Posted on 07/31/2007 1:56:48 PM PDT by SmithL
IF YOU REALLY believe that the planet is at the tipping point on global warming and the consequences will be fatal for people around the world, especially the poor, then all industrialized nations need to curb their greenhouse-gas emissions. If the United States must sacrifice, so must China, which is fast emerging as largest producer of industrial greenhouse gases on Earth.
Yet U.N. Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon, in a breakfast meeting with The Chronicle editorial board Friday, suggested that industrialized nations - read the United States - have a "historical responsibility" to cut emissions, which are "almost to the saturation point," while China and India, two superpowers that were not bound to reduce emissions as part of the 1997 Kyoto global warming pact, "have their own positions."
As for the Democratic-led Congress, Ban said, "They have already begun moving. It's only the (Bush) administration" that has not. And, while he said he is not a scientist or economist: "The science is very clear. The economics is very clear."
I understand the social justice argument: America has produced more industrial greenhouse gases than any other nation, hence Americans should have to cut back more than other countries. But who knew in 1910 that global warming would be an issue?
"The few who did know about it thought it was a good thing," noted the Cato Institute's Pat Michaels. "And when global surface temperature declined from 1945 through the mid-1970s, the feeling was one of absolute alarm. The world was going to have a food crisis. The shipping lanes in the North Atlantic were cluttered with ice."
Remember global cooling? That's what the - all bow - scientists warned about 30 years ago. Now bygone Americans are to blame for not foreseeing science's end-of-the-world scenario, global warming.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I wish someone would tell Secretary-General Ban ki-Moon that the official U.S. response is “Get lost.”
Although global warmijng, so called, is a fiction, it’s a matter of Luddite New Age religious dogma and a cash cow for a multitude of NGOs around the world; as such, it is to be foisted off on the credulous and the cash-rich in exchange for legitimizing The Faith and transferring plenty of money. The Chinese aren’t buying, however, inasmuch as, being past masters of propaganda and bunk, they know it when they see it. The whole point of the exercise, of course, is to hobble economic advancement, which is anathema to the neo-Marxists attempting to pass off all this pseudo-science, and the Chinese know that. They refuse to allow their economic progress to be retarded in this fashion, and so should we.
Why we continue to piss money away in this bastion of fools and Marxists is beyond my comprehension...
Got me. The money wasted on the UN could go to several million other better causes.
“Ban said ...while he is not a scientist or economist: “The science is very clear. The economics is very clear.”
Ban, the fact that you are an elitist moron is very, very clear.
There was global warming 10000-15000 years ago. Seems like the human race got thru it alright. Even without the UN or Kyoto Accords they managed to invent agriculture.
Maybe instead of statism and force, environmentalists could, I don’t know, just leave individuals alone to respond in the way most to their own advantage by engaging in the appropriate form of productive activity.
Another means by which the Lilliputians can bind Gulliver. It is always easier to cut the other down than to go to the hard work of elevating yourself.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
By “emissions”, the authorities mean CO2, then we are nowhere NEAR any “tipping point”.
Carbon dioxide is ESSENTIAL to life as we know it, and if it were three, or four, or five times its present level, that would not impact negatively on either the mean temperature of our atmosphere and oceans, or in our ability to adapt to its presence.
Too much CO2 causes us to breathe faster, and may have some short-term effects on our body chemistry, but unlike carbon monoxide, is not in the least “poisonous”, else we could not finish a can of Coca-Cola.
As to the effect of CO2 on “global warming”, CO2 is a TRAILING indicator, its percentage of composition in the atmosphere increasing only AFTER the environment has grown measurably warmer. Despite grave warnings not th speak of the sun as the probable source of temperature variations on earth’s surface, the sun is still the major factor in the relative amount of heat retained in the oceans and atmosphere. And the core of earth itself, is a molten mass, with temperatures far too warm to be tolerated by living things that have evolved in the biosphere of this planet. This heat is continually leaking outward to the surface of the planet, sometimes in violent eruptions of magma flow, bur always a steady radiation and conduction through the upper layers of the earth’s crust.
The few non-left media outlets should take heed and repeat/reprint the astute comments on this forum. Great stuff.
This is all true; I don’t think pointing this out will be a way to convince people though - limousine liberals have been hypocritical in almost every policy they promote to their audience. I think you need to focus on the scientific debate; even if lim libs don’t practice what they preach, people are dumb enough to believe their sermon.
Naturally, all of the foregoing is hypothetical and assumes the GW premise for the sake of discussion. Moreover it is simplistic in that it does not consider contributing factors or their interactions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.