UN Conference on Climate Change

[Tini]

I dont think the debate is about what we produce or who consumes it - I think the debate is about HOW we produce and consume.

I do believe that there were many "wrongs" committed by especially European colonisation and removal of resources for processing and use in the home country. But that's an entirely different debate that should not be dragged into this one - or used as a sword over anyone's head.

I also believe that everyone needs to do something about greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Both the developed AND developing world. I totally disagree with countries like China and India really increasing their capacity with no checks or balanaces. However, I am also opposed to the US not coming on board with any targets and actions.

I believe that this a global problem and we ALL need to pull our weight to stop it (just as everyone did with the CFC gases that were harming the ozone in the 1980's). The 1980's case also lead to no huge dent in anyone's lifestyle either - we all ended up with new refridgeration gases and life continues - but the ozone layer is "safe".

I am positive that if we all apply our minds to it - we can come up with new technologies to still have SUV's etc. and our lifestyles will not change dramatically.

Just as the internal combustion engine made a huge change, as did televsion, the PC etc.

We must ust embrace change and move forward I believe.

 

[illudium_phosdex]

I dont think the debate is about what we produce or who consumes it - I think the debate is about HOW we produce and consume.

I do believe that there were many "wrongs" committed by especially European colonisation and removal of resources for processing and use in the home country. But that's an entirely different debate that should not be dragged into this one - or used as a sword over anyone's head.

I also believe that everyone needs to do something about greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Both the developed AND developing world. I totally disagree with countries like China and India really increasing their capacity with no checks or balanaces. However, I am also opposed to the US not coming on board with any targets and actions.

I believe that this a global problem and we ALL need to pull our weight to stop it (just as everyone did with the CFC gases that were harming the ozone in the 1980's). The 1980's case also lead to no huge dent in anyone's lifestyle either - we all ended up with new refridgeration gases and life continues - but the ozone layer is "safe".

I am positive that if we all apply our minds to it - we can come up with new technologies to still have SUV's etc. and our lifestyles will not change dramatically.

Just as the internal combustion engine made a huge change, as did televsion, the PC etc.

We must ust embrace change and move forward I believe.

We should all take a lesson from cro-magnon man. When his scientists saw that their SUVs, industrial plants, metropolises, deoderants, cattle, toothpaste, etc, etc, etc...was ending the last great ice age, he destroyed all these things to the point that we are not able to find them in the fossil record and thus ended global warming.

 

[Tini]

We should all take a lesson from cro-magnon man. When his scientists saw that their SUVs, industrial plants, metropolises, deoderants, cattle, toothpaste, etc, etc, etc...was ending the last great ice age, he destroyed all these things to the point that we are not able to find them in the fossil record and thus ended global warming.

Hee Hee

 

[LovesTruth]

I work in this field and must say - that I find it amazing that people still believe that global warming and climate change is either:
1) A natural cycle (in this particular case) or
2) not occuring

I'd be interested in hearing your views.

My how the conservatives have been proven true and Al Gore wrong.

The majority of the top level weather and climate scientists are either undecided or hostile to Al Gore's ideas.

 

[FluffyRabbitHunter]

My how the conservatives have been proven true and Al Gore wrong.

The majority of the top level weather and climate scientists are either undecided or hostile to Al Gore's ideas.

Welcome to LovesTruth on Social Justice, AKA Comedy Central!

It must be nice to have one's head in the sand. Perhaps then you can pretend to ignore the plight of the poor, the needy, the dying, which Christ came to save. Gloabal warming is causing chaos in the world, inflicting more and more suffering in the world and all you can do is mis-use your bible to defend the indefendable!

Luckily, as the OP has said, there's a huge movement that does accept climate change is being caused by humans, and that there are things we can do to stop it. Denying it is either willful ignorance or blatent agression against those suffering. Neither is really Christian.


Origional Poster: well done for bringing this up. The vast majority of the world agrees with the overwhelming evidence and main scientific body that humans are casuing or at best speeding up climate change. The majority of Christians care about this! Keep up your work and don't let our so-called brothers peddle their lies and propaganda stop you from working.

There is no serious scientist in the world who doesn't believe the earth's heating up because of all the extra CO2 emissions. Resources consumption is slightly different but against LovesTruth is peddling lies by stating that Americans / Western Europe doesn't consume resources. We go through VAST amounts of resources. The only thing that is preventing the world from being spent completely is that most children are starving, and so clearly don't all have PlayStations or whatever. If they did, we'd all be in trouble!

This willful neglect of our neighbours, this willful deciet and deliberate mis-use of the bible to sponsor and justify the rediculus notions of a few republicans has to stop.

 

[xapis]

Gloabal warming is causing chaos in the world, inflicting more and more suffering in the world

Proof?

The only "chaos" I see resulting from global warming is caused by scaremongering demogogues on the left.

 

[FluffyRabbitHunter]

http://www.christian-aid.org.uk/climatechange/index.htm

Have a little read!

Trying to label those you disagree with as 'left' hardly helps. Do labels help you ignore facts, perhaps?

 

[LovesTruth]

The facts are that the myth of global danger from warming is bogus... just an excuse by unproductive socialists and commies to try to harm the free world.

There is not a consensus about the impact of global warming. In fact more agree that it is harmless. There is a natural warming and cooling cycle... no big deal!

Scientists Rally Around NASA Chief After Global Warming Comments​

WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Jun. 1 -/E-Wire/-- "NASA's top administrator, Michael Griffin, speaking on NPR radio made some refreshingly sensible comments about the present global warming scare," said Robert Ferguson, Director of the Science and Public Policy Institute. "Many rationalist scientists agree with him, clearly demonstrating there is no scientific consensus on man-made, catastrophic global warming," said Ferguson.

Griffin said he doubted global warming is "a problem we must wrestle with," and that it is arrogant to believe that today's climate is the best we could have and that "we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn't change."

While NASA scientist, James Hansen, was sharply critical of his boss, other scientists from around the world came to Griffin's support.

Said Dr. Walter Starck, an Australian marine scientist, "Griffin makes an important distinction between the scientific findings of climate change and dramatic predictions of catastrophic consequences accompanied by policy demands. The former can be evaluated by its evidence, but; the latter rest only on assertions and claims to authority. Alternate predictions of benefits from projected changes have been proposed with comparable authority and plausibility. For example, unless one chooses to define the Little Ice Age as "normal" and "optimal" the net effect of any warming has only been beneficial and any anthropogenic contribution very small indeed. Dramatic predictions of imminent disaster have a near perfect record of failure. Griffin's note of caution in the escalating concern over climate change deserves sober consideration.

Another Australian, who testified before a Senate panel last year, Professor Robert Carter, observed, "My main reaction to Michael Griffin is to congratulate him on his clear-sightedness, not to mention his courage in speaking out on such a controversial topic."

Dr. Tim Ball, a Canadian climatologist, responded: "Griffin's statement is sensible because it allows time for the testing of the man-made global warming hypothesis to continue as it should."

"I certainly support Griffin's comments," said William Kininmonth, a former head of the Australian National Climate Centre. "Not only is it speculative to claim that humans can in any way influence the course of climate but it is arrogant to suggest that today's climate is getting worse than it has been in the past. For example, who would prefer to return to pre-industrial conditions as they were during the Little Ice Age? Frost Fairs were common on many rivers of Europe and the London diarist John Evelyn records that in 1683-84 the Thames River froze from late December to early February. Conditions were terrible with men and cattle perishing and the seas locked with ice such that no vessels could stir out or come in. The fowls, fish and exotic plants and greens were universally perishing. Food and fuel were exceptionally dear and coal smoke hung so thickly that one could scarcely see across the street and one could scarcely breathe."

Kansas geologist, Lee Gerhard added, "Griffin's statement focuses on the hubris that affects much of public policy. It is great to know that someone out there besides geologists understands that humans do not dominate earth's dynamic systems.

Said Ross McKitrick, an economist at the University of Guelph, "Claims of major, impending catastrophe are speculative and go far beyond what has been credibly established by researchers to date. Hence Griffin's view is not at all controversial or out of step with available evidence, and he should be commended for having the courage to say it. The fact that it took courage, however, points to the deeper problem that questioning the catastrophic propaganda we hear so much is now considered politically incorrect."

Dr. Pat Michaels at the University of Virginia agrees: "NASA Administrator Michael Griffin's statement about whether or not it is in fact a "problem" is supported by a scientific literature that his employee, James Hansen, appears to ignore. It is well-known that much of the Eurasian arctic was between 4 and 12 degrees (F) warmer than modern temperatures for much of the 6,000 years between 3,000 and 9,000 years ago, and that such warming was caused by a massive intrusion of warm Atlantic water into the arctic. Given that the only way it can get there is to flow east of Greenland, Mr. Hansen's well-publicized fears that a massive amount of Greenland's ice will fall into the ocean in the next 100 years is mere science fiction. It is ironic that today President Bush appears to have given in to Hansen's hysteria rather than to the calm reason of NASA Administrator Griffin.

Finally, Harvard University physicist Lubos Motl praised Griffin's climate comments, calling them "sensible." On his public blog, Motl said he applauds Michael Griffin and encourages him to act as "a self-confident boss of a highly prestigious institution." "I have always believed that the people who actually work with hard sciences and technology simply shouldn't buy a cheap and soft pseudoscientific propaganda such as the 'fight against climate change,'" Motl added.

http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/3967


Let us laugh at the United Nations and ignore it. The UN is worthless anyhow. Global warming is just one more joke.

 

[blueguy]

I personally do not believe that global warming exist...I believe it's a scam.
It is sad that the subject has turned political and is out of the scientists hands now and along party lines.
I am watching what happens with the weather in regards to end times scenerios.

 

[Tini]

Look at the following 2 websites.

I find the members rather credible and consider them some of the "top" scientists in the world - on a range of topics - from biodiversity to meteorology to oceonography.

You read these fairly thouroghly and see where the "cranck" science is. Because i haven't managed to yet.

www.ipcc.ch

www.realclimate.org

 

[FluffyRabbitHunter]

Riiight.

It's quite interesting that even China is beginning to take notice of climate change. Yet the world's wasters in the USA are determined to burt their heads in the sand and pretend nothing's happening. Since climate change will affect the US as negatively as other places, it's either willful ignorance or deliberate environmentalist vandalism by those who seek to gain money by polluting and wasting. Interestingly enough, it's the same people making money out of pollution who are sponsoring political parties, NASA, etc... etc...

Co-incidence?

 

[Tini]

Hey - I must come to the US's defence here. I also felt that way until I went to the New Engalnd states last year. There is actually quiet a lot happening "behind the scenes" at a local or state level and among technology providers and developers. I agree that at a national level they are acting a bit l;ike the proverbial ostrich - but a lot is happeninjhg. I believe that there will be a lot of leadership form the states (along with countries like UK / Germany). Even Aus (who have acted in a similar vein to the US by not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol - are doing a lot internally!

 

[FluffyRabbitHunter]

Well, fair enough. I guess Brit lefties do demonise the US a bit. It always seems, though, that any efforts to reduce pollution are derailled by America at every opportunity. It's really, really fustrating.

 

[Tini]

I agree - it is frustrating. Especially not gettign towards any global standard - even here in the developing world!

 

[FluffyRabbitHunter]

By far the most fustrating thing is that it is so called 'Christians' who are fighting the tide to try to stop progress. It's really disheartening for those involved in Social Justice work.

But, luckily progress IS being made, despite the best efforts of many rich capitalists with shares in oil companies, and it will be sorted - whether Bush and his crazy band want it or not. The US can either stop flapping on the sidelines and start doing, or they'll get left behind.

I do wonder, how many Bangledeshis the US will be willing to take when 95% of their country floods!

Are there many areas at risk in South Africa, Tini?

 

[Tini]

Rising sea level is not so much the issue here - as changing rainfall patterns and distribution.
We are already a semi-arid country - this will just be exaccerbated in the future.

Obviously - local areas are affected by sea level rises (e.g. Cape Town) - but biodiveristy wioll also be severely affected by temperature changes.

 

[FluffyRabbitHunter]

I thought that would be the case. Climate change doesn't do wickets any good, either! Unless you want to bowl on wickets like the Gabba in Australia!

I can't really imagine what it must be like to know that unless action is taken, your country's farming land will be turned to desert. It must be pretty awful. England's green and pleasent pastures will hardly be touched, London might get a little wet, but it is just so unfair that those who pollute the least are going to get hit hardest!