Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When more wealth moves into the developing world, as it's projected to, they will need to raise their emissions standards and take action.
LMAO! Thanks for the laugh!
Because the developing world will always step up and do the right thing. The dictators and sham governments in many of these places will just willingly halt or put a damper on their newfound wealth in order to be more environmentally aware.
The same places that when we attempt to aid these countries most of the money goes to the ruling class instead of the poor people who need it.
I suppose as wealth flows into the developing world the corruption will just magically go away .. because wealth tends to have that effect on people
LMAO! Thanks for the laugh!
Because the developing world will always step up and do the right thing. The dictators and sham governments in many of these places will just willingly halt or put a damper on their newfound wealth in order to be more environmentally aware.
The same places that when we attempt to aid these countries most of the money goes to the ruling class instead of the poor people who need it.
I suppose as wealth flows into the developing world the corruption will just magically go away .. because wealth tends to have that effect on people
South Korea was a third world militaristic dictatorship as recently as the 1980s.
Postwar Japan was ruined and destitute, but rose to become a global power over the course of the next 40 years.
China was destitute and had a horrible record of human rights, a situation that is rapidly improving.
On top of that, China is currently building infrastructure, stabilizing and developing several African nations in an attempt to score some of their resources.
These things still happen all the time-- it's not going to happen tomorrow but over the course of a few decades it is easily possible. Whenever the wealth flows into a country through industry and economic improvements, some of that wealth will always end up in the hands of the people... supply and demand.
If a country is stable and profitable to do business in, it will attract investors... there are exactly zero countries with the exception of North Korea that don't find this prospect enticing. But even Kim Jong Un met with a German adviser about opening up the North Korean economy to foreign investment last year.
Inevitably, under an improving economy the people will begin to demand better conditions, and the governments will oblige because it's easier and more profitable than using force.
Glacier melt in the Antarctic is due to volcanoes not global warming according to a new study by researchers at the University of Texas, Austin.
Researchers from the UTA’s Institute for Geophysics found that the Thwaites Glacier in western Antarctica is being eroded by the ocean as well as geothermal heat from magma and subaerial volcanoes. Thwaites is considered a key glacier for understanding future sea level rise.
"Evidence for elevated and spatially variable geothermal flux beneath the West Antarctic Ice Sheet"
Dustin M. Schroeder1, Donald D. Blankenship, Duncan A. Young, and Enrica Quartini
Institute for Geophysics, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78758
Edited by Mark H. Thiemens, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, and approved May 8, 2014 (received for review March 19, 2014)
There is no such thing as "settled science". Science, by definition, invites further inquiry and investigation. Cults, on the other hand, have "settled" beliefs that cannot be questioned under any circumstances without threat of persecution.
I find it amusing that the global warming cult members do not even realize that they are staunch opponants of the scientific method, yet usually claim the high ground of "science".
There is no such thing as "settled science". Science, by definition, invites further inquiry and investigation. Cults, on the other hand, have "settled" beliefs that cannot be questioned under any circumstances without threat of persecution.
I find it amusing that the global warming cult members do not even realize that they are staunch opponants of the scientific method, yet usually claim the high ground of "science".
Precisely! "The Science is Settled", "The Debate is Over" , "there is this huge consensus"… none of these things have anything to do with science! They have to with dogma, cultism and politics.
Almost since the very beginning of this debate, there was an attempt to quash and marginalize any dissent or skepticism.
So wait-- you're upset because you think that other places are going to instate a carbon tax without lowering other taxes... because of your right wing paranoia and persecution complex, because you so need to hate Obama that you're unwilling to actually look at what he has done objectively and admit that there are some good ideas mixed in with the bad, just like every other president.
And the reason that first world nations were targeted is because they can actually afford to do so, because they have more money. Developing nations are still in the midst of industrialization and would never commit to the targets if they weren't given leniency. I think we're a little better off than people in Africa or India.
China already has higher emissions standards for its vehicles than the US, which is still the worst polluter for its population size... on top of that, they're starting to take action to reduce their emissions-- mostly because wealth has moved into China so rapidly. When more wealth moves into the developing world, as it's projected to, they will need to raise their emissions standards and take action.
Another reason is that developing nations still consume less than your average American. Most of the emissions in the third world are still caused by American consumption patterns. Palm oil in Indonesia is a massive source of deforestation, and most of it ends up in things like Ice Cream and margarine and pudding and cosmetics for people in the US. So is meat-- and tell me that Americans don't eat ridiculously huge amounts of meat every day. Even if the agriculture is taking place in the third world, wealthy American consumers are driving the demand.
And to answer the other poster and his whole 'it will raise the cost of fossil fuels'-- I say GOOD.
If that happens, people will stop driving 5 minutes to go to the store and will get up and walk for 20 minutes. If they live in the country, they'll make sure they get everything they need on their weekly drive into town. There will be more demand for affordable public transit. Bicycle sales will be boosted, and people will be healthier to boot.
Gas-guzzler sales will drop and manufacturers will be pressured to explore alternative fuel sources... all of the money currently being put into oil will be channelled into developing better solar and wind technology, hybrids, or more fuel efficient vehicles. Things like more efficient appliances or discounts on solar panels is a big plus. Even making cars smaller will help out a lot. Earth-sheltered homes, building materials other than concrete, making homes smaller so they don't need as much heat and light, etc.
People might stop stuffing their faces with calories they don't even need, and which only end up causing health problems for both themselves and their children.
Developing nations might be hosting the production of these things, but they are too poor to be driving the consumption-- if you make these destructive patterns less affordable, then people will live longer, healthier, happier, cheaper lives.
Developed nations can already afford these types of changes because Americans already consume way way way too much, but the problem is that the oil companies are pushing hard and are still receiving huge subsidies from the government, and capitalism and consumerism is completely out of control.
this just goes to show that you to have bought into the whole pile of rubbish because you are too blind to see what is really going on, and that the whole thing is not about global warming, but rather a wealth redistribution scheme on a global scale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Odo
South Korea was a third world militaristic dictatorship as recently as the 1980s.
Postwar Japan was ruined and destitute, but rose to become a global power over the course of the next 40 years.
China was destitute and had a horrible record of human rights, a situation that is rapidly improving.
On top of that, China is currently building infrastructure, stabilizing and developing several African nations in an attempt to score some of their resources.
These things still happen all the time-- it's not going to happen tomorrow but over the course of a few decades it is easily possible. Whenever the wealth flows into a country through industry and economic improvements, some of that wealth will always end up in the hands of the people... supply and demand.
If a country is stable and profitable to do business in, it will attract investors... there are exactly zero countries with the exception of North Korea that don't find this prospect enticing. But even Kim Jong Un met with a German adviser about opening up the North Korean economy to foreign investment last year.
Inevitably, under an improving economy the people will begin to demand better conditions, and the governments will oblige because it's easier and more profitable than using force.
You're ignorant.
very true, but rather than do it on a global scale, lets do something silly and let the locals do their thing, and let the rich countries keep their hard earned wealth. and lets keep the UN OUT of local government matters.
Glacier melt in the Antarctic is due to volcanoes not global warming according to a new study by researchers at the University of Texas, Austin.
Researchers from the UTA’s Institute for Geophysics found that the Thwaites Glacier in western Antarctica is being eroded by the ocean as well as geothermal heat from magma and subaerial volcanoes. Thwaites is considered a key glacier for understanding future sea level rise.
"Evidence for elevated and spatially variable geothermal flux beneath the West Antarctic Ice Sheet"
Dustin M. Schroeder1, Donald D. Blankenship, Duncan A. Young, and Enrica Quartini
Institute for Geophysics, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78758
Edited by Mark H. Thiemens, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, and approved May 8, 2014 (received for review March 19, 2014)
I would take a closer look at your source but whats the point, you are not here to discuss facts or science. Rather you are here to push the agenda of corporate CEO's, Fox news, and Rush radio.
And don't waste your time responding to my post, I will not waste my time locked in your pointless debate to deny global warming so corporate profits increase.
I would take a closer look at your source but whats the point, you are not here to discuss facts or science. Rather you are here to push the agenda of corporate CEO's, Fox news, and Rush radio.
And don't waste your time responding to my post, I will not waste my time locked in your pointless debate to deny global warming so corporate profits increase.
What's the point in talking to you? You aren't here to discuss facts or science here yourself. You are here to dismiss anyone who is skeptical as a partisan right-winger or an oil company/corporate stooge while YOU parrot left wing talking points and pretend that you are being objective.
What's the point in talking to you? You aren't here to discuss facts or science here yourself. You are here to dismiss anyone who is skeptical as a partisan right-winger or an oil company/corporate stooge while YOU parrot left wing talking points and pretend that you are being objective.
You are fully correct and what I said was very un-scientific.
But reality is most people in these "global warming hoax" threads are not here to discuss facts and learn the truth. Rather they are here to fight for the republican party's political objectives, and that's not science.
They post anything that says global warming is a hoax, but not because they have personal knowledge of problems with global warming science. They start these threads because they are part of a group that dismisses global warming because combating global warming decreases corporate profits.
And their scientific statements are not created with thought or logic, they are created because they suit the agenda of the republican party. They have one objective and that's to discredit global warming, and to do this they ignore the most basic of scientific principles, ignore overwhelming facts, and manipulate to carry out their political objective.
Science is about finding out the truth, its not about increasing corporate profits.
Chad.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
