Right now the Kyoto countries make up 30% of the man made green house gas emissions.
Right now two of the biggest polluters, the USA and China, are not on board.
Right now, thanks to the Conservatives and Rona Ambrose, the third world countries that are starting to thrive on microcredit are looking for a new kid to rob of his lunch money, because us Canadians have learned some karate and are standing up for ourselves.
Right now, environmentalistas are screaming out loud in an effort to shame Canada into supporting the rest of the world with Kyoto credits, thus enabling the rest of the world to rape us of a percentage of our natural resources via treaties.
Right now countries like Saudi Arabia are laughing while they charge full price to the USA and other free countries for oil without putting a dime into Kyoto because, believe it or not, Saudi Arabia is considered a developing country.
You heard me right. They are considered a developing country. One of the 100+ nations signed on to Kyoto who won’t pay a dime, while nations like Canada, that pump far less fossil burning fuels into the world market pay.
As a developing country, Saudi Arabia would not be subject to emissions cuts under Kyoto, a requirement only binding 30 industrialised nations. Some 135 nations have formally given their support to the pact.
Think about that. A nation like Canada gets petitioned left right and center for things like better equality for women or to dish out our fare share of money to Kyoto and to stifle our economy, while one of the richest nations in the world, Saudi Arabia, pumps millions of barrels of oil a day without penalty. And then they turn around and treat women like a piece of trash.
Saudi Arabia had a GDP in 2005 of rougly $350 Billion and a surplus of roughly $28B surplus yet they whined throughout the Kyoto negotiations at the thought of losing $19B in oil revenue by the year 2010.
Yet do you see Greenpeace or other agencies giving Saudi Arabia any “dinosaur of the day” awards at the UN Climate Change Conference?? NoooOOOoooooo…… They just harp about Canada coming clean and stating we will not meet our Kyoto requirements and threaten to take us to some world level court.
And why do you think they would do that? Because they want their pound of flesh from of our resource-rich nation. Well I for one am glad that Minister Ambrose is on the job and telling the world the truth about what Canada will do and what we won’t do.
Now here’s the kicker. Yesterday, Monday November 13th on Canada AM I heard Julia Langer from the World Wildlife Fund harping about how global warming is causing drought in Canada and lowering the water levels and that it would continue to do so on a global level.
*Screeeeeeeech*
What?? Global warming will LOWER water levels??? Has the left not brainwashed us into thinking the melting icecaps will flood the low lying areas of the planet displacing or killing millions of people in the process??
I am just about fed up with the left and their fearmongering. We just can’t win. Global warming will flood us. Global warming will dry out our lakes. Oh and did I tell you?? Global warming will slow down your internet connection and turn your hair blue. Global warming will kill your dog, break up your marriage and get your teenage daughter pregnant too!!
Be scared!!! Be very scared!!!
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Good article. I’m so sick of hearing about the Environment and Global warming. Ask everyone to park their SUV’s and see how much they care about the environment. Is they no other topic of interest to anyone in Canada.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
i think i just pised my self its funny cause its true.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
The right has been accused of using the Politics of Fear with regard to terrorism, but the left is now using it with global warming. FEAR! Concerning Minister Ambrose being “slammed” at her conference appearance (the only ones slamming her are Canadians, BTW) and Canada getting a dino award, it appears there were no winners, no matter what other countries did:
Sweden, Britain and Denmark are doing the most to protect against climate change, but their efforts are not nearly enough, according to a report released Monday by environmental groups.
The United States — the world’s biggest emitter of greenhouse gases — ranked at 53, with only China, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia doing worse.
“We don’t have any winners, we only have countries that are better compared to others,” said Matthias Duwe of the Climate Action Network-Europe, which released the data at the U.N. climate conference. “We don’t have big shining stars.”
http://tinyurl.com/yz6k7k
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
I also heard that China, of all countries, has decided to chastise Canada for not meeting it’s Kyoto Commitments. *excuse me*? We are talking about China, one of the worlds biggest greenhouse gas polluters, right?
What a joke.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
It’s a money grab plain and simple. Take Canadian taxpayers money and deposit it in the bank accounts of corrupt third world governments for supposed climate change projects. No green house gasses get reduced, only bank accounts.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
We’re singing the same song.
What the Conservatives need is a lesson in PR, not the environment — they’ve been so busy trying pretend they’re buying into Kyoto, when they don’t — when they should just tell the truth — Kyoto will put money in the hands of already rich dictators — it won’t be used to help developing nations to fix their environmental problems. Kyoto puts us at a trade disadvantage with so-called ‘developing’ nations and does nothing to ever ensure that climate change won’t happen.
If it can’t possibly have the intended end-effect (slowing or stalling of climate change or global warming) and we know it can’t because of the huge polluters who’ve either opted out, or who are considered ‘developing’ and not subject to Kyotos ‘targets’, it is a flawed treaty.
Why should we throw good money down the drain, when we can implement restrictions on pollutants that actually foul the air we breathe?
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
We should actively trade in carbon credits in CANADA only. Ontario’s coal fired plants can buy carbon credits from Quebec to support their KyotoQ
Alberta’s oil sands projects can buy credits from Manitoba’s wind energy (?) etc…..
presto!!! we made our targets, on paper, didn’t have to change a damn thing, just keep good books.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
I am concerned that the global warming “cult” is winning the media wars. It is very hard these days to find people challenging the Kyoto vision. Every time I think Kyoto is dead — it resurfaces. I also find it astonishing — because from my research, the whole premise of Kyoto is seriously flawed. That’s what makes me quite pessimistic — that people could be so easily duped.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Here’s a climate change 101 lesson for you. LAKE levels will lower because they’ll evaporate. SEA levels will rise because of the melting of the glaciers at both poles. If you choose to be in denial, at least understand the concept you’re denying.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
John Bennett of The Sierra Club, among others, appeared on Mike Duffy Live not long ago espousing the Kyoto Agreement. IMO, the entire credit buying system reeks of world redistribution of $$. Smells to me.
Now on your bookstore shelves:
“How The Granola-Eating,Tree Hugging Thug Huggers Are Ruining Our Country” by CFRA’s Lowell Green.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
spamdex (#9) here is a concept for you. Water from all over the world evapourates and rains wherever the winds take it. Then it falls and forms other bodies of water and flows through crevices that we like to call streams which feed bigger crevices we call rivers which eventually lead to oceans.
Nice try though.
(Note: I changed the word “lakes” to “other bodes of water” after posting this comment but before any followups were posted)
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
You caught them in one of their own silly contridictions Mulder, good stuff.
Now have a look at the mother load right here…
http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
T.O.M:
“Water from all over the world evapourates and rains wherever the winds take it. Then it falls and forms other bodies of water and flows through crevices that we like to call streams which feed bigger crevices we call rivers which eventually lead to oceans.”
Try this:
Lakes and rivers are relatively shallow bodies of water compared to oceans and seas. Greenhouse warming causes a greater amount of evaporation, probably also at greater rates than before, by increasing the heat inside the Earth’s atmosphere. The shallower areas will lose water more quickly, more noticeably than areas with deeper reserves, such as oceans. Meanwhile, at the same time, polar ice caps will melt more quickly due to the increased heat, raising water levels in the oceans, thus inundating coastlines.
So, the answer, Virginia, is: yes, global warming can (theoretically) cause droughts and rising sea levels at the same time.
And I note that _nobody_ in this august company offers evidence (or, God help me! logical thought) to the contrary; it’s just served up as warmed over “Evil Leftists” theory.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Todd (#13), as I have pointed out before the north pole polar ice cap and ice bergs do not add to the sea level.
But you can keep dreaming that they do and you might get a job with the Sierra Club one day.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
While you have correctly pointed out that ice _bergs_ aren’t much of a problem (which wasn’t the whole of my point anyway), look here:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/question473.htm
(and you never responded to your last interlocutor at your link, who pointed out a flaw in your logic)
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
I’m watching this TV program right now. Quite salient to this conversation:
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/denialmachine/index.html
Oh, and just a point to remember about those evaporating lakes…fresh water is NOT a renewal resource. All you have to do is drive an hour north of Toronto to see cottage docks that lead to nothing but dry lake beds. You have to walk out a little further to actually get to the water. It’s not fantasy. You can see it with your own eyes.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Todd, your own link points to the answer that dispels the myths about Antarctic ice. The Antarctic temperature is averaged at -37C. The global temperature could increase by 10C and most, if not all, of Antarctica wouldn’t melt. And the flaw with the iceberg logic is that icebergs are not just chunks of ice that break off land masses. In the North Pole the ice bergs are formed when two sheets of ice press against each other and push chunks high into the air from pressure. When the ice sheets break up, these large pieces float around longer than a thinner sheet.
Their is also a flaw in that the average temperature of the oceans is above 4 degrees C so the warmer the oceans get the less dense they will become thus lowering the overall temperature.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
So let’s see your proof. It’s really easy for somebody to just assert, “You’re wrong, you’re wrong” or “You’re right, you’re right”.
I was referring to this part of the link:
“But there might be a less dramatic reason than polar ice melting for the higher ocean level — the higher temperature of the water. Water is most dense at 4 degrees Celsius. Above and below this temperature, the density of water decreases (the same weight of water occupies a bigger space). So as the overall temperature of the water increases it naturally expands a little bit making the oceans rise.
In 1995 the International Panel on Climate Change issued a report which contained various projections of the sea level change by the year 2100. They estimate that the sea will rise 50 centimeters (20 inches) with the lowest estimates at 15 centimeters (6 inches) and the highest at 95 centimeters (37 inches). The rise will come from thermal expansion of the ocean and from melting glaciers and ice sheets. Twenty inches is no small amount — it could have a big effect on coastal cities, especially during storms.”
So, unless you’re a climatologist wtih an in to the information and the people who are researching it, all you can do is find someone (without a suspicious background for wanting to refute global warming theory) who can back up what you say.
So let’s see it.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Todd, explain this one to me. Why is the movement going from “global warming” to “climate change”??
Why are record cold temperatures being recorded just as record warms?
What do you think will happen when the increased temperatures make plant life thrive? That same plant life that sucks carbon dioxide (a green house gas) out of the atmosphere and turns it into oxygen (increasing things like the Ozone layer?)
You read too much garbage and don’t use your own head enough.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
I’m not involved with those groups, so you’d have to ask them your questions (I don’t know if there is a shift in focus or that’s just how you’re perceiving it, and I simply don’t know enough about the “record cold” info because I haven’t heard it mentioned from any source; how about showing me yours; as for your comment on plant life, if this were so obvious a refutation of concerns about global warming or climate change, it would be coming up a lot more often I suspect, by far less obviously biased sources). I’ve read up on the subject, listened to what various people have had to say (taking into account best I can who’s saying it) and decided there’s something to it, like anyone else (including you).
As for your comment on reading garbage and not using my own head, given how relatively specialized and technical (and political) a topic as climate change (never mind environmental science itself) can be, unless you have some specialized knowledge that the rest of us don’t, or you have acquired the ability to see as perfectly objectively and as comprehensively as a deity, this amounts to little more than projection of an anxiety of yours.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
Todd I can’t keep looking links up over and over everytime someone says my opinion is not based on facts or backed up by others. You can just type Kyoto in my search bar for past links. I did have several to envirotruth.org but their site is down right now so you can go read quite a bit more at the National Center for Public Policy Research.
Enjoy your reading. I am off to the Sens game.
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
I suppose it’s slightly less batshit insane to be saying that melting ice caps would lower sea levels, in the sense that in a totally closed and controlled environment, the volume of water is less than the volume of ice due to the higher density. So it makes marginally more sense than saying it would raise the sea levels, in the sense that buying one lottery ticket gives one a marginally higher chance of winning $10 million than buying zero tickets.
Of course, that’s *if* it were a closed system and *if* the ice could actually affect sea levels, which is *if* the ice would actually melt, and of course that’s only *if* the temperature were to increase enough to melt it, which is only *if* all the positive-feedback models of global warming are true, and that’s obviously only true *if* the CO2 levels are actually significant enough to cause any temperature rise at all, and even that depends entirely on *if* the Earth’s atmosphere behaves like an actual greenhouse…
Gives me a headache just thinking about all the pseudoscientific leaps of logic here. I could have sworn that they taught this stuff in elementary school.
Pingback:
Notice: Only variables should be assigned by reference in /var/www/wp-content/plugins/subscribe-to-comments/subscribe-to-comments.php on line 590
OfficiallyScrewed.com » Stephane Dion Must Have A Big Butt