Those who beat their swords into ploughshares wind up ploughing for those who don't.
We don't spend nearly enough on defence given the role we'd like to have on the world stage. That said, it doesn't mean we shouldn't be investing a lot into finding ways to fight climate change. However, I get the sense that nothing we can do will actually make a difference. China and India's rapid growth will have a far greater impact than anything we could do.
Well, that's my first exposure to Tehran's skyline, but I've been in San Jose, Costa Rica (which is in the middle of a giant valley and has lacklustre air quality), and I've also been to Los Angeles and seen smog there. I remember one time coming back from a summer of military training at CFB Gagetown to Toronto in August and realizing how different the air was. Then of course there's the fact that where I live, Peterborough, is notorious for having terrible air quality, again because of the fact that it's basically surrounded by higher ground
( ... )
If Canada stopped producing green house gasses, like 100%, tomorrow, it wouldn't make any difference other than to inspire bigger nations [which are more responsible for this stuff] like China and India to follow our lead. In the case of Canada, Kyoto is symbolic. And no one has the guts to say it.
Given the devastation that dramatically reducing Canada's GHG would wreak on Canada's economy and standard of living, and the negligible beneficial effect it would have, it would likely inspire China and India to take a pass on following Canada´s lead.
Cycles or warmer and colder temperatures have been with us for some time. So have storms, fires, floods, bugs, drought, melting glaciers, snow and polar bears.
Canada should do as much as it can and make reasonable and meaningful sacrifices to reduce pollution. It shouldn't, however, unilaterally commit economic suicide and expect other countries to follow suit.
On the flip side, you've got the problem of the government spending too much overall.
Kyoto is bad policy. It puts huge restrictions on industrialized nations but gives developing nations a pass. Simple economics dictates that the CO2 production will just relocate itself.
It would be a lot better if we put more of that money and effort into helping those developing nations reduce their CO2 output.
The added upside is that in order to reduce the CO2 output in those nations, massive technology transfer is required, which will help them be more productive in the long run.
You know, logic would dictate that if we're the ones causing all this mess, the inordinate amoiunts of money and effort that have gone into fighting the environmental threat would have at least SOME measurable effect on the problem. Yet we haven't seen it. The climate continues to change despite our efforts to keep it from doing so.
It seems that everyone has forgotten the simple fact that there has been global warming going on since Chicago was covered in a mile of ice many thousand years ago (remember? that's how the Great Lakes happened). I bet those people would freak if they saw that the polar ice cap has receded as far as it has.
The former is blindingly obvious. One could probably also directly correlate the increase in global temperatures with the amount of hot air coming out of the environmentalists. Since it correlates, it must therefore be the cause, right? There's an awful lot of that kind of stupidity coming from those same environmentalists.
Comments 65
(The comment has been removed)
We don't spend nearly enough on defence given the role we'd like to have on the world stage. That said, it doesn't mean we shouldn't be investing a lot into finding ways to fight climate change. However, I get the sense that nothing we can do will actually make a difference. China and India's rapid growth will have a far greater impact than anything we could do.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Reply
I mean ...other than live with storms, fires, floods, bugs, drought, melting glaciers, less snow, and dead polar bears.
Maybe we should tell larger nations to stop, or else we'll get a nuke and use it? heh. "Did that treat come from Canada? tell them to fuck off."
Reply
Canada should do as much as it can and make reasonable and meaningful sacrifices to reduce pollution. It shouldn't, however, unilaterally commit economic suicide and expect other countries to follow suit.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Kyoto is bad policy. It puts huge restrictions on industrialized nations but gives developing nations a pass. Simple economics dictates that the CO2 production will just relocate itself.
It would be a lot better if we put more of that money and effort into helping those developing nations reduce their CO2 output.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
This statistic was brought to you by the ministry of pulling numbers out of our asses.
Nobody seems to be calling much attention to the fact that the OTHER pole is getting a good deal colder.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/cold-science/2002-01-18-wais-thicker.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4565935.stm
http://www.cgfi.org/materials/articles/2002/feb_6_02.htm
http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050516/full/050516-10.html
Reply
Research and articles dated in 2002 don't count as damning evidence against global warming.
Reply
It seems that everyone has forgotten the simple fact that there has been global warming going on since Chicago was covered in a mile of ice many thousand years ago (remember? that's how the Great Lakes happened). I bet those people would freak if they saw that the polar ice cap has receded as far as it has.
Reply
This is a flame attempt?
Get out of your box and start doing some non-selective reading.
Reply
The latter is well-known fact.
The former is blindingly obvious. One could probably also directly correlate the increase in global temperatures with the amount of hot air coming out of the environmentalists. Since it correlates, it must therefore be the cause, right? There's an awful lot of that kind of stupidity coming from those same environmentalists.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Leave a comment