Climate Variability?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Scarletwine

New Yorker
Joined
May 1, 2002
Messages
2,753
Location
Outside it's Amerika
Bush Delegation Blocks Progress at International Conference on Global Warming

While there is no longer any serious debate in the scientific and business communities about whether global warming is real, the Bush Administration last week executed perhaps its most astonishing act of denial at the conclusion of a two-week international conference in Buenos Aires.


The UN conference, attended by some 6,200 government officials, NGO observers and journalists, aimed to begin the implementation process for the 132 nations that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol, and to begin planning further ways to mitigate the spread of greenhouse gases after Kyoto expires in 2012.


But the United States--the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases--all but told the conferees to take a walk. Besides blocking all efforts to conduct substantive discussions, the U.S. allied itself with none other than Saudi Arabia in obstructing efforts to create a system of payments to help poor, low-lying island nations cope with the cost of mitigating damage related to global warming, such as rising sea levels, land erosion and increased storm damage.


"Science tells us that we cannot say with any certainty what constitutes a dangerous level of warming, and therefore what level must be avoided," said Paula Dobriansky, head of the U.S. delegation.


"This is a new low for the United States, not just to pull out, but to block other countries from moving ahead on their own path," said Jeff Fiedler, a climate change expert with the Natural Resources Defense Council, in an interview with The New York Times. "It's almost spiteful to say 'You can't move ahead without us.' If you're not going to lead, then get out of the way," added Fiedler, who attended the conference as an observer. [1]


Addressing the U.S. support of Saudi Arabia's obstruction of aid to countries most vulnerable to the effects of global warming--e.g. Pacific island states such as the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Kiribati and Tuvalu, and Caribbean nations such as Barbados and the Bahamas--Greenpeace observer Steve Sawyer told the Environmental News Service that "We hope everyone has taken note of the bullying tactics of the USA at these negotiations. This...ensures that there will not be the kind of progress we need on negotiations of future emissions cuts during the next 12 months." [2]


The New York Times report concluded by noting that the Bush delegation even opposed further use of the term "climate change," arguing instead for the much vaguer "climate variability." [3]

SOURCES:
[1] "U.S. Waters Down Global Commitment to Curb Greenhouse Gases," New York Times, Dec. 19, 2004.
[2] "Climate Talks Inch Forward Obstructed by U.S.," Environmental News Service, Dec. 20, 2004.
[3] New York Times, op. cit.
 
:down:

this seems to be the american administration's favourite tactic--eschewing any hope of global progess, while throwing its clout around to bully poorer nations into submission.

i understand that the financial implications of kyoto are staggering for some countries, but who better to bear that burden than the richest country on the planet?

this reminds of a quote i read on a poster once, a cree proverb:

'only when the last tree has died
and the last river been poisoned
and the last fish been caught
will we realize we cannot eat money.'

:mad:
 
dandy said:
:down:

this seems to be the american administration's favourite tactic--eschewing any hope of global progess, while throwing its clout around to bully poorer nations into submission.

i understand that the financial implications of kyoto are staggering for some countries, but who better to bear that burden than the richest country on the planet?

Have you ever BEEN to some of th epoorer nations ? The pollution there is STAGGERING, and they do very little to regulate it. I travel frequently to Shanghai, Manila, Bangkok and these places make LA's air look pristine.

Some of these poorer nations would do better to clean their own house before complaining about what the US does.
 
The general consensus now seems to be that the fight against enhanced global warming will just have to be put on hold for about 4 years, hoping someone with a bigger grasp of reality will have taken residence in the White House by then.

Sad but true.
 
cardosino said:


Have you ever BEEN to some of th epoorer nations ? The pollution there is STAGGERING, and they do very little to regulate it. I travel frequently to Shanghai, Manila, Bangkok and these places make LA's air look pristine.

Some of these poorer nations would do better to clean their own house before complaining about what the US does.

I love this tactic everytime the US does something wrong we point at the other countries. How does any of what you say excuse the US from doing this? None.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


I love this tactic everytime the US does something wrong we point at the other countries. How does any of what you say excuse the US from doing this? None.

Did I SAY it excused the US from it's own responsibilities ? No.

I merely pointed that many nations could do worse than to get their own houses in order.

Anyone who's ever travelled to those places will know what I mean.
 
cardosino said:

Anyone who's ever travelled to those places will know what I mean.

I do know what you mean and I think this would have been a step forward for many of them, but instead the US decided to take a step backwards.

Hopefully in four years we'll stop denying science and start making steps forward again.
 
cardosino said:


Have you ever BEEN to some of th epoorer nations ? The pollution there is STAGGERING, and they do very little to regulate it. I travel frequently to Shanghai, Manila, Bangkok and these places make LA's air look pristine.

Some of these poorer nations would do better to clean their own house before complaining about what the US does.

But those countries weren't even mentioned. The ones that were to receive relief were ones at or below sea level that the artic cap melt are flooding or creating monsoons or hurricanes. While the places you mentions may have little regulation, we the US still create the most, more than almost all other countries combined, greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
Hopefully in four years we'll stop denying science and start making steps forward again.

Even the Bush administration has acknowledged that the Earth is warming because of human activities but decides to do bugger all about it.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


I do know what you mean and I think this would have been a step forward for many of them, but instead the US decided to take a step backwards.

There are many steps they can take independently of Kyoto, let's see if they do.
 
cardosino said:


There are many steps they can take independently of Kyoto, let's see if they do.

Kinda seems silly that you are adamantly ignoring the US administrations role in this. Of course every country to take steps to make their own environment better, but this was a big step for the planet. Bush and his environmentally challenged staff chose to ignore that.
 
There's no doubt that the US emits a lot of greenhouse gases and that the earth has heated up the last few decades, but there is some evidence that pollution in Asia and sunspots are more to blame for global warming than the increase in greenhouse gases.
 
The point is that climate change is a real effect but why it occurs is a bit more ambiguous and Kyoto is not a good way to adress the problem (it is a shackle on the US while it gives massive concessions to Russia and Developing Nations).
 
that is basicly cause those nations are still 'developing'. US and the rest of the developed world have finished their industrial revolutions and burned all kinds of fossil fuels and now are ready to move on to cleaner types of energy (although US still doesnt) on the other hand countries like india and so are still industrializing. they HAVE TO use fossil fuels, cause thats all theyve got. one fact remains though. US is destroying the planet faster than any other nation on the planet.

may i also remind that a lot of multinationals based in US are working around the world, consuming resources everywhere?
 
WOW - what a great thread, Scarletwine!

Thank you for starting it and I agee completely with most of the posters here who are MORE THAN TICKED OFF BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION'S REFUSAL to move forward on the issue of global warming and climate change.

All I can do is to encourage those of us who want to save planet earth and her natural resources for future generations of our children to conserve and use is to NOT GIVE UP and join an environmental group. :yes:

Be part of the solution.

http://www.nrdc.org
 
Another thread that is close to home!

You are all talking about 3rd world nations not taking care of their own backyard and causing global warming, well let me tell you something. I've been living in New Zealand for some years now and it's obviously a country with a "clean, green, GE-free" reputation. Guess what? I am experiencing first hand the effects of global warming!! I don't think you can blame this one on the 3rd world. I think most countries, no matter where in the world, are guilty of not carpooling, of using that extra lightbulb that makes a difference, of dispensing non-biodegradable products (especially during Christmas season, argh), etc etc. Squeaky clean New Zealand is 2nd only to USA when it comes to the most waste (read this in the paper).

It's supposed to be bloody summer and it has been hailing almost everyday, I might say this weather is "barmier" than it's ever been in any winter! I can't wait to be able to wear shorts again!


foray
 
Photographs taken by a spacecraft orbiting Earth indicate that active volcanoes may still exist on the dead planet, further eroding its image as a dead world and offering prime sites to prospect for signs of Earth life.


it is only a matter of time until the surface of earth looks like mars
 
Only a matter of a few billion years yes, when both planets are balls of cold rock orbiting a white dwarf.
 
I am not optimistic for Earth's prospects

Humans will give the globe the Easter Island treatment with nowhere to take the longboats,
long before the Sun burns out.
 
I do not think that that will occur, the world is in relatively good shape - as I said before we are a supremely arrogant species, thinking that we can wipe out alll life or create problems that would never be undone.
 
It is precisely this thinking
that will do us in.

Indeed, we are a supremely arrogant species.

Again and again civilizations have disappeared.

This time we are all inner-connected and there will be no others after we are gone.

It will probably begin with something unnoticeable, in the oceans.
 
I'm with deep here. I firmly believe in the butterfly effect. Anyone who doesn't is kidding themselves. It's annoying how solipsistic people are.

foray
 
All I can say is that you should go out and review all the information out there, the feedback mechanisms inherent in complex systems (such as weather) are critical when modelling climate change and we have not discovered all of the data - correllation and causation are two seperate things, it is important that we approach global climate change in a measured way and get solid answers before doing anything rash.
 
deep said:
It is precisely this thinking
that will do us in.

Indeed, we are a supremely arrogant species.

Again and again civilizations have disappeared.

This time we are all inner-connected and there will be no others after we are gone.

It will probably begin with something unnoticeable, in the oceans.

The arrogance is that we THINK we can manipulate our climate
 
Back
Top Bottom