Russia ratifies Kyoto treaty ~ where is US

[Siwy]

Scotsman: Eu Success' as Russia Signs Up to Kyoto

When will we see Bush supporters being motivated by scientific rationalism rather then political dogma? If Russia can afford it, why can?t US?

 

[fallenangel99]

Bush wont allow the US to ratify the Koyoto protocol... i think the US was part of it, and he took us out

at least thats what i learned in my Environment Economics class

 

[maddogchen]

Bush has made his position very clear. NO. Will he succumb to the world and listen to what they say? NO. Will Bush go against his big business supporters? NO. Will Bush flip-flop on this issue? NO. Will our environment under Bush improve? NO.

 

[Todd33]

Expect the worlds scientist to be dismissed away by a first year grad student in 4..3..2..1....

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Expect the worlds scientist to be dismissed away by a first year grad student in 4..3..2..1....

I think you'll find that for each of the "world's scientists" that support the Kyoto initiative, you'll find an equally-qualified one who will denounce it as useless. Chalk it up to partisanship if you want, but I don't think we (as a nation and as a species) would have anything to gain by entering into this agreement.

 

[Smilin]

Look, I'm an environmentalist and a pretty serious Bush hater. However the Kyoto protocol in it's current state will cripple the world economies. The only reason the other industrial nations have ratified it is because they KNOW that we have no choice but to turn it down. It provides them an escape route that makes us look like the bad guys. If for some insane reason we accepted Kyoto you would see them all sh1t their pants and start backpedaling

Any real environmentalist (and not some crackpot) knows that for environmental policies to work they must strike a balance between the environment and the realities of feeding and clothing 6 billion people in an industrialized world. You can ask businesses to clean up their act but you can't ask them to close their doors.

Also as far as "the worlds scientists" versus a pre-grad student or any other scientist:
When Einstein was told that Hitler had assembled 100 scientists that refute his claims on relativity he replied, "If I was wrong it would only take one to prove it." Science isn't the study of opinion.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: Todd33
Expect the worlds scientist to be dismissed away by a first year grad student in 4..3..2..1....

I think you'll find that for each of the "world's scientists" that support the Kyoto initiative, you'll find an equally-qualified one who will denounce it as useless. Chalk it up to partisanship if you want, but I don't think we (as a nation and as a species) would have anything to gain by entering into this agreement.

Yeah, but the other half don't support him, so they are obviously idiots. This is an obvious truth of Todd's existence.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: maddogchen
Bush has made his position very clear. NO. Will he succumb to the world and listen to what they say? NO. Will Bush go against his big business supporters? NO. Will Bush flip-flop on this issue? NO. Will our environment under Bush improve? NO.

Yes, let's completely ignore the fact that the Senate voted to disagree to any treaty that adversly affected the US economy (Kyoto did such) by a 95-0 vote in 1997 and the treaty failed to meet the criteria suggested by Clinton and his staff. By all means, let's pin this solely on Bush being an "unapologetic cowboy.". :roll:


Link 1

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Expect the worlds scientist to be dismissed away by a first year grad student in 4..3..2..1....

I thought that the scientists said that they did not know if Kyoto would have any significant impact on global warming to a large degree?

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: maddogchen
Bush has made his position very clear. NO. Will he succumb to the world and listen to what they say? NO. Will Bush go against his big business supporters? NO. Will Bush flip-flop on this issue? NO. Will our environment under Bush improve? NO.

Yes, let's completely ignore the fact that the Senate voted to disagree to any treaty that adversly affected the US economy (Kyoto did such) by a 95-0 vote in 1997 and the treaty failed to meet the criteria suggested by Clinton and his staff. By all means, let's pin this solely on Bush being an "unapologetic cowboy.". :roll:


Link 1

You'll see from my post above the turning down Kyoto was a good idea. However don't delude yourself into thinking bush isn't an unapologetic cowboy. He has the worst environmental record of any U.S. President in our entire history as a country. I DARE you to dispute this. I'll rip you a new one so bad that you'll flinch every time you see a fact because you think it's gonna beat you up and embarass you again.

 

[Grakatt]

Originally posted by: Smilin
Look, I'm an environmentalist and a pretty serious Bush hater. However the Kyoto protocol in it's current state will cripple the world economies. The only reason the other industrial nations have ratified it is because they KNOW that we have no choice but to turn it down. It provides them an escape route that makes us look like the bad guys. If for some insane reason we accepted Kyoto you would see them all sh1t their pants and start backpedaling

Any real environmentalist (and not some crackpot) knows that for environmental policies to work they must strike a balance between the environment and the realities of feeding and clothing 6 billion people in an industrialized world. You can ask businesses to clean up their act but you can't ask them to close their doors.

Also as far as "the worlds scientists" versus a pre-grad student or any other scientist:
When Einstein was told that Hitler had assembled 100 scientists that refute his claims on relativity he replied, "If I was wrong it would only take one to prove it." Science isn't the study of opinion.

Good points. I always saw the Kyoto as insufficient, but the only idea of how to begin 'cleaning up' that's managed to get into everyones' head. I know I should read about it, but my time is chopped up into little bits. Me, slow me. Anyway, didn't the Kyoto protocol endorse or at least approve of 'carbon sinks', i.e some sort of special trees, where other trees may or may not have stood before? That worked over countries' borders, so that Andorra could for example dig up half the rainforest in Nicaragua and plant super-trees and STILL not do anything about its coal-power-plants?

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Expect the worlds scientist to be dismissed away by a first year grad student in 4..3..2..1....

Ah, the hypocrisy!
Bush doctrine: preemptive attack on terror-supporting nation
Todd doctrine: preemptive personal attack on anyone who disagrees with him

Sad thing is, I don't know anything about Kyoto so I wouldn't have even commented. Now, it looks like you dug your own grave and you're the one disagreeing with the scientists. :thumbsup:

 

[arsbanned]

It's sad that the U.S. has become a rogue nation under GWB.

 

[NesuD]

The Kyoto agreement has never really been anything more than a political maneuver by primarily the EU nations to embarrass the US and try to gain political leverage. None of them have to abide by it if we don't and our non participation has always been a foregone conclusion. Russia ratifying it really has no meaning. Meaningless headline.

Originally posted by: arsbanned
It's sad that the U.S. has become a rogue nation under GWB.

:roll:

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Smilin
[You'll see from my post above the turning down Kyoto was a good idea. However don't delude yourself into thinking bush isn't an unapologetic cowboy. He has the worst environmental record of any U.S. President in our entire history as a country. I DARE you to dispute this. I'll rip you a new one so bad that you'll flinch every time you see a fact because you think it's gonna beat you up and embarass you again.

1) I never said Bush wasn't an "unapologetic cowboy," just that you can't blame every single decision of his on this basis

2) Fvck you. Seriously, WTF is up with that last line? Does it make you feel better or more manly? Can I try it? "Two plus two equals four. I DARE you to dispute this. I'll skull-fvck your mom's corpse and rape your grandmother with my math skillz! Arggghhhh!" Nope, didn't do anything for me.

 

[ntdz]

yup, the usa is a rogue nation...except for the fact we still are the most powerful nation, richest nation, etc...If we were "rogue", we'd be threatening to use our 10,000 nukes.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: NesuD
The Kyoto agreement has never really been anything more than a political maneuver by primarily the EU nations to embarrass the US and try to gain political leverage. None of them have to abide by it if we don't and our non participation has always been a foregone conclusion.

Last I read most of the European countries didn't even meet their deadlines.

 

[fjord]

Read: Profit margin, greed, and lack of responsibility.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: Smilin
[You'll see from my post above the turning down Kyoto was a good idea. However don't delude yourself into thinking bush isn't an unapologetic cowboy. He has the worst environmental record of any U.S. President in our entire history as a country. I DARE you to dispute this. I'll rip you a new one so bad that you'll flinch every time you see a fact because you think it's gonna beat you up and embarass you again.

1) I never said Bush wasn't an "unapologetic cowboy," just that you can't blame every single decision of his on this basis

2) Fvck you. Seriously, WTF is up with that last line? Does it make you feel better or more manly? Can I try it? "Two plus two equals four. I DARE you to dispute this. I'll skull-fvck your mom's corpse and rape your grandmother with my math skillz! Arggghhhh!" Nope, didn't do anything for me.

1.) Your assertion that Bush isn't an unapolagetic cowboy was derived from the " :roll: " at the end of:

By all means, let's pin this solely on Bush being an "unapologetic cowboy.". :roll:

if this isn't what you meant then perhaps you should use big words instead of rolling your eyes and "rape your grandmother".

2.) So I guess you're not going to dispute that Dubya has the worst environmental record of any US president? I didn't think seriously that anyone would.

I think "skull-fvck your mom's corpse" isn't quite what I had in mind should you have disputed me. That statement is a bit useless and immature for a political discussion. The fact you said it pretty much undermines anything further you might say regardless of it's substance or merit. I don't conduct discussions with 12 year olds.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Smilin
2.) So I guess you're not going to dispute that Dubya has the worst environmental record of any US president? I didn't think seriously that anyone would.

I think "skull-fvck your mom's corpse" isn't quite what I had in mind should you have disputed me. That statement is a bit useless and immature for a political discussion. The fact you said it pretty much undermines anything further you might say regardless of it's substance or merit. I don't conduct discussions with 12 year olds.

The power of analogy continues to elude the members of this forum. :roll:

 

[Smilin]

I got your analogy. It was just in poor taste.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Smilin
I got your analogy. It was just in poor taste.

Yes, while "I'll rip you a new one so bad that you'll flinch every time you see a fact because you think it's gonna beat you up and embarass you again" has long been a staple in rational discourse. Didn't Lincoln have that in his Gettysburg Address? Maybe it got edited out..

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Smilin
I got your analogy. It was just in poor taste.

He used an excessive example to point out the excesses of your own statement. You're both arguing the exact same point. Why threaten to brow beat him with facts that are irrelevant to the current discussion?

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Smilin

1.) Your assertion that Bush isn't an unapolagetic cowboy was derived from the " :roll: " at the end of:

By all means, let's pin this solely on Bush being an "unapologetic cowboy.". :roll:

if this isn't what you meant then perhaps you should use big words instead of rolling your eyes and "rape your grandmother".

2.) So I guess you're not going to dispute that Dubya has the worst environmental record of any US president? I didn't think seriously that anyone would.

I think "skull-fvck your mom's corpse" isn't quite what I had in mind should you have disputed me. That statement is a bit useless and immature for a political discussion. The fact you said it pretty much undermines anything further you might say regardless of it's substance or merit. I don't conduct discussions with 12 year olds.

Here's let's try this again:

1) So you decide to take the last two words in the sentence and assume I disagreed with just them, because I put a "eye-roll" after the sentence? Let me try another analogy, even though you seem to lack the ability to comprehend them.

[news] A black man was accused of murder today.
[some response] That's just like a black man to kill some one!
[me] By all means, let's pin this solely on the man being "black." :roll:

Now how can you conclude from that sentence that I am implying that the man isn't black? You can't. You are forced to assume that I am implying that the cause cannot be attributted to the fact. Get it? See how the English language works? Hell, if I wanted to go further, I would add some random comments from you about how men are more likely to use urinals than woman and threaten you to disagree with me, despite that fact that it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

And what "big words" would you like me to use? Things like "rip you a new one so bad" or "gonna beat you up and embarass you"? Are those your examples of a mature conversation?

2) I have no idea if Bush is somehow the "worst environmental president" we've ever had, so I have no basis to try and dispute you. I was simply going to just believe you, as you seemed to be so adamant that I assumed you must have some some link to "prove" your statement that you were just itching to post so you could feel good about yourself.

3) You are quite the hypocrite to post some of the unnecessary threats in a previous post ("I'll rip you a new one.."), then whine about a parody analogy that mirrored your same sentiments. You seem to be able to dish it out, but not recognize your own crap when it's flung back at you. You have undermined yourself and shown yourself to be the "12 year old," not vice-versa.

 

[Corn]

Originally posted by: fallenangel99
Bush wont allow the US to ratify the Koyoto protocol... i think the US was part of it, and he took us out

at least thats what i learned in my Environment Economics class

Another strike against the public school system. Ask you teacher why he/she would lie to you about this.