Russia ratifies Kyoto treaty ~ where is US

[conjur]

Originally posted by: 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.

Are you the pot or the kettle?

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: 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?

If someone disagrees that Dubya has the worst environmental record of any president then the facts disputing them will be quite harsh. My statement wasn't intended as any threat since I doubted seriously that anyone in their right mind would argue. I'm not even sure I would actually take the time and trouble to dig up the facts for someone that dumb

I think the word "DARE" or "rip you a new one" in there triggered some sort of immature flame response in him and he flew off the handle. It was possibly a poor choice of words on my part. However, there was a line crossed in his "excessive example". "skull fvck your mom's corpse" isn't really in a grey area. It's poor taste. It's something I would expect a child to say.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: 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?

The day China and India have to abide by Koyoto is the day the US might agree to it.

 

[digitalsm]

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

Since when is not entering into another lopsided international treaty being a rogue nation?

Hell Koyoto wouldnt be passed even if Gore was President.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: 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?

If someone disagrees that Dubya has the worst environmental record of any president then the facts disputing them will be quite harsh. My statement wasn't intended as any threat since I doubted seriously that anyone in their right mind would argue. I'm not even sure I would actually take the time and trouble to dig up the facts for someone that dumb

I think the word "DARE" or "rip you a new one" in there triggered some sort of immature flame response in him and he flew off the handle. It was possibly a poor choice of words on my part. However, there was a line crossed in his "excessive example". "skull fvck your mom's corpse" isn't really in a grey area. It's poor taste. It's something I would expect a child to say.

Well you would have to add the statment, the worst environmental record of the past 50-60 years.

 

[maddogchen]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: 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?

The day China and India have to abide by Koyoto is the day the US might agree to it.

I think thats the day a mutated pig will learn to fly.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: digitalsm
Well you would have to add the statment, the worst environmental record of the past 50-60 years.

That's true I suppose. There wasn't much to worry about in George Washington's days. The real damage began with the industrial revolution but near the turn of the century it wasn't really known what the damage was doing so there was still little for a president to work on.

 

[Siwy]

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: 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?

The day China and India have to abide by Koyoto is the day the US might agree to it.

China and India are not required to commit to the first phase (until 2013) of Kyoto because they are developing countries which produce much less emissions per-capita, compared to other countries, as well as their economies are not as flexible to be able to absorb the initial investment the Kyoto requires. To be fair, they are not the ones who created the environmental mess we are currently in.

 

[Siwy]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: 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?

If someone disagrees that Dubya has the worst environmental record of any president then the facts disputing them will be quite harsh. My statement wasn't intended as any threat since I doubted seriously that anyone in their right mind would argue. I'm not even sure I would actually take the time and trouble to dig up the facts for someone that dumb

I think the word "DARE" or "rip you a new one" in there triggered some sort of immature flame response in him and he flew off the handle. It was possibly a poor choice of words on my part. However, there was a line crossed in his "excessive example". "skull fvck your mom's corpse" isn't really in a grey area. It's poor taste. It's something I would expect a child to say.

You need to talk to CycloWizard, he thinks for some reason that Bush is the environmental savior. :disgust:

Take a look at this recent thread.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Siwy

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: 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?

The day China and India have to abide by Koyoto is the day the US might agree to it.

China and India are not required to commit to the first phase (until 2013) of Kyoto because they are developing countries which produce much less emissions per-capita, compared to other countries, as well as their economies are not as flexible to be able to absorb the initial investment the Kyoto requires. To be fair, they are not the ones who created the environmental mess we are currently in.

By exempting the developing countries, they have no incentive to try and comply. Ten years from now, there will be other justifications for not compling.

Russia is now going to sign for political and economic purposes. The treaty allows selling of credits. Russia can sell those credits.

China should no longer be considered a developing country.
If they are able to support technology and affect the world markets through their economic polices and manufacturing capabilites, they shold abide by the standards that they wish to work with.

 

[CrazyHelloDeli]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: 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.

Are you the pot or the kettle?

HOLY SH1T!!!!!! A FVCKING TYPO!!!!! You are so owned Corn!!!!! Conjur just skull fvcked your mothers corpse!!!!

 

[maddogchen]

Originally posted by: Siwy

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: 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?

The day China and India have to abide by Koyoto is the day the US might agree to it.

China and India are not required to commit to the first phase (until 2013) of Kyoto because they are developing countries which produce much less emissions per-capita, compared to other countries, as well as their economies are not as flexible to be able to absorb the initial investment the Kyoto requires. To be fair, they are not the ones who created the environmental mess we are currently in.

So just because they are producing less emissions per capita, they get an exemption? Because they didn't start it they get an exemption? They're contributing to pollution today and they'll be big problems in the future. Its better to have them onboard now than later.

I've been to China, been there 3 months because of work and I can tell you first hand the pollution is horrible there. They say if you fly into Beijing and actually see the sun that day, you'll have good luck because it almost never happens. Even when I went to the countryside for long weeks at a time, I saw smog everywhere I went. Rivers polluted, air was horrible to breathe and I rarely ever saw the sun until I went to the coastal areas, to the beach.

I think to combat pollution you need a worldwide effort and shouldn't exempt 1/3 of the world's population just because their countries are technologically just a few steps behind.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: HelloDeli

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: 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.

Are you the pot or the kettle?

HOLY SH1T!!!!!! A FVCKING TYPO!!!!! You are so owned Corn!!!!! Conjur just skull fvcked your mothers corpse!!!!

That made me laugh.

To bad Corn got vacationed today and can't reply - silly Corn (but he was right). (typo of the word "to" inserted on purpose in hopes of getting pwned by Conjur to).

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Siwy

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: 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?

The day China and India have to abide by Koyoto is the day the US might agree to it.

China and India are not required to commit to the first phase (until 2013) of Kyoto because they are developing countries which produce much less emissions per-capita, compared to other countries, as well as their economies are not as flexible to be able to absorb the initial investment the Kyoto requires. To be fair, they are not the ones who created the environmental mess we are currently in.

So just curious - if India and China start producing Emissions PER CAPITA at the rate of modern countries, what point will the Kyoto treaty be anyhow since we'll be living under a big brown cloud

 

[arsbanned]

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..

He didn't use anything nearly as offensive as skull fvcking your mother, so I fail to see how your obscene threat is analogous to what he said.
In any case, as soon as you started making threats to skull fvck someones mother, this sh!t should have been locked down. IMO.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Siwy

You need to talk to CycloWizard, he thinks for some reason that Bush is the environmental savior. :disgust:

Take a look at this recent thread.

Ah man I'm gonna have to save that for another day. I'm not even gonna look right now; I'm afraid it will piss me off.

We thought Bush's environmental policies were bad when he was Governor of Texas. The stuff he's done since taking office is scary. Get's very little media attention too.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: arsbanned

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..

He didn't use anything nearly as offensive as skull fvcking your mother, so I fail to see how your obscene threat is analogous to what he said.
In any case, as soon as you started making threats to skull fvck someones mother, this sh!t should have been locked down. IMO.

:roll: Offensiveness is purely subjective. I was not "threatening" to do any such thing, but merely making a parody of his moronic statement. When the hell did they ban reading comprehension in this forum? Did you even read the whole thread, or are you just piping up just for the hell of it? I don't believe that anyone with even half a brain could read the thread could and think I was making a threat. If you can't see how "making a statement, followed by a challenge to dispute it and a baseless threat" is analogous to "making a statement, followed by a challenge to dispute it and a baseless threat," then maybe I'm no the one with a problem, eh?

I think the simple fact that I didn't get banned/warned and this thread was not locked shows that maybe the mods understand things a little more clearly than some of you uptight, self-righteous posters, hmm? Maybe they actually have a sense of humor and irony. And the ability to read.

Regardless, I apologize for nothing other than the fact that this thread has grown wildly off-topic due to childish bickering, in which I was involved. The end.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Smilin
I think the word "DARE" or "rip you a new one" in there triggered some sort of immature flame response in him and he flew off the handle. It was possibly a poor choice of words on my part. However, there was a line crossed in his "excessive example". "skull fvck your mom's corpse" isn't really in a grey area. It's poor taste. It's something I would expect a child to say.

He was agreeing with you and you threatened to rip him a new one - which is immature? Both are, without a doubt, but one was demonstrative of a point. Excessive, yes. Funny, yes. It got the point across.

Originally posted by: Siwy
You need to talk to CycloWizard, he thinks for some reason that Bush is the environmental savior. :disgust:

1. Stick to the strawmen.
2. Ignore the arguments at hand.

All signs are pointing to

 

[Siwy]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Siwy

Originally posted by: digitalsm

Originally posted by: 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?

The day China and India have to abide by Koyoto is the day the US might agree to it.

China and India are not required to commit to the first phase (until 2013) of Kyoto because they are developing countries which produce much less emissions per-capita, compared to other countries, as well as their economies are not as flexible to be able to absorb the initial investment the Kyoto requires. To be fair, they are not the ones who created the environmental mess we are currently in.

So just curious - if India and China start producing Emissions PER CAPITA at the rate of modern countries, what point will the Kyoto treaty be anyhow since we'll be living under a big brown cloud

Don't get me wrong, I wish that China and India were part of the first phase of Kyoto. Realistically though, unlike industrial countries they cannot afford it. It is the industrial countries that created 84 percent of the worldwide fossil fuel emissions and they are the ones who can afford to do something about it. As a side note, recently China reduced their emissions without any legal obligations.

 

[imported_judge]

the environmental rules will cost us to much and there for us will not join. Scientist can bitch all they want but nothing will happen

 

[Siwy]

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.

The conspiracy theory that Kyoto is some kind of a plot against US is baseless. I wouldn't mind hearing a more in depth explanation or preferably a link from respected source. Thanks.

 

[arsbanned]

the environmental rules will cost us to much and there for us will not join. Scientist can bitch all they want but nothing will happen

Expensive now or expensive later. Either way, it's inevitable.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Is there any study that says Kyoto will have any significant impact on Global Warming? Is it worth it to do this at the expense of the economy?

How is the pollution credits system devised?

 

[arsbanned]

Gotta start somewhere. Presumably, doing nothing would have less positive impact on the environment than Kyoto.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: arsbanned
Gotta start somewhere. Presumably, doing nothing would have less positive impact on the environment than Kyoto.

Yes, but is that start worth the possible impact on the economy?

Is it worth severely handicapping yourselves for a cause that is unlikely (possibly) to have any significant impact? Why not just take the money that would have been lost and invest it into cleaner sources of energy? Of course that is probably too idealistic.