Originally posted by: Smilin
Originally posted by: Siwy
I would not call it common sense, rather a theory without any actual basisOriginally posted by: Smilin
Nope. Don't have any links or whatnot. I might have heard it on NPR or something but a quick search over there isn't really producing anything. I don't really consider it any sort of "conspiracy theory" either. If anything it's a "common sense" theory.
I doubt that 125+ countries that ratified or acceded Kyoto did it just because they knew US would turn it down ~ it is totally ridiculous.
I don't believe other countries are deliberately trying to make us look bad either. Those are your words. I believe other industrialized nations know that they can't afford the Kyoto Protocol and it just so happens they have an easy way out without making them appear environmentally unfriendly. The treaty is not legally binding until it is ratified by everyone and they know the U.S. will never ratify it.
So they ratify it knowing it will never be legally binding and it won't! Not an entirely unclever move on their part.
That?s another one of your baseless theories, which can be easily refuted. The pact will be legally binding once it is approved by Russian parliament.
It won't be legally binding to us will it? Other countries can be legally bound to it once all accept. If we're not on the list then yes, it will be legally binding to them. If we ARE on the list it will never be legally binding because all parties did not agree. Watch and see how many other countries abide by it while we refuse. Kyoto in it's current form is not going anywhere without US approval.
It really is common sense. Although you clearly disagree with my point, I'm not really sure what your point is? If your point is you disagree with me then, ok I get it. Otherwise, what is your point exactly?
Now you are trying weasel out of it ~ you weren?t talking about the treaty being legally binding to US but the treaty being legally binding to everyone. Just admit you were wrong, happens to everyone; no big deal.
My point is that you are opposed to Kyoto without knowing basic facts. I?m not trying to offend you, I?m simply pointing out that maybe you should investigate something before you say anything about it.