YOU!BWA HA HA HA HAHA HA HA HA HA!
Seriously, we'll ratify Kyoto when you guys start PRODUCING like we do...but see, by then, you'll all realize Kyoto is a hunk of anti-progress junk and you won't want it either!
It's easy for these other countries to ratify Kyoto. They don't have to do anything under Kyoto.
The EU ratified Kyoto in 2002.
Not one of them has implemented the policies.
The whole thing is absolute bull.
The EU ratified Kyoto in 2002.
Not one of them has implemented the policies.
The whole thing is absolute bull.
The world's worst polluters (China, India) are exempted, so it won't do much to stop pollution. So what's the point in America signing it?
OK, who has the 'Not this crap again' graphic?
YOU!BWA HA HA HA HAHA HA HA HA HA!
Seriously, we'll ratify Kyoto when you guys start PRODUCING like we do...but see, by then, you'll all realize Kyoto is a hunk of anti-progress junk and you won't want it either!
"We have no intention of signing or ratifying it. We have not changed our views"
A bit of sanity in an insane world.
Thank God George Bush is our President.
I have posted this before, but it is applicable to this thread.
One of the arrogant statements by Kerry and the libs is that all "reputable" scientists support the idea of global warming by greenhouse gases. This assertion is simply not true. Recently, there has been an excellent series of letters and articles in The Industrial Physicist, which is published by the American Physical Society.
http://www.aip.org/tip/INPHFA/vol-10/iss-5/p4.html
http://www.aip.org/tip/INPHFA/vol-10/iss-4/p4.html
Several key points are made in this debate:
1. Global Warming and CO2 concentration are not correlated historically. Over geologic time scales, CO2 concentration has increased to a factor of 20 over present levels, but this is not correlated with increased global temperature. Indeed, there has been significant glaciation during these periods.
2. The best (time-dependent) connection is that CO2 concentration and global temperature are separated by 600 years AND the CO2 concentration increases 600 years after the temperature increase.
3. The global models do not properly include the changes in the solar flux.
4. The biggest problem with the global models is their large uncertainty, which is of order the actual change. Indeed, the MIT report, on reducing the global model error, shows that at the 2 confidence limit, the error is the same magnitude as the predicted temperature change.
5. The most difficult part of this, scientifically, is the difficulty in determining the error of the error without hard data. Colloquially, the signal is buried in the noise.
6. There has been little measured data except at the polar regions. Contrary to MSM press reports, the polar temperatures are DECREASING and have been for the past 50 years. This effect is exactly the opposite as predicted by the models. (The model prediction of warming is that it is not uniform across the globe but is concentrated at the polar regions) (think Waterworld). The models and the data disagree at this point, which suggests that the uncertainty may be even larger than the MIT report suggests.
It is, perhaps, given this uncertainty, a bit premature to be committing to Kyoto.
Thank the Good Lord for that. And God help us if we ever get Kerry (or any other Democrat) in the White House. They'll sell us out to the U.N. and Kyoto faster than you can say "tax hike."
"His administration and other climate criminals like Exxon-Mobil have failed in their attempt to wreck Kyoto, even going so far as to suppress the work of their own scientists."
Here's a major news organization effectively calling President Bush a criminal. Foaming at the mouth in France is reaching new highs.
Absolutely no way I would even begin to support any global emissions restrictions without the PRC being held to the same standards. That is absoultey ridiculous.
Interesting that Kyoto doesn't outright recommend nuclear power as a good answer. China is planning 30 (I think thats the right number) and even is willing to let US Companines bid on them. Enviros ignore that solution.