Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

That's what I like about President Bush. No apologies, no justifications, no spin, no excuses, just the straight truth. "It wasn't in our best interest, and if you don't like it, too bad"
1 posted on 06/30/2005 7:43:21 PM PDT by bayourod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: bayourod

At one point, the Kyoto Protocol exempted 99 of the 129 signees from the protocol. That makes as much sense as exempting 99 of 129 kids from the don't pee in the pool protocol.


2 posted on 06/30/2005 7:48:49 PM PDT by Keli Kilohana (Editor, ZARR CHASM CHRONICAL [sic], Sore, WV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod

At one point, the Kyoto Protocol exempted 99 of the 129 signees from the protocol. That makes as much sense as exempting 99 of 129 kids from the don't pee in the pool protocol.


3 posted on 06/30/2005 7:49:10 PM PDT by Keli Kilohana (Editor, ZARR CHASM CHRONICAL [sic], Sore, WV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod

Calling it as it is!


4 posted on 06/30/2005 7:49:33 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod
...which have been blamed for contributing to global warming..

I thought it caused it? And from I've been reading, it sounds more like global warming is causing greenhouse gasses.
5 posted on 06/30/2005 7:50:18 PM PDT by MarkeyD (I really, really loathe liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod

I read somewhere that for us to comply with the treaty we would need to remove something like 30% of the cars from the road almost immediately to cut emmissions to a compliance level. It was either that or pay billions to be distributed to countries that didn't have to comply.

Whatever the case it's stupid.


6 posted on 06/30/2005 7:52:35 PM PDT by cripplecreek (I zot trolls for fun and profit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod

>>>"Kyoto treaty would 'wreck' U.S. economy"<<<

No $hit?

When will MSM latch on to this concept?

Hell it was designed to wreck the US economy and that why it is promoted by Watermelons and Liberals alike.

TT


7 posted on 06/30/2005 7:55:29 PM PDT by TexasTransplant (NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSET)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod

"wreck our economy..." is the wrong answer even if it is true. It would have been nice if he said that he would not implement Kyoto because its based on dodgy science.


8 posted on 06/30/2005 7:57:00 PM PDT by deadrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod
Well said.

Regarding the post: >> the treaty did not include other nations — including India and China — that he called "big polluters

Because they are developing like we are, and they would likely tell the greenies to go piss in their hat.

This treaty was designed specifically to retard American industry, nothing else. When it was written they thought there were enough nitwits in America to accept it. There were not, and in 2006 there will be even less.
9 posted on 06/30/2005 7:58:36 PM PDT by mmercier (Incentives and power equations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod

Bush: Kyoto treaty would 'wreck' U.S. economy >>>

Yes, it would, he's absolutely right.


10 posted on 06/30/2005 7:59:03 PM PDT by Coleus ("Woe unto him that call evil good and good evil"-- Isaiah 5:20-21)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod

America first.


14 posted on 06/30/2005 9:09:36 PM PDT by henderson field
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod
There IS NO global warming.

Just a bunch of Fat, Rich, Devil worshipers wanting to strip
America of her wealth and make us bigger slaves
than we already are.

Kyoto is just an attempt at a Marxist tyrannical global
government run by the likes of a Mugabe.
16 posted on 06/30/2005 9:14:30 PM PDT by DaveTesla (You can fool some of the people some of the time......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod

We ought to get out of the 1967 UN Treaty, too, because that has wrecked the space development economy before it could even get started. It's possibly not too late.


17 posted on 06/30/2005 9:14:51 PM PDT by RightWhale (withdraw from the 1967 UN Outer Space Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod
Rod, you are so right, sir.

Our President Dubya has been rock solid in defending the American people against an economically punishing Kyoto protocol.

19 posted on 06/30/2005 9:21:06 PM PDT by Seaplaner (Never give in. Never give in. Never...except to convictions of honour and good sense. W. Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: bayourod; Blurblogger; WOSG; Grampa Dave; Dog Gone; Howlin; kristinn; Doctor Raoul

Here's where and how we can use political judo to turn our opponents' environmental momentum against them and for us.

Kyoto, you see, exempted China's underground coal fires from its pollution reduction quota. Those fires, however, contribute *MORE* air pollution than Kyoto would otherwise reduce.

Where *we* win on this Kyoto nonsensical environmentalism issue is by insisting that Kyoto's replacement treaty deal soley with putting out such massive polluting sources as underground coal fires.

Who else should be responsible for the pollution coming from government land, after all?!

So forget all of the Kyoto nonsense about private businesses having to pay for pollution "credits" from 3rd world kleptocracies (read: wealth transfer)...We can offer the world *real* environmental progress at the Chinese government's expense (OK, we'll throw in a little money for them if Europe, South America, and Japan do too).

Underground coal fires called a 'catastrophe'

Saturday, February 15, 2003

By Michael Woods , Post-Gazette National Bureau

DENVER -- ... a more common coal mine disaster is getting little attention, scientists said yesterday. It's the fire below.

Underground coal fires are relentlessly incinerating millions of tons of coal around the world.

The blazes spew out huge amounts of air pollutants, force residents to flee their homes, send toxic runoff flowing into waterways, and leave the land above as scarred as a battlefield.

"A global environmental catastrophe" is how geologist Glenn B. Stracher described the situation.

Stracher, of East Georgia College in Swainsboro, organized an international symposium on the topic at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

"This symposium is dedicated to disclosing the severity of the coal fires problem," Stracher said, noting that some of the fires have been burning for centuries with few people aware of the problem.

Concern and action is needed, he said, because of the environmental impact -- especially of mega-fires burning in India, China and elsewhere in Asia. One coal fire in northern China, for instance, is burning over an area more than 3,000 miles wide and almost 450 miles long.

"The direct and indirect economic losses from coal fires are huge," said Paul M. van Dijk, a Dutch scientist who is tracking the Chinese blazes via satellite.

He estimated that the Chinese fires alone consume 120 million tons of coal annually. That's almost as much as the annual coal production in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Illinois combined.

The Chinese fires also make a big, hidden contribution to global warming through the greenhouse effect, scientists said. Each year they release 360 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, as much as all the cars and light trucks in the United States.

Soot from the fires in China, India and other Asian countries are a source of the "Asian Brown Haze." It's a 2-mile thick cloud of soot, acid droplets and other material that sometimes stretches across South Asia from Afghanistan to Sri Lanka.

The cloud causes acid rain that damages crops, cuts sunlight reaching the ground by 10 to 15 percent, and has been implicated in thousands of annual lung disease deaths.

Mine fires are frustratingly difficult and costly to extinguish, panelists said.

Weapons range from backfilling mine shafts to cutting off the oxygen supply with a new foam-like grout that's squirted into mine shafts like shaving cream and then expands to sniff out the fire.

Most are simply left alone to burn until they eventually exhaust their fuel supply.

Michael Woods can be reached at mwoods@nationalpress.com


22 posted on 06/30/2005 9:31:38 PM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson