The Global Warming Hoax is falling apart

[drjekyllus]

Quote from TraderZones:

drj basically subscribes to "yell loudly" when one has nothing much. That is all I am getting out of his posts. His spelling is not accidental, he really does not grasp how to spell some big words. It is very similar to his grasp of research and science.

Fringe elements here are demanding to know why everyone accepts overwhelming evidence. Their only defense is to attack the mainstream and flout unsupported ideas, rather that disproving it.

"Yell loudly"? I put out three criteria that needed to be met in order for me to be convinced that the government needs to take action on global warming. Thus far, I have not seen a member of the MMGW cult successfully argue that any of the criteria have been met.

The burden of proof is on YOU. Your little plan is going to cost me money. My plan does not cost anyone money. As such, until you can meet the criteria I don't want to hear it.

 

[drjekyllus]

Quote from trefoil:

No, my point was to stop Jekyll from his tactic of trying to make it seem as if this was some sort of fringe nonsense.
Every country in the world except the US signed the Kyoto treaty, after all.
For the rest, see bigdave's treatment of your nonsensical ad hominems about the IPCC report. You're nothing but another liar.

LOL.

The United States did sign the Kyoto Protocol.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from drjekyllus:

LOL.

The United States did sign the Kyoto Protocol.

Actually Clinton did sign it but never submitted it for ratification to the Seante. Senate voted somethng like 97-0 on a sense of the senate motion that it not be ratfied. Very bipartisan. Democrats talk a big game but when faced with actually doing something, they folded like a cheap lawn chair.

Now they have gotten so crazy they seem determined to go ahead and actually wreck the economy as part of hugo obama's plan to turn us into venezuela.

 

[drjekyllus]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Actually Clinton did sign it but never submitted it for ratification to the Seante. Senate voted somethng like 97-0 on a sense of the senate motion that it not be ratfied. Very bipartisan. Democrats talk a big game but when faced with actually doing something, they folded like a cheap lawn chair.

Now they have gotten so crazy they seem determined to go ahead and actually wreck the economy as part of hugo obama's plan to turn us into venezuela.

Thankfully they folded like a lawn chair. The Kyoto Protocol was an extremely poorly thought out piece of garbage. We are one of the few countries who have not ratified it and thankfully so. What the MMGW crowd never tells you about Kyoto is a good deal of the countries who signed and ratified it are failing to meet their obligations so their support is merely symbollic. Its sort of like a UN resolution. Sure it makes everybody feel good, but it never gets obeyed and nobody does anything about it, so whats the point?

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Actually Clinton did sign it but never submitted it for ratification to the Seante. Senate voted somethng like 97-0 on a sense of the senate motion that it not be ratfied. Very bipartisan. Democrats talk a big game but when faced with actually doing something, they folded like a cheap lawn chair.

Yes, the Democrats are spineless, but you should read that bill -- it was written by Republicans and asks whether the senate would vote for a bill that causes economic damage. Nobody could vote for it.

Now they have gotten so crazy they seem determined to go ahead and actually wreck the economy as part of hugo obama's plan to turn us into venezuela.

Actually progress and research often result in new industries and economic growth. For example, Norway is investigating becoming THE carbon sequestration service for all of Europe.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20090615/wl_csm/onordicarbon

Iceland, as another example, has the highest energy consumption of any country but is one of the lowest carbon emitters.

48 European steel corporations and organizations have formed to research and develop methods of reducing their CO2 output. That will probably mean lower energy consumption for them as well, and thus lower costs compared to their US counterparts.

http://www.foodproductiondaily.com/...-resolves-to-achieve-long-term-CO2-reductions

In all these ways the US risks falling behind technologically.

 

[TGregg]

Quote from drjekyllus:

Its sort of like a UN resolution. Sure it makes everybody feel good, but it never gets obeyed and nobody does anything about it, so whats the point?

That's one thing I wonder about. Could you imagine being a young, naive, doe-eyed youngster fresh out of college and going to work at the United Nations to make the world a better place? Then you see the rampant corruption, while you spend years carefully crafting resolutions and documents. Then years discussing, refining, explaining and arguing about them.

Then they have absolutely no impact.

The teams that put together Kyoto were undoubtedly very proud of their accomplishment. For many, it was probably the crowning moment of their entire career - their pinnacle, their acme of perfection. But it's garbage and soon will be forgotten other than as an example of yet another rotten piece of work by a useless institution.

If that doesn't corrupt you, then you become bitter and cynical. In a way, working at the United Nations is a fitting punishment for those who believe in it.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from TGregg:

Then they have absolutely no impact.

If that doesn't corrupt you, then you become bitter and cynical. In a way, working at the United Nations is a fitting punishment for those who believe in it.

Although not perfect, it's been fairly effective at deploying peacekeepers, ending regional conflicts and food relief and immunization.

 

[drjekyllus]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Although not perfect, it's been fairly effective at deploying peacekeepers, ending regional conflicts and food relief and immunization.

Wrong, the United States has been good at deploying peacekeepers, ending regional conflicts and food relief. Lets face it, if the UN does not have the US to spearhead the mission, it does not get done. How many times have we seen the US pledge 10s of thousands of troops to a UN led project only to find out that countries like France pledged a wopping 50 people for use in non-combat operations. Its a joke. I also seem to remember the Asian Tsunami when the UN was holding meetings and having discussions about what to do, while the US had boots on the ground delivering food to starving Muslims.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from drjekyllus:

Wrong, the United States has been good at deploying peacekeepers, ending regional conflicts and food relief.

You're incorrect. You can see the most recent numbers as of May here:

http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/contributors/2009/may09_1.pdf

The United States has deployed only 95 people, exceeded by countries such as Portugal and Bangladesh.

Lets face it, if the UN does not have the US to spearhead the mission, it does not get done.

That's incorrect as well, as can be seen right off the top by Kyoto which the US has done everything to oppose and try to defeat. Kyoto has gone on to be ratified by at least 164 other countries (183 at last count).

How many times have we seen the US pledge 10s of thousands of troops to a UN led project only to find out that countries like France pledged a wopping 50 people for use in non-combat operations. Its a joke. I also seem to remember the Asian Tsunami when the UN was holding meetings and having discussions about what to do, while the US had boots on the ground delivering food to starving Muslims.

An Asian Muslim tsunami? Which one?

 

[drjekyllus]

Quote from bigdavediode:

You're incorrect. You can see the most recent numbers as of May here:

http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/contributors/2009/may09_1.pdf

The United States has deployed only 95 people, exceeded by countries such as Portugal and Bangladesh.



That's incorrect as well, as can be seen right off the top by Kyoto which the US has done everything to oppose and try to defeat. Kyoto has gone on to be ratified by at least 164 other countries.



An Asian Muslim tsunami? Which one?

Huh? Are you claiming that US has only sent 95 peacekeepers in support of UN missions in the last 60 years? This is what your statement suggests.

As stated before, Kyoto is a flawed document which is not being obeyed by many of the countries who ratified it. So you really can't use Kyoto as the UN crowning achievement. Second of all, Al Gore was the VP when Kyoto was written and his fingerprints are all over it. So your claim that US was hostile towards Kyoto is bogus.

I don't believe I refered to an "Asian Muslim Tsunami" I believe I refered to an "Asian Tsunami". Maybe you did not hear about the tsunami on Dec 26, 2004 which killed roughly 225,000 people in South East Asia. The hardest hit country,by far, was Indonesia which is the worlds most populous Muslim country. The US did not wait for the UN, they began relief immediately. The US had boots on the ground while the UN was busy passing resolutions and holding meetings. The relief offered by the US, by and large, helped Muslims.