45 Nations Form Anti-Global Warming Body

Big-Time Polluters United States, China And India Did Not Join Organization

(AP)  Forty-five nations answered France's call Saturday for a new environmental body to slow inevitable global warming and protect the planet, perhaps with policing powers to punish violators.

Absent were the world's heavyweight polluter, the United States, and booming nations on the same path as the U.S. — China and India.

The charge led by French President Jacques Chirac came a day after the release of an authoritative — and disturbingly grim — scientific report in Paris that said global warming is “very likely” caused by mankind and that climate change will continue for centuries even if heat-trapping gases are reduced. It was the strongest language ever used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, whose last report was issued in 2001.

The document, a collaboration of hundreds of scientists and government officials, was approved by 113 nations, including the United States.

Despite the report's dire outlook, most scientists say the worst disasters — huge sea level rises and the most catastrophic storms and droughts — may be avoided if strong action is taken soon.

In his call to action at a French-sponsored environment conference on Saturday, Chirac said, “It is our responsibility. The future of humanity demands it.”

Without naming the United States — producer of about one-quarter of the world's greenhouse gases — Chirac expressed frustration that “some large, rich countries still must be convinced.” They are “refusing to accept the consequences of their acts,” he said.

So far, it is mostly European nations that agreed to pursue plans for the new organization, and to hold their first meeting in Morocco this spring.

Chirac, 74, is seeking to leave his mark on international affairs before he leaves office, likely in May, though his own environmental record over 12 years as France's president is spotty.

Former Vice President Al Gore, whose Oscar-nominated documentary on the perils of global warming has garnered worldwide attention, cheered Chirac's efforts.

“We are at a tipping point,” Gore told the conference by videophone. “We must act, and act swiftly ... Such action requires international cooperation.”

The world's scientists and other international leaders also said now that the science is so well-documented, action is clearly the next step.

“It is time now to hear from the world's policymakers,” Tim Wirth, president of the United Nations Foundation, said Friday. “The so-called and long-overstated 'debate' about global warming is now over.”

Granger Morgan, an energy expert at Carnegie Mellon University in the United States predicted the new climate report “will kick a few more folks to get on board.”

And Jason Grumet, head of U.S. bipartisan advocacy group, the National Commission on Energy Policy, said: “The debate has clearly shifted from a battle over the science to fighting over the scope and design of the solution.”

However, many questions remain about Chirac's proposed new environmental body, including whether it would have the power to enforce global climate accords.

Chirac's appeal says only that the group should “evaluate ecological damage” and “support the implementation of environmental decisions.”

Many countries have failed to meet targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions laid out in the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. The United States has never ratified the pact. And on Friday, the Bush administration reiterated its rejection of imposed cuts on greenhouse gases.

Earlier this week, Chirac warned in a published interview that the United States could face a carbon tax on its exports if it does not sign global climate accords.

The European Union, which agreed to the Kyoto Protocol curbing emissions, has committed to a 20 percent reduction in carbon pollution by 2020, said Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. And if others join them, they could even try for 60 percent cuts by 2050, he said.

The United Nations also is considering a summit of world leaders to tackle global warming, and de Boer said he would expect the United States to send high-ranking officials to it.

Despite White House resistance to carbon-cutting measures with teeth, de Boer and Carnegie Mellon professor Morgan said they see movement in the United States anyway.

“We are certainly building critical mass among opinion leaders and nontechnical folks,” Morgan said from Pittsburgh, citing recent calls to action by corporate CEOs, even in the energy industry. “We are at the point over the next three to five years where the U.S. is going to get quite serious about it.”

And in May, the same international panel that wrote Friday's report will wrap up a new document spelling out the benefits and costs of slowing global warming, setting up a buffet of choices for policymakers.

For now, scientists are energized that the world is finally listening to them.

Kevin Trenberth, an American co-author of the new climate report, marveled at the overflow crowd of more than 400 reporters on hand for the document's release on Friday. It was more reporters than he'd seen in decades of climate conferences. He took out a small camera, smiled and took a picture of the media.

[rheola-2009]

Re. climate warming

How much longer are America and so many Americans going to deny the obvious for purely selfish materialistic reasons. surely the emerging evidence is enough to convince even total fools, maybe even G.W.Bush.
What is happening in decades has happened to some degree in the past, but over milleniums, not such a short period.
We have a similar problem in this country with a lap dog of Bush,s who has been in total denial of the obvious,until recently when for opportunistic reasons, and the fact that he was beginning to look like a complete idiot, he changed his opinions to fit in with what a majority of Australians appear to believe, but is still desperately trying to defend the powerful lobby machine of the coal and energy industries.
Unfortunately as in your country, the interests of the energy moguls, are put before the wellbeing and future of our coming generations.

[processor2]

Global Warming Debate Shifts To WHO PAYS

And that, ladies & gentlemen, is what "global warming" is really all about. A form of global socialism to make the USA pay for its "ways", and to re-distribute wealth (a tenet of communism) to the rest of the world.

A similar story circulated in the early 1970's,, So-called "social" scientists insisted the earth was experiencing "global cooling" and headed for disaster & possible ice-age; and of course, the U.S. was expected to pay for its "ways".

....

[rheola-2009]

Re. Climate warming

Just how totally , and blindly stupid can some people be, no matter what you say, the evidence is there, increasingly disasterous climatic events, massive ice melts in the polar regions, to even consider that it could be a conspiracy against America and Americans is so ridiculous, I cannot not believe the naievity of some people, but then of course those persons may well be members of the republican movement, wishing to protect their own totally selfish situations.
I am intiqued as to what they will say when the truth becomes so blindingly obvious, that they themselves can no long be in denial

[rheola-2009]

Re. Climate warming

With respect to my last, I wrongly stated Republican movement, I know that not all republicans think as does G.W.Bush, and apologise accordingly, however I should have said those blind followers of greed and materialism, no matter what the end cost to humanity

[olgreyghost]

Imagine the ramifications of this crime. Everyone is the victim and at the same time, everyone is the perpetrator. This makes for the perfect "Kill them all and let God sort 'em out" scenario. Neighbor mows his lawn with a gas-powered mower? Kill him, or call the police to do it for you, and do it with impunity because you are "saving the planet." Many great politicians of the past and present will agree with you - like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, etc., ad nauseum,...

[rheola-2009]

olgreyghost

It appears to me you are purposely missing the point and going on to the absolutely ridiculous, This global warming can in time be overcome by rational debate by the scientists and leaders of all countries working together, this I realize sounds as a pipe dream, but maybe one day such will happen.
Nothing will ever happen with such irrational statements as I have just read.
The motor mower bit, how bloody stupid.
And to resort to the mention of those creatures from the past is beyond belief for any rational thinker, under the circumstances.

[sharncedar]

" This global warming can in time be overcome by rational debate by the scientists and leaders of all countries working together"

How exactly? Will the developing countries stop burning coal and oil? How will you make them, given they have nuclear weapons and refuse any cooperation with the West? It's not a realistic concept. All that it seems is being proposed is for the US to be curtailed, probably the poorest people in the US (the rich will purchase greenhous "exchange points" or something). Meanwhile the outlaw nations will get the rest of the oil and burn it like crazy.

This sounds so much like typical Democrat garbage. They set out to cure a global problem, like hunger or poverty, and end up with a small, ridiculous, and limited program that costs billions and helps only a few of their cronies. Free college educations, Clinton promises, and delivers cheap loans to a few thousand of his own friends and supporters, higher tuition and taxes for the rest of us. Free medical care, touts Hillary, and delivers free care for Hispanic illegals, with the rest of us paying much more for worse and more limited and rationed care.

The Democrats and liberals of the world never dleiver anything, though they talk big. They set out to move mountains, and end up with hernias from a teaspoon of dirt.

[sharncedar]

And anyway, what's the big deal about global warming. We're all going to die anyway, and it will be unpleasant however it happens. We've lost our culture and our souls to globalization anyhow, and our country is overrun by foreigners. What's the big deal, have some courage and die like a man. Remember Davy Crockett, laughing and dying in the Alamo. We've lost the Alamo, let's die like men here in America, from global warming is fine with me. And too bad for Australia, I guess this will mess up your beer parties. Here's a tear ... not.

[rheola-2009]

Sharncedar

What a sick defeatist attitude.

When it is all said and done, you and I are foreigners in our own countries, like your forebears, mine also murdered,pillaged and raped the original inhabitants of our respective countries, to at least my eternal shame, as I unlike some others regard myself at least as an equal to all, but certainly not superior to any, we in the past have all seen the result of peoples regarding themselves as superior, eventually those people fall by the wayside, history is littered with them, from ancient times to the present

I might also point out, that if it were not for some of your foreigners, [The French] Washington would most probably been defeated at ,was it Jamestown.
I am not French, or of French descent.

You show your ignorance of this country. like your own people, we have a few,[very few]who put their booze before all else.

It is true it helps to have courage to die like a man, but to many fools die from false courage.

[jdweymouth]

rheola:
Nobody's interested in what an Australian squirt like you says. Go home.

vivaviva80: I don't know what you are, but learn to speak English. Until you do: stay off the threads.

[rheola-2009]

JDWeymouth

The truth hurts does it not, particuarly to people who have an overrated opinion of themselves

[rheola-2009]

JDWeymouth

Your ignorance is showing you for what you are, certainly in the other site
Your insults are as water off a ducks back, as you have shown they come from a fool, most likely of British heritage.

[jdweymouth]

rheola: If you mean by "overrated opinion", you mean the U.S. Yes, Americans think very much of our country because we have a reason to. WE defeated the Soviet Union; WE conquered Iraq with very minimal casualties. Did you know in this present Iraq War we reached Baghdad with fewer casualties than in the first war?

What has Australia done other than been rescued by the U.S. in WW2? N-o-t-h-i-n-g. Your country sticks with us because, without us, Australia is nothing! Yes, Australia is an industrialized country, yes, Australia is a wealthy country, but you need to guard that wealth.

It's Yorktown, not Jamestown. Also, without the French we would have won, but it would have taken maybe an extra year. The French complicated issues more than they helped in our revolution.

Your dream is obviously for the United States to fall. If that happened, let me assure you, you'd have far more immediate problems than global warming. If the U.S. fell: there would be a second dark age. Without the U.S.: most of the world's wealth, technology, and military power to defend third-rate countries like yours would be gone; the world would descend into utter chaos.

The truth hurts.

[jdweymouth]

rheola: My heritage is British! How did you know?!

[olgreyghost]

rheola:

The only thing we have to work from in guessing about the future is the past and we can observe that some things work in cycles and one of those is the abusive power of government based on government-approved and government-perpetuating science. It's not stupidity to propose that there are despots and tyrants, or even mobs who consider themselves victims, who will kill the masses in the name of this science because they have always done it that way in the past.

To keep doing things the same way over and over (like trusting government to solve all our problems) and each time expecting different results fits the definition of insanity.

[rheola-2009]

JDWeymouth

My overated opinion was referring to you my dear fellow
You would do well to read of the history of ww2.

In New Guinea, where in fact the japanese ground troops were turned around, the only help we got from your troops were some who took the longest possible means of arriving at Buna to relieve the 42nd battallian AIF, and did not arrive until after the action, which was the first defeat of the japanese on foreign soil in the pacific,and for which your General MaCarthur, wrongly took credit, after doing all in his power to thwart the inititives of the A.I.F. true you navy was very responsible for the winning of the coral sea battle, and is to be certainly commended for that, and the following advance to Japan
As a smaller Pacific nation, we have no alternative but to look to America , and to slip under it's umbrella, but that does not mean we have to jump to attention for everything American.
More to follow

[rheola-2009]

As for your ascertation that it is my wish that the United States would fall, again a totally ridiculous statement, I along with at least 90% of my countrymen know full well that would lead to a catatrophic situation in this world, but I will say, that the United Nations should have been given more time to find a possible solution in Iraq.
And the lies that were used by Bush and his cohorts to obtain the excuse to invade Iraq were nothing but reprehensible, where are those WMD's and why is the danger of terrorism so much greater throughout the world.
Before you jump on that one I consider myself an Atheist.

I could go on ad infinitum however for what use.
We should soon finish this exchange, I thank you for ceasing your insults, they were not helpful to rational debate
Iwish you all the best.
olgreyghost
Ithink we are generally in agreement

[jdweymouth]

rheola: (last 2 posts-God willing)

RE: You would do well to read of the history of ww2.

I'm sick of hearing that. I have an extensive knowledge of ww2. I know, for example, that American support was vital on New Guinea. Yes, Australians were mainly responsible for the defeat of the Japanese. However, when I was referring to us rescuing us, I meant Coral Sea. Had we not fought there, Australia would have been in very much trouble. Also, we were the main suppliers to Australia during the war. A lot of our sailors died in Coral Sea. Anyway, don't blame us for your woes on New Guinea: blame the British Empire for dragging your troops off to North Africa when they were needed at home.

I didn't say you should adopt American culture: I said you should give the "warmongers" their dues.

Fine, you don't want the U.S. to fall. Instead you want us to be good little world citizens, and you want our military to be one big peacekeeping force. -Continued-

[jdweymouth]

In regard to global warming-

I don't want the U.S. to bow to the wishes of a foreign power. We would do that if signed the Kyoto accords. The U.S. deals with its problems in its own way. We will look for cleaner, more efficient, and renewable energy. We will not sign an accord surrendering our sovereignty. If you want your country to do that: it's morally wrong. Conservatives are nationalists: a trait appallingly lacking in liberals. We (conservatives) believe in our countries more than peace and cooperation. You (liberals) believe in peace at any cost, including your integrity and pride.

Global warming, many scientists believe, is a hoax, and I agree partly. I don't believe in the human element, and I don't believe we're in mortal danger. I, essentially, believe "global warming" is natural.

[rheola-2009]

JDWeymouth

God wil be willing [if there is one]
We appear to be as one on New Guinea,
but you do seem to waffle from there on.I shall not bother waiting for the second instalment, have to go out, not to the pub. but to visit family.

Goodbye and God bless.

[volkswagen6]

From a news article in January.

"According to the most recent United Nation's statistics, the United States' progress in managing greenhouse gas emissions through voluntary measures is relatively better than many European Union (EU) nations %u2013 despite mandatory EU reduction targets set under the Kyoto Protocol."

And then later in the article

"The latest data released by the United Nations (UN) Framework Convention on Climate Change shows that from 2000 to 2004, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions increased 2.1 percent, while emissions of EU Kyoto Protocol signatories increased 4.5 percent. (The Kyoto Protocol amends the UN Framework, an international treaty on climate change, by assigning mandatory targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to signatory nations.)"

I'd like to give you the link to the article, but it doesn't appear to be available anymore. I was shocked when I read it, because all we hear on the news is that the US is the bad guy, because we aren't signed on to Kyoto. Looks like the data shows we aren't doing as bad a job as everyone wants us to believe.

[volkswagen6]

Ignore the "%u2013". It was a long dash in the original artical.

[reasnmclucus]

When is the IPCC going to employ real scientists instead of those who believe that minor atmospheric gases like CO2 (0.038% of the atmosphere) have some type of magical power to control atmospheric temperature? At the very least the IPCC should employ people who know something about basic math.

The reliance on looking at only the high and low temperatures of each day may actually be minimizing the amount of heat energy change on earth. Real scientists would look at all temperatures not just highs and lows. For example, melting of snow/ice depends more upon the amount of time the temperature is above freezing rather than the average temperature.

If humans are causing climatic change the more likely actions involve the terracalories (terra = trillion) of heat energy produced each day and changing the thermal characteristics of the landscape. A terracalorie of heat would be able to raise the temperature of 5 terra grams of air by 1 C.

Forests and farm fields convert solar energy into the chemical bonds of carbon molecules rather than becoming hotter. Asphalt parking lots convert solar radiation into heat energy to warm the surrounding area.




Scientists have already proved that urban heat islands may be 10 F or more above surrounding rural areas.

[shrade-2009]

Trying to reduce polution by cutting down on fusil oils and etc... won't do a thing only will waist trillions of dollars that could be used to feed and actually fix and help other people, all jumping into doing small things that won't do a thing.And they keep talkin about see lvl rising and etc...it was risin for the last 6k years since last ice age long before humans were doin anything to polute air, and even if all stop producin co2 somehow see lvl and temp will keep on rising. They should actually find a way to do something usefull before waistin those trillions of dollars on nothing.

[gwlafayette]

the people that most at fault are the people that breed uncontrolably

[hillaryin08]

Without naming the United States %u2014 producer of about one-quarter of the world's greenhouse gases %u2014 Chirac expressed frustration that %u201Csome large, rich countries still must be convinced.%u201D They are %u201Crefusing to accept the consequences of their acts,%u201D he said.

How could you blame any country for how much they contrubute if you cant measure what causes it?

Another assumption? Gee, now I feeel guilty somehow and Algore should be our leader

[perception5]

Of course France can meet the standards...... they have built 60 nuclear power plants since we in the USA built our last one in the 1970's........why hasn't the USA built any nuclear plants you say?????
Because of rich liberal environmental groups in .......that's why!!!!!

[exusmcsgt]

janem4-

The U.S. produces 25% of all greenhouse gasses pumped into the atmosphere all aroud the world making us, by far, the largest contributor of these emissions world wide - like it or not. It's true.

[talon1971]

if global warming is such an issue now what happened to nuclear winter, over population,and acid rain???????? All scare tactics just like this farse.what causes storms????? Now im not a meterologist but i do know that BIG storms are caused when warm air and cold air combine. If the earth is warming so much why are there storms like the one in Fla and why is the citrus crop in california freezing? so the storms should be getting smaller correct?

[exusmcsgt]

talon1971-

No. Trends are one thing, individual weather events are another.

[talon1971]

so what happened to overpopulation and acid rain and nuclear winter?

[talon1971]

ok here is another thing did you know that in medevil times england grew gra pes and made wine? now its too cold to do that. why is that global warming?

[exusmcsgt]

so what happened to overpopulation and acid rain and nuclear winter?
Posted by talon1971 at 10:27 AM : Feb 04, 2007

Overpopulation continues to be a threat. Have you not read of China's "one child" policy?

Nuclear winter has not happened because we have not had a nuclear war. The threat is still there should nuclear war happen.

Acid rain continues to degrade our environment. Look at the forests of New Yrk state that have been decimated by acid rain from the mid west not to mention dozens of lakes that no longer support aquatic life. The Black Forest in Germany is also dying from acid rain.

Do you read at all?

[exusmcsgt]

ok here is another thing did you know that in medevil times england grew gra pes and made wine? now its too cold to do that. why is that global warming?
Posted by talon1971 at 10:31 AM : Feb 04, 2007

England may have a wine industry again. Throughout the planets history, there have been cycles of cooling and warming.

The difference this time is that the effects of carbon based fuels on our climate are measureable and undeniable.

Rising sea levels will obliterate several small island nations and alter coastlines all around the world.

Our ozone layer continues to shrink, increasing cancer rates and affecting agricultural production.

You can refuse to accept man's role in altering the climate on our planet if you wish. Stick your head in the sand just like Bush for all I care.

[talon1971]

ok what do you do to correct YOUR part of global warming??? I see that "MR incoveint truth" Al gore flew all across this country when that movie came out . he flew from california to georgia and then to chicago all in one day. And heres another one . He went to a speech in califonia in his prius followed by his entourage in thirteen yes 13 suburbans/tahoa's. What a hipocrit

[exusmcsgt]

He went to a speech in califonia in his prius followed by his entourage in thirteen yes 13 suburbans/tahoa's. What a hipocrit
Posted by talon1971 at 10:44 AM : Feb 04, 2007

You want to try to fit his Secret Service contingent into a prius, talon?

[exusmcsgt]

ok what do you do to correct YOUR part of global warming???

Posted by talon1971 at 10:44 AM : Feb 04, 2007

In addition to keeping my tires inflated and my vehicle tuned, I recycle and do not vote for politicians like Bush who do the ostrich thing by sticking their head in the sand regarding global warming in the hopes that problem will fix itself. I vote for those who are not afraid to LEAD on the issue.

[darkfyreaol]

Some places heat up faster than others. Other places experience drastic climate changes- the geography of Planet Earth isn't a flat sphere, so there's bound to be differences. In the end however, temperatures will also rise in those areas that are now 'colder'.

[jt_lancer]

It boggles my mind that so many people are so quick to believe that global warming is a manmade phenomenon.

Recorded temperature records only go back 150 years - hardly a representative timeline to determine whether or not humans are causing the Earth (approx. 4.6 billion years old) to artificially heat up.

There is evidence of a warming period - the 'Medieval Warm Period' - between 900 and 1300 AD, and a cooling period - the 'Little Ice Age' - from 1300 to 1900 AD. In both instances, the climate changed fairly rapidly. Yet, I doubt if anyone would claim that mankind is to blame for either of these.

Global warming advocates are using the last 50 years as hard evidence that manmade pollution has caused the Earth to warm up during that time (about 1 degree F). Yet, as late as the 1970's, scientists were claiming that GLOBAL COOLING would doom us all! Remember the Time magazine cover from around 1975?

The climate is not rigid and static; it is fluid and always changing. Climate change is a naturally occurring event.

It is ridiculous to assume that 150 years of recorded temperatures can provide enough evidence to determine whether or not mankind is artificially warming the Earth in excess of the average fluctuations that the planet has naturally experienced over thousands of milleniums.

P.S. I am not a climatologist, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!

[sharncedar]

"ok what do you do to correct YOUR part of global warming???"

I keep myself flexible mentally and in touch with my primitive, savage self. I visit countries with jungles and try to understand how to survive in a primitive culture in a hot climate. I keep a sense of humour, so I can relax even while millions are dying around me in agony. I try to see the big picture - life is good, and nothing is guaranteed. i remember we are little ants, smaller than ants, and there is nothing we can possibly do as an individual or as a species that will change anything. I remember that life is much, much bigger than any one person, or even the whole human race, and life will be just fine without us or with us either way. If it gets hot, I'll put on some sunscreen. when it runs out, we'll come up with some plant equivalents. Or the brown-skinned people will survive better. Or we'll evolve more melatonin and more efficient cooling.

[processor2]

Global Warming Debate Shifts To WHO PAYS

And that, ladies & gentlemen, is what "global warming" is really all about. A form of global socialism to make the USA pay for its "ways", and to re-distribute wealth (a tenet of communism) to the rest of the world.

A similar story circulated in the early 1970's,, So-called "social" scientists insisted the earth was experiencing "global cooling" and headed for disaster & possible ice-age; and of course, the U.S. was expected to pay for its "ways".

....

[erasmus6]

I can't believe that people are still denying global warming. Are you willing to take the chance that you are wrong? Let's say that you were right and there wasn't global warming but we did the things we needed to do anyways. We would then have a cleaner, healthier planet, isn't that what we should have anyways? Now, lets say you are wrong and there is global warming, by the time it enters your thick heads that it is true, it will be too late because the planet will be well on it's way to being destroyed. Who knows it could be too late already. I think what the problem is is that alot of people are just too lazy to do what they need to do. They just want to leave it to others to do it. It has to be everbody. I know that I have been procrastinating myself, but not anymore! I am now motivated to get my butt moving, to do what I can do!

[rheola-2009]

Processor2

You seem to have a paranoia and a fixation of a world conspiracy against your country, as a result of which you appear hellbent on allowing the greedy and materialistic to destroy this world of ours.
Personally to my way of mind, the only conspiracy against your country is an invention of your own thinking, and that of those like yourself.

Take note of the last post by ERASMUS6, he appears to have at least a lot more inteligence than do you.

[olgreyghost]

erasmus6 and rheola:

Most people are not denying GW as a reality; we have a problem with proponents of Big(ger) Government saying it is Man-made (when there are equally valid arguments that it is natural) and can be Man-solved if we give them the power over our lives to handle the situation. Even the report suggests that there is nothing to stop it and we have the socialists/communists suggesting we need drastic government action to stop a runaway train (when dealing with a runaway train, the best thing to do is get out of its way).

Everything about conserving energy is all good but you will find most people are already doing so because it saves them money. Get Big(ger) Government involved and there will rationing of things that are plentiful, forced labor in activities that will be found later to be detrimental to the enviroment (recycling is a good example) and some people will have to be eliminated (read killed) in the name of "saving the planet" because "saving the planet" protects the rest of mankind (remember the NAZI's considered The Holocaust to be an act of self-defense).

Anytime our benevolent government officials say, "Trust us with this; we have your best interest at heart," is specifically the time to trust them least.

"Those who fail to study History are doomed to repeat it...in summer school."

[erasmus6]

You know what? We are doomed. There are so many dumb ****s out there we don't have any hope of coming out of this. I made a comment on another story about changing our light bulbs to the fluorescent kind and one person was concerned about what their complexion would look like! They wrote back saying that I was stupid for thinking that changing the light bulb was going to save the world. This is to "suiteo1" and "tomjohn9": Of course I don't think that changing the light bulb alone is going to save the world, but it is a start in the right direction. If you actually thought that I meant that that alone was going to save the world, you are indeed the stupid one!

[rheola-2009]

Hullo again olgreyghost.

I along with others do remember the holocaust was regarded by those responsible, as self defense, however it was the result of extreme nationalism, was it not so.

Unfortunately it is also a form of nationalism by many in this present world, making it difficult for a rational debate to take place on this potential Global warming. For this we are in part all to blame.

By the way I shall not make inferance er inference to your comments in future, but will unfortunately probably mispell an occassional word.
Have a great day.

[olgreyghost]

erasmus6:

Try selling the light bulb idea as way to save people money instead of "saving the planet." "Saving the planet" is an abstract that most people cannot touch, subsequently they don't feel the connection but they do feel the connection with their wallets. I've been around long enough to remember when that particular light bulb was an expensive novelty but now that they can be had for a reasonable price at our local Wal-Mart, more people should make use of them.

As for thse who have a problem with their complexion, tell them to fard outside in the sunlight...

[pakaal]

JT Lancer wrote: "It boggles my mind that so many people are so quick to believe that global warming is a manmade phenomenon."

That makes two boggled minds here. It boggles my mind that people can A) say this understanding was reached "quickly" (as opposed to the reality which is that this issue has been under discussion for the past 40 years at least), and B) that after all the evidence has been weighed and reweighed, and the world's scientists have concluded that this climate change is man-made, that people can still be digging their heads in the sand, saying it isn't happening.

If you can't believe global consensus by the world's leading scientists, governments worldwide, think tanks sponsored by Big Oil (notably Exxon last month), and even your own President Bush (finally), you're obviously not going to be convinced ever, at all. So just stay out of the way while the rest of us try and save the human race from extinction, OK?

[olgreyghost]

rheola:

G'day to ye, mate. Nationalism is the result of human nature to blame other humans and not to accept fault for our own actions which is the danger in giving some humans too much power (the current occupant of the WH is a good example). Tell the Hatfields that GW is caused by Man and they'll blame it on the McCoys, guaranteed.

Do what you can to save yourself and those who you care about and that will reduce the load on the rest of us to do it for you and I'll do the same here in The Republic (not US). Once we have secured our own survival, then we can reach out to help others.

[erasmus6]

I don't know how anyone could possibly believe that global warming isn't mostly man-made. Do you believe that we are polluting our air with exhaust from our cars? putting holes in the ozone layer? polluting our waters? How long do you think that we can go on doing these things before there are major problems? We already have millions of people with cancer. Do you think that the things that we do only affect us and not the planet? Yes, there is probably a natural warming of the earth, but not to this extreme. Where I live the weather has been VERY abnormal. We have had so many big wind storms, so much rain this winter. And the last two summers have been a lot hotter. Look at the rest of the world, all the tornadoes, hurricanes, floods,earthquakes. This isn't normal. We are paying the consequences for our stupidity.