Infinite Menus, Copyright 2006, OpenCube Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Global Warming - Man We’re Screwed

How’s this for a depressing start to the day. From Foreign Policy:

 As the world’s leaders gather in New York this week to discuss climate change, you’re going to hear a lot of well-intentioned talk about how to stop global warming. From the United Nations, Bill Clinton, and even the Bush administration, you’ll hear about how certain mechanisms—cap-and-trade systems for greenhouse gas emissions, carbon taxes, and research and development plans for new energy technologies—can fit into some sort of global emissions reduction agreement to stop climate change. Many of these ideas will be innovative and necessary; some of them will be poorly thought out. But one thing binds them together: They all come much too late.

Read the rest here. 

Tags: ,
Share and Enjoy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • blinkbits
  • BlinkList
  • blogmarks
  • digg
  • Reddit
  • Spurl
  • YahooMyWeb

RSS feed | Trackback URI

14 Comments in 14 threads.»

Pages: [2] 1 » Show All

Comment by Angel
2007-10-14 16:41:59

You mean global hot air. It’s a farce. What a joke. Man cannot destroy the planet. Duh.

Comment by Nature Wallpaper
2007-10-03 22:55:28

This whole world is soo late, it’s ridiculous. I have no idea how we could even reverse all the damage we have done. We have destroyed our ozone, and have melted away all our snow… We have destroyed everything… :( :( :(

Comment by manapp99
2007-10-03 11:16:25

I am only taking the words from the authors own mouth about it being too late. This is not what I believe. Also look at this line from the story:

“Eager to force deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, many of them hype the consequences of climate change—in some cases, well beyond what is supported by the facts—to build political support. Their expensive policy preferences are attractive if they are able to convince voters that if they make economic sacrifices for the environment, they have a reasonable chance of halting, or at least considerably slowing, climate change. But this case is becoming harder, if not impossible, to make.”

You can read this as: We know that we are lying to you about the consequences af climate change, but we have to because we need political (or financial) support for our theories. The only way you are going to give us your support (or money) is if we scare you bad enough. Don’t you get suspicious if a cause is built on, as the author of the piece puts it:

“many of them hype the consequences of climate change—in some cases, well beyond what is supported by the facts”

This is why a reasonable person does not jump on the bandwagon of the well meaning soothsayers of doom to quickly.

I do not doubt the intentions of those that feel we must take drastic actions now for the most part. However as with anytime the government throws around vast sums of money, there are going to be pigs gathering at the trough. There are going to be snake oil salesmen taking advantage.

Here in liberal ski country, I see article after article by the local liberals about how we need to sacrifice to save the planet. No one, however, is willing to call for the end of the ski industry even though there is no rational reason to continue a meaningless pastime that contributes to greenhouse gases in many many ways. Why? Because they like to ski, and mountain bike etc. In other words it is major hype and no real sacrifice. All hat and no cattle. Change a few light bulbs but ignore the 800 pound gorrilla in the room. The things being done so far to combat global warming are disasters. Look at ethanol. A stupid idea that will continue to cost us at time goes on. Even the compact flourescents have mercury and will end up in our landfills. I have no problem with a change away from fossil fuels and everyone is for cleaner water, air ground etc. I do have a problem with government forced changes that end up being a cure worse than the disease. I also am wary of governments using scare tactics to pry deeper into it’s citizens wallets. Why not let the facts speak for themselves without the need to “hype the consequences” Like Al Gore and his 21 feet of sea level rise. How does hyping the issue further the scientific look at anything?

Comment by Lisa
2007-10-03 10:43:56

Lisa, yeah, I guess your guys got all the cut.

Jersey-All the oil companies are making record profits even your little friend in Venezuela while he keeps his people poor and gives them just enough to get by to keep them unwillingly grateful.

Comment by admin
2007-10-03 10:12:35

Well actually you are wrong. The authors emphatically state that this is not a suggestion that we do nothing. On the contrary, it is an indictment that doing nothing may have cost us the chance to halt the impact of global warming. They clearly state that the faster we take measures, the longer we can prolong some of the more disastrous effects.

You bring up the point about starvation - well yep valid point. Why don’t we have mass starvation (oh wait in a way we do - half of africa, North Korea etc) is because scientist figured out ways to maximize crop potential. They took the issue seriously and money was invested in finding a solution. Even with that a large part of the world teeters on the bring of malnurishment if anything goes wrong. And guess what, Global Warming is one of those “wrong” things (and no the extended growing season does not offset the impact of the changing weather rsystems)

For the love of God would you quit making this a left or right issue. If that’s how you see it you are an idiot. I know a lot of “right wingers” who are on board with the idea that we are fucking the planet up (or should I say our ability to live on it successfully).

Frankly manapp I couldn’t care less if you think the piece is Tripe since you have absolutely no bearing on the credibility of said piece. What I do care about is someone reads you thinks “hmm he has a point” and decides to do nothing instead of acting responsibly to solve a problem.

I’ve often wondered why your group of naysayers is so quick to go to war without much evidence, but unwilling to do face reality on global warming when there is a preponderance of evidence. How does living in denial actually feel? Should we all try it? Ignorance might really be bliss.

Comment by manapp99
2007-10-03 09:53:44

Admin, the decision to get treatment for colon cancer or heart problems etc depends on the advancement of the disease. The author makes clear that global warming has advanced past the point of any cure. If you have cancer and are given 6 months to live without Chemo and perhaps 10 to live with treatment and all the attending problems wrought by the treatment, which would you chose? 6 months of relative peace or 10 of sickness caused by the radiation? If we have to place added burden on the developing peoples of the world in an attempt to make our lives a little better for a little longer is it worth it? If so to whom? Look at the millions dying from malaria. If we have already passed the tipping point regards the enviroment, why should we withhold DDT which would surely allow many future malaria sufferers to be delivered from this horrible death? What have we to lose? What do they have to gain? My point is that here we go again with the gloom and doom the left is famous for. Remember the starvation we were sure to face due to overpopulation touted in the 70’s? This piece you brought forth is tripe in my opinion but is relevent to the left wing hysteria everytime a new boogy man comes around. My attitude, as you put it, is to NOT go running around everytime an acorn falls from a tree and assume the sky is falling. Did you ever notice how the vast majority of movies depict the future as a bad place where mankind has ruined the earth? The left always thinks the future is a dark place, and that the evil humans caused it. The glass for the left appears to be far past half empty.

Comment by Jersey McJones
2007-10-02 23:29:50

Lisa, yeah, I guess your guys got all the cut.


Comment by admin
2007-10-02 13:02:41

Well Manapp I was waiting on that one. Let me answer it this way.

If you are diagnosed with colon cancer, do you get treatment or say screw it and give up?

if you have a heart attack and survive, do you change your habbits and try to increase your chance of a long life, or do you say well I already ate to many cheesburgers so I’m dead anyhow - super size it?

The point is that we may have already done irreparable harm to the environment and that there is little chance of reversing it because of, in part, attitudes like yours. It is not an excuse to do nothing. We can have problems, or we can have Major problems. That’s the choice we are left with.

Comment by manapp99
2007-10-02 12:07:05

If the article is correct in the assesment that we are too late, why go through the economic pain that cutting emmisions will cause. We have 300 years worth of coal here in America. Hell, may as well burn it all up and pull all of the oil out of the ground here and screw the Middle East. No need to burn our food supplies if we are too late. Why pollute our landfills with the mercury contained in compact flourescents if we are too late. Think of how many poor people we could provide food, clean water and health insurance if we didn’t give away billions in research on a problem that is too late to resolve. We are too late, we are doomed, the sky is falling. As I look out of my window here in the Rocky mountains, I can almost here the surf as it crashes the shores that used to be Utah.

Comment by Lisa
2007-10-02 11:07:51

Yep and it kills Hillary that she isn’t geting her cut.

Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
Subscribe to comments via email
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> in your comment.