quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

There should be one standard for all… no exceptions for so called third world countries. And all countries should sign on before it goes into affect.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

30 or 40 years ago we were supposedly headed for an ice age. what ever happened to that ?

Stop repeating this horseshit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

There should be one standard for all… no exceptions for so called third world countries. And all countries should sign on before it goes into affect.

Butch

That puts third world countries at a huge disadvantage. We need to consider the fact that emerging economies wont be as technically advanced as the west. So the question is do we help with technology to help these economies expand, or hold them to our standards and let them fail. The result of the latter is more economic migrants.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


Boo fucking hoo. If its a global fucking economy then everybody plays by the same rules. Its not developed countries' fault that others squandered whatever potential they had.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

1. There is no overwhelming evidence for A GW. I don't know anybody who doesnt think that there isnt ANY GW, just as I dont know anybody who doesnt think the earth has gone through cooling and warming cycles for billions of years.
2. It is not cheaper for a company to pollute if you hold them responsible for cleanup.
3. There is nothing wrong with cleaning up pollution.
4. There is nothing wrong with reasonable regulations that avoid further pollution.
5. CO2 is not a pollutant.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

1. There is no overwhelming evidence for A GW. I don't know anybody who doesnt think that there isnt ANY GW, just as I dont know anybody who doesnt think the earth has gone through cooling and warming cycles for billions of years.
2. It is not cheaper for a company to pollute if you hold them responsible for cleanup.
3. There is nothing wrong with cleaning up pollution.
4. There is nothing wrong with reasonable regulations that avoid further pollution.
5. CO2 is not a pollutant.

I really hate to break the news to you, but CO2 is a pollutant, in excessive amounts. Thanks to deforestation, there is not as many trees to recycle it into O2.

Oh, there are more scientists that agree CO2, in its present rate of emissions, is a pollutant.

There is a way to counter CO2, and that is simple. REPLANT trees in all the areas of the rain forest that has been deforested. Get some of the fanatic environmentalist nut jobs that dont want anything to change, even in areas already damaged by clear cutting, and replant the areas with trees that would produce sustainable lumber production.

Quit taking natural habitat and wiping out ecosystems to put up housing developments that are creating the need for longer commutes thus increasing the dependency on cars that pollute.

Actually develop mass transportation networks that actually are designed to be efficient and cost effective.

Finally, convince all those people who burned forests in south American to plant trees and only use the bare minimum of land to grow crops.

Then there would be less of a problem with CO2.

By the way, google "CO2 effect on oceans" or just read this article Impacts of Anthropogenic CO2 on Ocean Chemistry and Biology this was generated during the Bush Administration.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

We don't need yet another AGW thread unless and until something new and credible is found.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

We don't need yet another AGW thread unless and until something new and credible is found.

Okay, your stand is that CO2 is not a pollutant.

Then please explain why excessive CO2 is dangerous? I am sure you are aware that Nuclear Submarines have CO2 scrubbers to remove excess CO2.

Look at some simple facts, the world population is approximately 6922798914, and growing exponentially. Since the 1700's the impact on the natural world by humans have been well documented. There are rivers that are so polluted you do not dare eat the fish in them, or drink the water. Humans have pumped various gases into the atmosphere that have caused caused acid rain, reduction in the Ozone layer, and other problems. There are cities with air pollution so bad that they have warnings and health problems.

No one can deny these facts.

Even without Climate Change in the equation, reduction of elimination of these air and water pollutants just makes sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Whether or not you believe the OVERWHELMING scientific evidence about climate change or not, what is wrong with taking steps to clean up the air, water and oceans?

There's nothing wrong with taking steps to clean up the air, water, and oceans.

There is, however, something wrong with declaring carbon dioxide a "pollutant" in order to push your agenda forward by fiat while pissing and moaning that people who disagree with you don't care about the Earth.

Dishonesty is not a stop on the high road.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub
I thought...and I may be wrong...that conservatives were not against clean air standards reducing carbon dioxide emissions but were against treaties that did not require the same commitment across the board.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Kirata, even climatologists during the BUSH administration pointed out that CO2 levels are the highest in 650,000 years, and it is a greenhouse gas.

The carbon cycle on earth can no longer keep up with the amount of co2 being pumped into the atmosphere.

Yes, co2 is a naturally occurring gas, any animal that breathes exhales it. And in a perfect world, there would be enough plants to recycle it. Scientists from REPUBLICAN administrations declared co2 a problem long before President Obama declared it a pollutant, Bush 2 is a good example.

CO2 and Methane are the two most prominent greenhouse gases produced today. In a perfect ecosystem, both are dealt with by nature. The problem is that it is no longer a perfect system...

And all this has what, precisely, to do with cleaning up pollutants in our air, water, and oceans?

Answer: Absolutely nothing, unless carbon dioxide is falsely defined as a "pollutant".

K.