[MikeTV]

The US appears to have rejected draft proposals by Germany for G8 members to agree tough measures in greenhouse gas emissions, leaked documents have shown. BBC website - Saturday, 26 May 2007

[Singh400]

No surprise there. The Bush Administration are complete plonkers. And they only think about themsevles.

[truscotsman72]

I havent read the link, but the first thing that popped to mind was 'of course they're gonna reject it, if they agree to follow, how else would they be able to drive their 10 litre, V8, 6MPG, 4x4's to McD's'

[Stuart Wright]

The US goverment need a few more 'New Orleans's in areas where more rich, white people get made homeless.

Originally Posted by Stuart Wright

The US goverment need a few more 'New Orleans's in areas where more rich, white people get made homeless.

But Stuart, you do know that there is no proven direct causal link between GW and Katrina?

It is predicted by some that the frequency and strength of hurricanes will show an increase in response to increased seawater temperatures, but no one really knows how much.

A better stick to make the USA administration take action would be changes in US agriculture.

[blearyeyes]

The news that the US will not support the G8 in reducing CO2 decisions is a victory for common sense. Economic growth is the driving force for improved prosperity for all the world's people and to deny future generations any attempt to improve their lot because of misplaced, and frankly ludicrous concerns of the developed world, is blatent dicrimination of the worst kind. In spite of the squawks from the greenatics about pollution, etc., the world has never been in better shape than now. All this crap about endangered polar bears, millions of people at risk from flooding and disease is sheer rubbish propagated by the media and fuelled by 'scientists' and politicians wanting to stay in the limelight. Proof of the pudding must surely be the fact that since humans first stood upright there have always been the few who are convinced that we are doomed. The fact that we are still here proves that they were all 100% wrong and the present doomsters are no exception, regardless of their credentials.

[njp]

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

The news that the US will not support the G8 in reducing CO2 decisions is a victory for common sense.

No. It's a kick in the teeth for common sense.

In spite of the squawks from the greenatics about pollution, etc., the world has never been in better shape than now.

What does that mean, exactly?

All this crap about endangered polar bears, millions of people at risk from flooding and disease is sheer rubbish propagated by the media and fuelled by 'scientists' and politicians wanting to stay in the limelight.

And yet in the real world, ice continues to melt and sea levels continue to rise. Perhaps you were planning (in the manner of King Canute) to command them to stop, so that we can carry on as before?

[blearyeyes]

Originally Posted by Stuart Wright

The US goverment need a few more 'New Orleans's in areas where more rich, white people get made homeless.

This comment seems to show a vindictive streak in you which I also find offensive relating to the victims of that purely natural disaster. In spite of you personally wanting to seriously debate this issue it seems that you have made your mind up to give credence to the wild claims of the ignorant media and the idiots who fuel their propaganda.

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

This comment seems to show a vindictive streak in you which I also find offensive relating to the victims of that purely natural disaster. In spite of you personally wanting to seriously debate this issue it seems that you have made your mind up to give credence to the wild claims of the ignorant media and the idiots who fuel their propaganda.

What exactly are the "wild claims of the ignorant media" and who are the "idiots"? What is their "propaganda"?

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by Stuart Wright

The US goverment need a few more 'New Orleans's in areas where more rich, white people get made homeless.

Hi Stuart,

Do you think MMGW was the cause of the New Orleans disaster? I don’t know the answer to this.

I do know that a lot of rich white people live in Florida and they have more than one hurricane every year. Large numbers of them are made homeless, as are average income and poor white, black, Hispanic, Jewish and all other manner of creeds and colours. Home insurance I would imagine must be pretty expensive too. The last I heard, the people there voted in G. Bush's brother.

To elaborate slightly, George Bush received a lot of criticism from the liberal media for not sending in the National Guard (NG) to help the needy. I can understand the criticism fully, and indeed I would agree with this criticism, if I too had little knowledge of the US constitution. It is my understanding, and correct me if I am wrong, but the federal authorities have no power to send the NG to a particular state unless the state governor invites them to do so. This wasn’t done until it was all far too late.

I believe that the US argued that Kyoto was pointless because it paid no attention to the two billion people in India and China who will be exponentially increasing their use of energy in the future. All it would do, they argued, is postpone the inevitable for a few years whilst harming the US economy. That would mean harming the poorest in the US the most, as they can least afford economic shocks.

The following information is from the Daily Telegraph. I cannot remember the date, who wrote it, or in what context. If it’s wrong then please correct me. If my recollection is wrong, then please correct me.
It was suggested that if all road transport in the UK were halted immediately, then simply the growth in Chinas carbon emissions would render this redundant in less than 60 days. Also, if UK plc were to shut down completely, in which case MMGW would be the least of our worries, then the increase in Chinese CO2 output would render this heroic gesture redundant in only two years.

Kind regards,

Damo

[blearyeyes]

Originally Posted by nikyzf

What exactly are the "wild claims of the ignorant media" and who are the "idiots"? What is their "propaganda"?

Start here for the wild claims:

www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/2045/

The idiots are those who can't see that this is yet another attempt to install the old defunct 'command and control' philosophy on a global scale under the guise of protecting humanity from the evils of capitalist development.

By the way, I have yet to hear an avid greenatic speak any sense on any subject, and believe me I have had direct contact with quite a few over the years!

[njp]

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

Start here for the wild claims:

www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/2045/

But that page is written by John Brignell, and his comical understanding of the greenhouse effect means that he cannot be taken remotely seriously on matters of climate science. Or any science, I suspect. Imagine thinking that the greenhouse effect is a "three body problem"!

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

Start here for the wild claims:

www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/2045/

The idiots are those who can't see that this is yet another attempt to install the old defunct 'command and control' philosophy on a global scale under the guise of protecting humanity from the evils of capitalist development.

I see, that old conspiracy theory again. Do you check for reds under beds on a regular basis?

By the way, I have yet to hear an avid greenatic speak any sense on any subject, and believe me I have had direct contact with quite a few over the years!

I don't know what an "avid greenatic" is but I'm sure you must be right (in your own mind, that is)!

[blearyeyes]

Originally Posted by njp

But that page is written by John Brignell, and his comical understanding of the greenhouse effect means that he cannot be taken remotely seriously on matters of climate science. Or any science, I suspect. Imagine thinking that the greenhouse effect is a "three body problem"!

The guy didn't write the links if you would care to read the article! You really do want to believe you are right with this one (MMGW), but as I have said before the scientific community has an abysmal record of accurately predicting the future.

[blearyeyes]

Avid greenatic - one who selectively uses scientific evidence to back up a chosen agenda or belief; usually can't hold a rational argument; is technically and scientically challenged; believes humanity creates problems at every turn; anti-technology.

[njp]

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

The guy didn't write the links if you would care to read the article!

That's the whole point. I followed a random selection of his links and found nothing wrong with them! And when I looked at what Brignell himself believed, I found his views scientifically absurd. So the idea that he would be able to spot a ridiculous claim made by somebody else is frankly laughable.

I don't doubt that there are some ludicrous claims hidden in that long list. It would be surprising if there weren't. Why don't you find one for me, and then we can talk about that?

[andykn]

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

This comment seems to show a vindictive streak in you which I also find offensive relating to the victims of that purely natural disaster. In spite of you personally wanting to seriously debate this issue it seems that you have made your mind up to give credence to the wild claims of the ignorant media and the idiots who fuel their propaganda.

Whether or not that disaster was 'purely natural' or not is still the subject of debate amongst people who understand a lot more about climate mecanisms than you or I do.

Stuart's point is that the US Govt showed that it cared little for the victims and so was probably disinterested in the cause. Were the victims rich and white 'something would be done'.

The size and scale of Florida hurricanes is not remotely comparable.

Originally Posted by blearyeyes

Avid greenatic - one who selectively uses scientific evidence to back up a chosen agenda or belief; usually can't hold a rational argument; is technically and scientically challenged; believes humanity creates problems at every turn; anti-technology.

OK. I don't know anyone like that but I'll watch out for them.

[mw01908]

The thing is, Bush will continue to reject the G8 proposals because they will hurt Americas economy. His view and other scientists views are that its madness to do something that would harm America based only on a theory.
I've read a lot of the reports from the National Hurricane Centre and external reports which link from the site and they basically says that there is no link between increased sea temp and increased hurricane activity... Even if there was there is no further link between Co2 emissions and heating of the earth anyway.

Have a read its all online.

[Corey USA]

I think if someone proposed that the cuts be even across the board regardless to population density he would favor it for it would keep the USA companies and economy at the ratio of consumption and wealth the same as it is now.

Bush is also may be thinking in terms of nations not in terms of number of people.

There is a law within Profit driven Business that says "The (CEO) Can Not take any actions that would decrease profit" This is to ensure the interest(money) of the shareholders is secure.

OK here is the words from the source I used "The rule of corporate law that a corporation's directors are prohibited from any activity that would reduce profits."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpora...lity#Criticism
under "Criticism"

Bush does not represent the common citizen. Most everyone I talk too and including myself thinks he has gone insane catering to Big Business at the expense of the rest of the planet. Those same Big Business has the UK in there pocket as well. I am not saying anything bad about the UK citizens. I am just saying they were hijacked as we were. through lobbying, payoff, intimidation, etc. Proof talk to the people on the receiving end of the pitch by big business. I personally don't need to prove it. If I must, then its personal for it is partially responsible for my disability status. So, yes I do have a grudge against Big Business and For Profit Business and Corrupt Government, because they have a direct and personal impact on my quality of life.

I have been accused of being brutally honest. yeah, I have been hurt too much by lies, so I have rebelled by doing the opposite.

Back to Bush- Sorry for his actions, I did not vote for him this last election. I voted "constitutionalists"

As far as rich being in New Orleans They have multitude of homes so it does not hurt them other than a few lost dollars. They simply pack up and go to one of there other homes. Rich only represent less than 1% now in the USA
that is a income of 1 million or more a year. and the gap is getting worse every year as lobbying occurs to secure more profits.

Keeping this in mind about less than 1 percent, lets say the population is 200 only about 1 person would be filthy rich, so its going to be difficult to effect the rich with disasters. It would probably take direct action by the rest of the citizens to threaten the rich before anything would be done.

Personally I "suspect" Bush did not respond to New Orleans In hope that the poor would die en-mass so as not to need the welfare and other services.
They don't need National Guard. "Fema" is the one that is Suppose to respond to "environmental disasters"(especially after one occurs) they do not need Invitation to start relief efforts.
I used "Environmental" disaster instead because it is neutral in regards to it being natural or man caused.

I wish they would not wait till bush end of term and they should impeach him get him out so congress and the house can get the Consumption and Emissions down.

Hi guys

I live in the US but also have a second home here in the UK just outside London. I do like the UK and spend a fair bit of time here on work business.

What fascinates me most about you brits is your obsession with global warming. In the US it’s hardly ever mentioned but this side of the pond it’s a big talking subject amongst people and is constantly on the TV and in your newspapers.
What are people's views as to why Americans don’t seem to be bothered about it?. Is it because the global warming buzz has not got to our side of the pond yet or is it because most Americans just dismiss or maybe don’t understand it. The main talking point in the US especially for those who live here in New York is the Iraq war and the threat from terrorism so maybe we have got our hands full and dismiss many other things. I was in Greenwich Village, Manhattan when the trade centre was attacked on 9/11, this is less then 2 miles away from the towers so know only to well from first hand experience how this has affected people to such an extent that not a lot else is worth talking about.

I personally am not sure who and what to believe at present, a lot of this is due to the fact that until I lived here in the UK part time I have not really given it any thought as its not been something many talk about in the US. I have been bombarded from many people here telling me their opinions and I am nothing short of confused. I do feel a bit ashamed in saying this but it was only last week that I found out what a carbon footprint means, many of my fellow Americans would have a guess but would never be sure, many would also not understand or even care about what a greenhouse gas is.
If all the facts are correct and we are changing our climate then it’s something that we should all be worried about.


COREYUSA, I voted for Bush and have not regretted it, where are you from as you seem to have strong views, maybe the first American I have come across to have such strong views.

All the best, Mike.

[lynx]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

The main talking point in the US especially for those who live here in New York is the Iraq war and the threat from terrorism so maybe we have got our hands full and dismiss many other things.

Mike, terrorism in the UK - and the wider context of europe- is nothing new, it is something we have lived with for decades. It's focus has changed in the past few years however, from "the troubles" in Northern Ireland to an altogether different face of terrorism being heavily influenced by political events in the middle east.
Some examples...
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2004/madrid.bombing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/h...ml/default.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/...523526,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2357109.stm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_...hostage_crisis


Google is your friend,search for many,many more examples. I believe the threat of terrorism is a relatively new phenomenon for Americans (I'll stand corrected if I'm wrong).

Originally Posted by lynx

I believe the threat of terrorism is a relatively new phenomenon for Americans (I'll stand corrected if I'm wrong).

Yes you are correct and that is why it occupies us more then anything else. The extreme loss of life and the destruction of the WTC was a wake up call to not only New Yorkers but to all Americans.

Since spending time here in the UK I have learnt of the continuing fight against various terrorist organisations down through the years that your country has had to endure. But the sheer magnitude of what happened on 9/11 here in Manhattan will be sketched on my mind forever and has to go down as maybe the worse terrorist attack anywhere in the world.

I think this is going off subject now so I wont dither any longer but was just trying to give some insight into why Americans dont really wory about Global Warming.

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

Yes you are correct and that is why it occupies us more then anything else. The extreme loss of life and the destruction of the WTC was a wake up call to not only New Yorkers but to all Americans.

Since spending time here in the UK I have learnt of the continuing fight against various terrorist organisations down through the years that your country has had to endure. But the sheer magnitude of what happened on 9/11 here in Manhattan will be sketched on my mind forever and has to go down as maybe the worse terrorist attack anywhere in the world.

I think this is going off subject now so I wont dither any longer but was just trying to give some insight into why Americans dont really wory about Global Warming.

I have great sympathy for the predicament our US friends find themselves in, and for the horror unleashed in Manhattan six years ago.

One thing though that really does annoy me is that US citizens were ALLOWED to fund terrorist groups here in the UK, namely the IRA. Indeed, the IRA attempted to kill the entire British government, and came very close to killing the Prime Minister of the day. One of the ironies is that this particular Prime Minister was probably the greatest friend of the US here in the UK since the second world war, and helped enormously in the now almost forgotten struggle to bring about the end of communism in Europe and the Soviet Union.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/2531583.stm


And this is the 'event' that US citizens helped to fund in my home town...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/manchester/content/image_galleries/150606_manchester_bomb_gallery.shtml?23

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/c...bram=1&bbram=1

[MikeTV]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

Yes you are correct and that is why it occupies us more then anything else. The extreme loss of life and the destruction of the WTC was a wake up call to not only New Yorkers but to all Americans.

Since spending time here in the UK I have learnt of the continuing fight against various terrorist organisations down through the years that your country has had to endure. But the sheer magnitude of what happened on 9/11 here in Manhattan will be sketched on my mind forever and has to go down as maybe the worse terrorist attack anywhere in the world.

I think this is going off subject now so I wont dither any longer but was just trying to give some insight into why Americans dont really wory about Global Warming.

Hi Mike - it's interesting, because I am a Brit, but I too lived in the US at the time of 9/11, and was affected profoundly by the magnitude of the event (and experienced the events at close hand, also), but since living in the UK more recently, have a unique perspective. I think there are two main reasons for the differing priorities across the Atlantic:

1. It seems to me that in the US the events of 9/11 have been exploited by Bush to justify the war the Iraq, and in doing so, Bush has has manipulated the public into an almost hysterical fear of terrorism. This is great for Bush politically, because the public then want a hard hitting president, who will strike at US opponents.
2. Bush is determined to assist the US oil industry. The threat of global warming may severely damage the oil industry, in the long run. We have to switch to renewable energy sources that do not release carbon. Fossil fuel consumption is the main artificial source of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the main cause of global warming. It is worthwhile for Bush to down-play the threat, and manipulate the public into believing there is no impact (and to reject G8 climate proposals, etc.).

The US is fairly unique in that serious political discourse is almost non-existent - both parties are virtually the same politically. Both the US media and Politics generally, are largely controlled by corporate America - or at least more so than in any other country I can think of. In my opinion, this is why the US public is in the dark regarding Global Warming (and other significant political issues - like the fact that 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq, for instance). I believe the perspective we have here in the UK regarding the threat of GW, is the same perspective as held by the entire World except, of course, in the US. It is not Britain that is exceptional. The threat of GW is very real, and may have severe consequences. The US are the main contributors to the problem. The political parties in the US deliberately want to conceal this from the public, and want to create doubt in the public mind. The US media are entirely complicit in this objective, and in all Bush's political objectives. Only in very fringe media outlets is there any real challenge to the Bush agenda (I am thinking of services like NPR, Michael Moore, and perhaps even the Daily Show). The rest of the media offers wall-to-wall (and for want of a better description) right-wing propaganda. This isn't anything new, it has always happened in the US and has, unfortunately, allowed government corruption to succeed, and diminished public debate. But it has reached new levels under Bush. In the minds of much of the world, the US itself is the terrorist, with some justification.

(Having said all that, I still love the US and welcome all US contributors the Forum! Spread the word!)

Originally Posted by MikeTV

Hi Mike - it's interesting, because I am a Brit, but I too lived in the US at the time of 9/11, and was affected profoundly by the magnitude of the event (and experienced the events at close hand, also), but since living in the UK more recently, have a unique perspective. I think there are two main reasons for the differing priorities across the Atlantic:

1. It seems to me that in the US the events of 9/11 have been exploited by Bush to justify the war the Iraq, and in doing so, Bush has has manipulated the public into an almost hysterical fear of terrorism. This is great for Bush politically, because the public then want a hard hitting president, who will strike at US opponents.
2. Bush is determined to assist the US oil industry. The threat of global warming may severely damage the oil industry, in the long run. We have to switch to renewable energy sources that do not release carbon. Fossil fuel consumption is the main artificial source of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the main cause of global warming. It is worthwhile for Bush to down-play the threat, and manipulate the public into believing there is no impact (and to reject G8 climate proposals, etc.).

The US is fairly unique in that serious political discourse is almost non-existent - both parties are virtually the same politically. Both the US media and Politics generally, are largely controlled by corporate America - or at least more so than in any other country I can think of. In my opinion, this is why the US public is in the dark regarding Global Warming (and other significant political issues - like the fact that 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq, for instance). I believe the perspective we have here in the UK regarding the threat of GW, is the same perspective as held by the entire World except, of course, in the US. It is not Britain that is exceptional. The threat of GW is very real, and may have severe consequences. The US are the main contributors to the problem. The political parties in the US deliberately want to conceal this from the public, and want to create doubt in the public mind. The US media are entirely complicit in this objective, and in all Bush's political objectives. Only in very fringe media outlets is there any real challenge to the Bush agenda (I am thinking of services like NPR, Michael Moore, and perhaps even the Daily Show). The rest of the media offers wall-to-wall (and for want of a better description) right-wing propaganda. This isn't anything new, it has always happened in the US and has, unfortunately, allowed government corruption to succeed, and diminished public debate. But it has reached new levels under Bush. In the minds of much of the world, the US itself is the terrorist, with some justification.

(Having said all that, I still love the US and welcome all US contributors the Forum! Spread the word!)

Things have changed. Exxon accept that GW is happening, although they disagree with Kyoto about how to deal with it.
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2103541,00.html
ExxonMobil criticised Greenpeace, the Kyoto treaty and the European carbon trading system yesterday but insisted it was not a "climate change denier" and said it wanted to play a constructive role in countering global warming.

The Bush administration has a similar view.
http://environment.guardian.co.uk/cl...093055,00.html
George Bush yesterday threw international efforts to control climate change into confusion with a proposal to create a "new global framework" to curb greenhouse gas emissions as an alternative to a planned UN process.

As I've asked before, where does this leave the "sceptics"?

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by MikeTV

It seems to me that in the US the events of 9/11 have been exploited by Bush to justify the war the Iraq, and in doing so, Bush has has manipulated the public into an almost hysterical fear of terrorism.

Three thousand people were murdered, on US soil, at a stroke. Is it not possible that Bush is REACTING to the publics understandable fear of terrorism?

Originally Posted by MikeTV

The US is fairly unique in that serious political discourse is almost non-existent - both parties are virtually the same politically

I think the parties are very different. I also think that the US has a reasonably healthy and diverse media, albeit not to my taste.

Damo

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by Corey USA

Personally I "suspect" Bush did not respond to New Orleans In hope that the poor would die en-mass so as not to need the welfare and other services.

That is a pretty outrageous statement to make, in my opinion, mate.

Originally Posted by damo_in_sale

One thing though that really does annoy me is that US citizens were ALLOWED to fund terrorist groups here in the UK, namely the IRA.

I cant comment on this topic very much but feel it was not the average american citizen who allowed this.

Originally Posted by MikeTV

It seems to me that in the US the events of 9/11 have been exploited by Bush to justify the war the Iraq, and in doing so, Bush has has manipulated the public into an almost hysterical fear of terrorism. This is great for Bush politically, because the public then want a hard hitting president, who will strike at US opponents.

Mike, Bush had to do something, he could not just sit back and not respond. I am not sure if Iraq were involved in the 9/11 attacks or not but many here are pleased he has been executed.
I dont think Bush manipulated the US public into an almost hysterical fear of terrorism at all, seing what happened here on 9/11 was enough, we did not need our president to try to manipulate us at all.

[damo_in_sale]

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

I cant comment on this topic very much but feel it was not the average american citizen who allowed this.

No, it was the US government who failed to stop the indirect funding of the IRA by their own citizens. And it was individual men and women in the US who indirectly funded the IRA, who then purchased plastic explosives from Libya and then murdered innocent men, women and children here in the UK. I would imagine that many of the fundraisers, and donation givers of this particular terrorist organisation were 'Born and raised in the greatest city on earth'. I guess that isn’t easy to hear though mate, sorry about that .

Ironically, in terms of the contents of my post, the following link is from the BBC...

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world...as/1563119.stm

Originally Posted by Manhattan Mike

I dont think Bush manipulated the US public into an almost hysterical fear of terrorism at all, seing what happened here on 9/11 was enough, we did not need our president to try to manipulate us at all.

My point exactly mate But there is an unfortunate bigotry on the part of many British people, spurred on by the BBC, in that they assume and openly state that US citizens are ‘a bit thick’. It is ironic that the majority of those who espouse such views would be the first to cry foul if such derogatory terms were directed at other groups of people, except Israelis of course. But that is the nature of the left.