The Kyoto Protocol is Dead

**dalem** · 19 Dec 04,, 05:14

Only a fool ignores the sun when considering the temperature of the Earth. Sadly, the "Global warming from human industry" crowd is made up of some very vocal fools.

Mars has been heating up and losing ice over the last couple of years too. Gonna blame that on Kyoto-mysticism? Grow up.

-dale

**Bill** · 19 Dec 04,, 05:57

"yeh, I waded through it, basically said that there was no link between observed statistical data and global warming, and that historical global warming was because of natural events"

No, the article i read(i believe it was in Nature) stated that the statistical model used for the Hockey stick model was mathematically flawed, and hence the entire theory is invalid.

Do a google search, im sure you'll get hits.

**Parihaka** · 19 Dec 04,, 16:46

Originally Posted by dalem

Only a fool ignores the sun when considering the temperature of the Earth. Sadly, the "Global warming from human industry" crowd is made up of some very vocal fools.
-dale

as far as I'm aware Kyoto doesn't ignore the effects of the sun, it simply says that polution effects the amount of heat from the sun retained by earths ecosystem. Nobody asserts the suns variability doesn't effect earth.

**Parihaka** · 19 Dec 04,, 16:47

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

"yeh, I waded through it, basically said that there was no link between observed statistical data and global warming, and that historical global warming was because of natural events"

No, the article i read(i believe it was in Nature) stated that the statistical model used for the Hockey stick model was mathematically flawed, and hence the entire theory is invalid.

Do a google search, im sure you'll get hits.

ta muchly

**dalem** · 19 Dec 04,, 20:09

Originally Posted by parihaka

as far as I'm aware Kyoto doesn't ignore the effects of the sun, it simply says that polution effects the amount of heat from the sun retained by earths ecosystem. Nobody asserts the suns variability doesn't effect earth.

The "accepted" models of industry-driven temperature changes most certainly ignore the sun (and orbital variations) as a primary causative factor. A simple acknowledgement that "if we break the climate with our industry, then when the sun gets hotter it will hurt more", is not the kind of acknowledgement I am referring to.

The Earth heats up when the Sun heats up. We know the Sun is variable, we know that that variance has, in the past, caused significant temperature changes on Earth. The Sun has been heating up for the past few decades. And some moron wants me to worry about Carbon emissions? Please.

By all means, develop climate models and hone them to a level of utility, but don't cry to me about temperature without looking up to the sky first.

-dale

**Bennett** · 25 Dec 04,, 12:10

but it has certainly been proven that many of our emissions contribute to the global warming epidemic. of course the sun will factor in to an extent, but to continue letting off such large amounts of emissions is only worsening the worrying situation on our hands.

for the sake of the economy could be seen as a rather selfish reasoning, as for the US's own benefit, the rest of the world suffer's.

**dalem** · 25 Dec 04,, 18:32

Originally Posted by Bennett

but it has certainly been proven that many of our emissions contribute to the global warming epidemic. of course the sun will factor in to an extent, but to continue letting off such large amounts of emissions is only worsening the worrying situation on our hands.

for the sake of the economy could be seen as a rather selfish reasoning, as for the US's own benefit, the rest of the world suffer's.

1) There is no "global warming epidemic". The planet's average temperature is increasing, that's all. It has increased in the past, it has decreased in the past. Nothing has been "proven" about industrial emissions with regard to general warming trends - and as far as greenhouse emissions go, our contribution is a tiny fraction to the overall system.

2) Even if the logic behind the Kyoto agreement was based on reason and not politics, it would still be an unacceptable economic brake for the U.S. and as such eminently rejectable. I'll worry more about our theoretical impact on "the rest of the world" when "the rest of the world" starts worrying about their very real impact on us.

-dale

**aussie** · 26 Dec 04,, 02:28

Tragic news. People want a quick fix. No one seems willing too tackle an issue over a larger period of time.

**dalem** · 26 Dec 04,, 07:13

Originally Posted by aussie

Tragic news. People want a quick fix. No one seems willing too tackle an issue over a larger period of time.

What does your comment even mean? What "issue" are you referring to?

-dale

**Ray** · 26 Dec 04,, 07:20

What so great in Global Warming so long as the till rings $?

What so great about a few cylones hitting Florida and elsewhere?

What so great that Maldives sink below the waves? What's so great about Thailand, Malyasia, Indonesia, India, Bangladesh are devastated by earthquakes and tidal waves?

Nothing.

Till the US is affected.

I am not a troll. Please check what is happening around the world. Floods in Eurtope and Uk. Things are wierd as far as climate is concerned. It is warm wher I live when it should be cold.

It is time to check if money is everything that is important.

Is the US not a part of the world?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/4125481.stm

This is old news from what they reporting right now.

It is time you guys wake up.

The Bangladeshi are poor as it is. Now they are dying because you want to add to global warming.

It is sad that you guys have not read Dale Carnegie how to win friends!

Honestly, you require a Mother of an Earthuake and a huge tidal wave to wipe you up to realise the damage to wipe half of the US to jig;le your warped brains.

Money is not everything.

It took you a WTC to understand terrosim. Would I have to say that something should happen to make you realise the realities?

Unless your **** is taken, you don't realise anything.

**Bennett** · 26 Dec 04,, 10:27

Originally Posted by dalem

1) There is no "global warming epidemic". The planet's average temperature is increasing, that's all. It has increased in the past, it has decreased in the past. Nothing has been "proven" about industrial emissions with regard to general warming trends - and as far as greenhouse emissions go, our contribution is a tiny fraction to the overall system.

there is no "global warming epidemic"?. so its only an epidemic when its becomes something to really worry about eh? your right, its increased and decreased in the past, like that time when the temperature went down, think that was called the ice age? shall we wait till it gets to that stage till we call it an epidemic? *note sarcasm* we can either go 2 ways, help the current situation, or go with the trend. as the US is the leading superpower at the moment, and contributing approx 35% (i think? mite be more, dont quote me on that) of the current emissions, i feel that they share some sort of responsibility in helping out, or at least cutting down

Originally Posted by dalem

2) Even if the logic behind the Kyoto agreement was based on reason and not politics, it would still be an unacceptable economic brake for the U.S. and as such eminently rejectable. I'll worry more about our theoretical impact on "the rest of the world" when "the rest of the world" starts worrying about their very real impact on us.

-dale

no logic? lets see,

emissions = greenhouse effect
less emissions = less greenhouse effect

thus concludes our lesson today

Originally Posted by dalem

What does your comment even mean? What "issue" are you referring to?

correct me if im wrong, but i think we're talking about the global warming issue

**Ray** · 26 Dec 04,, 13:28

I am talking about the earthquake that hit Asia.

Waves above 10 metres hit everywhere. Tsunami.

The disaster that has struck Asia right from Thailand to East Coast India with thousands dead and fabulous damage is worth noting. Thousands dead and millions displaced and they are still counting......!

It was 8.9 on the scale and the 5th largest in history as per BBC.

It is OK by you, but let's hope that it does not hit you ever. Because, if it does, then only will you realise that your lust for money is not worth the sorrow that will hit you and your near and dear ones.

OK it was not because of Global Warming? It was because the Wrath of God that has descended, what? We must have done some big sin in our last birth, what?

**Confed999** · 26 Dec 04,, 18:27

Originally Posted by Bennett

contributing approx 35% (i think? mite be more, dont quote me on that) of the current emissions

Artificially created emissions are only a small part of the "overall system". As much as 3% of CO2 emissions come from unchecked coal fires in Northern China alone, without adding the ones in Indonesia, India, the USA, as well as other places. Greenhouse gasses released from volcanic activity dwarf our production.

Originally Posted by Bennett

emissions = greenhouse effect
less emissions = less greenhouse effect

thus concludes our lesson today

But where is the proof that our miniscule reduction to the total production of greenhouse gasses will make any difference? Lesson for today, the solution is as complex as the problem.

Originally Posted by Ray

I am talking about the earthquake that hit Asia.

Waves above 10 metres hit everywhere. Tsunami.

We have allways had earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, etc., but I've seen no concrete evidence polution caused any of the recent ones.

**dalem** · 26 Dec 04,, 21:36

Originally Posted by Bennett

there is no "global warming epidemic"?. so its only an epidemic when its becomes something to really worry about eh? your right, its increased and decreased in the past, like that time when the temperature went down, think that was called the ice age? shall we wait till it gets to that stage till we call it an epidemic? *note sarcasm* we can either go 2 ways, help the current situation, or go with the trend. as the US is the leading superpower at the moment, and contributing approx 35% (i think? mite be more, dont quote me on that) of the current emissions, i feel that they share some sort of responsibility in helping out, or at least cutting down

1) You can't stop the average temperature of the planet from rising or falling. Deal with it.

2) There is no connection between human industrial emissions and global temperature. None. Reducing and scrubbing emissions is a good idea in general because no one likes to poop where they eat, but the link to global temperature is false.

3) "35% of the current emissions" and similar statements are just meaningless homilies you have learned to chant at the Church of Global Warming. What does it mean? Last I checked, America was responsible for nearly 100% of the Americans on the planet. 100%!!!! Shouldn't someone be doing something about that number!?!?!?!?

no logic? lets see,

emissions = greenhouse effect
less emissions = less greenhouse effect

thus concludes our lesson today

You are merely advertising your ignorance. You are spending time and energy worry about a tiny fraction of the theoretical motive force behind global temperature.

correct me if im wrong, but i think we're talking about the global warming issue

Maybe that's what you're talking about, but I didn't understand what aussie was saying.

-dale

**dalem** · 26 Dec 04,, 21:44

Originally Posted by Ray

I am talking about the earthquake that hit Asia.

Waves above 10 metres hit everywhere. Tsunami.

The disaster that has struck Asia right from Thailand to East Coast India with thousands dead and fabulous damage is worth noting. Thousands dead and millions displaced and they are still counting......!

It was 8.9 on the scale and the 5th largest in history as per BBC.

It is OK by you, but let's hope that it does not hit you ever. Because, if it does, then only will you realise that your lust for money is not worth the sorrow that will hit you and your near and dear ones.

OK it was not because of Global Warming? It was because the Wrath of God that has descended, what? We must have done some big sin in our last birth, what?

Ray-

I understand why you're emotional right now, but earthquakes are fairly well understood events involving stress points along fault zones. None of the process is remotely related to humans except for the horrific effects.

-dale