1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Global Warming

Discussion in 'Social' started by Scott_Fraser, Feb 9, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Scott_Fraser

    Scott_Fraser Well-Known Member

    Hello friends. I saw an item on the news this week that truly shocked me.
    There were these polar bears, and they were stranded on what was left of an ice berg. They were so far from land, that they faced almost certain death.
    All this, I think is down to global warming. The Scientists that took part in this study, and there were hundreds of them who worked on this program said that in little over a 100 years many parts of our planet will be under water.
    We are all to blame for this, from deforestisation in the Amazon, to polution on a massive scale by China and India, and I'm afraid to say the USA, with there gas guzzling cars and heavy industry. Former Vice President Al Gore is leading this campaign along with Sir Richard Branson, to try and make us see sense before its to late.
    The Polar Ice Caps are melting at an alarming rate, some of our low lying countries like Holland, Bangladesh, small Island Nations will all be under water in a few years time.
    Remember the movie, "The Day after Tomorrow". Well don't knock it. Can you imagine New York being under water, or London the same. Hurricanes that hit Florida and the Gulf States of the US will be 10 times worse than what they are now. You only have to look at those tornados that hit Florida last week, to know that things are changing, and changing fast. Here in Scotland, between November and New Years Eve, we were hit by continious storms, which we have never had on such a scale before.
    Its only now that George Bush, Tony Blair, Jacques Chirac and such have cottoned to the fact that we are in deep shit. But, is it to late. I hope for our sake that they have. Do we want our Great Grandchildren to have a world that is shrinking because of polution, where the summer temperatures are more like the Sahara. Last summer in Spain and France and in Southern England, people were dieing because it was to hot for them, especially the old.
    Lets all try and do something, for all our sakes.
  2. Register to participate in live chat, PTSD discussion and more.
  3. Claire

    Claire Well-Known Member

    Hello Scott, have you seen the film "The Inconvenient Truth". An Al Gore documentary, its out in dvd now, in Blockbuster. Its got a fair few sad truths in it. Its certainly been in our headlines these last few weeks. The thing is its been happening for ages its just flavour of the month at the moment.

    I'm trying to cycle more and leave the van at home. Cheaper and I'll be fitter too! Not sure I'm in time to save those polar bears though :dontknow:
  4. Scott_Fraser

    Scott_Fraser Well-Known Member

    Hi Claire, yes I know, watching them brought a tear to my eyes. To see magnificent animals like that being given a death sentence should be a warning to us all. Yes cycle to work or walk, because we all know how reliable public transport is. I don't know how bad it is in Canada and the States, but if it is anything like it is here then i don't know what we can do. The Government keeps telling us to use public transport more, but if the public transport system fails us like it does, then god help us.
  5. Claire

    Claire Well-Known Member

    yes, public transport is rubbish here. There's too much countryside! I've just found out the trains aren't running all the way to the coast tomorrow so I now need to cycle 9 miles to the nearest train station, get the train and then ride about 7 miles to my destination down south. I'm reasonably fit but its not exactly convenient for most is it! Oh yeah, and the forecast is rain!:rolleyes:

    I think everyone is going to have to change their ways massively if anythings going to change. I really cant see this happening until the water is lapping at people's front doors!
  6. mac

    mac Active Member

    Good thread Scott,
    I agree that Global Warming is a mega dilemma we as a world face.

    I remember one officer (a great guy IMO) who was very devoted to Mormon scripture, ask me my opinion on why Hurricane Katrina came about because he felt like it was a sort of a wrath from God. I told him, "No, I think it boils down to Global Warming."
  7. anthony

    anthony Donate To Keep MyPTSD Founder

    I believe if your going to discuss such topics, maybe a good thing would be to explain to everyone exactly what global warming is, because most people don't really know what it is, and often confuse it with the the ozone layer issues, which global warming itself has nothing to do with. So, here are some facts so people understand what it is, and that ignorance is no longer acceptable:
    Now, why does Al Gore himself push this so far at the USA? The reason why is because the USA is the worlds largest contributor by far of Co2 emissions, to be more precise, more than 1/3 of the worlds contributor actually too the problem. The USA does not have the largest population either, far far from it. China has near 1.3 billion people, the USA around 330 million, and China's Co2 emissions are much less than the USA's. This is why the USA as a country must take a stand, and the population and politicians who are merely being ignorant to the issue, must come to understand that these exact ignorant people will likely be dead very soon as a result of their ignorance. Just look at the quote above, the earth is retaliating against us all. If you haven't watched the documentary that Al Gore has done, "The Inconvenient Truth" then I suggest you get off your ignorant backside, go to your local video store, rent it, and watch it. Learn from it and take in what the problems are. A person who turns around and says afterwards, "Well, me changing nothing isn't going to affect much, so I will just keep being ignorant and doing what I'm doing" is not good enough. The US population seem to be doing exactly this, and instead if the US population got serious with this, many of the issue would cease as the largest contributor to the problem.

    If you want my opinion, Al Gore merely confirmed and he even stated in that documentary actually, that it confirmed what all other countries already perceive of the USA as a country looking in at it, totally ignorant and disguisted with it. If the population doesn't change, each and every person putting in their bit, doing their bit, telling their friends and picking them up on ignorance, then it won't change and the catastrophe's in the US are only going to get worse. What are other countries going to do to help? Likely nothing, and leave the US to fend for itself because of ignorance.

    It is common day practice in Australia, has been for a long time now, that people recycle just about everything, to keep down the damaging effects of what we do to our country and the earth as a whole. Many other countries are the same, and have been for a very long time now. Some countries just remain ignorant though, and so does their populous.

    The KYOTO Treaty

    There is one treaty, and representatives of the world met six times to discuss and negotiate terms of the Kyoto Protocol between 1997 and 2006. In 1997, the Kyoto Treaty asked all signatories to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2 percent in 10 years. The objective was short-sighted. That objective only dealt with reducing current and future emission levels. It offered no solutions for the gases that are already in the atmosphere
    and will continue to be a problem for the next century or so. There are six countries ratified within the treaty, most are signatories of the treaty, meaning they will comply with it. There are very few populated countries that are not signatories of this treaty, and would make little to no real impact on the problem as such.

    United States

    The treaty called for 55% global reduction of carbon dioxide, based on 1990 levels.
    • The United States is responsible for more than one-third (36%) of the entire world’s CO2 emissions – far more than any other country.
    • As one of the original signatories of the Kyoto treaty, the United States agreed to reduce emissions by 6% from its 1990 levels.
    • In 2001 President George W. Bush refused to ratify the treaty, citing these reasons:
      • The US economy could suffer an estimated $400 billion in losses as a result of emissions restrictions on industry and transportation, and the US could lose almost 5 million jobs.
      • Many developing nations that have extremely high emissions are not bound by the emissions limits set in the treaty.
    • Since pulling out of the treaty, U.S. emissions have increased 15% above 1990 levels—21% above our initial objective.
    • However, several recent events may foreshadow a change in the US position:
      • America’s unique political structure gives each of the 50 states the autonomy to legislate Kyoto-like reforms on their own. Environmental leaders in some states are already promoting legislation that supports the objectives of the Kyoto Treaty.
      • The California Air Resources Board has set tough emissions standards and is well known for its strict emissions regulations.
      • The Chicago Climate Exchange is a group of North American municipalities, companies and organizations that have agreed to reduce their emissions over the next several years.
      • Massachusetts, New York, and New Hampshire are creating emission reduction and trading systems.
    • The recent 2006 elections have placed many in office who are sympathetic to environmental and global warming issues. This may lead to revisions in the US position on Kyoto.
    European Union
    • The European Union (EU) became a strong proponent of the treaty and has insisted that every provision be enforced.
    • Many European countries were offended by the US rejection of the treaty. This may have motivated them to ratify the treaty in spite of its flaws and their own differences.
    • Although other nations have been willing to make necessary changes and, in some cases, forgive nations that failed to meet standards, the EU has opposed any such compromise.
    • The EU was initially hesitant about giving credits for maintaining forests which store carbon in what are termed “carbon sinks.”
    • Despite its strong statements of commitment to the ideals of the treaty, the EU greenhouse gas emissions are only 2.9% lower than 1990 levels.
    • In 2004, just two years after ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, China backed up its commitment by announcing plans to generate 10% of its power from renewable sources by 2010.
    • There are still a number of concerns about China’s dedication to the ideals of the Kyoto Protocol.
      • China’s status as a developing country even though it has the world’s largest population and a rapidly expanding economy.
      • Developing country status exempts China from mandatory emission reduction objectives.
      • The exemption is a problem for China as it is the world’s largest coal producer. Its oil consumption has doubled in 20 years.
      • China does not show signs of complying with any requests for reductions in GHG emissions.
      • China is using a combination of CDM (Clean Development Mechanism) and CER (Certified Emissions Reductions) benefits to enlist foreign support for economic development projects, to promote its own contribution to global climate change, and to help reduce of acid rain.
    • Russia’s support was a critical factor in the acceptance of Kyoto and the targeted 55% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
    • However, subsequent developments have raised questions about Russia’s motives.
      • Some suspect that Russia used its support of Kyoto as leverage to open the door to membership in the WTO.
      • Since Russia’s industrial output has dropped significantly since 1990, it now could gain billions of dollars through emissions trading.
      • Emissions trading allows Russia to sell its unused emissions to other signatory countries that emit more than the protocol allows.
      • Some feel that this practice defeats the purpose of setting GHG limits.
    • Even though it is a leading member of the Kyoto Protocol, Japan was initially reluctant to ratify the treaty when the United States refused to sign.
    • Its ratification in June 2002 was important because:
      • Japan accounts for 8% of global GHG emissions.
      • Japan promised to reduce emissions by 6% of the published 1990 levels.
    • Unfortunately, by 2002 Japan’s GHG emissions had actually increased by 11% over its 1990 levels.
    • This setback has not deterred Japan from advocating clean air technology or from manufacturing cars with hybrid technology.
    • India ratified the treaty in 2002 because its representatives recognized the impact that its population (1 billion) has on global warming.
    • Like China, India gained developing nation status and thus avoided reduction quotas.
    • India has only submitted one emissions report (in 1994). The data from that year showed a 50% increase in emissions.
    • India’s prime minister maintains that per-capita emission rates of developing countries are a fraction of those of developed nations.
    Additional Thoughts
    • The responses and actions of India and China demonstrate that developing nation status will need to be addressed in the future. Their actions also lend some credence to the US rationale for not signing the treaty.
    • No matter how dedicated the Kyoto supporters are, there is no quick-fix solution to climate change. Carbon dioxide that is in the atmosphere will be there for several generations.
    • It will take a long-term, global effort and massive changes in energy usage to undo the damage.
    • The Kyoto Protocol is not the ultimate solution. It is a necessary first step in that process.

    All countries must be taking this seriously, otherwise none of our children are going to make it far in life, likely killed by what the earth throws back our way for abusing it in the first place. Will that be a bad thing to help balance the earth? Well, if your looking beyond your children, most likely not, because it would merely take out a lot of the worlds population and stop advancement in its tracks, thus allowing the earth to recuperate somewhat and balance its systems back out once again. Maybe, just maybe, after all these events occur, as they have already begun around the world killing thousands and hundreds of thousands at one time, the world might stop doing things and approach the future with more open mindness, not ignorance.
  8. jade

    jade Active Member

    When I met with my therapist on Thrusday we talked a little about the changes occurring. Our winter so far has been very mild. I have birds at my feeders that I have never had before. Dr. Cocghlin was telling me about a gentleman that makes predictions for the future. Surprisingly enough Dr. Cocghlin said that his predictions are right on the money. He told me tha man predicted that basically Vermont and Arizona will change climates. Vermont will go to above avg. temps. and no snow and Arizona will get our colder weather and our snow. The funny thing is when I was a child I used to wish that we(VT) would end up with Floridas weather. Guess I wasn't too far off. Its scary.
  9. cookie

    cookie I'm a VIP

    this is too big a topic for my mind, lol. we teach that the earth belongs to God, made for us, and it is our job to take care of it. a lot of us don't do our job. it is a sad thing.
  10. anthony

    anthony Donate To Keep MyPTSD Founder

    I didn't for a long time, without question, but I certainly do now, and have done for around 5 years... every single person must do their part. Save water, use cars less, own more economical and environmentally friendly cars, use less power, etc etc...
  11. reallydown

    reallydown I'm a VIP

    And force all our governements to take action...the way it's being handled here i sjust disgusting...
  12. mac

    mac Active Member

    These tactics will help some, but its going to boil down to everyone, to include the wealthiest in our countries, to make such sacrifices. I say FAT CHANCE on that happening though.

    Whooo... the ambian is starting to kick in good:smile:
  13. anthony

    anthony Donate To Keep MyPTSD Founder

    I really like that prize that Branson has put up... 32 million or something like that I believe, for the scientist that can remove a million tonne of Co2 from our atmosphere per year. If I where a scientist, I know what I would be doing at present.... Good to see him putting his money where is mouth is, and helping the world as a whole with his fortune.
Similar Threads -
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Show Sidebar