Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

ah isn't that cute, Bigdub thinks he's smart. Ahhhh! Wanna banana?

   

I doubt BigDub is allowed out past 7:00 pm, Twila. That being the case he should have ample time to properly look up all of the relevant data, learn about the Kyoto and figure out that his president, George W. Bush, has put money before the well-being of people all over the planet.

We don't expect much from Bush because we know that he's a moron who will happily kill for money, but his namesake here should know better.

   

Dictators are about power...not ideals.

idealism...1.the practise of forming or living according to ideals 2.the ability to see things as they should be rather than as they are.

ideal...1.a standard of perfection, beauty or excellence 2.one regardied as exemplifying an ideal and often taken as a model for imitation. 3. goal

That would be Webster's definition.

   

The guest post was mine for some reason it would not let me sign on last night.

You should be concerned about matters like this Big Dub. Victoria's dumping raw sewage into the Straits of Juan de Fuca. Don't you think its odd that sharks that normally live at a depth of 6000' are feeding near the pier in Seattle ?( National Geographic) When the marine layers hanging low, can't you the smog in Seattle? Can't you smell it?

Without international treaties, how are we to get Malaysia and Thailand to clean up there act? How are we to get England to stop dumping their nuclear waste directly into the ocean ?(Scientific American).

Don't you find it disturbing that the US Government is trying to influence scientists and their reports (reuters,see previous post) Aren't you disturbed by the fact that Texas( while Bush was governer) became the most polluted state in the nation.Don't you think that think that all the chemicals we add to the land ,air and water change the planet ?

   

If we can't get countries like the US to honor the treaties they have signed, there is no point going after Thailand and Malaysia.

   

Does that mean we should give up trying and just let the world die? Of course not. The way to get the US to comply to treaties is economic.

Rounds of boycotts against various US companies with public announcements of the boycott. This month we boycott Mobil, next month we boycott Home Depot, Walmart's next, then McDonalds,etc. If all countries in the world start boycotting specific US companies and it is advertised as to why this is taking place. CEO's will begin to take notice, if not there shareholders will. It did help with aparthied in South Africa.

   

Mr. Zenfisher,

Are you suggesting for a moment that a boycott by Canadians of American firms would have an economic impact? If in fact the masses could be convinced, 'a tempest in a teacup' in comes to mind, no? Imo the way to affect change in this instance is to appeal to what is right and what can be done at local levels which hopefully will develop the desired ripple effect. For example, if you can't convince the basic rollerblader to throw their plastic water bottle in a provided trash can strategically placed for exactly that - what makes you think you can take people like that globally. . . . . Until creature comforts and existance are threatened not much will be accomplished, other than the spending of massive amounts of dollars accomplishing absolutely nothing.

Kyoto is junk science. . . . Look! It says so right here. . . .



Someone registered can post the entire article. . . .

   

Is that the Tim Ball opinion piece that contaminated the Free Press this weekend?

The conference was sponsored in part by Imperial Oil and Talisman Energy

   

Zenfisher, sounds like a good idea. How do we go about setting up a rolling boycott? Use the forums on the net?

Rev, thanks for ferreting out the BS for us

   

It always shows up eventually with these anti-Kyoto guys, Milton. They get their funding from the oil companies.

Are you looking to start a movement here, Zen? I know your time is limited, as is most of ours, but I think a few of us would be willing to give it a shot.

   

Just because a conference is funded by corporate interests does not mean that the scientists are wrong. Where else are they going to get funding since they won't "cook" their science to conform to what the government wants them to say.

Science is science and is proven or disproven based on scientific process, not on where funding comes from - unless of course it is government funded then you can say what ever the hell you want and no one will be allowed the chance to try and disprove you.

People who understand science recognize that Kyoto is junk. People who don't understand science worship Kyoto like a god.

If you want to stop global warming, extinguish the sun. Good luck with that.

   

I wish I had the time or the energy, Rev. That is the problem,we,as individuals, are so caught up in trying to make a living, we delegate these decisions to our politicians. The problem is, the system (Canada & the US) is so corrupt we seldom find politicians willing to stand up and do the right thing.

This is why boycotts are ultimately more effective. all I can suggest is to start with companies already concerned about their public image.
( Walmart, McDonalds ) or companies that are high profile already (Martha Stuart Living, Enron )or what's left of it. This generates publicity for the cause.

Third Eye is right about the governments skewing scientific data just as much as corporations. As seen by the reuter's article in my previous thread.What you have to look at is who's doing he funding. If the companies sponsoring it are not going to receive a direct benefit from actions taken or not taken,it makes the report more believable. The reverse is true, if there is a possibility of economic gain from the report, its validity is in doubt.

I think David Suzuki understands science. He does think Kyoto's a good idea.

   

Fair enough. I should rephrase that to "Many who understand science recognize that Kyoto is junk. Any who don't understand science worship Kyoto like a god."

I understand your respect and admiration of Dr. Suzuki, but his specialties are genetics and zoology. I am sure he is smart enough to understand atmospheric science, but I doubt that he has researched or studied in that field at length. Plus he is an environmentalist to boot, which may make him prone to knee-jerk reactions based on gut instinct and emotion rather than hard data when it comes to global warming. And given the fact that he has been in broadcasting, journalism, and activism for so long, he may be out of touch with newer scientific theories in fields other than his own.

   

I don't quite know how to tell you this Third Eye, but that's the most ridiculous thing you've said for a while now. The man is a trained scientist who has many contacts in various discilplines. He understands how the scientific method works and, according to all reliable accounts, follows that method and applies it to his work.

Trying to denigrate someone for using their expertise to save the environment is silly.

   

Are you denying that environmentalists may be susceptible to reactions based more on emotion, unproven theory and political bias than real science, no matter how well they understand the scientific process?

I was not trying to denigrate him. I was simply implying he is a little bit out of his area of "expertise" when it comes to atmospheric science and climate theory. His efforts are admirable, but it doesn't mean they are right.

No one is infallible - not even the great David Suzuki.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next