From the MediaBite message board:
The rest of it is available here.Originally Posted by Someone on the MediaBite message board
Link to programme:
http://www.radioireland.ie/lastword/2312008-17.wmv
<Mod>Edited to remove the copyright material. Please don't post full articles. Summarise and link.</Mod>
Forgot link:
http://www.mediabite.org/
You can always count on the EU to punish success
Liquidate labour, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate.
China and the other developing countries are poluting on a massive scale and they are obv going to start challenging our industries soon with all their economic growth.
Social responsability is fine to a point but lets not become the sick man of Europe again just to comply with Brussels and Strasbourg
History will absolve me
It's very difficult to find a response for the Brazilian who complains of the Europeans tellng him not to cut down his forest after they did the very same thing 400 years ago.
Liquidate labour, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate.
mediabite is purposely misinterpreting what the grian guy was saying he's was pointing out the farce and mishandling of the carbon credit market
What does the Irish President spend their time doing. Work in progress
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Is global warming a physical or political problem?
If its physical, caused by CO2 emissions, everyone needs to reduce, the fact that the Chinese produce less per head of population is irrelevant if the total quantity needs to be reduced. It seems to be more of a European political problem where we must feel guilty and cut back on our emissions on the basis that Europe has caused most of the problem to date and we can complain about the US not agreeing with Europe.
Personally, I agree with driving smaller engined cars, improving house insulation, long life light bulbs, windmills but I draw the line at reducing cattle numbers - cows today, people tomorrow?
If engineers were wrong as often as economists, would anyone fly aeroplanes?
There's no excuse for the ignorance on display here.
"Only the total elimination of industrial emissions will succeed in limiting climate change to a 2°C rise in temperatures, according to computer analysis of climate change. Anything above this target has been identified as "dangerous" by some scientists, and the limit has been adopted by many policymakers.
The researchers say their study highlights the shortcomings of governmental plans to limit climate change.
A warming of 2°C above pre-industrial temperatures is frequently cited as the limit beyond which the world will face "dangerous" climate change. Beyond this level, analysis suggests the continents will cease to absorb more carbon dioxide than they produce. As the tundra and other regions of permafrost thaw, they will spew more gas into the atmosphere, adding to the warming effect of human emissions.
The end result will be dramatic ecological changes, including widespread coastal flooding, reduced food production, and widespread species extinction."
Full horror here
You have your heads in the sand up to your backsides. Donal Buckley and his petulant mewlings are entirely irrelevant - or at least they would be if the gullible and the greedy wouldn't take him seriously. Some people seem to think that Climate Change is going to politely step around Ireland. You might as well be saying 'excuse me please but our Celtic Tiger has collapsed, please go away'. Do any of you have children? What sort of world are you intending to leave them? Face it, the party is over. By party I mean the one that's been going on for the last three centures beginning with the Industrial revolution. There is a very strong possibility that any human life that survives this change is going to be forced back to a lifestyle the equivalent of that in many respects. What is needed here is the courage to look at that and embrace it. Basic survival will be the issue.
More here:
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate ... htm?csp=34
And you can always count on a member of FF to stay something stupid.
We need to reduce our carbon emissions, and if left to our corrupt government, it'll never get done.
I don't agree with this carbon emission trading scheme, but if it's a choice between that, and nothing at all (which it seems to be) then it's better than nothing (if the reduction targets are met)
Actual morality is doing what is right regardless of what you're told. Religious morality is doing what you're told, regardless of if it's right.
Carbon trading is a red herring.And you can always count on a member of FF to stay something stupid.
We need to reduce our carbon emissions, and if left to our corrupt government, it'll never get done.
I don't agree with this carbon emission trading scheme, but if it's a choice between that, and nothing at all (which it seems to be) then it's better than nothing (if the reduction targets are met)
"Larry Lohmann, who works with the Corner House, a research organization in Britain, argues that carbon trading is little more than a license for big polluters to carry on business as usual. For instance, the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme was further weakened by provisions that allowed big polluters to buy cheap “offset” credits from abroad. A British cement firm or oil company that lacked enough EU permits to keep on polluting could make up the shortfall by buying credits from, say, a wind farm in India or a project to burn landfill gas to generate electricity in Brazil. “Such projects,” Lohmann said, “are merely supplementing fossil fuel ... not replacing it.” "
More here about the chaos of the European experiement with carbon trading
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote