Comments like this one are "living" proof of the "let's keep burning oil" movement.
We are discussing about our planet, we aren't talking about economy.
But if you are going to talk about economy let's make clear that USA (the second top CO2 emitter) have not spent a single penny in honour of Kyoto protocol. US leaders have not signed the protocol at all.
It's funny you pretend that the only way of saving our planet is keep burning oil. It's like fighting for the peace. It's obvious that you only care about your money. And you hide your main interest by adding some pseudo altruist ideas in your speech.
Do we have to thank God that you are willing to burn the oil (even when is the last thing you would like to) in favour of your planet?
Even when I think you're wrong (about the cause of climate change), I respect what you wrote in this last comment.
Now, there is something I don't understand. If you are that sure about human activity being nothing compared with a few volcanoes. You are admitting there is a climate change.
Why do you object five sentences in my comment when just the last one regards to the human activity as the cause?
Finally, I'm not sure if you are against the position of "climate change existence" or you're against "human responsibility".
I'm 100% with you.
I wonder if a "this is the end of the world" message comes out of my previous post. I swear it wasn't my intention. All I tried to say was "let's not deny a climate change for economic reasons".
I can hardly believe you are talking to me. I guess you are from USA for the way you see the life. You look like scared of loosing your money. But I'm not here to take it from you.
I wrote against climate change deniers. I didn't even say that you should stop using your computer. But your brain is trained to be paranoid, I see, then you say to me: "YOU stop using your computer, YOU go live in a cavern". I'm not doing that my friend. I didn't ask you to do that. If you read what I wrote you will notice I didn't write what to do for stopping climate change.
In your blindness you never had a chance to realize that.
(I hope my "obvious grammatical mistakes" are not telling you that I'm wrong)
I'm here to comment the event, doing my best about English grammar as it isn't my first language.
"When one admits that nothing is certain one must, I think, also admit that some things are much more nearly certain than others. It is much more nearly certain that we are assembled here tonight than it is that this or that political party is in the right. Certainly there are degrees of certainty, and one should be very careful to emphasize that fact, because otherwise one is landed in an utter skepticism, and complete skepticism would, of course, be totally barren and completely useless." - Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970)
You are right. It sounds like a joke when, in the country where I live at least, there is a law against driving and using a cell phone at the same time.
There is a lot of people interested in denying climate change whatever it takes.
Taking a single error from a single study about climate change as proof of a non-existent climate problem is obtuse. The global warming shows itself in so many ways that no one can tell it isn't happening at all.
Of course we can sit to discuss how are we responsible for this change and how much of the change will occur as part of a natural process. But there is no such discussion. Instead you see a bunch of corporations claiming "there is no such climate change, let us keep burning oil".
Slashdot Mirror
Comments like this one are "living" proof of the "let's keep burning oil" movement. We are discussing about our planet, we aren't talking about economy. But if you are going to talk about economy let's make clear that USA (the second top CO2 emitter) have not spent a single penny in honour of Kyoto protocol. US leaders have not signed the protocol at all. It's funny you pretend that the only way of saving our planet is keep burning oil. It's like fighting for the peace. It's obvious that you only care about your money. And you hide your main interest by adding some pseudo altruist ideas in your speech. Do we have to thank God that you are willing to burn the oil (even when is the last thing you would like to) in favour of your planet?
Even when I think you're wrong (about the cause of climate change), I respect what you wrote in this last comment. Now, there is something I don't understand. If you are that sure about human activity being nothing compared with a few volcanoes. You are admitting there is a climate change. Why do you object five sentences in my comment when just the last one regards to the human activity as the cause? Finally, I'm not sure if you are against the position of "climate change existence" or you're against "human responsibility".
I'm 100% with you. I wonder if a "this is the end of the world" message comes out of my previous post. I swear it wasn't my intention. All I tried to say was "let's not deny a climate change for economic reasons".
Dear Coward, You talk about money, I talk about a planet where life is possible.
I can hardly believe you are talking to me. I guess you are from USA for the way you see the life. You look like scared of loosing your money. But I'm not here to take it from you. I wrote against climate change deniers. I didn't even say that you should stop using your computer. But your brain is trained to be paranoid, I see, then you say to me: "YOU stop using your computer, YOU go live in a cavern". I'm not doing that my friend. I didn't ask you to do that. If you read what I wrote you will notice I didn't write what to do for stopping climate change. In your blindness you never had a chance to realize that.
(I hope my "obvious grammatical mistakes" are not telling you that I'm wrong) I'm here to comment the event, doing my best about English grammar as it isn't my first language. "When one admits that nothing is certain one must, I think, also admit that some things are much more nearly certain than others. It is much more nearly certain that we are assembled here tonight than it is that this or that political party is in the right. Certainly there are degrees of certainty, and one should be very careful to emphasize that fact, because otherwise one is landed in an utter skepticism, and complete skepticism would, of course, be totally barren and completely useless." - Bertrand Russell (1872 - 1970)
You are right. It sounds like a joke when, in the country where I live at least, there is a law against driving and using a cell phone at the same time.
There is a lot of people interested in denying climate change whatever it takes. Taking a single error from a single study about climate change as proof of a non-existent climate problem is obtuse. The global warming shows itself in so many ways that no one can tell it isn't happening at all. Of course we can sit to discuss how are we responsible for this change and how much of the change will occur as part of a natural process. But there is no such discussion. Instead you see a bunch of corporations claiming "there is no such climate change, let us keep burning oil".