Becasue he's an arsehole, and what was the point of the post? To say that the US are a bunch of winging wankers who would rather drive around in gas guzzling toss wagons rather than face up to their actions? I don't believe that most Americans think that way, but by the sound of it, most of the Americans on this site do.
You really worry on so many levels reading a post like this. Is it the lack of any scientific insight or thought, or the assumption that somehow the rest of the world wants to do down the US just for the sake of it? The USA is only 5% of the world population, but yet produces over 25% of the world CO2. Don't you think that this might be a little unfair?
I've noticed that most of the sensible posts (such as Cally) are non-US based, but the barking ones seem to be mostly US. Since even the US Academy of Science says Global Warming is man-made, can we please move beyond defensive denial and get to sensible solutions. Crichton could have written a work of fiction about a conspiracy involving rich powerful people covering up the evidence for the changing of the earth's weather, involving the increase in flooding, hurricanes and droughts. he didn't because 1) He's an idiot, and 2) its actually happening for real.
The comments about Kyoto being no more than a band-aid are simply wrong. Kyoto is a first step, and its targets were seriously watered-down in order to get the US (in particular) on board, as well as getting as many countries as possible to sign up. Will China and India somehow unfairly use the Treaty? Possibly, but since global warming will have a massive effect on their economies, they have certain incentives to play by the rules. As far as the US economy is concerned, any country that refuses to do anything about vehicles that burn oil at 12 miles to the gallon, while spending billions on protecting supplies from one of the most volatile (and anti-American)regions on earth can do a lot worse than simply increase the efficency of its energy use. There are major pay-offs to the US, not least because it has a huge amount of scientific resources and technology that it can sell to the rest of the planet.
There seems to be a certain divide on these postings, between those who are extremely cynical of the science/politically conservative/and or very protective of the US's stance; and those who wish to see change (no matter how tentative at first)/ and who may not be from the US. Is it just me who is picking up on this?
Trusting people who have MBA's? Obviously all those with MBA's who ran or observed Enron got a free pass that day! In fact there is an amazing level of consensus as far as global warming is concerned, and the differences within the mainstream scientific community are about levels of dgree, not whethr humans are causing the warming in the first place. The problem with relying on the judgment of those in the business community is that they are in the business of making a profit, and often this makes them take a short-term view, especially where it may harm profits. However, there are many business leaders who are pushing for change, and many who will support them (such as the Rocky Mountain Institute), who see increased efficency and better ways of doing things as positive for business, as well as the planet. Pollution is waste, the cost of which is largely externalised to the rest of us. The US economy actually has the capacity to not only absorb costs from following Kyoto, but actually make a profit from it. Lomborg and his ilk have been shown to be wrong in their views, so lets look at what should be done, not why it cant .
Slashdot Mirror
Becasue he's an arsehole, and what was the point of the post? To say that the US are a bunch of winging wankers who would rather drive around in gas guzzling toss wagons rather than face up to their actions? I don't believe that most Americans think that way, but by the sound of it, most of the Americans on this site do.
You really worry on so many levels reading a post like this. Is it the lack of any scientific insight or thought, or the assumption that somehow the rest of the world wants to do down the US just for the sake of it? The USA is only 5% of the world population, but yet produces over 25% of the world CO2. Don't you think that this might be a little unfair? I've noticed that most of the sensible posts (such as Cally) are non-US based, but the barking ones seem to be mostly US. Since even the US Academy of Science says Global Warming is man-made, can we please move beyond defensive denial and get to sensible solutions. Crichton could have written a work of fiction about a conspiracy involving rich powerful people covering up the evidence for the changing of the earth's weather, involving the increase in flooding, hurricanes and droughts. he didn't because 1) He's an idiot, and 2) its actually happening for real.
The comments about Kyoto being no more than a band-aid are simply wrong. Kyoto is a first step, and its targets were seriously watered-down in order to get the US (in particular) on board, as well as getting as many countries as possible to sign up. Will China and India somehow unfairly use the Treaty? Possibly, but since global warming will have a massive effect on their economies, they have certain incentives to play by the rules. As far as the US economy is concerned, any country that refuses to do anything about vehicles that burn oil at 12 miles to the gallon, while spending billions on protecting supplies from one of the most volatile (and anti-American)regions on earth can do a lot worse than simply increase the efficency of its energy use. There are major pay-offs to the US, not least because it has a huge amount of scientific resources and technology that it can sell to the rest of the planet. There seems to be a certain divide on these postings, between those who are extremely cynical of the science/politically conservative/and or very protective of the US's stance; and those who wish to see change (no matter how tentative at first)/ and who may not be from the US. Is it just me who is picking up on this?
Trusting people who have MBA's? Obviously all those with MBA's who ran or observed Enron got a free pass that day! In fact there is an amazing level of consensus as far as global warming is concerned, and the differences within the mainstream scientific community are about levels of dgree, not whethr humans are causing the warming in the first place. The problem with relying on the judgment of those in the business community is that they are in the business of making a profit, and often this makes them take a short-term view, especially where it may harm profits. However, there are many business leaders who are pushing for change, and many who will support them (such as the Rocky Mountain Institute), who see increased efficency and better ways of doing things as positive for business, as well as the planet. Pollution is waste, the cost of which is largely externalised to the rest of us. The US economy actually has the capacity to not only absorb costs from following Kyoto, but actually make a profit from it. Lomborg and his ilk have been shown to be wrong in their views, so lets look at what should be done, not why it cant .