NewsWeek debunks its own Global Warming Story

Search my posts over the past couple of years. All I do, and all I'm going to do when not dishing out ridicule for your silly opinions, is to refer you and the other ostriches to realclimate.org.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(F8L @ Aug 17 2007, 10:53 AM) [snapback]497893[/snapback]</div>

China is responsible for their pollution. Yes, by participating in the global market, China will produce some amount of pollution. Everyone who participates does that. However, China's pollution is far in excess of what would produced by western nations were they to produce products in the same volumes. That's where China is to be blamed for the pollution that they emit. Obviously, with current technology/practices some amount of pollution will be produced, by China exceeds that by leaps and bounds. They could also choose not to produce the products or to produce them in a way that makes the products more environmentally friendly. They're not helpless pawns in this game.

 

Tripp, since GW does not obey political boundaries, it seems clear to me that nations intent on decreasing worldwide CO2 pollution will have to extend taxation to consumption based on a carbon tax in order to influence producer nations.

The present notions of a carbon trading market directed at producers is simply going to shift production to nations who will look the other way for the short term benefits.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarkMN @ Aug 21 2007, 12:00 PM) [snapback]499857[/snapback]</div>

Public policy is not decided by scientists. In a representative democracy, it is up to us to evaluate the various claims and elect representatives that will create the policies that will help the situation.

The misuse of science in public policy has devastating effects, second only to the misuse of religion in the last 100 years. So it is incumbent on us to not accept blindly what a government panel publishes as the "truth", but to question the claims and make sure we understand what is being asked of us.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TimBikes @ Aug 21 2007, 05:23 PM) [snapback]499968[/snapback]</div>

How about this for scientific evidence?

[attachmentid=10843]

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Aug 21 2007, 07:21 PM) [snapback]499997[/snapback]</div>

While China is no doubt complicit by not instituting more stringent pollution controls, consumers also have to share in that responsibility. The attraction of Chinese made goods is primarily lower price, resulting in part from lower or no pollution control costs.

 

I agree with the comments regarding China's responsibility etc etc. EricGo, I was thinking about that too. Unfortunately, it would likely start a trade war. Still, I think something like that may eventually happen as the costs of pollution get higher. The only real hope is to develop cheap technologies which have much lower environmental costs. I don't see us being able to solve these problems through "enlightenment". Godiva (I think) posted that pic several months ago. Always good for a laugh. Nice come back, BTW, Tim.