The planet's future: Climate change 'will cause civilisation to collapse'

reply to post by grover


This not a right vs. left issue. What it is is basic science. The same jokers who are telling us that we're going to burn up were telling us we were going to freeze to death 20 years ago.

How about we look to solve the problem(to the extent that it even exists). I totally agree with you. We should assume that the problem exists and that there is a man-made component to the problem. OK. Now that we are there, lets develop an objective goal for a specific level of carbon reduction at a global level and then set about devising the most cost effective way to achieve that goal. That solution would not be in the form of "cap and trade" or any other solution that would impact US lifestyles as significantly as the current proposed solutions would. The reason for that is that the socio-economic components of the solution are the main objective and the carbon reduction merely ancilliary benefits.

Have the wealthy nations contribute to a UN fund that enhances the industrial infrastructure of the third world and you will have a far greater impact on the environment than these solutions currently being proposed. Again, the reason this is not a good solution is that carbon reduction is but an ancilliary benefit to the global socialists.

All I am saying is that we should look for solutions here with a limited objective and dispense with the other components. If this is all about science, which, obviously I don't think it is, then lets have the best scientific solution to hit the reduction levels we wish to achieve at a global level. I would anticipate the US contributing heavily to a global solution, but again, make the solution scientific.

The other problems with the currently proposed solutions is that they do nothing to improve the quality of the environment of the third world. Yes, we can do something that will tax productivity of the wealthy nations and "feel good" about that. There are a lot of folks in parts of the world living in dire environmental states that would have no benefit.

This is exactly like the banning of DDT. Oh yes, we feel great in the western world about banning DDT. The fact that malaria is the largest killer of people in the world and that it could be essentially wiped out were we to use DDT in parts of the world does not register.

Run to the hills everybody!!
The sky is falling in .....cause the Rockefellers say so!!

reply to post by dolphinfan


Very good post except for the idea of 'Giving the UN' any more money or power to do anything. The UN has screwed up every situation we have given them to solve. A more useless organization is non-existent!

Zindo

reply to post by ZindoDoone


I agree with you that the UN is likely the most inept and corrupt organization on the planet. I use that as an example of a model where you could get global cooperation to solve the problem. Be far to create a mechanism outside of the UN composed of folks how actually have accomplished something in their lives other than wring their hands and push paper.

reply to post by grover


The right says that we should just pollute away and the left says we must live like peasants and kill our children to save the earth, did you ever wonder if they were both full of it?

The right is not very bright as the last 8 years has shown us but the left if not any better but much more fascist, the beginning of any freedom is the right to be left alone and I for one see that just about everywhere Obama supporters are running around telling people what to do and how to live their lives, I for one am sick of it and I say to all you Obamabots, you are not our masters and you will not dictate how we live our lives!

At least the right had enough respect and common sense to stay out of our personal lives.

What’s next our kids go fight in Obamas wars (Bush is gone now)while yours stay home and boss us around?

I do think that is is our duty to care for the earth but I didn’t make any of the decisions that have resulted in this mess, send polluters to prison long term and lets enforce the laws we have now.
There are better solutions than the current one which is to elevate certain rich people to god like status while the rest of us are enslaved or killed off.

Obamas owner’s solution of making us slaves and peasants is not going to save the earth, destroying the elite’s stranglehold on new technology and control of the earth will.

I myself do not believe in man made global warming, I think we are just in a galactic cycle.

One thing I have just begain to think about is Atlantis, and it's demise.
What I thought interesting Edgar Cayce said Atlantis was destroyed 50,000 years ago. If you look at our galactic cycle of 26,000 years times 2 that eguals 52,000 years.
This is only though but I am wondering about the 2012 alignment with center of Milky Way, and what if anything will occurr

Ok I hear everyone saying that this is the voice of the Rockefellers simply because they help fun the report. But if you look at what it says, it seems to be criticizing the wealthy of the world...

"Too many greedy and deceitful decisions led to a world recession and demonstrated the international interdependence of economics and ethics."

Seems rather obvious to me...

Originally posted by grover
All of the right wing loon claims that global warming is not man made and by extension we don't or can't do anything about it begs the question and obscures the issue...

I guess I"m one of those people you consider to be a 'right wing loon' So I'll respond.

I don't 'claim' that global warming isnt' man made.
I'm stating the FACT that there is no evidence to support the notion.
I'm also stating the FACT that nothing can be done about sun spots
or about natural cycles in earth temperatures.

You'll notice that I said it is a GOOD thing to clean up our planet so
that we won't be wallowing in our own muck. If that were to somehow
help 'global warming' ... so be it. But science says it won't.

As in most everything the right is wrong.

As in most everything correct that the right says, grover just doesn't like it.

Originally posted by samhouston1886

At least the right had enough respect and common sense to stay out of our personal lives.

Allow me to preface my response to the above statement by declaring that I do not accept the false dichotomy that there is a two party system in this country.

IMO it it merely a "shell game" designed to confuse and generate apathy.

I am most assuredly NOT a "lap dog" for either the right or left.

In regards to the "right" having "enough respect and common sense to stay out of our personal lives" please refer to The Patriot Act for evidence contrary to that assertion.

reply to post by Snisha


Not to mention gay rights and/or marriage and their opposition to abortion which is meddling in a person's private life to the Nth degree.

reply to post by ZindoDoone


Personally I believe that the climate is changing due to natural phenomena that has been aggravated by human behavior...its simple enough to understand...

Take the drought in the southwest in what its...5th maybe 6th year or longer. Droughts are natural phenomena...a long hard one brought an end to the Anasazi culture. Fine. the drought is natural. BUT when you consider how many people have moved into the area...far more than it could normally support and then the diverting of its rivers for agriculture...play and excess (Las Vegas) and you create a situation where more water is being taken out of the aquafer than is being replaced making the drought worse...end result...dropping water table, dry forests and wildfires.

That is a prime example of how human behavior can make a natural phenomena worse.

As to the question...what if we are wrong about Global warming...

Being more efficient and better stewards of the planet and polluting less could never be a mistake and as for destroying jobs, you are wrong because jobs would be created as we change our ways of doing things...far more than any that would be lost.

The worst mistake would be to do nothing and be wrong rather than do something and be wrong.

reply to post by grover


I tend to agree with those points. However, the mention of jobs seems to be a non-starter and the 'Green Jobs' that have been created so far have been created offshore and out of the country! GE has siphoned millions of dollars to offshore companies to do the R&D for many of its projects. It would not surprise me one bit that nearly all the jobs GE creates with our money will never see the light of day here in the US. They will expect us to indulge our selves by purchasing the products but not pay American workers to produce them! GE has Obama in their pockets and will do what ever it takes to keep him there since they own or have control of the options on most of the Green Tech so far!

Zindo

[edit on 7/15/2009 by ZindoDoone]

reply to post by ZindoDoone

Actually many of the jobs would by necessity have to be made here. You can make things overseas but they still have to be installed here.

And if the people hold congresses feet to the fire something will be done about hauling those jobs abroad.

Still...to put profits first is wrong.

reply to post by grover


There is a big difference between an engineering job and an installation job. Both are good, but the engineering job is better. Given equal compensation (which there is not. The engineer will almost always make more money), there is an add on effect to a robust scientific/engineering job sector, which is more people will seek those fields, enhancing our math and science skills. Other add ons include teachers, universitys, etc.

The most significant difference is that with a firm like GE, they are structured in such a manner that intellectual property has a local domain. That means that engineering break-throughs that happen in an engineering shop in India are Indian intellectual property, regardless of where the corporate entities are registered. A fact of contract law is that GE India is in fact a distinct entity from GE corporate. Policy where IP and especially long-term critical IP is not US IP is not a good thing.

Did you know that GE spends more in lobbying than all of the major oil companies combined? Check it out. They do.

Back in the 1950s when Eisenhower told us all to beware of the military industrial complex, he was talking about GE as a metaphor.

Global warming is caused because im so hot, i thought everyone knew that

Rediculous! WE, will be responsable for own destruction.This is just another scam to mislead people into things like the carbon tax. Thier wont be new technologys avilable for us. Example..solar heating and lighting! Those cell collectors ontop of roofs. IF they really cared, it would have been made affordable for all. But, in reality, we see the big oil companys profiting, ripping us off as well. My father used to say, it will never happen. Oil is so big and powerful, they will never let a new technology hurt thier profits and power. never in a million years.
The technology is thier...its not for us. Otherwise wede have already seen change, at least since 1990.

The point is, they will hold it all back form us, and greedliy cash thier check payments we owe em, when its bill time! When the prices keep skyrocketing, and becomes unaffordable,a nd people cry out for help, sooner or later, it could explode into the streets. So, while we become an economy in survival and civil war, they will be sitting comfortably far away form it all, knowing they were the casue of this collapse.
Humans and greed, run the show here on earth. Not all humans, just those involved with the 'scheme of things'

reply to post by ziggy1706


Agreed. I just spent a month on Crete. Every house has solar. You can not get a building permit without solar infrastructure. Now it is sunny there most of the year and during the times of the year that they get poor weather, they have to tap into the grid. But you don't need to have baking sun to make good solar technology work. If you can create a shadow, there is sufficient solar energy to work the infrastructure.

If they can do it in Greece, they can do it here. They won't do it here because big oil and the rest of the huge corporate entities call the shots.

I have seen solar houses on the coast of Maine augmented by wood stoves...if you can do solar there you can do it just about anywhere.

reply to post by grover

Backed by a diverse range of leading organisations such as Unesco, the World Bank, the US army and the Rockefeller Foundation

That says it all does it not?

Now we know who will get rich by scaring everyone into destroying the worlds economy to eliminate the Middle Class.