| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Chat Room
Thread: Copenhagen |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 12
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I have been reading the Copenhagen Synthesis Report.
It's damning stuff. Indicators of climate change are all tracking at (or above) the high end of IPCC estimates. The situation hasn't improved since the last IPCC report. Finally, it is time to stop wasting time with pointless and empty denials, and to start taking action - action which we should have taken decades ago. As the report notes: "inaction is inexcusable". So, kudos to Obama for getting the American Clean Energy and Security Act passed, and to Brown for proposing a £60bn annual fund to help poor countries deal with climate change. Even these commitments may not be enough. We have to set our sights high, and listen to the scientists. The Copenhagen summit is 23 weeks away. Now is the time to start telling your elected representatives that we fully support the action that needs to be taken, even if it causes us some minor inconvenience. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I have been reading the Copenhagen Synthesis Report. It's damning stuff. Indicators of climate change are all tracking at (or above) the high end of IPCC estimates. The situation hasn't improved since the last IPCC report. Finally, it is time to stop wasting time with pointless and empty denials, and to start taking action - action which we should have taken decades ago. As the report notes: "inaction is inexcusable". So, kudos to Obama for getting the American Clean Energy and Security Act passed, and to Brown for proposing a £60bn annual fund to help poor countries deal with climate change. Even these commitments may not be enough. We have to set our sights high, and listen to the scientists. The Copenhagen summit is 23 weeks away. Now is the time to start telling your elected representatives that we fully support the action that needs to be taken, even if it causes us some minor inconvenience. Happily, the bill has not passed both houses and, with the thin margin it got in the House of Representatives, it will probably fail in the Senate, especially when Americans wake up to the fact that the Democrats are using it as a way to dig deeper and deeper into our pockets for money! |
||
|
|
keithhenry
Ace Cruncher Senile old farts of the world ....uh.....uh..... nevermind Joined: Nov 18, 2004 Post Count: 18667 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Oh DANG! And here I thought this was a thread about chawin terbakky.
---------------------------------------- |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Dave, you can only hold that position by disregarding the science.
This isn't a matter of opinion. Deciding exactly what the best thing to do is a matter of opinion, but if you deny the basic science, then all your conclusions will be wrong. Climate change is a non-partisan issue. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Dave, you can only hold that position by disregarding the science. This isn't a matter of opinion. Deciding exactly what the best thing to do is a matter of opinion, but if you deny the basic science, then all your conclusions will be wrong. Climate change is a non-partisan issue. I'm sorry, but the bill as crammed through the House was not non-partisan. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
What objections do you have to it? I am only familiar with the broad targets.
|
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I am primarily upset by the way it was rushed through the House by the Speaker.
|
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I didn't watch the debate, but according to the BBC: "Correspondents say the bill was passed after a long and heated session."
Dealing with climate change carries a cost. The cost is that we have to pay now, to avoid paying a far greater price in the future. The concern is that this bill does not go far enough. If your only objection is that it might hurt your bottom line, then I believe you are taking a short-sighted view. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
I didn't watch the debate, but according to the BBC: "Correspondents say the bill was passed after a long and heated session." Dealing with climate change carries a cost. The cost is that we have to pay now, to avoid paying a far greater price in the future. The concern is that this bill does not go far enough. If your only objection is that it might hurt your bottom line, then I believe you are taking a short-sighted view. We see things quite differently and there is no value in discussing it further as you will not change my view nor will anything I say change yours. [Edit 2 times, last edit by Former Member at Jun 28, 2009 5:39:56 AM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
So what, in your view, is the best way to tackle climate change and prevent the worst (and most expensive) consequences?
|
||
|
|
|