Australian Politics Forum - Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30088
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #15 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 4:18pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 3:15pm:

No.

China has a 1990 figure. They should reduce to a % of that.
If they split into four, then split that up as well.

The United States has a 1990 level and we'll reduce to that.

Level playing field.

Nothing bigotted anywhere by the way. I spend enough time in China recently and they are very pleasant and welcoming to me.

I have no bad words for them as people.

and you reckon some chinaman has to bend over and reduce his emissions even further just so you can drive around in some 6.3 liter V8 gas guzzling piece of sh.t when a 2 liter RAV4 would do the job equally as well !!

Which fricken planet are you on mate ?

jeez some people kid themselves Sad

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #16 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 4:31pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 3:15pm:

Nothing bigotted anywhere by the way. I spend enough time in China recently and they are very pleasant and welcoming to me.

I have no bad words for them as people.

No - there certainly bigotry there.

You have arbitrarily decided that one group of people must sacrifice their quality life for your benifit - so that you may continue to emit pollution at a rate 4 times greater than these other people. Your only basis for this discrimination is based on the nationality of these people.

if that is not bigotry - I don't know what is. Unless of course, your defense is that you are just really, really dumb and you really have no idea what you are talking about. I suppose I could buy that.

Back to top

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #17 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 5:20pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 2:37pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 2:29pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 2:22pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 2:11pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 9:52am:

For some reason people keep pointing out that Australia's GHG emissions are far less than those of China, India etc (example 1, example 2). It is a pretty stupid argument, but looking back, it does not appear to be an argument at all. I have not seen anyone follow this up with any sort of rational argument or conclusion. So I would like the people who keep parroting this line to start by attempting to make an argument. Here are a few suggestions, based on what I think they are trying to say:

1) A country's emissions should be compared directly, regardless of population, so that a country with 1 million people can contribute as much as one with 100 million.

2) Smaller countries should not have to do anything about their GHG emissions.

3) We could solve global warming by getting China to split into lots of smaller countries so they can make the same stupid argument.

4) Any excuse, no matter how vapid, will do, so long as we don't have to pull our weight.

5) It will help in international negotiations to set targets for all countries if we blame the problem on countries with lower per capita emissions and expect poorer countries with less resources to make bigger sacrifices than us.

6) It is harder for us to reduce our emissions because we are emitting so much less than China and India.

Australia's GHG emissions, on a per capita basis, are among the highest in the world.

This empty headed one-liner gets trotted out pretty much constantly now, but for some reason these questions always go unanswered, the responses go ignored and people just keep parroting it.

Ok, I'll try.

The whole 'per capita' argument is designed simply as guilt trip to make us ( the population of Australia) feel worse about our emissions than we feel about China's...

The principle fact in the whole Co2 pollution argument is more=bad, less=not so bad, right?...so raw tonnage is, or should be, the major factor on the World stage.
Per Capita should be a purely internal matter, used only to decide how much each individual has to cut back to meet the nations targets..

China as a whole, produces about 7 Billion tonnes of GHG per year, and Australia produces about 400 Million tonnes....

If every person in China reduces their 'carbon foot print' by 10%, that equates to a reduction of 700 million tonnes (almost twice Australia's total), on the other hand, if every person in Australia reduces theirs by 10%, that's a reduction of only 40 tonnes. So, classifying our emissions as far worse than China's is incorrect (or an out right lie).

as an individual you should feel guilty Sad

what has an artificial border got to do with ones environmental impact on the planet when what an individual does effects the planet as a whole and not only within this artificial border as you are alluding to ?

How about dividing the china population up into many imaginary borders and then how does your stupid argument fair ?

Well I don't feel guilty...

you are responsible for about 4 times that amount of emissions of an average Chinese person - yet you want them to reduce emissions while you do nothing!

You should feel guilty.

Hello!!!!! Remember me???....I'm the guy you keep failing to convince that Co2 is anything but plant food....

And no I don't....I'd like all countries to reduce their total emissions by the same percent of that countries total tonnage...(providing of course that the emissions have anything to do with
global warming..or whatever it's called this week)...just to be fair, ya know???

None of this 'individual guilt' 5hit that goes on, just the flat TOTAL tonnage...So China drops their 7 BILLION tonnes per year by, say, half, and Australia drops out 400 MILLION tones by the same amount, the next year.

p.s....I spose i should have guessed all the usual suspects would wiggle out from under their rocks, as soon as I answered FD...first nails, then you, I guess MOTR-mouth will be next?

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #18 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 5:36pm

freediver wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 3:14pm:

Quote:

so raw tonnage is, or should be, the major factor on the World stage

Can you turn this from vague waffle into a point?

Sure, if you like..

Instead of the current vague waffle of 'eeewww you use too much of a vanishingly small total, and the individual Chinese use less of a massive amount, so you are naughty', like it is now....

STOP making it about the number of people in the country...and make it about the amount the country as a whole produces..seriously, given the amount (in tonnes) that China produces, there is a heap more 'wiggle' room for them to reduce emissions than there is for Australia..

There are over 50 coal power stations in China ( I didn't count gas, fuel oil etc) and 26 coal power stations in Australia (again, not counting gas, fuel oil etc).

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49030
At my desk.

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #19 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 5:37pm

Quote:

None of this 'individual guilt' 5hit that goes on, just the flat TOTAL tonnage...So China drops their 7 BILLION tonnes per year by, say, half, and Australia drops out 400 MILLION tones by the same amount, the next year.

So if poorer countries want to increase their per capita emissions to those in the west (whatever they happen to be at the time), they should have to give money to western nations for the priviledge?

Quote:

STOP making it about the number of people in the country...and make it about the amount the country as a whole produces

So if China split in two that would solve half the problem?

Quote:

there is a heap more 'wiggle' room for them to reduce emissions than there is for Australia..

Can you turn this from vague waffle into an actual argument?

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #20 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 6:26pm

Unfortunately FD, you seem to define 'bad argument' as anything that disagrees with you. If you equate CO2 with 'bad' then the policy should be about reducing 'bad' and not some endless guilt-ridden diatribe about why we should do more than China.

it is politically-correct bleeding heart arguments like this that make the whole ACC hysteria look unbelievable. After all, if ACC were a REAL problem then we would be making a genuine global effort not this faux-hand-wringing example of idiocy. Central to the UN's motivations are the payments of hundreds of billions of dollars per year from rich 'emitting' countries to poor 'low emitting' countries. As if that is going to reduce emissions!!!

China is the biggest emitter and as such is required to reduce emissions as much as everyone else. Anything else is simply unacceptable. the biosphere does not think in per capita terms and us doing so puts lie to the supposed urgency. And do not feel sorry for China. It is arguable the worlds oldest country and it is in its poxy state thru centuries of mismanagement culminating in the communism fiasco. it does not deserve special treatment because of incompetence.

if it is a true global emergency then there is no reason for ANY special treatment at all.

but there isnt really a global emergency. is there? Just another bit of over-wrought fear based on under-done science and the opportunity to take from the rich and give to the undeserving poor yet again.

PS before anyone asks. I am using my LW58 Id because my GM one isnt working. I am on holiday using a mobile internet and this happens sometimes.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

JC Denton Gold Member Offline Posts: 5471 Gender:	Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries Reply #21 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 6:47pm fd's right on the money about the per capita sh1t. split the u.s into 51 different countries then each individual state wouldnt have to do anything by the logic of people who oppose action on climate change.
Back to top	IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #22 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 6:51pm

JC Denton wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 6:47pm:

fd's right on the money about the per capita sh1t. split the u.s into 51 different countries then each individual state wouldnt have to do anything by the logic of people who oppose action on climate change.

au contraire... In fact, you made the opposite argument. what we are saying is actually the same rules for everyone regardless of size. The bleeding-heart lobby wants india and China to be given a free ride thus making everyone else's emission reductions nothing more than a compettitve disadvantage while not actually doing much abotu emission reductions globally.

t is the perfect left-wing policy. Gloriously complex, doseds in guilt and utterly ineffective in its stated goals.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #23 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 6:54pm

freediver wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 5:37pm:

Quote:

None of this 'individual guilt' 5hit that goes on, just the flat TOTAL tonnage...So China drops their 7 BILLION tonnes per year by, say, half, and Australia drops out 400 MILLION tones by the same amount, the next year.

So if poorer countries want to increase their per capita emissions to those in the west (whatever they happen to be at the time), they should have to give money to western nations for the priviledge?

Quote:

STOP making it about the number of people in the country...and make it about the amount the country as a whole produces

So if China split in two that would solve half the problem?

Quote:

there is a heap more 'wiggle' room for them to reduce emissions than there is for Australia..

Can you turn this from vague waffle into an actual argument?

Nope it wouldn't...because the 2 ex-china countries would be producing 11.75% of the World's emissions (still 10 times what Australia does)

If you want to base 'fault' on per capita, then shouldn't you be proposing sanctions against the Falklands Islands??...After all, per capita, each person there produces one tonne more per year than Australians do (as of 2009)..of course the whole place only produces 59,000 tonnes per year...

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #24 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 7:08pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 6:54pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 5:37pm:

Quote:

None of this 'individual guilt' 5hit that goes on, just the flat TOTAL tonnage...So China drops their 7 BILLION tonnes per year by, say, half, and Australia drops out 400 MILLION tones by the same amount, the next year.

So if poorer countries want to increase their per capita emissions to those in the west (whatever they happen to be at the time), they should have to give money to western nations for the priviledge?

Quote:

STOP making it about the number of people in the country...and make it about the amount the country as a whole produces

So if China split in two that would solve half the problem?

Quote:

there is a heap more 'wiggle' room for them to reduce emissions than there is for Australia..

Can you turn this from vague waffle into an actual argument?

Nope it wouldn't...because the 2 ex-china countries would be producing 11.75% of the World's emissions (still 10 times what Australia does)

If you want to base 'fault' on per capita, then shouldn't you be proposing sanctions against the Falklands Islands??...After all, per capita, each person there produces one tonne more per year than Australians do (as of 2009)..of course the whole place only produces 59,000 tonnes per year...

a large part of our emissions are because of the size of our country and would still occur if no one lived here. another major component is our mining industry. Given that we export the vast majority of that to paying customers then emissions as a result of that should be deducted otherwise you end up penalising a country (like ours) because we feed large parts of the world and give them the materials to build their economy. obviously a terrible thing to do!

i repeat my position that if ACC were a REAL PROBLEM there would be none of this garbage about per-capita. it speaks to the central nature of the beast - that is is a lie and a con.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49030
At my desk.

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #25 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 7:15pm

Quote:

Unfortunately FD, you seem to define 'bad argument' as anything that disagrees with you.

It is not so much a bad argument as a complete lack of an argument. If you know what people are getting at when they blurt out 'China is a really big country', please enlighten us. No-one has been able to build it into a cogent argument so far. Here is another example of lack of substance. Can you elaborate on what measure of reductions you are referring to?

Quote:

China is the biggest emitter and as such is required to reduce emissions as much as everyone else.

Another example of meaningless posturing - what are those rules?

Quote:

what we are saying is actually the same rules for everyone regardless of size.

Quote:

The bleeding-heart lobby wants india and China to be given a free ride

How about you start with what people actually say longy? There is no point scoring grand debating victories over your imaginary foes here.

Quote:

Nope it wouldn't...because the 2 ex-china countries would be producing 11.75% of the World's emissions (still 10 times what Australia does)

OK Gizmo you got me there. How many countries would China have to split into to solve the problem?

Quote:

If you want to base 'fault' on per capita

Perhaps this is the source of your incoherence gizmo. This is not about posturing and fault and blame shifting. It is about solutions. Do you ahve any, or are you more worried about blame?

Quote:

then shouldn't you be proposing sanctions against the Falklands Islands?

You go from complaining that Australia has to do it's part to calling for sanctions for countries that emit slightly more.

Quote:

a large part of our emissions are because of the size of our country and would still occur if no one lived here

The emissions in question are anthropogenic.

Quote:

another major component is our mining industry. Given that we export the vast majority of that to paying customers then emissions as a result of that should be deducted otherwise you end up penalising a country (like ours) because we feed large parts of the world

I think you are confusing farmers and miners.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #26 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 7:22pm

freediver wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 7:15pm:

Quote:

Unfortunately FD, you seem to define 'bad argument' as anything that disagrees with you.

It is not so much a bad argument as a complete lack of an argument. If you know what people are getting at when they blurt out 'China is a really big country', please enlighten us. No-one has been able to build it into a cogent argument so far. Here is another example of lack of substance. Can you elaborate on what measure of reductions you are referring to?

Quote:

China is the biggest emitter and as such is required to reduce emissions as much as everyone else.

Another example of meaningless posturing - what are those rules?

Quote:

what we are saying is actually the same rules for everyone regardless of size.

Quote:

The bleeding-heart lobby wants india and China to be given a free ride

How about you start with what people actually say longy? There is no point scoring grand debating victories over your imaginary foes here.

Quote:

Nope it wouldn't...because the 2 ex-china countries would be producing 11.75% of the World's emissions (still 10 times what Australia does)

OK Gizmo you got me there. How many countries would China have to split into to solve the problem?

Quote:

If you want to base 'fault' on per capita

Perhaps this is the source of your incoherence gizmo. This is not about posturing and fault and blame shifting. It is about solutions. Do you ahve any, or are you more worried about blame?

Quote:

then shouldn't you be proposing sanctions against the Falklands Islands?

You go from complaining that Australia has to do it's part to calling for sanctions for countries that emit slightly more.

Quote:

a large part of our emissions are because of the size of our country and would still occur if no one lived here

The emissions in question are anthropogenic.

Quote:

another major component is our mining industry. Given that we export the vast majority of that to paying customers then emissions as a result of that should be deducted otherwise you end up penalising a country (like ours) because we feed large parts of the world

I think you are confusing farmers and miners.

you continue to define 'bad argument' or 'lack of argument' as no more than differing with you. Gizmo and I (and others) say that there is no reason that ANY country should be treated differently. same rules for everyone. the one not making an argument is you. What possible reason - given that reducing emissions is the actual goal - is there for treating china and india and the like with lower emission reductions limits?

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #27 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 7:25pm

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 6:26pm:

Unfortunately FD, you seem to define 'bad argument' as anything that disagrees with you. If you equate CO2 with 'bad' then the policy should be about reducing 'bad' and not some endless guilt-ridden diatribe about why we should do more than China.

it is politically-correct bleeding heart arguments like this that make the whole ACC hysteria look unbelievable. After all, if ACC were a REAL problem then we would be making a genuine global effort not this faux-hand-wringing example of idiocy. Central to the UN's motivations are the payments of hundreds of billions of dollars per year from rich 'emitting' countries to poor 'low emitting' countries. As if that is going to reduce emissions!!!

China is the biggest emitter and as such is required to reduce emissions as much as everyone else. Anything else is simply unacceptable. the biosphere does not think in per capita terms and us doing so puts lie to the supposed urgency. And do not feel sorry for China. It is arguable the worlds oldest country and it is in its poxy state thru centuries of mismanagement culminating in the communism fiasco. it does not deserve special treatment because of incompetence.

if it is a true global emergency then there is no reason for ANY special treatment at all.

but there isnt really a global emergency. is there? Just another bit of over-wrought fear based on under-done science and the opportunity to take from the rich and give to the undeserving poor yet again.

PS before anyone asks. I am using my LW58 Id because my GM one isnt working. I am on holiday using a mobile internet and this happens sometimes.

Gee, the pot calling the kettle black?

I see, you've finally decided to make a comeback Longy?

So much for all of your earlier statements that Longy & GM weren't the same!

So, is GM now gone?

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30088
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #28 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 7:27pm

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 5:20pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 2:37pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 2:29pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 2:22pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 2:11pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 9:52am:

For some reason people keep pointing out that Australia's GHG emissions are far less than those of China, India etc (example 1, example 2). It is a pretty stupid argument, but looking back, it does not appear to be an argument at all. I have not seen anyone follow this up with any sort of rational argument or conclusion. So I would like the people who keep parroting this line to start by attempting to make an argument. Here are a few suggestions, based on what I think they are trying to say:

1) A country's emissions should be compared directly, regardless of population, so that a country with 1 million people can contribute as much as one with 100 million.

2) Smaller countries should not have to do anything about their GHG emissions.

3) We could solve global warming by getting China to split into lots of smaller countries so they can make the same stupid argument.

4) Any excuse, no matter how vapid, will do, so long as we don't have to pull our weight.

5) It will help in international negotiations to set targets for all countries if we blame the problem on countries with lower per capita emissions and expect poorer countries with less resources to make bigger sacrifices than us.

6) It is harder for us to reduce our emissions because we are emitting so much less than China and India.

Australia's GHG emissions, on a per capita basis, are among the highest in the world.

This empty headed one-liner gets trotted out pretty much constantly now, but for some reason these questions always go unanswered, the responses go ignored and people just keep parroting it.

Ok, I'll try.

The whole 'per capita' argument is designed simply as guilt trip to make us ( the population of Australia) feel worse about our emissions than we feel about China's...

The principle fact in the whole Co2 pollution argument is more=bad, less=not so bad, right?...so raw tonnage is, or should be, the major factor on the World stage.
Per Capita should be a purely internal matter, used only to decide how much each individual has to cut back to meet the nations targets..

China as a whole, produces about 7 Billion tonnes of GHG per year, and Australia produces about 400 Million tonnes....

If every person in China reduces their 'carbon foot print' by 10%, that equates to a reduction of 700 million tonnes (almost twice Australia's total), on the other hand, if every person in Australia reduces theirs by 10%, that's a reduction of only 40 tonnes. So, classifying our emissions as far worse than China's is incorrect (or an out right lie).

as an individual you should feel guilty Sad

what has an artificial border got to do with ones environmental impact on the planet when what an individual does effects the planet as a whole and not only within this artificial border as you are alluding to ?

How about dividing the china population up into many imaginary borders and then how does your stupid argument fair ?

Well I don't feel guilty...

you are responsible for about 4 times that amount of emissions of an average Chinese person - yet you want them to reduce emissions while you do nothing!

You should feel guilty.

Hello!!!!! Remember me???....I'm the guy you keep failing to convince that Co2 is anything but plant food....

And no I don't....I'd like all countries to reduce their total emissions by the same percent of that countries total tonnage...(providing of course that the emissions have anything to do with
global warming..or whatever it's called this week)...just to be fair, ya know???

None of this 'individual guilt' 5hit that goes on, just the flat TOTAL tonnage...So China drops their 7 BILLION tonnes per year by, say, half, and Australia drops out 400 MILLION tones by the same amount, the next year.

p.s....I spose i should have guessed all the usual suspects would wiggle out from under their rocks, as soon as I answered FD...first nails, then you, I guess MOTR-mouth will be next?

no one cares about whether you are convinced or not.

and if you don't believe that CO2 is anything but plant food then why are you posting your sh.t on this thread since this thread should be totally irrelevant to you ?

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: Comparing our GHG emissions with foreign countries
Reply #29 - Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 7:28pm

perceptions_now wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 7:25pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2013 at 6:26pm:

Unfortunately FD, you seem to define 'bad argument' as anything that disagrees with you. If you equate CO2 with 'bad' then the policy should be about reducing 'bad' and not some endless guilt-ridden diatribe about why we should do more than China.

it is politically-correct bleeding heart arguments like this that make the whole ACC hysteria look unbelievable. After all, if ACC were a REAL problem then we would be making a genuine global effort not this faux-hand-wringing example of idiocy. Central to the UN's motivations are the payments of hundreds of billions of dollars per year from rich 'emitting' countries to poor 'low emitting' countries. As if that is going to reduce emissions!!!

China is the biggest emitter and as such is required to reduce emissions as much as everyone else. Anything else is simply unacceptable. the biosphere does not think in per capita terms and us doing so puts lie to the supposed urgency. And do not feel sorry for China. It is arguable the worlds oldest country and it is in its poxy state thru centuries of mismanagement culminating in the communism fiasco. it does not deserve special treatment because of incompetence.

if it is a true global emergency then there is no reason for ANY special treatment at all.

but there isnt really a global emergency. is there? Just another bit of over-wrought fear based on under-done science and the opportunity to take from the rich and give to the undeserving poor yet again.

PS before anyone asks. I am using my LW58 Id because my GM one isnt working. I am on holiday using a mobile internet and this happens sometimes.

Gee, the pot calling the kettle black?

I see, you've finally decided to make a comeback Longy?

So much for all of your earlier statements that Longy & GM weren't the same!

So, is GM now gone?

everyone knows they are the same ID dopey. As usual, you are late to the party you werent even invited to.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged