Canada disgraces itself on the enviroment.

Started by Starhawk39 pages

So we are stuck in the basic argument of whats more important health and the environment or the rich lining their pockets.

Starhawk:

what do you say to the fact that, in Canada specifically, our standard of living and economy (ie, your life) will be better with the effects of Global Warming?

It is only a proposition, but one that people in your position never seem to address.

Also, let is assume for a moment that the world would be heating the way it is, even without human intervention (most scientists believe this, and in fact consider human involvement to be exacerbating the natural warming trend). How would you address this concern?

Originally posted by Starhawk
So we are stuck in the basic argument of whats more important health and the environment or the rich lining their pockets.

maybe as a "lawyer" you think you are immune to such things as depression or recessions. Thats quainte.

Originally posted by inimalist
Starhawk:

what do you say to the fact that, in Canada specifically, our standard of living and economy (ie, your life) will be better with the effects of Global Warming?

It is only a proposition, but one that people in your position never seem to address.

Also, let is assume for a moment that the world would be heating the way it is, even without human intervention (most scientists believe this, and in fact consider human involvement to be exacerbating the natural warming trend). How would you address this concern?

I will assume something cooked up by right wing big business. And no our standard of living will not increase under Global Warming, certainly not that of our inheritors to come.

so if you don't agree with the premise that a person has they are right wing propogandists?

can you not see that there are far more than 2 sides to this debate?

Originally posted by inimalist
so if you don't agree with the premise that a person has they are right wing propogandists?

can you not see that there are far more than 2 sides to this debate?

Well you only seem to be promoting the right wing big business argument.

Originally posted by Starhawk
Well you only seem to be promoting the right wing big business argument.

No, you are only promoting the hippie bullshit, which is why you think everyone opposed to you is evil and only pro big businesse. On the contrary, we want the standard of living to be high too, and we choose the more probable road of not doing kyoto.

lol

please tell me what my argument about global warming is

back it up with some quotes of what I have said, especially back at the beginning of the thread where I compare it to things like poverty or malaria.

The right wing denounces and tries to discredit anything concerning the effects we are having on the environment in order to protect big business.

Thankfully, the majority of the public agrees with the environmentalists and I hope in the next federal election it's raised as an issue. It's certainly hurt Harper's poll numbers.

LOL, no it won't hurt Harper. Environmental reform is popular, Kyoto is not. Harper is probably going to get a majority next election because everyone knows what else there is...

NDP = run country into the ground through overspending and Jack Layton is potentially the worst thing that would happen to international relations.

Liberal Party = no backbone, no solid leader (he's a dual citizen with France which should be an automatic fail), scandals, made our military an embarassment

Conservatives = reduced GST, balanced budget that passed, strong foreign relationships, got several billion dollars back from the Americans over the softwood agreement (the Liberals got 0...), successfully, told the Americans to stay out of our northern waters, kept their word on putting homosexual marriage to a free vote , etc. They have kept their word, have improved the economy, improved our military so we embarass ourselves less, instead of just agreeing to Kyoto without a plan have actually made a plan that works for Canada and doesn't just piss our money away to Africa

Conservatives have credibility and backbone and that is why they will win if they don't do something during the election campaign.

I agree 100% with Nell here.

I am certainly not a "conservative" (as in the party, I am somewhat conservative in ideology). But compared to the rest of the Canadian political scene, its the only choice, much like the liberals were under chechien

http://www.livescience.com/environment/070504_new_particles.html

lets chalk this one up to reasons the future is unpredictable by today's science

I want an independent group to come to the same decision as NASA before I just take that as fact.

??

why is nasa not independent?

They have spoken out against the administration many times before, especially about global warming...

And yet that are sponsored by the administration.

they recieve government tax dollars.

there have been many times in the past 7 years that NASA has spoken out against bush, be it for diverting funds away from projects for maned space flight, underfunding the hubble or censoring their results on global warming.

Not only that, the study is being published in peer review.

That means nada

http://www.livescience.com/environment/070403_arctic_ice.html

are you saying peer review means nada?

I'm saying being funded by the administration can sway things whenever.

every scientist in North America recieves government funding for their research

are you saying that the entire scientific community is in the pocket of the government?