Canada disgraces itself on the enviroment.

Originally posted by Fishy
Economists are not of interest here, they aren't scientists. And there are a large group of scientists that put the results of the IPCC into doubt, even scientists that worked on the reports. They criticize the way the IPCC works and the way they got their results. But you want to ignore that of course.

To the best of my knowledge, the recent problems with scientists and the IPCC was with regards to the effect of global warming on hurricanes and not on the core idea of anthropogenic global warming.

I have certainly seen the quotes where the scientists that left the IPCC meetings were saying things like "They had preconceived notions about global warming" or other such things, but I thought those were of a much more specific context to parts of global warming

I don't disagree that what the IPCC says should be taken with a grain of salt

Originally posted by Fishy
They are dying in mass number because of aids, because of poverty, because they don't have hospitals medicine and electricity. Cancer will be a small factor in to all of that. Many of them don't have any water anyway, and the water they do have is polluted as hell. Of course they could get clean water but that would require big businesses to build factory's there and would mean that they couldn't comply with environmental demands. To prevent progress in those country's is to kill millions. And that is what you are willing to do for a heavily debated theory.

poverty>>>>>>>>global warming

Still more cancer crap? Global warming and ozone depletion are two separate issues. The link between Kyoto and cancer is tenuous at best.

Originally posted by inimalist
[B]To the best of my knowledge, the recent problems with scientists and the IPCC was with regards to the effect of global warming on hurricanes and not on the core idea of anthropogenic global warming.

I have certainly seen the quotes where the scientists that left the IPCC meetings were saying things like "They had preconceived notions about global warming" or other such things, but I thought those were of a much more specific context to parts of global warming

I don't disagree that what the IPCC says should be taken with a grain of salt

I got it from the great global warming swindle. One of the scientists trying to discredit the theory is a co-author of the IPCC first climate report. Some others might have been involved in the IPCC I don't remember all of them, just that one because I felt it was surprising somebody that helped write it disagreed with it.

Originally posted by Fishy
I got it from the great global warming swindle. One of the scientists trying to discredit the theory is a co-author of the IPCC first climate report. Some others might have been involved in the IPCC I don't remember all of them, just that one because I felt it was surprising somebody that helped write it disagreed with it.

There is no doubt there is bias in the reports of the IPCC

whether that discredits the science that backs up what they say is another thing entirely

but ya, without splitting hairs I don't think we disagree

Originally posted by inimalist
To the best of my knowledge, the recent problems with scientists and the IPCC was with regards to the effect of global warming on hurricanes and not on the core idea of anthropogenic global warming.

I have certainly seen the quotes where the scientists that left the IPCC meetings were saying things like "They had preconceived notions about global warming" or other such things, but I thought those were of a much more specific context to parts of global warming

I don't disagree that what the IPCC says should be taken with a grain of salt

poverty>>>>>>>>global warming

This is about more then just global warming, and not it's not less important. The environment is something that will effect everyone the world over. As I said there is already people dying in Africa, it's been that way for a very long time now and it's not going to change. But we have to be concerned with everyone, not just people in one nation or another.

And no, it is only heavily debated because the right wing big business guys don't want to admit they are going to have to change the way they are doing things. I love the fact that in Canada, this issue if hurting the conservatives poll numbers, I hope it gets them voted out.

Health and Life >>>>>>Money

Originally posted by Starhawk
This is about more then just global warming, and not it's not less important. The environment is something that will effect everyone the world over. As I said there is already people dying in Africa, it's been that way for a very long time now and it's not going to change. But we have to be concerned with everyone, not just people in one nation or another.

Romeo Dallaire, probably one of the greatest Canadians ever to live, would call you a racist

The idea that "Africa is never going to change" is based on thousands of years of social conceptualization of Africa and black people. There are struggling democracies and countries on the brink of collapse, none of which are able to effectively get aid from western nations because we see all of Africa, and thus Africans, as lost causes.

And besides, lack of economic prosperity is a much greater threat to people in the third world than any environmental concern at this point. Many countries don't have average life expectancy rates of over 40 years.

Originally posted by Starhawk
And no, it is only heavily debated because the right wing big business guys don't want to admit they are going to have to change the way they are doing things. I love the fact that in Canada, this issue if hurting the conservatives poll numbers, I hope it gets them voted out.

What is not heavily debated? are you saying there is no scientific debate about the effect of global warming on hurricanes?

Originally posted by Starhawk
Health and Life >>>>>>Money

ah, see, in a capitalist economy, money=health/life

For instance, we need to spend money to make the environment a better place, without that money, our health and life go kaput. Take an economics class next year, they are retarded and all just graphs and whatever, but it may help you with these basic concepts of capitalism.

Originally posted by inimalist
Romeo Dallaire, probably one of the greatest Canadians ever to live, would call you a racist

The idea that "Africa is never going to change" is based on thousands of years of social conceptualization of Africa and black people. There are struggling democracies and countries on the brink of collapse, none of which are able to effectively get aid from western nations because we see all of Africa, and thus Africans, as lost causes.

And besides, lack of economic prosperity is a much greater threat to people in the third world than any environmental concern at this point. Many countries don't have average life expectancy rates of over 40 years.

What is not heavily debated? are you saying there is no scientific debate about the effect of global warming on hurricanes?

ah, see, in a capitalist economy, money=health/life

For instance, we need to spend money to make the environment a better place, without that money, our health and life go kaput. Take an economics class next year, they are retarded and all just graphs and whatever, but it may help you with these basic concepts of capitalism.

First off, who brought hurricanes into this? And yes I understand capitalism very well, but it's a matter of if we will be able to live in the world at all. Big business cries and whines at the idea of ANY tax increase, most companies are making record profits, trust me it's not going to cause this massive collapse of the economy you and the right wing fears.

It is not that I see Africa as a lost cause completely, but seriously, Africa is just one nation, the concerns to the environment are a world issue. I live in a fairly large city and we have had 2 cases of contaminated water in the last 4 months, our air quality readings go down yearly. There was a report on my local news (A-channel) recently about how the number of cancer cases will soon be so large it will become the number one killer in Canada, many of these caused by UV exposure. Many species are being wiped out, many essential to the planet such as bees.

Now unfortunately the richer classes and the government are going to have to foot the bill on this one. There is a report today in the London Free Press (A paper which 8/10 times falls on the side of the conservatives) which states that a study by Statistics Canada says that over the last 5 years income for the higher tax brackets has risen 22% and the poorer classes income has gone down by 11%. If They try to push the cost onto the poorer classes that are already at a crisis, then we will have staggering rises in crime rates and violence.

In addition to my tax increase to the higher income brackets and eliminating loopholes. I also suggest the following.

-Roll back wages on MP's, MPP's, Judges and higher level government jobs. Cut Government expense accounts down, roll back military spending.

And to help get more doctors, the government needs to start an incentive program where they give tuition assistance for medical students with the agreement that the student will work for 5 years in the location the government assigns.

I really don't think people get how serious the situation of our environment is. What good is money if your not around to spend it or appreciate the things it buys?

You, don't understand capitalism. You can't argue otherwise because you have proven that you don't more than once.

I can hardly believe that you called Africa "just one nation" when it is many nations and has over 500 million people in it. You are a complete idiot.

Once again you mention UV radiation. This fails because the ozone layer is repairing itself. The issue has already been addressed and the situation reversed (by big businesses because there was an advantage), but you fail to realize that this is the case and that big business was a huge part of it.

The loopholes are there for a reason. You closing them off will hurt lower income tax payers because they are the ones that benefit most from them. If you cut the tax loopholes, employers will no longer be allowed to write of salary expenses. Do you understand the implications of that? You have proven that you don't. It means massive lay offs and decreased pay for unskilled labour. That means that low income earners learn less. You're solutions are counterproductive. People like you should not be allowed to vote because you would run the country into the ground.

Rolling back the pay would save maybe $10 million a year. That is so insignificant and pathetic of an idea that it hurts. That won't help anybody do anything.

I agree with the doctor program. Too bad that has nothing to do with the environment, or the economy. If anything the government needs to start paying doctors more to keep them in the country. Meaning increased spending in that area.

Originally posted by Nellinator

Once again you mention UV radiation. This fails because the ozone layer is repairing itself. The issue has already been addressed and the situation reversed (by big businesses because there was an advantage), but you fail to realize that this is the case and that big business was a huge part of it.

The loopholes are there for a reason. You closing them off will hurt lower income tax payers because they are the ones that benefit most from them. If you cut the tax loopholes, employers will no longer be allowed to write of salary expenses. Do you understand the implications of that? It means massive lay offs and decreased pay for unskilled labour. That means that low income earners learn less. You're solutions are counterproductive.

Rolling back the pay would save maybe $10 million a year. That won't help anybody do anything.

I agree with the doctor program. Too bad that has nothing to do with the environment, or the economy. If anything the government needs to start paying doctors more to keep them in the country. Meaning increased spending in that area.

Okay I cut the crap and childish insults out of your post.

Doctors have no relation to the environment? When you get sick from the polluted water and the toxins in the air and cancer and the fact that your malnourished due to the plants being gone, what are you going to do? Pray and hope God kisses it and makes it all better? No your going to go to a doctor. As the environment around is crumbles, medical professionals are going to become more and more important. The cuts I suggested would save more then 10 million a year.

And there is also useless loopholes, such as business related travel, which in reality is them going on a vacation.

Show me where the scientific community says the Ozone layer is repairing itself.

The right wing needs to take the dollar signs away from there eyes long enough to actually look around and see what is happening to this world.

Originally posted by Starhawk

Show me where the scientific community says the Ozone layer is repairing itself.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s914411.htm

Originally posted by Starhawk
The right wing needs to take the dollar signs away from there eyes long enough to actually look around and see what is happening to this world.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/070419_earth_timeline.html

🙄

the "Africa is one Nation" comment probably hurt my respect for you way more than the environmentalist BS. That shows utter ignorance of the continent if you think Somalia and South Africa are the same.

No by nation I was referring to the continent of Africa, as in we cannot worry about one when the environmental collapse will effect all. The needs of the many are more important.

I can't possibly understand how polorized you are on this issue....

You mean how little I've bought into the right wing bug business propaganda? I've contacted some local environmental groups in my city and area and have given them contact info for many members of parliament and some ideas on how to get this issue even more to the forefront of the news, I am glad this issue is hurting the conservatives poll numbers, I hope we can get in a real government that can do what needs to be done.

see, thats the thing

You look at issues of environmentalism and politic through the lense of someone devoted to the left/right spectrum

You completely generalize all opposition as being "right wing propoganda" to the point that you have bashed major scientific publications.

But ya, cognitive dissonance can explain exactly why you will dismiss everything that I have said as trying to feed into my pro-corporate worldview (which, if you knew my worldview at all, is silly)

Because the right wing chooses to ignore any scientific evidence which would require changes to the economic sector of society. your incredibly naive if you don't think that.

ok, do you think I am pushing the right wing story on global warming?

Pretty much yes. As I said Global Warming is only one of many issues that needs attention.

Polluted water supplies.
Increasingly contaminated air.
More and more species such as bees being wiped out.
Rapidly growing cases of cancer.
Even our food, the steroids they pump into pigs and cows to get them to grow.

So what you are saying is that you have a much more objective view of environmental science than I do, seeing as I push aside studies that don't conform to my worldview?

Originally posted by Starhawk
Because the right wing chooses to ignore any scientific evidence which would require changes to the economic sector of society. your incredibly naive if you don't think that.

And by real government what do you mean? NDP = definitely a joke and a disaster for Canada. Liberal = proven crap over last 10 years. The Conservatives are actually getting things done and working with other parties. This government has easily been the most effective government we've had in the last 10 years.

Originally posted by Nellinator
You do realize that the "right-wing" needs a healthy environment as well? Unlike the Liberals who joined a counterproductive Kyoto Accord with no plan for meeting it, the Conservatives have actually made a plan. In fact we are seeing a minority government making excellent inroads as the Conservatives are willingly working with the Liberals and the NDP to make an effective, made-in-Canada plan that will work and make progress. You have jumped the gun on this issue because the plan is in the process and in the end I expect to actually make inroads in pollution reduction unlike the Kyoto Accord.

The conservative "plan" was to switch to lightbulbs that cannot even be thrown out in the trash due to the magnesium in them. That is all they have come up with. Please show me links to these other plans of theirs?