Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gases takes Effect

[Goose75]

If he accepts the reality of global warming, why didn't the USA ratify the Kyoto Protocol. We are the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases globally.

There was more to the refusal of the US to ratify the Kyoto Protocol than the treaty itself. When Bill Clinton signed it, he did so without notifying congress beforehand and gaining their reluctant nod. This is a major breach with precedent. Although the public rarely understands the maneuvering, Presidents and Congress are always redefining the power of the Presidency and this was a major increase for it. With Congress in the opposing party’s hands he knew this would not be accepted. I believe he is intelligent, therefore he must have known the result – everyone else did. I can only assume that his strategy was to elevate the issue in the public eye and to create a foreign policy embarrassment that would sway his opponents. If the other side was not convinced of the tragic consequences of the treaty, he may have succeeded. Presidents always have major wins and losses. I always try to give credit where due whether I agree with the politician or not. Clinton gambled big on Kyoto and failed. He was also the President that pushed for gas/electric hybrids, which Bush continued until they were advanced enough to move onto fuel cells. In the end, I think these Presidents will have accomplished twice as much with a fraction of the political cost by industry incentives instead of treaties.

 

[dlndavid]

There is no enforcement mechanism capable of punishing the United States for noncompliance. How do you think we got away with Iraq when the UN told us no?

-B

Huh? The UN told us (the U.S. no)? We are a sovereign nation, we don't answer to the U.N. And when has the U.N. done anything right? Oil for food?

 

[dlndavid]

Natural emissions such as volcanoes, forest fires, and animals that emit methane are largely out of human control.

Well gee thanks for enlightening us all on this and clearing it up. Who would have figured this? But if we in the U.S. take away some of the restrictions on forest harvesting, we would have better control of our forests, minimizing out of control blazes.

We do not want to push nature's limit, the result could be catastrophe out of anyone's imagination.

Yah, like in the movie "The Day After Tomorrow". Although entertaining, highly fictional.

 

[dlndavid]

If I'm not mistaken, even our globally "esteemed" President Bush finally accepted the reality of global warming. Given the possibility he may not accept the theory of evolution, I think this suggests a tremendous acknowledgement of the reality of this problem!

Right?

Dr. Bill
Tongue in Cheek

And just like in the 70's it was the reality of global cooling?
Evolution? Just how does someone accept a theory? It is just a theory right?

 

[Goose75]

And just like in the 70's it was the reality of global cooling?
Evolution? Just how does someone accept a theory? It is just a theory right?

Evolution is a theory, but if we everyone wants to debate it, I think we should open a separate thread. The effects that mankind has on Global Warming is also theory. Unfortunately we don't have mathematical models capable of crunching all the variables and data isn't broad enough, so assumptions are made. It's the assumptions, data used and data reduction methods that are debatable. Either you agree with the data set or you don't. Since Governments are not run by scientists and they have their own political ends in mind, it's hard to take the number of countries signing up as proof of the theory's strength. The best way is to study the math, data collection techniques and analysis yourself. Since there are as many against it as for it (at least in the US), I think it a better use of time to argue conservation for the sake of reducing our dependence on limited resources.

The real question we should be asking is, how do we motivate people to cut the waste in our homes and offices?

 

[Mako Mark]

The US is money based. We don’t want to rule the world; we just want to be rich, fat and left alone. .

President Bush finally accepted the reality of global warming............he may not accept the theory of evolution,

:lol:

I would like to thank you both for your simplicity and humor, you just made my day.

On a per capita basis I think the data shows the US is the greatest contributor by far to the situation. If you look at China's emissions (ranking #2 in total) on a per capita basis, they produce far less.!

now we are talking, It is about individual responsibility.

.

 

[drbill]

Like any scientific theory, one accepts it based on the facts and their fit. Science can never fully prove a theory... only disprove it with one example that requires a new hypothesis to explain the situation.

There is plenty of evidence to support evolution. Creationism must be accepted based on faith, not repeatable experimentation.

Mark- it's always a matter of personal responsibility unless the mechanisms that generate the pollution or impact the environment in other ways are beyond the "control" of the individual alone. Glad you enjoyed the sense of humor!

Dr. Bill

 

[Goose75]

Like any scientific theory, one accepts it based on the facts and their fit. Science can never fully prove a theory... only disprove it with one example that requires a new hypothesis to explain the situation.

There is plenty of evidence to support evolution. Creationism must be accepted based on faith, not repeatable experimentation.

Mark- it's always a matter of personal responsibility unless the mechanisms that generate the pollution or impact the environment in other ways are beyond the "control" of the individual alone. Glad you enjoyed the sense of humor!

Dr. Bill

Ahh! Someone who can accept the word theory without getting in a huff. I needed that. I grow tired of explaining to creationists that science can be right without dispelling something based on faith. And then explaining to evolutionists that no matter the amount of evidence a theory can be right or wrong. Too many believe that the best way to be "right" is to silence the other side. But I digress, we were on Kyoto.

Does anyone know what currently is our largest polluter? I'm think it's electricity generation but I haven't seen a breakdown. If we doubled the effieciency of our autos, reduced our home and office electrity use by 20%, what affect would it have?

 

[Green_Manelishi]

If we .. reduced our home and office electrity use by 20%, what affect would it have?

I'd be sitting in a dark room most of the time.

Perhaps we in the USA should burn cowchips or some such thing rather
than fossil or nuclear fuels. Yeah, let's turn the clock back on our industrial progress.

And will someone please point out an interim lifeform? You know, that great leap between ape and man or land mammal and whale or dinosaur and bird? Can anyone say "Cambrian"?

 

[dlndavid]

That's it! I don't agree with the data set. Most temperatures of record are taken at airports where there are tons and tons of asphault and cement, "big heat sinks".
But I am all for conserving and conservation, I even practice it.