Re: What's the Worst That Could Happen? (Climate)

See Nigel Lawson's "Cool Look at Global Warming"
http://www.nzcpr.com/guest76.htm

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• global
• warming
• climate
• change
• controversy
• panic
• skeptic
• poverty
• trade
• freedom
• gore
• kyoto
• scam
• swindle
• con
• cost
• carbon

[coogiez]

but if the mean temperature around the globe rises by two degrees, that's like the human body's temperature rising by two degrees, you're really ill!

[coogiez]

also, didn't that wanderingmind guy say that all his argument in the end specify that it's not even the ammount of damage this environmental distabalisation, it's about the fact that we can do something about it?

that makes this rebuttle pointless.

[SteveWrathall]

The alarmists claim that even if we stopped emitting GHG now, the earth's temperature would still rise. But the shut-down of the global economy would immediately cause billions to starve. Sounds like a high price to pay for nothing.

[SteveWrathall]

No the Earth is not a product of natural selection, unlike your body. The Gaia religion is new-age mumbo-jumbo with zero predictive value. There are ecosystems with average teperatures of -20 and others +30 deg C. And all tolerate large temperature swings.

[Pestv]

youve got to be kidding me! we know kyoto will do nothin to help! thats why we need to take MORE action! you undermined your own argument as well!

'developed' countries have already mostly destroyed environments through deforestation/pollution (look how much of the UK used to be covered in forest!)

and it is what countries ARE doin to grow economies, freetrade means NO protrection for trees!

yr arguments make no sense!

dont post if you dont know the facts, our future 'could' be at risk! :-)

[SteveWrathall]

Overall, developed countries have increased their forest cover in the 20th century. NZ has been increasing its plantation forests, while preserving its natural forests ever since the 1950s. The last few years have actually seen an increase in deforestation- Why? Kyoto.

Forest owners rushing to convert to pastureland, so that they have the option of converting this "existing use" to forest in future and claim the carbon credits. Another brilliant bureucratic stuff up.

[Savehumanrights]

More carbon is better for trees. They breath the stuff. Look at scandanavia cananda look at all the trees. Look at the Australian desert. Once it was dust now with dams we can grow things. Do a search on world reforestation and you will see that there is more trees mainly in develped countries then say 50 years ago. The vegos are clearing the amazon (non westen) to grow soybeens cause they won't eat meat.

[FlamerKidd]

blah blah blah thecnic shit

[SteveWrathall]

You're right. But their projections cluster around temperature/sea rises that are not catastrophic.

[OgallalaKnowhow]

The IPCC uses multiple scenarios with no 'one', universally agreed upon prediction. So saying that the IPCC 'actually predicts this' is a moot point.

Also I take issue with you point that developed countries have been able to replant forests because of the superiority of our system, ect.

We buy a lot of wood from 'poor' counties, so saying that forests are logged due to 'corruption' outright ignores economic relationships between developed and poorer states.