Submit Kyoto for Ratification

I am concrn that all countries must sign the kyoto protocol.The emmission of the green house gases causes devastiating effect on climate.food shortage,scarcity of water,burden of diseases,and other threats the poses challeges to maintenance of international peace and security.Its the tree of life mention in the book of genesis that was found in the midlle of the garden of even.
let reach global consensucs to international agrreements.
It contact you in my voting report.
sincerely,
opio moses korsuk

China is one virto power to un security council,why is their government neglection international coopeation and maitenance of peace and security?

I need the responses beacause we have to cooperate,
Thank you.
Opio moses korsuk

Tee Hee! Put Kyoto up for ratification. When will the moonbattery end? Kyoto is nothing more than global welfare to give money to countries that cannot, nor will not govern themselves in their people's interests, nor fix their own problems. Climate changes, no matter what man does. CO2 does NOT change the climate, and never has.

As to peacekeeping, what a fiction. As a former Canadian Army Officer I can attest to the utter failure of Peacekeeping. It is ineffective, and immoral.

The first thig the new US President should do is withdraw from the UN. It is a joke, corrupt, and an abyssmal waste of time and money.

President Clinton had an opportunity to submit Kyoto for ratification and declined to do so because the Senate voted 97-0 on the "Protection of American Industries Act". This was Democrats and Republicans that voted unanimously. Why?

Because any treaty that exempts "so called" developing countries such as India and China from the restrictions on Carbon emissions is not a fair deal to the USA or Europe. It is a uneven playing field that seeks to punish the US (and EU) for being a highly developed, highly sophisticated economy(ies). Why would a President commit to something that at it core seeks to undermine the competitiveness of American manufacturing, industry and jobs?

If you cannot fathom this simple fact, try the following: How would you like it if at your job, your boss froze raises and bonuses for you while exempting your co-workers, because you happen to move up the salary scale faster than your peers? Would you be happy? Would you show up for work?

This is nothing more that class warfare on a global scale. It seeks to punish productive economies under the guise of fairness. China is putting up the equivalent on 1 coal burning power plant a month, why should they and not the US? Why would I want my President agree to that?

The Kyoto Treaty was a bad idea to begin with. It was a thinly disguised attempt to extort funds from the United States Treasury for the benefit of a few foreign fat cats at the UN.

Why ratify it now? It is due to expire soon. That is why there was so much political screaming and manipulations at the recent conference in Bali. Did you notice that all criticism of Al Gore's view points was stifled?

Actually, they could submit Kyoto for ratification- it would be defeated because it is in the top 5 of the most stupid and useless international agreements of all time (right behind the Kellogg-Briand pact of 1927), and it would be great sport to watch all the pontificating blowhards in the US Senate have to find ways to rationalize the fact that it is bottled up in committee. There aren't more than 25% of the Senators who would actually want to vote for it, they do, however, want to stand up and get green credentials by blaming Bush that he didn't send it up after Clinton (recognizing the facts) refused to do so.

Socio-economic rationales are all well and good, but in what other case would we be saying that we should do what China is doing? It's terribly convenient, the choices we make about when to be unilateralist and when no action can be taken unless everyone is in perfect agreement.

Note that we went into Iraq because we "perceived" a threat from the regime there. We invaded WITHOUT the support of the UN Security Council (which includes China, by the way) to "protect" the American people.

Now we admit (finally) that climate change is a threat to everyone, even Americans, and we cannot take action unless everyone else does it first. Hypocritical, if you ask me.

The idea that this is class warfare is a paranoid notion. The rest of the industrialized world is going ahead with this. We are alone on this issue, with China as our company. Since when did we start playing "Simon Says" with China? Did our founding fathers wait on forming a democracy or starting a revolution because a regime change could cause a few economic changes?

If we want to continue to call ourselves leaders, we're going to have to lead on issues important to the world, not just American interests.

And as for the questions raised on climate science: the truth is there if you look at it. There are some people who say climate change is not real, but then some people still believe the sun rotates around the earth, don't they? Climate change is not a religion, or Santa Claus. You don't just believe in it or not. It is real, and it will affect you. Doing nothing about it is selfish, lazy and irresponsible.

Kenny Kenny Kenny
What have you been smoking and or drinking.
Bill Clinton's decision regarding Kyoto was not totally based on the Chinese action/inaction. He and Congress realized that the benefits of Kyoto were only minimal. It was not something to subscribe and submit for politically correct reasons. With few exceptions the great nations the championed and created Kyoto have failed miserablely to met their Kyoto commitments.

There are some ego maniacs that truly believe the earth is flat, that the universe revolves about planet Earth, and that the United States controls the climate. These are the same people that run the scam schemes to trade carbon footprint futures.

I'm an environmentalist but the Kyoto Treaty is fatally flawed. It would disproportionately tax the United States because we are the world's largest economy (even California is the world's fifth largest economy). Nations like China and India could keep on spewing CO2 and growing their economy while the United States was bogged down.

Kenny - what does Iraq have to do with this thread?

And no one argued that we do what China does. Most here have argued why should we be stopped from doing something that China and India are allowed to continue doing.

Leadership is also NOT doing something that everyone else is clamouring to do, especially if said thing is stupid in your view. The US is responsible to its people first, not the world.

You do realize that mitigating climate change is beneficial to Americans as well, right? It's not like we don't get affected by rising sea levels. I don't think Kyoto is perfect, but it's a lot better than what we're doing now.

Here's the relevance of the Iraq comment:

Bush says Iraq is a threat, so he invades, even when no one else thinks it's a good idea

Bush says climate change is a threat (a "flip-flop" I might add), and suddenly we can't do anything unless everyone else is doing it too.

Does that not seem a little hypocritical?

The system for mitigating climate change SHOULD put the biggest burden on the United States, because we are the largest per capita contributers to the problem. If we are smart, we can use our economic leverage to force China to reduce its emissions.

Finally, to be a leader, you need followers, otherwise you're not leading anything. The US has no followers in the industrialized world on this issue. There are zero nations in the OECD saying that they should be following the US example on climate change. In every discussion on the topic that happens in the UN or the OECD, the US impedes progress in the name of economic competitiveness. Now, having done nothing, our economy is still in trouble and we still have a huge trade deficit with China.

In the meantime, Europe is leading the way, and even if they're not meeting the goals they set for themselves, at least they're setting goals.

Kenny
President Bush HAS NOT agreed that AGW is fact OR that the world faces imminent danger(s) from climate change. He has only agreed to support more research to see if it is a phenomenon that can be controlled?

You and your fellow lemming alarmist have raised the specter of imminent and impending disaster simply because the climate is in a warmer phase than it has been in during the past few decades. We are all going to drown in 10 to 15 years.

Why have you and your fellow chicken little lemmings changed your terminology from Anthropogenic Global Warming to simply Climate Change? Have you realized that as more and more data become available and validated they refute the basis for your myriad of claims.

Could it be that you are using climate change simply because you know tomorrow's weather will be different than today's? Then no matter whether it is warmer or cooler you can complain about it and call for government action about the climate's change.

What happens when the climate enters a cooling phase?

Will we suddenly have to generate and release more CO2 to keep the world from becoming a large snowball and we are in immediate danger of freezing to death? We do know that when the cooling phase begins you will take credit for it. After all you discussed it and made people aware and caused a public debate.

Wow. The fact that the very first statement in your post is an absolute lie is a testament to your complete and utter lack of knowledge on the subject. Or maybe you just made your post in 2003? Not exactly sure what your sources are, but follow this link to see how wrong you are:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/environment/

Why would the administration be talking so much about reducing greenhouse gas emissions if there were no problem? Why did I sit in a press conference in Paris in 2007 where a couple of Bush cronies tried to convince me that the Bush administration is leading the way in resolving the problem? They even call it "climate change"! Those alarmist lemmings!

I could dispute every other misinformed statement you've made, but you won't listen. You'll make some claim about how all the climate scientists are biased and maybe use the word lemmings some more or make some references to a children's story to try and make me seem ridiculous.

I'll be honest. I was a skeptic for a long time. I too thought it seemed crazy and alarmist. Then I put my politics aside and did some actual research on the matter, and I'm not just talking about Al Gore's movie. The evidence is overwhelming. It's real.

The sad thing is that everyone who wants to do something about it will be screwed just as much as those of you with your heads in the sand. And if we succeed in stopping or at least minimizing the damage, then we still look wrong or overblown, and you still get the benefits of a non-ruined or lesser ruined planet.

What makes you think that you're smarter than the entire industrialized world? What makes you think that the vast majority of climatologists from across the globe are creating a conspiracy? What makes you think that the moneyed interests behind the emission of greenhouse gases are the good guys? What makes you think that pumping unfathomable amounts of gas into the atmosphere has no effect on the planet?

Get your fingers out of your ears, open your eyes and come out of your cave.

My fingers are out of my ears.
I have educated my self and continue to do so.
The facts supporting AGW are far outweighed by the facts that contradict it.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/will_the_ice_caps_melt.html

You continue to amaze me. The fact that you've used a conservative think tank and a right wing internet publication as your sources are a testament to everything I've said.

You're right. That totally outweighs the collective judgment of the best climatological scientists and the most advanced nations in the world. How blind I've been...

I'm done with this. You may have your fingers out of your ears, but it doesn't matter if you continue to listen only to those who agree with you.

In case you decide to challenge your politically motivated perceptions of science:

http://www.ipcc.ch/
http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/climate
www.gcrio.org/OnLnDoc/pdf/ClimateChangeScience.pdf
http://www.ametsoc.org/amsnews/news.html#noaa
http://www.agu.org/
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686#ref6

Of course, I could go on all day, with these, but you probably won't actually read them anyway.

Kyoto is worthless because it is weak and voluntary. Any and all reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are going to come exclusively from countries' own efforts to reduce their own emissions. The US desperately needs to do this by funding renewable energy and eliminating subsidies for oil and car companies, but international treaties (especially an expired one like Kyoto) are useless for this.

Look At The Solar activity data , we are in a solar minimum. It is the sun, not co2 that is largely responsible for cyclic climate change. Here are a couple of interesting sites: http://www.spaceweather.com and http://www.solarcycle24.com Also look at this article: http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_Arch_NY_Mar2_08.pd

Two weeks ago, 2 respected Russian scientists, said we are headed for global cooling because of solar inactivity, and that inactivity will last some 200 hundred years It is obvious that the Sun has the greatest influence on the climate, and to think man can change the climate by signing the Kyoto treaty is utter nonsense . Do some research.
The earth has gone through four ice ages prior to dawn of the industrial age and the hated use of oil. Oil that made possible the highest standard of living for human kind ever. Instead if hating oil , in a sane world, we would be singing its praises. Even if you ignore the fact that the sun is largely responsible for global warming you must ask your self can we do anything about global warming even if we wanted to? Even the scientists that think that humans are responsible for global warming agree that implementing the Kyoto treaty will have no impact on the climate. It will just make all of us poorer, much poorer. Moreover, the money and resources we spend trying to stop the unstoppable could have been spent much more wisely elsewhere.

If you think that we cannot affect the planet's qualities on a global level, you've apparently never heard of the hole in the ozone layer.

It's also interesting that Europe continues to push forward to reduce its carbon footprint, yet the US is the country in an economic crisis. The economic impact of reducing carbon will be negative, but small in the short term, but ultimately it will improve the economy by creating new jobs and new economic sectors.

Change can be a good thing, so quit trying to confuse the debate and go turn off that light you're not using. There's nothing wrong with energy independence.

Kyoto is too little too late. Make it stronger and then sign it. Or global warming will kill all life on the planet except perhaps cockroaches.

Hated oil??? yeah, when one sees the side effects. The sun... I live in the valley of the "sun" Phx,AZ. Believe me the climate HAS changed here. It is almost so very "un-bareable" in the summer here. The weather is insane everywhere and they have film of Polar Bears floating on broken pieces of ice, up in the arctic region.
What is wrong with these types of people? They have/are ruined/ruining AZ! ANYTHING! humans CAN do to better our environment/planet/air/clean burning energies cannot hurt! Oil has let humans live a spectaculor way of life, r you saying we are " in-grateful"? No we are more knowledge-able. Americans CAN do amazing things, Think of all the inventions. We MUST convert to CLEAN energies, our children deserve to have the same FREE/CLEAN world we had. FREEDOM is also being violated... This planet belongs to all that are born unto it and NOT to the rich inc or thieves of the world! Stop the fanatics in middle-east, Let their women have a chance, maybe they can CHANGE Things. Women have alot to bring to the table, educate, teach self-suffecient agricultures, Get OFF the BIG global monies@ ANY cost " scam-train". It is past due that we ALL step up and be responsible and do what we ALL know is RIGHT!!!

4 ice ages, a couple of polar shifts, mass extinctions, a few asteriod strikes, super volcanos, solar activity,etc etc. All before the human race was off all fours.
Make another pitcher of Kool aid and kick back kids. This planet can shake us off like a case of fleas any time mother nature wants to no matter what we do about it. In fact, thinking that we have an effect or can control nature is truly the ultimate conceit. Worrying about it is only good for people who have no lives and nothing better to do. Try Xanax to combat Global warming worries.

On the coastlines where there are glaciers that are vital to the survival of the planet (such as permafrost containing methane, and the polar ice caps), is there a possibility of hooking up cooling panels in the ocean on the boundaries where the glacier previously reached too in a satisfactory environment, and powering those cooling panels through various electricity generating resources, such as turbines powered by the current of the ocean, windmills powered by the air, and solar panels powered by the sun.

I believe this combination would not effectively solve the issue which the planet is experiencing, but will dramatically decrease the effects of them (but I’m not a scientist), until we reach a level of technology where we could repair the damage which has been inflicted from pollution.