Durban Climate Change Conference 2011

[EagleSmack]

None of which has anything to do with the question of whether or not human activity changes our climate.

Hasn't the climate always changed?

Tell me, if I hit you with a shovel, and it hurts, does that mean it won't hurt if someone else hits you with a shovel?

No it will hurt. Should we have a pain tax?

We'll see.

It really depends on how negotiations go for the next 3-4 years.

Yes, they realized after Copenhagen that the we won't just hand our cash so easily and after a few day conference.

"Ok everyone... how much are we going to get the Americans to pay us and who gets what?"

They will be a lot easier if investments in clean energy are reasonably spent and the technology is well developed.

I'm all for that... just not from my wallet.

 

[Tonington]

Less than an hour can be catastrophic with respect to climate change. It is well known how fast a mammoth can freeze and virtually a whole hemisphere with it. That near instantaneous climatic change still persists.

And in such a case, the signal to noise ratio would be overcome by a huge signal...a mammoth doesn't freeze when the temperature changes by a tenth of a degree or even a few tenths of a degree. By the way please cite some evidence that a whole hemisphere froze in less than one hour.

 

[petros]

And in such a case, the signal to noise ratio would be overcome by a huge signal...a mammoth doesn't freeze when the temperature changes by a tenth of a degree or even a few tenths of a degree. By the way please cite some evidence that a whole hemisphere froze in less than one hour.

A myth we can agree on.

 

[Tonington]

Everyone knows that ad hominem always wins any arguement. You win.

And everyone knows that an ad hominem is a logical fallacy, in the form where someone attempts to negate a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic of the person making the claim.

But you apparently like to throw that bit of Latin around without knowing anything about it. I clearly responded to a question from Eagle, not a statement, and a remark from TenPenny. If you'll notice, there was no claim where I attempted to negate it by pointing out negative traits of the claimant. :roll:

 

[petros]

We'll see.

It really depends on how negotiations go for the next 3-4 years.

They will be a lot easier if investments in clean energy are reasonably spent and the technology is well developed.

Technology doesn't need development. People need to be educated and equipped to feed themselves while turning a profit from their efforts or technology will forever remain out of their hands.

 

[Walter]

The GW, AGW, CC, ACC or - whatever the next accronymn is - farce continues its path to oblivion in Durban.
RealClearPolitics - Long Faces in Durban

 

[Tonington]

The GW, AGW, CC, ACC or - whatever the next accronymn is - farce continues its path to oblivion in Durban.
RealClearPolitics - Long Faces in Durban

Ahh distortion...how convenient that they don't mention which working groups those newspaper articles are referenced in. A nice segue for a video of one of the very best scientific communicators (Steve Schneider, 1945-2010), on distortion, science, and the part the media plays:

Stephen Schneider: Science and Distortion - YouTube

 

[petros]

Durban....a great place to hold a climate conference bashing energy consuption considering S.A. consumes 65% of all electricty on the continent of Africa.

 

[TenPenny]

Durban....a great place to hold a climate conference bashing energy consuption considering S.A. consumes 65% of all electricty on the continent of Africa.

And it's easy to go there, and complain about the oil industry, without using any oil to get there.

 

[mentalfloss]

Yes, they realized after Copenhagen that the we won't just hand our cash so easily and after a few day conference.

"Ok everyone... how much are we going to get the Americans to pay us and who gets what?"

It's not just Americans, but all developed countries (and some near-developed countries like India) that will eventually make some concessions. They've been able to eek out $100 Billion for the Green Climate Fund from all developed countries.

The only policy that will really work is for industrial corporations to gradually reduce their emissions in a manner that still allows them to be profitable. But this requires a co-ordinated ethical move that probably won't happen as all organizations work to maximize profit by squeezing the towel as much as they can.

Economic policy does not lend itself well to scientific consensus.

 

[petros]

If we let global change warming climate happen and let the polar bears drown, Canadians won't have to consume 44% of their energy for keeping alive in winter.

 

[captain morgan]

It's not just Americans, but all developed countries (and some near-developed countries like India) that will eventually make some concessions. They've been able to eek out $100 Billion for the Green Climate Fund from all developed countries.

The only policy that will really work is for industrial corporations to gradually reduce their emissions in a manner that still allows them to be profitable. But this requires a co-ordinated ethical move that probably won't happen as all organizations work to maximize profit by squeezing the towel as much as they can.

Economic policy does not lend itself well to scientific consensus.

The policy will never work. The divide between the developed and non-developed nations in terms of the maturity of the industrial & resource sectors, along with the standard of living, wages, etc are opposing forces. Transferring funds to the non-developed nations will act only as a mass subsidy at the expense of the developed economies.

The solution lies in tehse non-developing countries getting off of their collective asses, developing their economies and competing head-on with the rest of the world.

 

[mentalfloss]

The solution lies in tehse non-developing countries getting off of their collective asses, developing their economies and competing head-on with the rest of the world.

Right.

That's why they need to gradually invest in alternative technologies to remain successful in the long term.

Otherwise, if there is no development in this sector, the economy will collapse once the resource is gone.

 

[petros]

They say Canadians are the biggest consumers, so what can I get out this? What's my cut of the $100B?

 

[captain morgan]

Right.

That's why they need to gradually invest in alternative technologies to remain successful in the long term.

Otherwise, if there is no development in this sector, the economy will collapse once the resource is gone.

No argument there.

That said, consider the track record of 'economic development' within those African nations that have been reliant on Western funding for all these years... It is nothing short of an unmitigated failure in terms of lifting their society/communities out of the crushing poverty that they have experienced to date.

Changing the subsidy from sector 'A' to sector 'B' won't change a thing.

 

[mentalfloss]

No argument there.

That said, consider the track record of 'economic development' within those African nations that have been reliant on Western funding for all these years... It is nothing short of an unmitigated failure in terms of lifting their society/communities out of the crushing poverty that they have experienced to date.

Well clearly it's because they haven't received enough funding.

 

[captain morgan]

Yup... That what the 'President-for Life' generally states as the cause.

 

[petros]

That said, consider the track record of 'economic development' within those African nations that have been reliant on Western funding for all these years... It is nothing short of an unmitigated failure in terms of lifting their society/communities out of the crushing poverty that they have experienced to date.

Yeah we might end up with a guy like Mugabe who sends his military in to kill people and remove them from lands to be designated as a "carbon sink"

 

[mentalfloss]

Yup... That what the 'President-for Life' generally states as the cause.

Glad you support this measure.

 

[TenPenny]

You really have to laugh at this. China is criticizing Canada for not doing something that China doesn't have to do.

China’s state news agency, Xinhua, denounced Canada’s decision as“preposterous”, calling it “an excuse to shirk responsibility”. It urged Canadato retract its decision so it could help reduce global emissions.

…

Under Kyoto, poorer countries including China and India, take voluntary,non-binding steps to curb the growth of emissions while they focus on economicdevelopment, and rich nations must sign up to quantitative cuts in emissions.

The United States has refused to join the protocol and argued that China andother big emerging emitters should come under a legally binding framework thatdoes away with the either-or distinction between advanced and developingcountries.

Makes perfect sense to me.