If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Enviromental groups sue U.S. goverment over global warming. China and India whistle nonchalantly, try to look innocent   (foxnews.com) divider line 139
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

3111 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Apr 2007 at 1:27 PM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



139 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-04-02 10:09:25 AM
The groups are not suing for damages, they are trying to force the government to follow laws already on the books. NEPA was signed into law in 1970 by Nixon, and it only requires that federal projects be aware of environmental damages ahead of time, and take that into account. Since right-wingers constantly complain about how liberals don't consider unintended consequences of government action (read Thomas Sowell), this is only bad if climate change is, well... inconvenient.

/don't make me reference Gore again!
 
2007-04-02 10:11:52 AM
This headline got me thinking. There was a time when the US wanted to compare itself to the best out there but now it's "there's someone worse so we're okay," all in the name of competition. India and China suck so we have to suck too? Growing up, I remember when American work ethic was compared to European but now we're comparing ourselves to literal Chinese sweatshops.

Anyway, just a thought. We're really making an effort to lower the bar.
 
2007-04-02 10:15:52 AM
I find it more of a compliment to have the American work ethic compared to China or India, or to US immigrant labor. I find it an insult for our work ethic to be compared to Europeans. Of course, that probably says more about Europe than anything, but I'm happy without flat GDP growth and double-digit unemployment.

But then again, I'm sitting here typing on fark...
 
2007-04-02 10:24:53 AM
That'd be "government".
 
2007-04-02 10:30:56 AM
submitter: China and India whistle nonchalantly, try to look innocent

Which makes it A-OKAY for us!
 
2007-04-02 10:36:21 AM
I am wondering if the spelling of 'enviro-mental' in the headline is intentional. They're enviro mentals alright.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2007-04-02 11:05:56 AM
There should never have been a private right of action under NEPA.
 
2007-04-02 11:10:01 AM
There should never have been a private right of action under NEPA.

Because we all know that the government cannot be captured by special interests to the detriment of the public.
 
2007-04-02 11:41:45 AM
NikolaiFarkoff: I find it more of a compliment to have the American work ethic compared to China or India, or to US immigrant labor. I find it an insult for our work ethic to be compared to Europeans.

I guess I didn't mean "compare itself to." I meant expected to compete with. There was a point of pride in saying that we work harder than someone and have a better standard of living. The middle class had a decent balance of work/life. Now if you work less than your Mexican/Chinese/Indian counterparts, you are lazy. shiat, at least the Chinese and Indians get healthcare for their hard work. The Mexicans do too - at our hospitals.

Again, just a rant.
 
2007-04-02 11:41:47 AM
But, but, but China...
 
2007-04-02 01:14:09 PM
But, but, but China...

China is bad, but North Korea is worse. Due to their mismanagement, they've caused massive soil erosion in their country. China just rents factory space to foreign corporations and lets them dump their factory waste right into the river...but North Korea is almost vindictive in their agricultural mismanagement. it's almost like they won't be happy until every last bit of topsoil blows away and the country isn't anything except bare rock.
 
2007-04-02 01:22:41 PM
Weaver95
it's almost like they won't be happy until every last bit of topsoil blows away and the country isn't anything except bare rock.

Well then, problem solved. No need to send the nukes. Sounds good to me.
 
2007-04-02 01:30:40 PM
Non-believers in global warming: Ann Coulter, South Park guys, Inhofe and Fark moderators.

How did you all get so farking retarded?
 
2007-04-02 01:31:09 PM
T-Servo: read Thomas Sowell

Aww, do I HAVE TO?
 
2007-04-02 01:33:27 PM
What does China and India have to do with the way we run things?


/constantly wonders if GOP parents ever gave the "Timmy doesn't live here, you do, so you live by MY rules" speech.
 
2007-04-02 01:34:06 PM
Hyaku-Shiki: submitter: China and India whistle nonchalantly, try to look innocent

Which makes it A-OKAY for us!


What I came here to say.
 
2007-04-02 01:34:08 PM
I've been to China, and I have no doubt there will be a day of reckoning in less than 100 years. The levels of pollution are simply indescribable. All of you who think that the Green movement is a waste of time should travel to China to see the other side.

My worry is that when the cancer rates explode, and soil dies (basically i'm saying when China starts to die) that the Chinese will attempt to take Australia or some other nation by force in order to survive.

Look at the blue sky and green trees, and love them. Yes, you pay a price for than puff of freshness.
 
2007-04-02 01:34:30 PM
If you look at the terms of the "Carbon Transfer Credit" scheme, it basically says that poor countries who are unable to have their own industries will be paid money by rich countries for doing absolutely nothing, basically as a sop to the conscience of the latter.

In plain English that means a corrupt elite will suck up all the money, the people will get nothing, the taxpayers will pay higher bills and hate the third-worlders for being ungrateful parasiotes, the third-worlders will hate the richer nations for being such cheapskates, and no one will gain.

It has nothing to do with the environment, it's all about money.
 
2007-04-02 01:34:50 PM
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNDDDDDDDDDD... we're off to the standard R vs. D argument here on fark...

On the right we have "we're not the worst so nothing to see here"

and on the left we have "we should crucify our economy to save the spotted swamp flea inspite of what the rest of the world, including countries that are >
Please carry on.
 
2007-04-02 01:34:52 PM
I love how everything environmental is greeted with a dumb ass tag

someone should post an article about a random polluting industry, 10 bucks says the mods'll change that one to hero.
 
2007-04-02 01:35:58 PM
Lord_Baull


What does China and India have to do with the way we run things?


/constantly wonders if GOP parents ever gave the "Timmy doesn't live here, you do, so you live by MY rules" speech.


I thought they pollute more and don't want to clean up.
 
2007-04-02 01:36:33 PM
Non-believers in global warming: Ann Coulter, South Park guys, Inhofe and Fark moderators.

I know Coulter speaks out against it (more of the anti-liberal agenda-pushing part), but me personally, I think that Al Gore's ideas are bullshiat.

Is there global climate change occurring? (both inc and dec in temps) Yes.

Did man cause these? No.

Increase in CO2 != temperature change. Why?.. Explain to me how the middle ages were warmer than now? How did the last ice age end? Naturally

Should we ignore environmental concerns? No. I'm all about conservation, but I'm not about scaring people into thinking New York will be under water in 50 years.
 
2007-04-02 01:37:25 PM
People who say we're lowering the bar are missing the point: we're raising the bar of China and India before worrying about a country (ours) that is less of a problem. It doesn't make sense to wallow in how awful the US is when their are other people who could take smaller more feasible steps that lead to greater change, compared to the US taking drastic measures that do very little (see: Europe & Kyoto).
 
2007-04-02 01:38:19 PM
Seems like as good a time as any to point out that Kyoto treats China, India, and developing nations differently for a reason.

They are developing, having their version of an industrial revolution. Most environmentally efficient technologies are pretty high tech. Developing countries are by definition low-tech.

Kyoto negotiations did discuss the possibility of technology transfer, providing proprietary advanced tech to developing countries, but corporations that actually own that tech wouldn't hear of it.

So we are left with expecting developing countries to skip directly from agrarian to post-industrial without all that messy stuff in between.

Put another way, we would otherwise be asking them to do as we say, not as we did.

Kyoto doesn't really exempt them- it just says they get some time, like the US did, to develop. It's a compromise, and one that most enviros don't really like.
 
2007-04-02 01:39:31 PM
"What does China and India have to do with the way we run things?"

Because if we drive out business with increased and expensive new rules they will likely just move their industry to India or China where they are basically free to do whatever they want.

If you can't get China and India to sign on to these agreement you can end up making global warming worse as these companies relocate to to countries with lax standards.
 
2007-04-02 01:40:41 PM
godofusa.com

You get the hero tag from me!

Seriously.
 
2007-04-02 01:41:22 PM
Increase in CO2 != temperature change. Why?.. Explain to me how the middle ages were warmer than now? How did the last ice age end? Naturally

That's some mighty fine reasoning...
 
2007-04-02 01:42:09 PM
cover the statue of liberty with incandescent bulbs. that'll show those douchebags.
 
2007-04-02 01:45:13 PM
I know I raped and killed that little girl, but he raped and killed the little brother!
He's way worse, and until you do something about him, I will do nothing to help out my own situation!

\No wonder R's get arrested more, have higher crime, murder and teen pregnancy rates.
 
2007-04-02 01:45:33 PM
Fizpez

and on the left we have "we should crucify our economy to save the spotted swamp flea inspite of what the rest of the world, including countries that are >

Actually, most credible mainstream enviros say things more like we should cut (emissions, energy use, consumption, etc.) by 10% or so by making some relatively common sense changes. Also, we should plan for a future that is not dominated by petroleum because it isn't a good idea to have all our eggs in that one basket.

What a bunch of moonbats.
 
2007-04-02 01:45:33 PM
I thought it was.. other than volcanoes and people breathing all the time, I cannot think of any other way CO2 was released into the atmosphere in 1257...and if it was warmer then than now.. my guess is the change was natural.

ignoringyou Still not sure if I believe you :P I'm usually flamed on the forums for whatever reason.
 
2007-04-02 01:45:34 PM
For the brazillianth time -

China and India do not emit more CO2 than the USA

Yes, fine, they may be farking up their groundwater/soil/ntire ecology.
No, I don't give a flying fark if you believe in AGW or not.

Just stop with the goddamned "buh, buh, buh China and India!!" because it's not true. The USA, one twentieth (ish) or world population. One quarter of CO2 emissions.

Now shut the hell up.
 
2007-04-02 01:47:00 PM
www.davidsanger.com


Boy, this smog sure beats having clean air to breathe! Im looking forward to cancer, asthma, and emphysema, as well as increased bacterial and viral infections of the respiratory tract. Soldier on pollution enthusiasts!!
 
2007-04-02 01:47:27 PM

If you can't get China and India to sign on to these agreement you can end up making global warming worse as these companies relocate to to countries with lax standards.


Wow. I had no idea the U.S. couldn't punish US companies for environmental violations.
 
2007-04-02 01:48:31 PM
Glass parking lot?
 
2007-04-02 01:49:58 PM
DigitalReligion: we're raising the bar of China and India before worrying about a country (ours) that is less of a problem

You think 300million people using twice or more energy and resources than 2 billion people is okay?
 
2007-04-02 01:52:04 PM
godofusa.com

No, I'm serious. I'm very much into the idea of natural climate change. Because that's the way it works. I don't know how one can (logically) explain it otherwise.

My job title is environmental specialist. People seem to get that confused with environmentalist. That's a scary thought.
 
2007-04-02 01:52:53 PM
godofusa.com

I think you're safe in saying that the warmer temperatures of the middle ages didn't follow the industrial revolution.
 
2007-04-02 01:55:40 PM
FTA
He also cited increased attention on the issue in the news and entertainment media, including Gore's documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth."

SAT prep for all you High School Farkers out there.

Michael Moore : Election 2004 :: Al Gore : ___________

/Not doubting Climate Change, but Al's ideas are not the answer.
 
2007-04-02 01:56:07 PM
ignoringyou
At first I read that as environtmentalist specialist (I think work is starting to get to me).. but I'm glad I read it over :D

Leonard Washington
It was those damn alchemists! They caused global warming! Damn that quest for gold from lead!! yarrrrr
 
2007-04-02 01:56:15 PM
godofusa.com:

Is there global climate change occurring? (both inc and dec in temps) Yes.
Did man cause these? No.


Glad you're such an expert on climate change, we need someone to set us all straight.

Increase in CO2 != temperature change.

The laws of physics disagree with you.

Why?.. Explain to me how the middle ages were warmer than now?

They weren't. They were, however, nearly as warm as now. This is attributed at least partially to the solar Medieval Maximum.

How did the last ice age end? Naturally

So? Ice age cycles are generally thought to be caused by Earth's orbital variations: they end when the Earth gets a little closer to the Sun, or changes its tilt a little, etc. No such orbital variation is currently taking place. In addition, it takes at least a thousand years for an ice age to end, which bears little resemblance to the rapid warming taking place over the last 40 years. No natural forcings (e.g., solar) have been large enough and rapid enough to come close to explaining this climate change.

I fail to understand the logic of "The climate has warmed naturally in the past, therefore it must be warming naturally now", despite the numerous discrepancies between natural changes and what is actually being observed.
 
2007-04-02 01:56:39 PM
Oil has carbon in it. The carbon was sequestered for millions of years, and hasn't been part of the carbon cycle for that long. Now we burn the oil. The carbon goes in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere makes it warmer. The end.
 
2007-04-02 01:57:05 PM
Both Beijing and New Delhi argue that they must use more energy to lift their populations from poverty, and that emissions per person are a fraction of those in rich states. Manmohan Singh, the Indian prime minister, told a conference this month: "The principal polluters are the United States and countries of western Europe. Per capita emissions are far ahead [of India and China]. You cannot preserve energy by perpetuating poverty in the poor nations."

The figures bear out his words. India emits 1.1 tonnes of carbon dioxide per person. China puts out 3.5 tonnes. Both are less than the global average of 4.2 tonnes. The comparable figures for the UK and America are 9.6 and 20.2 tonnes respectively.


source

The approximate amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is about 3 trillion tonnes. If the 2.5 billion population of those two countries increase their output to the current US levels (and if the US remains as high, there is no viable position you can criticise them for doing so) that is 2.5 billion times 18 tonnes extra per year, which equates to adding 1.5% of current co2 concentrations each year, in addition to the existing increases (unless extra sinks appear, or existing sinks become more efficient due to the increased concentration, some of which does happen, but is generally accepted to be nowhere near enough to be much of a factor in the short term).

/holy run on sentences batman!
 
2007-04-02 01:57:32 PM
bikerific: "Kyoto treats China, India, and developing nations differently for a reason".

The reason is that the whole charade falls apart if we acknowledge that these countries can and will negate the sacrifices Kyoto signees make.
 
SVX
2007-04-02 01:58:12 PM
My father just got back from Shanghai last week. He took pictures. They were incredible. Incredible as in the pollution in the air. There were pictures taken at 2:00 in the afternoon that looked like an especially gloomy sunset. The sun was red and weak because of the smog. I have periodic asthma, and he says that the 10 days he spent there would have ripped my lungs apart. He also went well into the interior, over 400 miles from Shanghai. The pollution and smog was just as bad there. Their national health nightmare is not very far away at all. If this is a deliberate plan by the Chinese government to shrink population through shortening lifespan - it's going to work.
 
2007-04-02 02:00:36 PM
godofusa.com
I thought it was.. other than volcanoes and people breathing all the time, I cannot think of any other way CO2 was released into the atmosphere in 1257

Not flaming you or anything but the Medieval Warm Period and the following Little Ice Age were a regional events. Ice cores and other data show that the global temperature did not change significantly during that period.
 
2007-04-02 02:01:03 PM
ignoringyou: I don't know how one can (logically) explain it otherwise.

You could, I dunno, crack open these nifty things called "books". A whole lot of them happen to have valid information AND tend to define things a little better than x != y.

Rovian: I'm looking forward to cancer, asthma, and emphysema, as well as increased bacterial and viral infections of the respiratory tract. Soldier on pollution enthusiasts!!

The funny thing is, rabid environmentalists happen to exaggerate 10 times less than rabid anti-smokers. Being in Southern California, you don't have to pretend to cough every time you drive by a factory billowing out smoke.
 
2007-04-02 02:02:06 PM
Gothnet
Just stop with the goddamned "buh, buh, buh China and India!!" because it's not true.

Yes is it, or at least will be by 2010. China builds a coal power plant roughly every 6 days. And even then, who cares about the CO2 production per person? Shouldn't total emissions be the one that counts? It is still being emitted anyway, and it still contributes to the problem.

You wanna save the world? Buy your kid a chemistry set and tell them to create a fuel that is cheaper than coal. Hint: Nukes, Oil, Natural Gas, Ethanol all aren't the answer.
 
2007-04-02 02:02:34 PM
ignoringyou

The only thing that scares me is someone confusing an environmental specialist with a scientist.
 
2007-04-02 02:03:36 PM
ignoringyou: My job title is environmental specialist.

I know you won't say but I'd love to know for which organization you work.
 
Displayed 50 of 139 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report