Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

    In a nutshell, according to Christiana Figueres, head of the United Nations climate organization, governments are starting to obey the recommendations of 'science' which call for a centralized transformation that will make life of everyone on the planet very different.

    It is the most inspiring job in the world because what we are doing here is we are inspiring government, private sector, and civil society to [make] the biggest transformation that they have ever undertaken. The Industrial Revolution was also a transformation, but it wasn't a guided transformation from a centralized policy perspective. This is a centralized transformation that is taking place because governments have decided that they need to listen to science. So it's a very, very different transformation and one that is going to make the life of everyone on the planet very different.

    Global warming talks progress is 'slow but steady'
    or...
    UN Climate Chief: Talks Are Making Slow, Steady Progress by Elizabeth Kolbert: Yale Environment 360

    Christiana Figueres


    BTW, her brother is a member of SocialistInternational.org and he also works with 'capitalist' Richard Branson in his 'carbon war room.'


    Central planning is associated with a Communist economy; the theory is that the government will overcome market failure and achieve equality of distribution.

    Central Planning | Economics Help

  • #2
    Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

    Well, this will dove-tail so nicely with what it appears the Obama administration has in mind for the EPA

    More than 50 EPA staff are now crashing to finish greenhouse gas emission standards that would essentially ban all construction of new coal-fired power plants. Never before have so many EPA resources been devoted to a single regulation. The independent and non-partisan Manhattan Institute estimates that the EPA’s greenhouse gas coal regulation will cost the U.S. economy $700 billion

    November surprise: EPA planning major post-election anti-coal regulation | WashingtonExaminer.com
    At a time when the economy is very weak, some would charactize it as teetering, the administration's thinking is to increase the cost of energy because it can absorb the additional costs and expenses so well?

    If businesses have additional costs forced on them, where do you think they get the money to pay for them? Their customers. In a time when GDP growth, business investment and hiring and demand are at low ebb, is this really the right time to increase expenses on everyone?

    Makes me really wonder what sort of insular bubble these guys are living in.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

      tHE Island president is an interesting movie dealing with the fate os small islands dealing with rising seas.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

        Oh no the rest of the world are doing stuff conservatives don't like.
        You can stick your head in the sand over this if you like but Europe and other places will clean up it's power generation (The UK is building massive offshore wind farms) and generally lower our carbon footprint.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

          Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
          Well, this will dove-tail so nicely with what it appears the Obama administration has in mind for the EPA



          At a time when the economy is very weak, some would charactize it as teetering, the administration's thinking is to increase the cost of energy because it can absorb the additional costs and expenses so well?

          If businesses have additional costs forced on them, where do you think they get the money to pay for them? Their customers. In a time when GDP growth, business investment and hiring and demand are at low ebb, is this really the right time to increase expenses on everyone?

          Makes me really wonder what sort of insular bubble these guys are living in.
          Then wouldn't it make more sense to deal with the problem globally?
          If you are going to reduce coal burning, doesn't it make sense to make coal more expensive to burn everywhere?
          Shouldn't that promote conversion of electric utilities to the cleaner natural gas, which BTW we have in abundance.
          So much so in fact that unless demand can be raised, the price of gas will collapse.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

            We can't centralize people's feelings, relegion, sexualequality, or voting but fossil fule use we can? Let's bring on the alternatives. But be seriouus folks we are buring the oil and the coal too. Energy demand isn't going to shrink as the world population continues to climb. Everyone on the planet can cut their carbon footprint to half of what it is today but when there is twice as many of us...

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

              Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
              Oh no the rest of the world are doing stuff conservatives don't like.
              You can stick your head in the sand over this if you like but Europe and other places will clean up it's power generation (The UK is building massive offshore wind farms) and generally lower our carbon footprint.
              Lowering your carbon footprint while driving electricity prices sky high, while at the same time having absolutely no impact on global carbon emissions or global climate change.

              Do you really think other counties are going to follow your lead as they see you ruining your economy with this useless nonsense?

              Skepticism in the face of a lack of evidence is not " head in the sand". Its just rational thinking.

              Also, EU countries are building more coal plants while claiming they are going green with more wind turbines, which adds up to a large load of BS. Same goes for China.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

                Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
                Oh no the rest of the world are doing stuff conservatives don't like.
                You can stick your head in the sand over this if you like but Europe and other places will clean up it's power generation (The UK is building massive offshore wind farms) and generally lower our carbon footprint.
                Which corporations have the contracts to produce and manage these wind farms?

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

                  Originally posted by goober View Post
                  Then wouldn't it make more sense to deal with the problem globally?
                  If you are going to reduce coal burning, doesn't it make sense to make coal more expensive to burn everywhere?
                  Shouldn't that promote conversion of electric utilities to the cleaner natural gas, which BTW we have in abundance.
                  So much so in fact that unless demand can be raised, the price of gas will collapse.
                  Collapsing the economy with higher energy prices, the only result of which will be less demand because everyone will be less productive. As only the 'rich' economies will be able to afford the increased energy prices, it still leaves the bulk of the developing world in the middle of their industrial revolutions emitting the most. Minimal benefits in emission reduction with maximal damage to existing advanced economies that many are depending on for their daily bread. Doesn't that sound too risky to you? Just have to look at how much the US emits and how bad it is vs. how much China emits and how much worse that is to see my point. The air is global.

                  While I agree that we should be good stewards of the planet, I don't see where collapsing the economy in a potentially misguided effort to do so is a real advantage for anyone, especially the poor who can't afford solar panel roofs, no have the land for wind farms, are basically left out of all of

                  Or is that what you are really after? A permanent underclass for the libs to continue to purchase votes from with promises paid for by everyone else?

                  If you really, really believe that carbon emissions and CO2 are really the problem, invent something that can beat the existing technologies in the marketplace in and of it's own right, without government funded life support. You'll have the population beating a path to your door wanting to buy it, you won't have to shove it down anyone's throat, they'll come willingly, it saves them money. So many of you pretend to be oh so morally and intellectually superior, so much superior in science and engineering, here's your chance to prove it.

                  Forcing the issue by artificially increasing prices isn't really the solution to convince an entire planet's population to change what they know works for something that's more expensive. That's a non-starter, and only a few fringe folks who can afford it will convert over. We see that sort of limited adoption right now with the bi-modal hybrids.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

                    Originally posted by eohrnberger View Post
                    Collapsing the economy with higher energy prices, the only result of which will be less demand because everyone will be less productive. As only the 'rich' economies will be able to afford the increased energy prices, it still leaves the bulk of the developing world in the middle of their industrial revolutions emitting the most. Minimal benefits in emission reduction with maximal damage to existing advanced economies that many are depending on for their daily bread. Doesn't that sound too risky to you? Just have to look at how much the US emits and how bad it is vs. how much China emits and how much worse that is to see my point. The air is global.

                    While I agree that we should be good stewards of the planet, I don't see where collapsing the economy in a potentially misguided effort to do so is a real advantage for anyone, especially the poor who can't afford solar panel roofs, no have the land for wind farms, are basically left out of all of

                    Or is that what you are really after? A permanent underclass for the libs to continue to purchase votes from with promises paid for by everyone else?

                    If you really, really believe that carbon emissions and CO2 are really the problem, invent something that can beat the existing technologies in the marketplace in and of it's own right, without government funded life support. You'll have the population beating a path to your door wanting to buy it, you won't have to shove it down anyone's throat, they'll come willingly, it saves them money. So many of you pretend to be oh so morally and intellectually superior, so much superior in science and engineering, here's your chance to prove it.

                    Forcing the issue by artificially increasing prices isn't really the solution to convince an entire planet's population to change what they know works for something that's more expensive. That's a non-starter, and only a few fringe folks who can afford it will convert over. We see that sort of limited adoption right now with the bi-modal hybrids.
                    So what would you suggest we do?

                    I said I'd favor a global approach, which you then claim would crash the economy, based on what, something you heard on the radio?
                    The best way to clean up the atmosphere without destroying the economy is the global approach.
                    You want China and India in on the cleanup, you don't want to just make it a US/Europe thing.
                    The idea of cap and trade, and emission credits is to make dirty energy more expensive than clean energy.
                    Or to fully reflect the cost in the price.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

                      The idea of cap and trade is to create a market for buying and selling carbon credits as a commodity. Its about money, and it always has been. The whole idea of cleaning up the environment is a nice theory for all you feel gooders out there, but its not about that. There will be a lot more of them 1 percenters out there as a result of cap and trade. That you can bet on.

                      Originally posted by goober View Post
                      So what would you suggest we do?

                      I said I'd favor a global approach, which you then claim would crash the economy, based on what, something you heard on the radio?
                      The best way to clean up the atmosphere without destroying the economy is the global approach.
                      You want China and India in on the cleanup, you don't want to just make it a US/Europe thing.
                      The idea of cap and trade, and emission credits is to make dirty energy more expensive than clean energy.
                      Or to fully reflect the cost in the price.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

                        Originally posted by goober View Post
                        The idea of cap and trade, and emission credits is to make dirty energy more expensive than clean energy.
                        The idea of cap and trade, in addition to what you said is also the following:
                        South
                        1) To make consumer goods cost more resulting in us consuming less.
                        2) To enrich big banks (they already have carbon derivatives ready to go)
                        3a) To have a mechanism to redistribute wealth illegally obtained by the 'North" via colonization from the '' back to the 'South.'
                        3b) This 'North to South' redistribution of wealth (funding via cap-and-trade) will be used to build infrastructure and other economic needs in the South so that these 'backwards' countries can get into globalization and get their women working. If their women are working, they will have less babies.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

                          Originally posted by JDJarvis View Post
                          We can't centralize people's feelings, relegion, sexual equality, or voting but fossil fuel use we can? Let's bring on the alternatives. But be seriouus folks we are buring the oil and the coal too. Energy demand isn't going to shrink as the world population continues to climb. Everyone on the planet can cut their carbon footprint to half of what it is today but when there is twice as many of us...
                          Exactly.

                          If AGW is true, we are basically hosed; and rather than trying to prevent it, we might as well prepare for the consequences. Assuming there are any worth talking about it.

                          As an aside, spring is AWOL in my part of the country this year and the silence from the warmists is deafening. In contrast, last year when it got into the 80’s at this time of year ‘global warming!’ was the buzz.

                          It’s nothing more than simple variation within parameters.

                          Politically, the hope is that Obama gets bogged down in the budget debate or whatever else comes along so he can’t implement any ridiculous AGW policy initiatives.

                          If the warmists are looking for a causal relationship they should look no farther than that which exists between the cost of energy and the economy.

                          You can actually prove that one.



                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

                            Originally posted by USCitizen View Post
                            Which corporations have the contracts to produce and manage these wind farms?
                            Sorry for the late reply but what does it matter who finances them? The UK has some of the windiest sea's on earth and we are using them just as you do with your resources.
                            We have also finally given the go ahead for a new nuclear plant so hopefully our current mess of generating capacity can be sorted.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: UN: centralized policies needed for global warming solutions

                              Originally posted by PeterUK75 View Post
                              Sorry for the late reply but what does it matter who finances them? The UK has some of the windiest sea's on earth and we are using them just as you do with your resources.
                              We have also finally given the go ahead for a new nuclear plant so hopefully our current mess of generating capacity can be sorted.
                              Today is officially the first day of spring - but it will bring little respite to freezing Britain as snow continues to fall, closing schools and causing chaos on the roads.

                              The country is on track to suffer its coldest March in more than 50 years as conservationists warned that the prolonged winter weather was damaging wildlife.

                              The unrelenting cold weather is showing no signs of slowing this week as snow continues to fall across the North.
                              Read more: UK weather: March could be the coldest for 50 years and winter is expected to stay for yet another week | Mail Online

                              Wasn't it just a couple of years ago that the alarmists said the the EU would never see snow again?

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X