Talks in Bali between countries from all over the world have been struggling to agree on a plan to cut emissions, with the US reportedly unhappy signing up to strict targets. Do you think the summit will achieve anything positive? Does the attitude of the US make you angry? Or are the talks a pointless exercise in the fight against global warming?
cowboy from Birmingham,
Do you read any of the posting on this subject?. Check the proof supplied through the increased levels of pollutants trapped in both ice caps. This and other geological data is what prompts the vast majority of scientists and climatologists to agree that the world is heating up at an unprecedented rate. Open your eyes for goodness sake, shoving your head in the ground and saying there isn’t a problem it’s all a government ploy to screw us for more tax is beyond comprehension. Next thing you’ll blame is the Pixies smoking their pipes too much!.
To Margaret from Essex
If you type in EARTHS CORE into any half decent search engine you will be able to select any of the sites their to expalain exactly what you ask.
I tested it and by using Google I had the choice of 5,180,000.
Apart from that it was part of elementary Geography when I went to school.
The summit guaranteed one thing more TAX...TAX...TAX for the U.K.
I don't think people seem to understand the issues.
First of all it's industry that puts Co2 into the atmosphere and it's industry that sells it's products to the public, in exchange for what?
The idea is that technology produces a better standard of living for everyone.
I would argue the only invention that has really helped society is running water and sanitation.
Everything else is just whizzo gadgets and you can do the same thing without them the only advantage is the speed by which you can do things.
We just change the terms for everything which makes people all kind of muddled up such as taxpayers now being called 'customers' and kings and authorities being referred to as executives, we seem to think that if you put another label on it it's different even if it does the same things.
Then there is the contradictory statments from 'experts' one says there has been no warming since 1998 another says that there has been warming since 1998 and 2007 is the warmest year on record.
The issue of warming is not whether the earth will continue to exist the issue is will it continue to be habitable and tolerable for people to live in.
A nation is not just a people and it's not just the land it is the land and the people who occupy it.
The issue is whether or not the 'nation' will be comfortable to live in for the future.
What difference that makes to many people is rather questionable as traditionally it is the 'executives' who enjoy the best living conditions although it is possible for the less well off to improve their lot.
Asitis, can you tell me how this was proven. Have the scientists bored right to the centre of the earth or is this just another theory, please can you give me nuggests of your wisdom
Report this comment:
Comments page 5 of 12