[Ravenblade]

I dunno if it's been recieving much publicity across the pond but our press are currently following the Bali Conference very intensely. This is especially true now that Al Gore (possibly the only decent American Politician to have ever lived) has waded into the affair proclaiming that the world "Can't wait for George Bush". Im aware Gore is democrat and Bush is republican etc etc but still, this is on the international stage, and Gore has vehemently criticised his own country (very rightly) for obstructing the whole process.

Al Gore's Speech

The above his an extract of his speech - he did of course go on to attempt to rouse people into doing more to help and to prevent them giving up due to the obstructions placed infront of them by unwilling countries.

I mean, I guess the issue is, how much does the US government want to have a planet for more than about another 100 years. With that said, in the rest of his speech, Al Gore mentioned he had recieved emails from 350 000 Americans asking him to tell the world that they were going to change their country when the next election came through and that they would start being co-operative.

This is at least encouraging.

EDIT - this is the rest of his speech but the link is termperamental - i'll post the whole thing if people are finding it doesnt work, but its long so im hoping not to have to:

Full speech

[Golden Legacy]

Wise words from Gore, I'm very glad that he's being critical of the USA - without the "biggest obstacle" out of the way, no chance at preventing irreversible climate change will occur. The support for it is there - 350,000+ Americans sending e-mails in to assure of that change is a reasonably good sign. I wonder if the Bali conference will be able to succeed in producing the follow-up to the Kyoto Protocol when it expires in 2012.

[Ironsight]

Ravenblade, on Dec 14 2007, 08:31 AM, said:

Al Gore (possibly the only decent American Politician to have ever lived)

You've got to be effing kidding me.

I dont beleive in Global Warming. But I don't think everbody cleaning up their act would have any negative affects.

[Eugine]

You don't believe in Global Warming? So... you're telling me the average surface temperature isn't increasing?
Ah well. It's true man.

Whether it's natural, or man-made can be debated though >>

[Ironsight]

20 years ago it was Gobal Cooling ;)

[My Best Wishes]

I'm not sure this is the smartest thing to do, but I'm with DS, I seriously don't believe that, if anything at all is happening, it's a non-natural man influenced event.
There's so much talk on each side, and I don't trust the media.

And I'm also severly pissed that Australia's new *Prime Minister* (Prime Dickhead) is so headstrong on the enviroment and 'climate change', it's called Global Warming!

[Golden Legacy]

watch, on Dec 14 2007, 11:03 PM, said:

And I'm also severly pissed that Australia's new *Prime Minister* (Prime Dickhead) is so headstrong on the enviroment and 'climate change', it's called Global Warming!

Actually, the more correct term nowadays is in fact "climate change" - it's not just global warming that's the problem. Some areas of the world are experiencing floods, other parts are in a seemingly perpetual drought. Cold winters are colder, the summer's are more brutal, etc. basically, there are starting to be more "extremes" in weather and in the climate overall, hence the term.

That said, also, this topic isn't for the global warming debate folks, we have that here. This topic is for the specific 2007 United Nations Climate Change Conference (yes, that's the official name) being held in Bali, Indonesia - this particular meeting is also mostly political and diplomatic, as a lot of is going to be pressuring the US and China too to follow worldwide regulations and agreements on reduced carbon emissions.

[Aquamarine]

DarkSword, on Dec 15 2007, 02:04 AM, said:

You've got to be effing kidding me.

I dont beleive in Global Warming. But I don't think everbody cleaning up their act would have any negative affects.

So, you think the Arctic will be ice-free in five years by accident?

[Laharl]

global warming is fun, i learned what utter crap it is at A-level.

the main arguement for global warming is the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, yet carbon dioxide only represents 0.03% of the gases in the atmosphere

most studies cover the last 100-200 years, which in planetary terms is not even the blink of an eye, data needs to be based on the last 1000 years at the least to be credible, its also important to note a period of significant cooling in europe in the 1600s.

too little is knwn about the expansion and retreat of glaciers to credibly claim that global warming is responsible

increases in storm severity and extremes of temperature because of global warming have ABSOLUTELY NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THIS

that said, i was disapointed Mr. Gore didnt mention manbearpig

[Ravenblade]

Ive got to admit, i was told at university that global warming was not man made and that we are actually overdue another ice age which is being put off by the wonders of the industrial revolution.

However, its worth pointing out that top scientists in the world who work for the UN　> University lecturers and A level teachers.

I mean, the North Atlantic current actually stopped for a few days in 2005!!

Im gonna point out now that the Bush Administration has actually admitted global warming exists.

Link

And if even they have, then the issue isnt so much "Why dont they believe its happening?" but more "why are they standing in the way if they've admitted its happening" This is the main thing to take away from this, although if people wanna discuss global warming:

I really don't see how its possible to argue with this stuff anymore - i mean, In Britain you can actually SEE the effects! Its raining all year round, even in winter when it used to snow, our climate suddenly got more tropical and now we're getting dangerous killer insects coming from the south along with birds having messed up migratory patterns.

There is no disputing that the earth is getting warmer. Surely the only dispute is whether or not its man made.

But frankly, with the amount of fumes the US and China produce compared to the rest of the world, im having difficulty seeing why people find this so hard to believe.

Carbon Dioxide levels at highest point for 650 000 years

There's a study that spans over 1000 years. This seems like common sense to me - we produce more CO2 (fact) - CO2 levels reach 650 000 year highs (fact, they checked) - Earth's temperature rises (fact, check the last 25 years) - ergo we ARE having an effect. And surely, even for you naysayers, its not worth risking global catastrophe just to remain skeptical?

I found this graph, which can only be hypothetical i suppose, especially as i found it on wikipedia but it gives some perspective:

Last 1000 years

If you look at this graph, it supports what laharl said in the 1600s but if you look at the end of that graph, we've suddenly shot up temperature wise since, you guessed it, the industrial revolution. Its probably not too worth getting caught up in debate over that source though since its ultimately unreliable.

Riad is right however, this isnt the topic for this - and if i had noticed he'd said that before writing out all this stuff about global warming then i wouldnt have bothered x.x;;im not deleting it now though! Its seems linked in however, especially if you disagree with international action. I'd be more interested to learn why people think the bush Admin is blocking it though, especially with regards to what ive already said.

[Saturos S.]

Personally I think Al Gore is a butthole ever since I saw his movie: An inconvinient truth.
He kept linking totally irrelevant things to global warming. "1000 years ago, the carbon dioxide level was this, now it's this, it is clearly linked to industrial thingies." PROVE THE BLOODY LINK THEN BUTTHOLE! FOR ALL I KNOW THE ABSENCE OF COOL PIRATES IS THE REASON OF GLOBAL WARMING!

... right.

Well as long as the US doesn't start cooperating with the kyoto protocol or whatever, and keeps saying that they don't want to rish their economy suffering they should think about "the greater good." What's more important, being the center of the world's economy for a few more years, since China and Japan and bound to take over soon, OR a less screwed up world for future generations. They finally recognise global warming, start doing something about it.

[Ravenblade]

Actually I have to admit that i heard Al Gore's video thing was kinda lame - it got banned from being aired in schools over here because it was too politically biased. But anyway, this isnt so much a discussion on Al Gore as a discussion on the Conference.

I have actually read that Japan, Canada and Australia have also been obstructing the process x.x;;

[Eugine]

The US imo, was right for not signing the Kyoto Protocol. It puts way too much pressure on the US and it's economy, and little on China.
I admit, the US should try to reduce emissions but not the way the world thinks it should be.

[Saturos S.]

But at least China brings in better arguments for it. They're still in the industrialisation process. Most of the emissions that cause the global warming were emitted by Western Europe and America. Because of this the US economy (and Western Europe) could evolve to what is today. On top of that, the USA pollutes the most per citizen in the whole world.

The world is pissed off at America because the way they defended their point. Sure they have good reasons, but they basicly said: "Screw the world and everyone with it, we want money."

[Ravenblade]

I agree with SS (or whatever you get called for short around here). The US (and indeed the rest of the Western World) takes for granted that all our plasma screen TVs, games consoles and technological conveniences all get made in China. This means that if China cut its emissions, we wouldnt get any of these things any more - or at the very least they wouldnt be as cheap. China still isnt as large a polluter as the US anyway (although its a matter of time)

As SS said, China is still developing and they need to continue to advance in order to combat poverty and provide proper health services etc. Plus they have about a 1/5 of the world's population to deal with. The US and to a lesser extent Western Europe (I say lesser extent cos at least we're trying) needs to think of the bigger picture and not just worry about how they'll continue to line their pockets.

[Eugine]

Well, I agree. I just disagree with the way the Kyoto Protocol works.

I believe it's too general, and most countries wouldn't meet their deadlines anyway. Each country has different needs, and requring every country which signed the protocol to meet the same demands are impossible. Also climate change needs to be handled by countries because we hardly need anymore bureaucracy when dealing with the issue.

[Ravenblade]

Well i suppose in an ideal world it could be the best option, having countries doing that. Sadly though, if that was the case, i very much doubt countries like China and India would pull their weight, and they'd be even less likely to allow UN inspectors in to make sure they were keeping up their end of the bargain.

Plus, at least this way we can have a transfer of technology (environmentally cleaner technology) for the poorer nations. We cant just sit here and demand emission cuts if we dont provide them with the technology for them to do it.

As a final note, if global warming is as far along as scientists are saying (i know people are skeptical but come on, who are we to judge, we dont know anything about this apart from what the media says - and the scientists dont work for the media) then do we really have time for niceties about who should do what, when and where? Surely the emphasis has to be on solving the problem by any means necessary as a collective species rather than arguing amongst ourselves as usual. Cos we all know that the arguin has worked out so well in the past...

[Lemontime]

watch, on Dec 15 2007, 01:03 PM, said:

And I'm also severly pissed that Australia's new *Prime Minister* (Prime Dickhead) is so headstrong on the enviroment and 'climate change', it's called Global Warming!

Cause fat old stupid lying pissweed johnny was waaaay better..

[Ravenblade]

X.x Well, it seems that the Americans won in the end. Its being reported as a compromise - the EU gave up on the "reduction of emissions by 25% to 40%" which was the thing we needed according to the IPCC in order to prevent serious climate change. The Americans have "conceded" that poorer nations should not be forced to do so much. Basically, all this means is that Europe is going to fall over itself trying to save the world for the next decade all on its own while the rest of the world does nothing.

The document said countries recognise that "deep cuts in global emissions" will be required, and calls for a "long-term global goal for emissions reductions".

Yet another shameful day for the Western world...I can only hope a Democrat gets into Presidency next time x.x Or someone with an ounce of common sense.

Still, at least the US is signed up to it now anyway. That's something.

[My Best Wishes]

Lemontime, on Dec 16 2007, 09:52 AM, said:

Cause fat old stupid lying pissweed johnny was waaaay better..

Sorry I liked having low intrest rates and a high dollar. The Australian dollar right now is the highest it's ever been who did that? Labour. What happened last time Australia was bankrupt? Liberal.

But this isn't really the topic.

[Toasty]

All I can say is, is that this is just another pointless meeting where Al Gore and other environmentallists threaten the scientists to say what they want them to say (some of them at least). If anything, this is only meant to be more brainwashing.

[Saturos S.]

You can't deny the fact that global temperatures are rising because of mankind. It's not a random idiotic idea that hasn't been proved. *cough* Iraq having nukes, my ass *cough*