Salvaging Kyoto Protocol a tall order

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Author Infomation

  • -1


    Aren't the Seychelles uner water yet? Didn't Al Gore and the rest of this "we need more regulation (and regulators to kick back campaign contributions) promise us they would be under water by 2010? Does anyone still belive these liars.!

  • 0


    Aren't the Seychelles uner water yet?

    Don't be silly and make strawman arguments. Nobody said the Seychelles would be under water by 2010. You are probably thinking of one of the lower Pacific island groups, which it's sometimes said they will be largely under water by 2050, not 2010.

  • -1


    Ask USA under the "Shrubs" presidency administration, snubbed the Kyoto Protocol and not to be blamed.

  • 3


    America which is one of the biggest producers of greenhouse gases refused to even sign the Kyoto Protocol. America, China and India don't even want to discuss it until at least 2015.

    It's encouraging here in Japan that since 3/11 with now only 10 of the atomic reactors operating out of a total of 54, and more power generated from gas and coal, that the overall total of CO2 only increased by 4%.

  • 0


    Canada has pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol .Canadians want people in the Seychelles to die, apparently.

  • 0



    The UN "science" reports have been debunked countless times.

    Really? News to me. Tell me more!

    For those that missed out on grade 1 science class. Water cannot rise just in one area, it must rise uniformly across the globe. How come no coastal city in the world has yet reported any problems with this apparent rise?

    Because the islands are small and low to the sea - waves now was over the coastal roads on Tuvalu, and the freshwater supply is being contaminated with seawater.

  • -2



    Yes I have heard of the Climategates, and due to my ability to read the released mails, and not just the snippets put up on denialist websites I can see it's an attempt to paint normal work discussion and banter as 'conspiracy'. Take, for example, the foo-faw over the word 'Trick'. It obviously has to be a bad thing, eh? Or...

    The trick to riding a bicycle is to not look down at the ground.

    ...maybe not?

    The data is all fudged because the real-world data doesn't fit the hypothesis.

    And isn't it amazing that all these tens of thousands of scientists can fudge their data into close agreement? They must be on the phone to each other all hours of the day. Surprising they have any time for work!

    In fact they had the change the mantra from Global Warming to Climate Change because Climate Change is broader and can be applied to any and all changes in weather.

    Yup, that's why they changed the name of the UN panel dealing with it from the 'Intergovernmental Panel on Global Warming' to the 'Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change' in...oops - strike that! It's always been Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

    It's become a non-falsifiable theory.It's become a non-falsifiable theory.

    Ah! So you're familiar with the works of Karl Popper? Why don't you tell the problems with his theory on falsifiability?

    Luckily, serious and honest scientists are beginning to openly question the theory, much to Al Gore's disappointment, especially considering all money he's invested in his carbon exchange.

    You can define these scientists as serious and honest because of your experience in science - or because of what you read on a denialist website?

    As for scientists opposing the theory of man-made climate change - there is no 'beginning to': there always has been a hard core on the fringes opposing the theory for some reason or other (religious, political, financial, etc...). The fact is that 98% of Climatologists support the theory, and 100% believe climate change is happening.

    Check out for some of the observations, theories, and reasons behind the science.

  • 0



    and I guess the fact that the theory make sense doesn't have anything to do with it?

    Also, your assertion that foundations dish out research money sounds odd. They can't fund all of the studies, can they? And such funding has to be declared in the scientific papers published.

    As for research coming from the UN - I don't recall seeing scientific papers labeled 'from the UN' recently, or ever. Are you sure you haven't swallowed a barrelful of propaganda?

    Even 30 years ago, the mantra among climatologists was the the earth was cooling and that a new ice age was coming.

    Ah, if you'd spent a minute on Google you'd discover that was a Newsweek story from the 70s - and not a widely held scientific position.

Login to leave a comment

EMBA Special Lecture: Operations Modeling

EMBA Special Lecture: Operations Modeling

Temple University, Japan CampusContinuing Education / MBA

Special Offers




More in Opinions

View all

View all

Japan Investment

Listings Updated Daily