[Newsbot]

<strong>Title: </strong> <a href="/link.php?id=19137" target="_blank">David Suzuki blows up </a> (click to view)

<strong>Category:</strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=News_Links&file=category&catid=20" target="_blank">Environmental</a>
<strong>Posted By: </strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=Your_Account&op=userinfo&username=ridenrain" target="_blank">ridenrain</a>
<strong>Date: </strong> 2007-02-15 10:56:39
<strong>Canadian</strong>

[tritium]

David Suzuki, is very passionate about he environment.

I wish there were more people like David Suzuki out there. He is a very intelligent person and has a unique vision for the future of mankind.

However, I don't like Kyoto, I think we need to Federal regulation within Canada to fix problem at home.

[Scape]

So the tobacco industry hacks are now working for the climate deniers. BIG SURPRISE! This problem originated in the west so who better to start the redress? What are you doing Rain quaking in denial and running smear campaigns? At least tell me they are paying you for this.

[hurley_108]

Here's what I heard.

I heard a talk show host who was trying to simultaneously get enviro-cred by having David Suzuki on, but at the same time prevent anything useful from acually being said.

First he tried to get into wheter or not we should be in Kyoto, depite the fact that we already are in.

Then he brought up the BS about there still being quibbles about the science. There are a few vocal critics which the media latches onto in a misguided attempt to appear "unbiased." If the media did a story on the new gravity probe series of satellites, would they have on some crackpot who says that gravity is about "the 'earth' element in all things trying to be near each other" so they can present an opposing viewpoint to general relativity? NO! It's hogwash! You don't have to show two sides of a story when there's only one side.

Then he tried to make it into a left vs right thing, an idealism vs realism thing (again, a dichotomy so as to appear unbiased).

Is it any wonder Suzuki got flustered when this is the exact same show we've been hearing for years and years and years? It's always is climate change real or not? Should we be in Kyoto or not? Will this kill the economy or not?

What we need now is to talk abotu ways people can do things that are both effective and economically achievable. We can't keep on talking about wheter or not we should do anything, we need to talk about how to actually DO SOMETHING. The closest we got to that on this show was Suzuki giving out his website address.

This was nothing more than an attempt on the part of the radio station to appear to be contributing without actually contributing.

[Scape]

Amen!

[ridenrain]

So both of you support buying $20 million of carbon credits from China?

[hurley_108]

ridenrain ridenrain:

So both of you support buying $20 million of carbon credits from China?

What $20 million in carbon credits?

[ridenrain]

$1:

Trading system
The Kyoto Protocol allows countries to use a trading system to help meet the accord's goal of reducing the world's greenhouse gas emissions by an average 5.2 per cent relative to 1990 levels by 2012.

Any country struggling to meet its targets may buy credits — essentially the right to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide — from countries exceeding their reduction targets.

source

[BluesBud]

I think the e-mails from ridenrain are starting to get to him.

[hurley_108]

ridenrain ridenrain:

$1:

Trading system
The Kyoto Protocol allows countries to use a trading system to help meet the accord's goal of reducing the world's greenhouse gas emissions by an average 5.2 per cent relative to 1990 levels by 2012.

Any country struggling to meet its targets may buy credits — essentially the right to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide — from countries exceeding their reduction targets.

source

Dodge. Where's this $20 million figure from?

[ridenrain]

$1:

The Globe argued that Canada's Kyoto commitment is virtually unattainable, noting that the target is 563 million tonnes of GHGs while this country will likely produce close to 780 million tonnes this year.

"To meet those targets, Canada would almost certainly be forced to buy emissions credits from other nations. That market is tight, because the Europeans and the Japanese have also been buying credits, often from the offshore operations of corporations that pay taxes to them. That's very convenient for them. Suppose Canada bought 90 million tonnes a year over the five-year period of the treaty? At the current price of roughly $23 a tonne, that could hit $10-billion. Even then, Canada would not meet its treaty obligations.

source

There you go..$10 billion is more than $20 million.

[BluesBud]

I didn't hear him "Blow Up". He spoke passionately on a topic he feels strongly about. Points were put forward and he made his views clear on rebuttal. That is called conversation, debate and good talk radio. I thought it was a very good volley of information.

[IcedCap]

John Oakley is a smug little prick who's about a tenth as funny as he thinks he is

[hurley_108]

ridenrain ridenrain:

$1:

The Globe argued that Canada's Kyoto commitment is virtually unattainable, noting that the target is 563 million tonnes of GHGs while this country will likely produce close to 780 million tonnes this year.

"To meet those targets, Canada would almost certainly be forced to buy emissions credits from other nations. That market is tight, because the Europeans and the Japanese have also been buying credits, often from the offshore operations of corporations that pay taxes to them. That's very convenient for them. Suppose Canada bought 90 million tonnes a year over the five-year period of the treaty? At the current price of roughly $23 a tonne, that could hit $10-billion. Even then, Canada would not meet its treaty obligations.

source

There you go..$10 billion is more than $20 million.

Supposition. Go figure.

[ridenrain]

It's quite simple. If you support Kyoto, you also support Canada sending taxpayers money to China and other such countries. Due to Chretien signing this, without the approval or consultation of Canadian voters, then stalling for a decade, we are now facing sending billions of our money to foreign countries for no actual return.

Moe Strong must be laughing his ass off at you usefull idiots.