Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Kyoto: Myth or Science?

This is topic Kyoto: Myth or Science? in forum The Flameboard at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/11/1056.html

Posted by Tahna Los (Member # 33) on :

http://www.nationalpost.com/search/site/story.asp?id=A1EAB9EF-BC6E-46CE-B02D-29EEE60D9474

An interesting thing: the National Post is traditionally a right-wing Newspaper. Normally it does not support Kyoto, but the above article makes it a bit perplexing.

Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :

Oh, Kyoto exists. I know people who've been there. ARE there, actually.

Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :

I live in saskatchewan, so we don't really worry about pollution, cause were like 45% farmland and 50% forest, and the last 5% is towns, cities, lakes, and any thing else. Anyways, They're really against the Kyoto Accord in Alberta because they think it will hurt thier oil industry.

Personally I really don't care about it. If some politician thinks we need to cut back on polluting, then good for him. I respect the environment, and I don't really need some idiot in a suit to tell me that I'm hurting the planet.

Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :

Not 50%! Slightly less!

Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :

Hah! I didn't even think Saskatchewan had anything on the internet. Fine then. Slightly less than 50%. I was just geuss-timating anyways. Who here thinks they need some stiff-ass politician to tell them that global warming is bad? It's sad really how those damn government tight-asses think we're all a bunch of ignorant morons. Well, some of us are ignorant morons, my friend comes to mind (no names)... But that's besides the point. I care about the environment too, but if the world warms up a few degrees i'm not one to complain. It's too damn freezing here anyways... [Smile]

Posted by The Mike from C.A.P.T.A.I.N. (Member # 709) on :

the gist of what ive heard is that the wierd incentives are being made to convince countries to up their forests ability to produce O2 in order to reduce CO2.. but now evidence is that new growth forests operate on an O2 deficit..

basically, we'd be better off if we hadnt deforested in the first place. which everyone should realize anyway.

the accords shouldnt be thrown out on this fact though, the end result will still be improvement of the envrionment, itll just take longer than we thought for it to take effect, to give the new growth forests time to do what we intend them too.