All this is about is another way for financial markets to make money for themselves. Golden Sacks and all the other players (Barclays) are just salivating at the prospect of running up artificial profits on the commodity of - thin air. Talk about money growing on trees, this is money floating through the atmosphere.

I take it you've never heard of compound interest? Don't they teach the 3Rs in Arizona?

You quoted me, and I'm from the UK actually.

The quote was that we are responsible for 6% of the total release annually. There is no discussion of whether the total annual release or our 6% of that total annual release is changing or static, so your comment is inaccurate in the absence of additional information.

I suggest you forget the 3R's, and study mathematics/statistics instead.

Apologies to Arizonans.

You selectively quoted me. The additional information was included - some 60% of our emissions remain in the atmosphere long term. You chose to ignore it.

I do hope that the US does stick 2 fingers up at Brussels and the leeches contained therein.I would like to think that the UK govt might just grow a pair and join in............oh my....was that a flight of 6 pigs I just saw fly by????:):)

The 6% figure was in relation to our little bit of the total *emitted* to the atmosphere every year from all sources. That some gets re-absorbed is irrelevant to the fact. All of it could be re-absorbed - it does not affect the fact that we are still only 6% of what is emitted on an annual basis.

Besides - the 6% shows what a load of baloney it is anyway. Then they worry about the 2% of 6% of some other figure causing "catastrophic climate change". I think what is really going on is a catastrophic failure by the general population of the planet to recognize the manipulation that is being perpetrated against them. :ugh:

If you want to really worry about the planet, go visit Fukushima and the North Pacific. I'm sure as hell not eating tuna from there! In case people forgot already, that is where no less than 4 nuclear reactors exploded, spewing radiation all over the planet, but largely into the Pacific Ocean. Interesting they didn't introduce an anti- radiation tax yet.... I can't imagine why not! :}

Eunochs, all of them?
 

Throb@30wCPDLC Quotes:-" I would like to think that the UK govt might just grow a pair and join in."

Can't see that happening, apart from the women the rest appear to be eunochs.


"...........oh my....was that a flight of 6 pigs I just saw fly by????http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...lies/smile.gifhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...lies/smile.gif"

I'm afraid so and in tighter formation than the Red Arrows.

Sadly I think you are right....handwringing seems to be the preferred default position.....:ugh:

Let me post again a poser from the past re: simple maths.

CO2 is expressed, for convenience' sake, as Parts per Million of mixed atmosphere.

That value is currently at around 380 ppm. This portion of the total atmosphere is rising, at 2ppm/year, or so it is said.

Once again, since the proportion of CO2 is increasing, what are some other components doing? Either the atmosphere can be measured that finely, or it cannot.

What other gas is losing ground? If that cannot be answered, then no attention can be wasted on CO2 alone. Is it Oxygen? Water? Nitrogen? Unimportant?

Once known, I would lke to see that poor gas get some attention, perhaps some massive grants, or at least a heads up to AlGore, Junior.

CO2, not only a pollutant, but a rude one, at that.

The elephant in the room.
 

As far as I am concerned, the whole question of global warming or Anthropogenic Climate Change - or whatever the current phrase to scare the troops is - is more or less a complete waste of media space. Until the elephant in the room is acknowledged. By someone, anyone.

The elephant is, of course, the uncontrolled, unregulated and virtually un-noticed rise in global population. The seven billionth person was born this year and we will make another billion in a handful of years. How much CO2 do a billion people expire every year?

Another billion people is an arrogance the planet simply cannot afford, a fact of which many, even most of our political and religious leaders are aware, but who refuse to even acknowledge the elephant. Let alone do something about it. Indeed, we have come so far that it may be beyond not only our Leaders political and spiritual, it may be beyond humanity itself.

I have been saying, for more than thirty years, that there is not a country, nor any nation in it, that would not ultimately benefit by having thirty percent fewer people. Actually the global number for sustainability is about two billion I believe so, we need to get rid of five billion people in the next few hundred years.

The answer is not, as some invariably suggest in these arguments, 'Logan's Run.' You simply cannot kill enough people for long enough. The only way is to reduce the number of new people. I am no mathematician so I cannot figure out if one child per couple or two children per couple is the right way to go, but unless and until we make a very big hole - right across all races and all religions - in the birthrate, then we are right royally skrewed.

The amount of CO2 my Land Rover produces is completely irrelevant.:ugh:

Roger. And I don't have a Trabant, check my user name for a good guess.

Birth Control
 

Landroger Quote "The elephant is, of course, the uncontrolled, unregulated and virtually un-noticed rise in global population."

You are, of course, absolutely correct. But when is the elephant going to be tamed.

Nightly on our television screens are to be seen appeals from various aid organisations for money to provide clean water, mosquito nets, food, shelter etc. etc.

When did you ever see an appeal for a family planning or birth control scheme - never?

We are informed that 20,000 children die needlessly every day.

But how many are born needlessly every day?

The solution is simple, but who will act?

Standing by for the inevitable incoming human rights/PC response - which is also part of the problem.

Every single hour, 24hrs a day, people (mostly US citizens) are shot (mostly by US Citizens) in their own country , due to strange gun control law.

Why should the US care about "EU CARBON TAX"?

Their lobbyism is, IMHO, without limits.

Hetfield, you ask "Why should the US care about "EU CARBON TAX"?

The opening post of this thread stated that:-

"Senate votes to shield U.S. airlines from EU's carbon scheme | Reuters"

So it would seem that regardless of who is shooting whom and where, the U.S. actually do care quite strongly about the scheme and are rejecting it (at the moment).

Science has nothing to do with it
 

Arguing over whether the Senate made the right call based on the soundness of the science behind ETS denotes a complete misunderstanding of the politics behind the vote...
One of the two main sponsors hasn't met a tax he likes, let alone a foreign tax!
The other is a Democrat, until recently in a losing battle to win re-election next month against a very conservative Republican. What better way to enhance your patriotic standing against a Republican than to sponsor a law opposing something foreign?

As for the rest of the Senators, pick your poison:
-Some are up for re-election. Who in their right mind would take that opportunity to support a tax that doesn't even benefit a campaign donor or two?
-We're God's gift to man-kind (the white Christian God of course), the world's super power, we're better than everyone else, we give orders, we don't take lessons from foreigners. USA #1. Europe? Bunch of lazy welfare-addicted do-nothing tax-and-spend Communists, sorry Socialists. Best to oppose anything they come up with to reinforce our sense of superiority, even if it is the best thing since sliced bread. After all, no one's ever won an election by saying someone else might have a better idea...
-The ETS has no valuable constituency in the US (green-minded voters will vote for the Democrats no matter what because, seriously, what's the alternative). So why go on a limb and stand in favor? Taking a risk for nothing? What politician does that?

And science in all of this? Please! Where do you think you are? Europe?!? Since when do scientists have a say?

WTF ??


Back to the thread..


Can anyone, anyone at all provide any empirical evidence that CO2 is responsible for climate change ?

No ?

Then why is this industry (and others) being damaged by punitive actions over a falsehood.

I support the US 100% in this.

"Can anyone, anyone at all provide any empirical evidence that CO2 is responsible for climate change?" Nope, and one of the main places over here (England) that is over the voice of global warming, the University of East Anglia, has been caught out lying and falsifying the data. Carbon credits are just a way of transferring the wealth from the public to the elites and corporations, under the guise of saving the planet.

@stuckgear

I feel sorry, if US Citizens kill eachother day by day.
But that's not my business.

Global warming affects me and my children and the US are, like others, responsible.

IT'S NOT YOUR PLANET!

Neither is it yours.

@con-pilot

With that kind of attitude/arrogance this global problem will definitlely not be solved.

Take a look who, behind China, is the worst air poluter!!!

Like I said, feel free to kill yourself, but not me.

Be wary of "global problems" hetfield. Especially the passionate ones. These are generally the class of "issue" that has an agenda behind it that does not serve the people.

Something that gets my attention is the struggle with hunger, disease, and oppression, not to mention political tyranny and genocide.

If one thinks for a simple minute, and takes an objective and longish view, there are things we should be doing that we are not.

The Planet is warming? Worth a look? Certainly, but realize that we have disaster in our laps, and should be addressing these, prior to increasing harvests, improved comfort in the upper latitudes, etyc, if these even arrive in the next hundred years.

Hysteria is an unacceptable replacement for resolve.

Be Well.

hetfield, you are aware of course that there are many European manufactured vehicles that can be bought and used in the UK and Europe, that are not allowed to be sold in the US, because they cannot met the US's emission standards.

Germany is building more coal fired power plants, in the US we are shutting coal fired power plants down.

AGW is a complete fraud. If the climate is warming, man has sod all to do with it. Even so, the so-called pollutants from aircraft is minuscule.

This carbon tax is just an excuse for demanding tax monies for the EU, has nothing to do with saving the planet.

Besides that, the EU has no right what so ever to demand a tax for anything outside its airspace. If they want to tax me for flying in EU airspace, nothing I can do about that. But don't charge me a tax when I'm not in EU airspace.

I take issue with EU claiming money anywhere. It is an alliance, and as such has no mercantile rights of its own. If some countries want to affiliate, that is fine, but to arrogate a legal authority to play highwayman to the world's economy is odious.

I do not wish ill for anyone, but I would like to point out that some "constructions" do not serve those they rule.

Anyone who believes the planet isn't warming are sticking their heads in the sand.

And almost all the time, the people that don't believe it, it won't affect directly. Anyone seen a significant increase in natural hazards/disasters in recent years? Flooding, hurricanes, tornadoes, snowfall etc.

Oh no, its in poorer nations people don't care about! The Maldives for example will not exist in a few decades time because they'll be under water. Why? Because of climate change!

The climate is changing, the climate has always changed and always will. When it is time to worry about the climate, is when it stops changing.

But the EU charging a so-called carbon tax on aircraft flying to and from Europe, for the entire route incluidng outside of the EU's airspace, is just a scam for money.

Nothing more and nothing less. As I posted before, it has sod all to do with climate change.

as do citizens of every nation on this planet.

so why then are you making it your business and trying to make an agenda out of it, which is completely disconnected from the thread subject ?

For millenia, the planet has continually warmed and cooled. a couple of thousand years ago (30ish) there was an ice sheet over a kilometer deep that spread from the northern pole to southern midwest of the USA. it's retreat was toss all to do with aircraft.

the US is not responsible for trajectory of the planet though space, or perhaps you would feel more comfortable blaming GWB for that?

I offered the opportunity to provide empirical evidence for CO2 causing global warming and you respond with hysterics.

so,

Show empircal evidence that CO2 causes global warming.

i will give you a heads up here.. there is none.

There is factored and manipulated data to support a theory that CO2 causes global warming, but there is no evidence.

anyone could cite a theory that your backside emits watermelons and provide factored and manipulted data to support that theory, but it does not make it fact.

then,

provide evidence that global warming in fact exists and is human driven.. again see above, there is no data to support this, there is factored and manipulated data to support the theory that it happens but there is no evidence. and historically, we know that the climate has gone through huge changes, both warmer and colder, before mankind existed, so explain that.


neither is it yours, but it my tax money that is being spent on unicorns.

let me give you this little quote to digest:

The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated. – Ottmar Edenhofer

Edenhofer, by the way, when that statement was made, was the Co-Chair of the IPCC Working Group.

Precisely so, stuckgear. The entire kerfuffel is a device. The goal is primacy in the governance of the Planet. "Redistribution".

Resources are always distributed, that is the nature of humankind. Controlling the means of distribution is also part of the psyche of man...

There has not been a category three or higher Hurricane to hit the US landmass since 2005, a time period unique in the historical record.

As the Planet is currently losing (shedding) energy, the cooling that is measurable lessens these energetic events.

A cold Planet is quiet, weatherwise. There is nothing more quiet (save the wind) than Drought...

Look for "Climate Change" to shift to "Cooling" in a short calculated time.

This will require an about face in the handling of Carbon credits, of course.

Possible? Inevitable.

Whether the Planet warms, or cools, the Carbonistas cannot lose, they collect the handle, the vigorish, either way.

Bookies never lose, ever.

If only Gore can be patient, he will have a big pay day, WARM, or COLD.

That is the goal, to monetize CARBON.

I think Gore et al are working on AIR.

How is flying to/from Europe, the entire route outside the EU?

Dannyboy...

Did you check your logic at the door?

well, hang on.. is it warming or cooling ?


And if it is warming or cooling, why is that human activity and not the natural climate cycles of this planet ?

There is NO, Zero, Zip, Zilch emperical evidence that the planet is indeed warming or that it is driven by human activity.

If *YOU* want to be concerned about environment, rather than running around in hysteria shouting about global warming, why not actually stand up for the decimation of rainforest and the loss of Orangutan habitat, which are being cleared on a huge industrial scale to provide.... errm... eco-friendly [sic] bio-fuel plantations for EU destined bio-fuels which are mandated by EU law to be used incrementally over the coming years.

Or is that little fact too much for a brain to get around ?


No, there has not been a huge increase in natural hazards / disasters over recent years. There has only been an increase of the ability of news outlets to present the events to the public. Not even a couple of decades ago, a natural disaster could have taken days to be in the media, today it can be shown live.


as posted by Green Granite elsewhere:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/c...sh/monthly.png

As you can see, the temperature variation anomolies were greater in 1850 than today.

Besides, the EU-ETS will not change one bloody thing in terms of climate and temperature.

Ands as for your hissy fit about the Maldives:

It's B/S about rising tide, if anything, it's geological movement that is the biggest threat to the Maldives.

So here. fill yer boots... or waders...

Despite popular opinion and calls to action, the Maldives are not being overrun by sea level rise | Watts Up With That?

The Maldives are sinking – and we aren’t talking about sea level | Watts Up With That?

The Maldives Emily Littella sea level moment – never mind… | Watts Up With That?

And yet again, the EU-ETS is not only punitive to the industry, it will have no effect on climate, and as posted previously the EU policies on climate is actually damaging to the environment. (see growth of biofuel plantations and damage to the environment.)
So please don't give me all this AGW save the planet garbage, all you are doing is toeing the line of the vested interests with their own agendas that serve to sacrifice this industry on the altar of climate change while ignoring that the very policies its spouts are damaging to environment directly and not by any factored or manipulted data to support an unproven theory but by FACT.

AGW is bunkum and belongs with Chemtrails and the EU-ETS is a fraud.

Dannyboy.

Just to make it simple for you.
If say I'm flying from LAX to CDG, I'm flying to Europe, but if I'm flying
from CDG to LAX, I'm flying from Europe.
Simples

More absolute pig ignorance from someone who has no idea.

I suggest you look at the stats for "carbon dioxide pollution" PER CAPITA and realise how low the US really is. Yes, Australia is actually worse than the US, and huggy-fluff "look at all our wonderful wind power" Denmark is FAR worse than China. When we move to "greenhouse gases" as a whole, the situation is the same, Australia is a worse polluter than the USA and huggy-fluff Denmark is FAR worse than China.

So look at who is actually polluting the most before you spout off more nonsense, look at which population is burning the most fuel per capita, then come back to us in the thread for this subject in JB. And expect your anti-american wittering to be treated with the "respect" it deserves if you do find the nerve to join the discussion there.

If I leave OKC in my Falcon 900EX and go non-stop to London, I would be charged for the entire route, not just the small portion of the route I would be in EU airspace.

That is complete nonsense, to be charged for the entire route, not just the time I spent in EU airspace. Shouldn't really be charged at all for this carbon fraud, in or out of EU airspace.

Fortunately now, it looks like Congress agrees. If President Obama will sign the bill, I don't know. But at least it is a step in the right direction, as not to be held hostage by the EU.

It's completely up to you, to reflect what the US left behind in Vietnam, Korea, Irak, not to mention Afghanistan and not to forget, in your own country (Gun control).

Take a look to your Citizens, US Victims of mentioned threads. Take a look to all the post Vietnam victims, all the suicides within your glorios armed forces.

Relax, think about it and try to be honest....

Carbon con
 

As has been said carbon credits are traded like stocks - in other words they're not worth the paper they're printed on.

The way this is set up it is just a revenue stream burdening everybody with a tax which once in the <exchange> generates profits for the few and misery for the rest.

Pyramid selling and Ponsi schemes are illegal yet here comes another <legitimate?> scheme from those non elected gravy train riders in Europe.

The farce continues while, as usual, the supine Brits lie there and think of England while being shafted yet again.

More power to the US, China, and any one else with the balls to stick two fingers to these people.

so hetfield, you are basing your anti-US rhetoric on EU-ETS not by dint of climatology but on:

Vietnam, Korea, Irak, not to mention Afghanistan and not to forget, in your own country (Gun control).

open forum question:
there's a word i am thinking of.. can anyone help me out with that ?

Oh yeah, they will, for sure, save our planet:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

But interesting, to see the US along with China......

i take issue with that, rather lie back and think of england, it's more a case of face down, biting the pillow.

though i do agree with the US, China, Russia, India, Brasil, most of the S. and C. American states, as well as other challenging this farce.

yet, you succinctly ignore the facts.

one would consider that as much ':ugh:' you do, it wont knock any sense in, or drive out those murrican deamons.

These carbon taxes have nothing to do with saving a planet, especially one that needs not saving from CO2.

So, let me ask you a couple or so questions.

Just how is the EU going to use this ransom money to "save" the planet?

What are they going to use it for except to line the EU's pockets?

Is there a machine that the EU can buy with this money to "save the planet"?

So tell us just what for this money will be used?

Take your time, I'll wait.

@con-pilot

Please tell me what the US are doing about climate change, except to point their fingers on the rest of the world.

It's all about money. People who are much more clever than I am, and maybe more than you, know about it. Don't step into the Lobbyism trap.

I hope, you, your belovest, your kids will never ever become a victim of US Lobbyism.