G8 Meeting.

[DevilMacCry]

Well in the Near Future is the G8 Meeting.
So who dont know what is G8 its the meeting of the 8 world nation.
This time in Germany.

In Europe decided that the lowering of the Co2 emissions to be lowered to have because of the green-house effect.

1. Increase of the Energy-efficence around 20% and admixture of 10% bio fuel to the fuels.

2. Lowering of the Co2 - emission until 2020 around 20%

3. the portion of renewable Engerie is to be increased until 2020 on 20%.

Angelika Merkel German (Federal Chancellor) she said: "If George Bush agrees with which in Europe was decided and he rises also, will Germany decrese his Co2 emission on 30%."

Some Hints to disscus: Do you think that George Bush will agree to that?


So what do you think about that, and do you think your nation of the G8 meeting should be in agreement to which decide in Europ?

G8 Staats- Austria - England - America - Russian - Germany - France - China - Japan. I Hope thats right.

So Disscus when you want.
I post my Opinion later.

[Habanero]

Actually the countries are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States. :)

Anyway, I think after all the heatwaves and hurricanes and such, even US has to admit that global warming is happening and that something has to be done. They sure feel annoyed to some extent that others are telling em what to do, but that has been on the way for a long time the way I see it.

Of course it won't be an easy decision for US to make, since it will cause huge economic expenses. Having a few hurricanes crashing on major cities per year sounds like a worse option to me though.

Hoping for the best, something must be done anyway.

[Tokoyami]

Actually the countries are Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States. :)

Anyway, I think after all the heatwaves and hurricanes and such, even US has to admit that global warming is happening and that something has to be done. They sure feel annoyed to some extent that others are telling em what to do, but that has been on the way for a long time the way I see it.

Of course it won't be an easy decision for US to make, since it will cause huge economic expenses. Having a few hurricanes crashing on major cities per year sounds like a worse option to me though.

Hoping for the best, something must be done anyway.

Actually, this sudden change in weather should not and cannot be left on the idea of global warming.

As most of us know there is a weather phenomenon called El nino (El ninyo), that weather event is also making the weather crazy. It comes around every few years, always has, always will as far as i know.

This doesnt mean that global warming hasnt showed its ugly face though.

[Habanero]

Well, last year there was more hurricanes and warmer than for over a hundred years, and the trend has been going upwards for some time already, I'd say it just isn't arguable anymore. But that's just my opinion of course. :p

Something must be done sooner or later anyway. I'd prefer sooner.

[II Xion II]

Anyway, I think after all the heatwaves and hurricanes and such, even US has to admit that global warming is happening and that something has to be done. They sure feel annoyed to some extent that others are telling em what to do, but that has been on the way for a long time the way I see it.


I hate to point out to you that the increase in hurricane strength in the Atlantic Basin and the recent severe weather phenomena worldwide have not been linked to global warming. I hate to sound arrogant, but I am a hurricane aficionado and I have tracked and heavily studied hurricanes and tropical cyclones across the world and their related history. In fact, out of everything I know, tropical cyclones would be my number one or number two area of expertise. I have read scientific articles, and it is repeatedly pointed out that the increase in hurricane strength and mesoscale weather phenomena cannot be attributed to global warming for a couple of reasons. First, the accurate records for hurricane strength only date back to the early-mid 1990s when dropsondes became commonplace and hurricane strength approximations only to about the late 1960s. Second, the Atlantic is in a period of increased tropical wave activity known as Atlantic Multidecadel Oscillation which will last for the next 20-30 years. Finally, because we don't have near-accurate records for the past 1000s of years for such weather phenomena, we cannot attribute it to global warming because global warming belongs to climatology, and the records for such events go back to the 1960s at best for tracks of such storms. Such a short period of time cannot be used to make climatological judgments.

As for whether or not Bush will sign, I really and honestly do not know. Bush does not seem to like alternative energy or conservation, so I am quite pessimistic about anything useful getting done by the United States. However, Bush doesn't decide everything, he will probably follow party sentiment on the issue, and hopefully it is that sentiment that will lead to the United States signing on, unlike we did for Kyoto. I have to say though, that there could be other reasons besides the fact that Bush "hates the environment" that we would not sign. Possible economic or trade issues might arise or similar concerns, I am honestly not educated enough on the issue to truly say what should or should not be done. But I believe that reducing CO2 emissions and other energy- and planet-saving steps would be great no matter how small they be, unless of course other major concerns arise elsewhere.

[Habanero]

Oh, nice to have someone in here who has extensive first hand information. It's not arrogant to bring some actual facts into the debate. :)

However, doesn't the fact that the hurricanes aren't yet affected by the global warming make the issue even worse? When/if it does kick in, the hurricanes will be lot more powerful and frequent than what we've seen so far right? Since the increasing energy in the atmosphere has to channelize somewhere or we'll be dealing with another Venus planet here.

As for the US part, nothing to add really. It's complicated and will cause economical losses for them but should be done in my opinion.

[DevilMacCry]

Well i dont understand hwy Georg Bush dont want to sign everything which is helpfull for the earth health. Well just look austria the green house effect is so hoorible there and thats only the beginning of that. George bush want to have wars all over the world he dosent thing to have peace thats why he wouldnt sign it.

and thats what i hate about him, i hope the next choice to the presidenten will be not bush. Just look the weather here in germany we had just 3 or 4 days whit snow here from Nov to march this is ridiculous.


Thats why in Europ they think better know about evrything about Co2 emission - renewable energy and so on. Well the hole world should do that the biggest problems are USA, China and Japan well they want to destroy the ozone layer the harmfull radiation comes to earth... We dont have a layer which protect us and reflect the most of the radiation back to the universe.

Its just a movie "Day after tommorrow" but that can be true in the near future. Global warming is death for us. I see some reports from a person from USA and thre can we see that the most see on the earth will drain out of here water and a loot more disasters in the next 40-50 years i still remember that, this should open the eyes but they think this will never happen...

Its just sad that Georg bush nothing notice about the environment.

[James Cizuz]

The US did already accept global warming exists. About 2 months ago, so yeah...

[dragoneyes001]

theres far more to earths storms than simply what we see on earth the solar flares affect our oceans as much as anything else so does the moons orbit which is directly affected by solar activity.

as for Bush he has little to do with what will actually be done or not by the US the lobby groups run the country simply by adding or subtracting support from legislation they can quite literally cut the legs out of any proposal that might be forwarded.

oil lobby is a strong group but not nearly as strong as the industry lobbies are and they will be the first to kill anything that cuts into their profits (such as the cost of cleaner emissions equipment) as they have before to kill support for Kyoto.

[II Xion II]

However, doesn't the fact that the hurricanes aren't yet affected by the global warming make the issue even worse? When/if it does kick in, the hurricanes will be lot more powerful and frequent than what we've seen so far right? Since the increasing energy in the atmosphere has to channelize somewhere or we'll be dealing with another Venus planet here.
Therein lies the true issue. Because global warming can pragmatically lead to increased sea surface temperatures (SSTs), tropical cyclones will have increased fuel to get larger and more intense than ever before. If SSTs do warm substantially, there is no doubt in my mind that stronger storms will develop and more lives and more property will be in jeopardy, not just in the Atlantic, but the world over!!! SSTs have been pretty warm recently, but this is not yet attributable to global warming. The 2005 Atlantic hurricane season was a freak of a season. It was the most active on record with 28 named storms (33 total actually) and four Category 5 hurricanes. Wilma was the most intense and powerful storm ever recorded in the Atlantic Basin, was Mexico's worst storm in recorded history, and was the third most costly hurricane to hit the U.S. Katrina was the costliest tropical cyclone in history, the worst natural disaster to strike the U.S., and the third deadliest storm for the U.S. Rita was the most intense storm ever observed in the Gulf of Mexico and forced the largest mass evacuation in Texas history. With a rap sheet like this, it's hard to believe that "normal" conditions would be at work. But this was just an anomalous season, not global warming. The Great Hurricane of 1780 which killed over 24, 000 people across the Caribbean and stripped the bark off of trees with 200 mph rain bullets was not blamed on global warming. Neither was the 1970 Bhola cyclone, possibly the third deadliest natural disaster in recorded history (the first two deadliest were Chinese floods). Global warming should be reduced for sure, but in order for that to happen, people like George W. Bush must stop to think about the macrocosmic connection, and I think we all know that that will never happen!!!

[Vampyrelord]

The US did already accept global warming exists. About 2 months ago, so yeah...

These posts are really too short guys, come on, Read the Rules...

/me sighs

Guys, don't make me use the warn meter, because I will. Failing that, I'll IP track you and kill your family.

[Tokoyami]

Therein lies the true issue. Because global warming can pragmatically lead to increased sea surface temperatures (SSTs), tropical cyclones will have increased fuel to get larger and more intense than ever before. If SSTs do warm substantially, there is no doubt in my mind that stronger storms will develop and more lives and more property will be in jeopardy, not just in the Atlantic, but the world over!!! SSTs have been pretty warm recently, but this is not yet attributable to global warming. The 2005 Atlantic hurricane season was a freak of a season. It was the most active on record with 28 named storms (33 total actually) and four Category 5 hurricanes. Wilma was the most intense and powerful storm ever recorded in the Atlantic Basin, was Mexico's worst storm in recorded history, and was the third most costly hurricane to hit the U.S. Katrina was the costliest tropical cyclone in history, the worst natural disaster to strike the U.S., and the third deadliest storm for the U.S. Rita was the most intense storm ever observed in the Gulf of Mexico and forced the largest mass evacuation in Texas history. With a rap sheet like this, it's hard to believe that "normal" conditions would be at work. But this was just an anomalous season, not global warming. The Great Hurricane of 1780 which killed over 24, 000 people across the Caribbean and stripped the bark off of trees with 200 mph rain bullets was not blamed on global warming. Neither was the 1970 Bhola cyclone, possibly the third deadliest natural disaster in recorded history (the first two deadliest were Chinese floods). Global warming should be reduced for sure, but in order for that to happen, people like George W. Bush must stop to think about the macrocosmic connection, and I think we all know that that will never happen!!!

Honestly im ashamed to have George W. Bush as my president. The majority of the country he represents can agree upon the opinion that he is an idiot. The vast majority of the country doesnt quite know why we are in Iraq, we dont know how Saddam threatened the U.S., we dont kno why the president didnt get into to much trouble after there were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq.

Honestly the one thing u can bet your last dollar, pound, what ever your currency is, the one thing in this world u can bet your last dollar on is the ignorance of the American people when it comes to major issues. When it comes to Global warming, it scares me. There are many who have done there own info seeking, research, but there are many others that dont bother to realize that it affects all of us.

On the issue of Global Warming it seems like things like Anna Nicole dying, the tara Grant murder, and britney spears fucking herself over are more important to spend hours of news time on than the facts, info, and research going or gone into a situation which could utterly destroy the world as we now recognize it.

It worries me that people arent to concerned about it, including myself sometimes. It worries me that u dont hear about this issue enough on TV or in mass media. It definately worries me that i found out that in some documents or papers paragraphs were edited to make global warming seem less important or not as threatening.

"An Inconvenient Truth" a great movie to check out, but everyone needs to do there own info seeking and see for yourself whats up with out CO2 emissions and such.

Sry for rambling so much, i got goin i guess.

[dragoneyes001]

Honestly im ashamed to have George W. Bush as my president. The majority of the country he represents can agree upon the opinion that he is an idiot. The vast majority of the country doesnt quite know why we are in Iraq, we dont know how Saddam threatened the U.S., we dont kno why the president didnt get into to much trouble after there were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq.
Honestly the one thing u can bet your last dollar, pound, what ever your currency is, the one thing in this world u can bet your last dollar on is the ignorance of the American people when it comes to major issues. When it comes to Global warming, it scares me. There are many who have done there own info seeking, research, but there are many others that dont bother to realize that it affects all of us.
On the issue of Global Warming it seems like things like Anna Nicole dying, the tara Grant murder, and britney spears fucking herself over are more important to spend hours of news time on than the facts, info, and research going or gone into a situation which could utterly destroy the world as we now recognize it.
It worries me that people arent to concerned about it, including myself sometimes. It worries me that u dont hear about this issue enough on TV or in mass media. It definately worries me that i found out that in some documents or papers paragraphs were edited to make global warming seem less important or not as threatening.
"An Inconvenient Truth" a great movie to check out, but everyone needs to do there own info seeking and see for yourself whats up with out CO2 emissions and such.
Sry for rambling so much, i got goin i guess.

the problem is not so much not talking about it as much as it is not knowing what to really do about it.

reducing emissions although stellar in the effort are little more than adding a band aid onto a severed artery.

realistically we need a carte blanch to study the exact nature of our atmosphere and how we could replace the loss in mass amounts to reduce the current effects as well as reverse some of the damage but doing that we also need to know how not to go too far the opposite way so we don't create a completely different problem.

[Tokoyami]

the problem is not so much not talking about it as much as it is not knowing what to really do about it.
reducing emissions although stellar in the effort are little more than adding a band aid onto a severed artery.
realistically we need a carte blanch to study the exact nature of our atmosphere and how we could replace the loss in mass amounts to reduce the current effects as well as reverse some of the damage but doing that we also need to know how not to go too far the opposite way so we don't create a completely different problem.

I agree with that idea.

Does anyone know exactly when the G8 meeting is?

I hope the meeting will resolve some issues.

[Hollow_Man_ct]

I doubt that Bush will fund the project, His country is already spending Billions of dollars on the war in Iraq and the middle east, this project would for sometime decrease the energy production in the country slowing down the army and such, so becoming an obstacle for bush in his war, also, billion of dollars on war + a few billion more on the environmental project would pretty much bankrupt america xD.

[Alex26]

Hmm, i've reading articles about the global warming from both sides, the GW scientists and the Anti - GW scientists, and i must say that i believe on the anti GW's version, they claim that CO2's not the one causing GW, its the sun and it's cycles, plus there are lots of articles disproving the evidence of the GW scientists and explaining how biased and faulty their data is. Plus, there's evidence that GW has happened before were industries didnt even existed, im talking about the Medieval GW i think its call and the little ice age wich was the consequence of the mediaval gw wich brought many disasters to the European civilization. Anyone interested should take a look on google or search on youtube for some interesting videos, also, books on history can give you prove of those past events. Be aware, i agree that every kind of emisions that negativly affects the ecosystems should be at least reduced, i just dont agree what the GW scientists says about the human made CO2 causing global warming, Nature alone produces hell lot more of co2 than humans. GW's just a natural cycle earth's being going through for millions of years.

Anyway, i highly doubt Bush will accept that, the impact on the economy would be a pretty harsh and Bush doesnt likes to lose, he's like kid, plus even the GW scientists says that the kyoto thing wont help reduce CO2 significaly (sp?) maybe he knows about that <_< and well, i cant say much about this because i really dont know much about Bush's preferences and the US's interests etc...