INSTANT KARMA ok

[Vitamin-X]

Signing on for a disfunctional program so every one will say how great you are isn't a gloreous first step.
It's an exercise in pointlessness.

-So every one signs up. Starts shipping large transfers of cash to Iceland (and certain other under-industrialized nations) and everything carries on exactly the way it did before.

It's like being a leader in the "if every one jumped off a cliff?" scenario.

And I'm not even going to get into the "is global warming really caused by co2 emmisions?" argument.

[Gusto]

Originally Posted by Vitamin-X

It's like being a leader in the "if every one jumped off a cliff?" scenario.

errr except that jumping off of a cliff leads to certain death and decreasing global warming does not. regardless, the petition is not to stop global warming, it's to get focus on it.

[Vitamin-X]

My concept was as economic death. ^

[mojo]

what harm can come from signing this petition? Maybe it will not have an impact, maybe it will.
A lot of you folks just sit here and fucking debate about shit, displaying the egocentrism that has fucked our planet into the position it is in now...maybe put some of that energy into a possible change (this petition is a start) instead of simply sounding off about it.

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by mojo

what harm can come from signing this petition? Maybe it will not have an impact, maybe it will.
A lot of you folks just sit here and fucking debate about shit, displaying the egocentrism that has fucked our planet into the position it is in now...maybe put some of that energy into a possible change (this petition is a start) instead of simply sounding off about it.

What have you done recently?

I stand by my beliefs. Kyoto has more problems then solutions. Sure it may "draw attention" to global warming. But the economic and politcal disaster that is sure to follow is hardly worth it.

As for the petition, I've stated before, it does nothing. That's a fact. Find me one case where the federal government cited an online petition as a reason behiend a major political decision. Hell find me once that they even mention it. All it does is give people a warm fuzzy feeling because they forward it to all their friends thinking they've done good.

It's the modren day version of the chain letter.

[mojo]

I recycle, i volunteer my time, i live life with altruism for the greater good. I am not going to claim to be mother teresa, because i am not. but what i don't do is throw negativity at an idea which could, potentially do some good. Do you think that politicians or anyone for that matter disclose or are aware of all influences that help them make decisions? Just because information like this is not disclosed does not mean that it doesn't have an impact.

I'm also not going to pretend that i am fully versed in the Kyoto protocol, but i think it is rediculous to say that just because the three main contributors of Co2 are not on board it will not make a difference. Any reduction is a benefit.

[Gusto]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

As for the petition, I've stated before, it does nothing. That's a fact.

if nothing else, it helps to inform the uninformed and asks them to think about it enough to make a decision. that's not nothing. that's a fact.

it might have little direct political leverage, but wouldn't it be great if it did? just because no one is listening doesn't mean everyone should shut up. being heard is worth a shot.

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by mojo

I'm also not going to pretend that i am fully versed in the Kyoto protocol, but i think it is rediculous to say that just because the three main contributors of Co2 are not on board it will not make a difference. Any reduction is a benefit.

But it's not nessesarily a reduction. It'll be cheaper to produce things in China, India, and America. What this means is that production will simply shift.

If something like Kyoto goes into effect wouldn't that deter a better laid out agreement being put in place? Yes there could be a slight reduction, but the countries involved would no longer work towards a unified agreement meaning that the opprotunity for a more effective agreement could be missed.

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by Gusto

if nothing else, it helps to inform the uninformed and asks them to think about it enough to make a decision. that's not nothing. that's a fact.

it might have little direct political leverage, but wouldn't it be great if it did? just because no one is listening doesn't mean everyone should shut up. being heard is worth a shot.

But my problem is that it makes people think they are doing something without actually having done something. Emailing your PM directly, or even better sending a letter, does much more.

[mojo]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

But it's not nessesarily a reduction. It'll be cheaper to produce things in China, India, and America. What this means is that production will simply shift.

If something like Kyoto goes into effect wouldn't that deter a better laid out agreement being put in place? Yes there could be a slight reduction, but the countries involved would no longer work towards a unified agreement meaning that the opprotunity for a more effective agreement could be missed.

I understand what you are saying, production could and will likely simply shift to those countries who do not choose to play. But then we as consumers have the choice to promote this economic activity. Here is where I agree with what decypher was saying. The problem is not the emissions themselves but rather the economic system that is supporting it.
What other options are there that Kyoto is holding back? I don't know of any other efforts of such magnitude that are being pushed riht now, and if there is nothing on the table i think that we should try to run with what we have, even if the majority is going the other way.

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by LEEROY CHANG!!

it was written in the comments area of the cbc page. the article seemed a little too subjective for me so i wanted to see some other opinions on the matter. if you ask me, it sucks that all climate change issues and resolutions are so politically driven because there's always skepticism over whether a politician is choosing to do "the right thing" for humanitarian reasons or political reasons

i know if i was in harpers position i'd have a hard time deciding what to do. on one hand you could sign the treaty and hope that the next super powers in the world (china, india) dont take advantage of the situation all the while having the economy in your own country go down (lets not forget the PM's first and foremost responsibility is to help govern his own people). on the other hand, you dont sign the treaty in an attempts to have global consensus on the matter, making it all the more effective.

and i think the point ninjaboy was trying to get at is that signing an online petition is really not going to mean anything. there are probably more effective ways to get your voice heard and online petitions are never accounted for in any official way because of forging

id just sign the treaty, it may be binding but its not like any of the other signatories are going to honour it anyway.

There aren't any meaningful consequences if we sign the treaty and then increase emissions 100% anyway.

a global cap and trade system might actually work, this probably wont

[esoter1c]

Signed.:amuse:

It's just that easy kids.

[Gusto]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

But my problem is that it makes people think they are doing something without actually having done something. Emailing your PM directly, or even better sending a letter, does much more.

"In February 2007, most world leaders were still asleep at the switch on the issue of climate change. Avaaz members sponsored a global television ad campaign with a provocative "Wake-Up Call" message. The ad aired on TV in India, the US and Europe and was covered in major media around the world, marking the launch of our global warming petition.

Within weeks we passed 100,000 signatures, and handed them over at a planning meeting for the G8 summit. Sigmar Gabriel, German environment minister, waved the petition at his fellow ministers as he pledged to meet our demand to put climate at the top of the summit agenda. The other ministers agreed, and the stage was set for the G8 summit in June."

"G8 Summit - 400,000 Avaaz members sign a petition delivered to the German chair of the G8 summit negotiators. The leaders agree to start work on a new agreement.

In the run-up to June's G8+5 summit US President George Bush attempted to wreck global efforts to develop a new treaty to stop climate change. Avaaz members rallied and spread the word, and built the biggest global climate petition in history. We hand-delivered that petition to the Chairman of the G8 negotiators, as well the UK, French and Brazilian governments. During the Summit, we also marched with thousands of peaceful climate demonstrators, carrying banners in eight languages. Many leaders told us that our global voice assisted their effort to stand up to Bush at the negotiating table.

We and our allies won half a victory at the G8. We didn't get the binding emissions targets we'd campaigned for. But all the big polluters agreed to one of our central demands – that they begin work this year on a new global treaty to stop catastrophic climate change."

http://www.avaaz.org/en/report_back_1/

[Grapes]

Signed.

THe fucking nerve!...

NUSA DUA, Indonesia -- As Canadian and international critics attacked Canada's commitment to fighting climate change on Monday, Environment Minister John Baird took his own swipe at Canadian green groups, blaming them for the country's dismal reputation on fighting global warming.

^^^ Where does he get off?!?


Kam probably raised the most important point in this thread, aside from Nicole's initial act of getting it started..

If world leaders continue to sit back and point their fingers at each other from across audtioriums at their fellow world leaders and say "But THEY aren't doing anything!" then we're not going to get sweet fuck-all done and the climate is going to hell in a handbasket.

The "But what about their failings??" approach hasn't worked for the middle east, and it won't work here. Someone has to step to the forefront and take action, leading by example. Normally this would be something to be expected of our nation, but we have a Prime Minister who once called Kyoto "A socialist scheme designed to filter money from rich nations to poor nations", and an Environment Minister who apparently hasn't had a chance to read the countless availlable and scientifically sound climate reports, perhaps because he's busy stuffing donuts into his giant craw.

We need to start making moves here. This will involve economic SACRIFICE. We can't have our cake and eat it too. But it doesn't have to amount to anything close to "economic suicide" if we use innovations, some of which are already available, and determination that I hope won't be deterred by the assholes we have in parliament right now.

Personally I am willing to be less rich than I am in order to have an enviroment that I can depend on, and that future generations can depend on.

Hope you guys are too.

Ive always kinda sat on the fence when it comes to global warming issues and I kind of see Harpers point with this one.

FIRST PRIZE: CANADA
Canada roared into a first-place Fossil finish for refusing to take on absolute emissions reductions targets unless developing countries do so as well—ignoring Canada’s historical responsibility and its vastly higher per capita emissions compared to developing countries. Could Mr. Harper be hiding behind developing countries as a way to protect his precious tar sands?

Anyways sorry Nichole, I know im not a science genius, but Im having a really hard time getting the cold hard facts on this issue and seeing the big picture. Most of the links given claiming to be "experts" are far too bi-est for me to get a good idea of whats really going on. I just want to see both sides before I go off and sign something.

[stephen_c]

Canadians are #11 right behind our buddies USA.

List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

what's the point, we talk alot, but we'll never change.

[starbright]

Originally Posted by NinjaBoy

Well, the media isn't going to pay attention to this. So there goes that.

OH HAY.
welcome to the 21st century, ignoramus.
we ARE the media!
Avaaz.org - The World in Action is media.
fnk is some kinda dysfunctional interactive media.

anyway,
in my mind different political issues bear different weight...

economic collapse = i won't be able to buy shit for my kids
ecological collapse = my kids won't be able to BREATHE properly (and then some...)

we could argue til we're all blue in the face and we still wouldn't cover all the arguments out there. i appreciate seeing various sides of each story. common sense to me is determining what is most important.

i mostly made the original post in hopes sidekick would see it and forward it to the green centric facebook group i've temporarily abandoned during my hiatus. from now on i suppose i should stick to promoting activism to like-minded people who are interested.

thanks for those who were supportive.
i'm proud to have gusto and kam as two of my best.
(intellectual and rational dudes with looks to kill.)
all those opposed i hope you are making strides to do whatever it is that helps you sleep at night. please consider what good criticism is without a sliver of constructive direction?

[robyn]

yeah guys why should we have to take action before the country where we outsourced 90% of our manufacturing to save money does?

[Grapes]

Originally Posted by starbright

from now on i suppose i should stick to promoting activism to like-minded people who are interested.

O rly? Preaching exclusively to the choir? Doesn't sound too productive to me.

[starbright]

yah but these jerks make me feel like fable and after 40 hrs and no sleep i want to cry cry cryyyyy

[esoter1c]

I has a theory....

If we can get everyone in the americas and europes to leave their freezer doors open all day for a week, or two.

Yeah, I failed science, nvrmind.

[JadoreJDM]

I signed it, if it helps even the littlest tiny bit then thats good, cuz every little bit helps. And if nothing comes from it then meh...I'll move on to the next thing that comes along that may or may not help.

PS: I hate Harper. lol

[Grapes]

"We'll cut emissions... but you first." "No... you first."

[NinjaBoy]

Originally Posted by starbright

OH HAY.
welcome to the 21st century, ignoramus.
we ARE the media!
Avaaz.org - The World in Action is media.
fnk is some kinda dysfunctional interactive media.

Fnk, is an interactive media. But with maybe 150 regular posters/readers. So don't get to excited.

I have a bit of background knowledge on how the media works btw.

anyway,
in my mind different political issues bear different weight...

economic collapse = i won't be able to buy shit for my kids
ecological collapse = my kids won't be able to BREATHE properly (and then some...)

I didn't realize a complex issue like this is just black and white.

thanks for those who were supportive.
i'm proud to have gusto and kam as two of my best.
(intellectual and rational dudes with looks to kill.)
all those opposed i hope you are making strides to do whatever it is that helps you sleep at night. please consider what good criticism is without a sliver of constructive direction?

Post in a public forum, expect people to have diffrent opinions. Don't get mad just because everyone didn't post "Yah! I'll sign right away!"

[Vitamin-X]

The World body should put its efforts into productive avenues such
as combating the scourge of malaria, famine, "insert other problem here".

So much headway could be made in these type of areas with a fraction of the effort the world wants to throw at Global Warming.

ps: Environmentalism is the new Nazism