[BartSimpson]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/copenh ... world.html

Excerpt:

Quote:

In one paper Professor Kevin Anderson, Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, said the only way to reduce global emissions enough, while allowing the poor nations to continue to grow, is to halt economic growth in the rich world over the next twenty years.

This would mean a drastic change in lifestyles for many people in countries like Britain as everyone will have to buy less ‘carbon intensive’ goods and services such as long haul flights and fuel hungry cars.

Prof Anderson admitted it “would not be easy” to persuade people to reduce their consumption of goods

He said politicians should consider a rationing system similar to the one introduced during the last “time of crisis” in the 1930s and 40s.

This could mean a limit on electricity so people are forced to turn the heating down, turn off the lights and replace old electrical goods like huge fridges with more efficient models. Food that has travelled from abroad may be limited and goods that require a lot of energy to manufacture.

“The Second World War and the concept of rationing is something we need to seriously consider if we are to address the scale of the problem we face,” he said.

So the AGW proposal is to beggar the developed world.

[sandorski]

No, one guy in one paper merely suggested that. This is why Scientists should figure out what Reductions need to be accomplished, but Governments and the Public decide on how it is to be accomplished. So far the Government and Public are failing.

[BartSimpson]

Failing to do something about a non-problem is a non-failure.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

How come we have a bunch of dimwits flying all over the friggin' globe and hiring limos to go to these "summits" so they can tell us to quit flying and driving land yachts?
I guess the bigger dimwits are the ones that actually listen to these shmucks.

Oh wait, I get it, their carbon footprints are far less harmful cuz they're powered by smug self-righteousness?

Actions speak sooooo much louder than rhetoric.

[SprCForr]

Kevin Anderson can take his reccomendation and shove it up his ass.

[Zipperfish]

This guy should stick to climate science. Clearly he's out of his depth in the field of human behaviour. Who the hell in their right mind would sign up for "drastic lifestyle changes" to impose austerity? And to say this while you're at a conference in Cancun? What a tool.

[BartSimpson]

Remind me again why they didn't hold this year's conference in Copenhagen?

[Thanos]

Yes, and the austerity measures Britain undertook after both World Wars did such wonders for them. Christ Jesus, these goddamn scientists are awesome at proving that being book-smart also means being totally inept and obtuse in about every other aspect of human life.

[BartSimpson]

Thanos wrote:

Yes, and the austerity measures Britain undertook after both World Wars did such wonders for them. Christ Jesus, these goddamn scientists are awesome at proving that being book-smart also means being totally inept and obtuse in about every other aspect of human life.

Not to pick a fight with Mr. Canada, but with him as an example of someone who follows theory over practice it doesn't surprise me that a cloistered academician could cook up an idea like this. Mr. Canada adheres to a vision of 'communist theory' as some sort of ideal despite the fact that each and every time communism was attempted it resulted in a bloodbath. These so-called scientists barf out these idealized theories on how to maybe resolve a problem and they utterly ignore the fact that these ideas, if implemented, will cause not theoretical inconveniences, but real suffering and, eventually, wars.

God help us all if someday we're asked by our grandchildren why, when all of these people were gathered in one spot, why we didn't kill them when we had a chance?

[Pseudonym]

I think I'm going to reduce my expenditures by using my fireplace to help offset my normal heating costs. I sure hope that it helps!

[Pseudonym]

BartSimpson wrote:

God help us all if someday we're asked by our grandchildren why, when all of these people were gathered in one spot, why we didn't kill them when we had a chance?

Because in our superior moral framework, murder is wrong. It's hard to be the good guys sometimes, ain't it?

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Zipperfish wrote:

This guy should stick to climate science. Clearly he's out of his depth in the field of human behaviour. Who the hell in their right mind would sign up for "drastic lifestyle changes" to impose austerity? And to say this while you're at a conference in Cancun? What a tool.

That's the big problem. Let's say for sake of argument that AGW is a more serious issue than I actually believe it to be. It's moronic actions like those of this group of mental midgets that completely detract from any legitimacy of scientific claims.
It would be akin to a group of hard core communists telling us they had scientific proof that communism was the best way to go and insisting we give up the materialistic trappings of consumerism while they own major shares of huge corporations, ride around in limos, eat lobster and fois gras and live in 24 room mansions with more house staff than residents.

If ya can't/won't live it, don't preach it!

[DrCaleb]

Thanos wrote:

Yes, and the austerity measures Britain undertook after both World Wars did such wonders for them. Christ Jesus, these goddamn scientists are awesome at proving that being book-smart also means being totally inept and obtuse in about every other aspect of human life.

That's why Scientists always say what needs to be done, and leave it to Government to implement.

[Zipperfish]

PublicAnimalNo9 wrote:

That's the big problem. Let's say for sake of argument that AGW is a more serious issue than I actually believe it to be. It's moronic actions like those of this group of mental midgets that completely detract from any legitimacy of scientific claims.

Well, to be fair, regardless of these kinds of antics, there's a good number of people who would still discount the scientific claims. The fact that creationsim still ranks with evolutionary theory in the US is a case in point.

[martin14]

Pseudonym wrote:

I think I'm going to reduce my expenditures by using my fireplace to help offset my normal heating costs. I sure hope that it helps!

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat ??????


All that inefficiently burnt fuel, you will add to our global warming problem.


Bastard !!!!!!!!


Go and live in the caves to reduce ! Heat is a luxury we cant afford anymore !