"Lawrence" wrote in message
...
Just to illustrate my points about The Green party. I did several searches
on their site.

1) Fox Hunting 14 hits: all the same barbarous theme.
2)Ritual Slaugher 0 hits
3)Halal meat 0 hits
4)Kosher meat 0 hits
5)Abattoirs 11 hits: all of course expounding their cruelty


I put in Co2 pollutant and got 8 hits. I wonder if the plants know this

I am not sure what Fox Hunting has to do with uk weather or global
warming, but no-one has advocated joining Greenpeace or the
Green Party. In fact if you had listened to the clip "Who's to Blame
for Global Warming?"
http://www.radio.cbc.ca/programs/qui...-05/oct23.html
you would have heard green organisation being criticised for not
taking global warming seriously enough. For instance Greenpeace
seem to rate Global Warming along side saving whales.
http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/content... tekeyParam=D
There won't be any whales to save if global warming is not stopped :-(

Cheers, Alastair.

Why would I trust you on climate Lawrence? What are your qualifications?

"Lawrence" wrote in message
...
How can you have any faith in Green peace They are hypocrites at their
best
and dangerous looney's at their worst. One of their leading members Jenny
Jones happens to be the Deputy leader of the London Assembley. This
wonderful women wants to legalise cannabis, even though there is growing
serious mental health problems associated with this drug and a lifestyle
of
certain youth in London and other areas of England that Livingstone, the
Labour party and even the Tories dare not mention. I recently looked at
the
Green peace website, it had a split screen there was a large photograph
of
a muslim cleric greeting a Hisidic Jew on one side and on the other an
image
of Fox hunting in full cry.
The two sentiments being Ahhh... the poor Foxes at the hands of the Evil
privaleged Country Alliance...booo hiss. The other being the respect and
tolerance of ethnic religion. All good sentiments of course.. but alas
the
fact was lost on Greenpeace that Hisidic Jews and Muslims carried out the
also cruel practise of Ritual Slaughter here, every day in this country,
this by the way is very cruel and stressfull to the animal. I emailed
them
to point this out and hear their views but they never replied but the
image
was dropped.

The point I'm making is that I wouldn't trust this motley bunch off shrill
pampered infantiles all living in high affluent societies with
baby-sitting
a puppy let alone a child. So why would I trust them on climate!

By the way I speak for myself it would seem that three individuals here
speak for Greenpeace






Here are some links

http://london.greenparty.org.uk/?s=n...f2 c151a50d99


http://www.grandin.com/ritual/rec.ritual.slaughter.html












"Alastair McDonald" k
wrote
in message ...

"kiticat" wrote in message
...
Martin Brown wrote:

I doubt it will do much good. It was scary listening to that paranoid
guy make such unwarranted accusations about the integrity of a famous
British scientist. Boycotting Esso in Europe is one way to make the
point.

Ive discussed that with dh and its something we are willing to do

Sarah

Greenpeace has already started a campaign against Esso. Here is their
web
page.
http://www.stopesso.org
You don't need to be a Greenpeace member to join in.

Cheers, Alastair.

In message
"Gianna Stefani" wrote:

"Gavin Staples" wrote in message
.. .

Given the fact that the Kyoto protocol was supposed to limit CO2 which is
supposedly a greenhouse gas ...

Are you saying it isn't then ?

and that more than 50 per-cent of the human
population have been exempt, these being China and India. If one is
serious
about limiting CO2 then these countries would have been included.

I hope you are encouraging them to join soon.

It is infantile to suggest that American goods should be boycotted.

Is it ?

China will be using more oil than America by 2010 and more than America
and
the EU put together by 2015.

They might ... but soothsaying aside ...

Isn't the whole GW issue about soothsaying?


Do we then say let's boycott Chinese goods and
then see how qucikly we get accused of racism.

Possibly - boycotting Chinese goods is no more racist than boycotting
American goods (and in fact, neither can be considered racist if they are
being boycotted for a reason other than the fact that they are Chinese,
American, etc.).

Well, what other reason are we suggesting boycotting them for. I understood
it was becuase their governments refuse to to as we tell them.

We can't even get our own European governments to do that (RIP democracy) so
what chance have we got with foreign governments who don't even need us to
vote for them.


When India are added to the equation by 2015 China and India will be
using 3 times more oil than the US.

They might ... but soothsaying aside ...

You cannot dismiss predictions based on the extrapolation of current trends
without also dismissing the GW argument which is exactly that!



Kyoto is dead in the water. It was never meant to be anything else.

Really? I imagine the learned persons involved in bringing it about, both
organisational and scientific, must be delighted to know that their efforts
were always meant to be pointless. I cannot think why they did not ask you
first before wasting all that time.

Like everything else governments do, it is a sop to try to sell people the
idea that they are doing something about the problem. As always, even if
they succeed in getting woldwide adoption of Kyoto, it will be ineffective.
It is a bit of a King Canute exercise after all!


Yes I can ...

Gianna



--
Created on the Iyonix PC - the world's fastest RISC OS computer.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/m.dixon4/

"Martin Dixon" wrote in message
...
In message
"Gianna Stefani" wrote:

"Gavin Staples" wrote in message
.. .

Given the fact that the Kyoto protocol was supposed to limit CO2 which
is
supposedly a greenhouse gas ...

Are you saying it isn't then ?

and that more than 50 per-cent of the human
population have been exempt, these being China and India. If one is
serious
about limiting CO2 then these countries would have been included.

I hope you are encouraging them to join soon.

It is infantile to suggest that American goods should be boycotted.

Is it ?

China will be using more oil than America by 2010 and more than
America
and
the EU put together by 2015.

They might ... but soothsaying aside ...

Isn't the whole GW issue about soothsaying?


Do we then say let's boycott Chinese goods and
then see how qucikly we get accused of racism.

Possibly - boycotting Chinese goods is no more racist than boycotting
American goods (and in fact, neither can be considered racist if they
are
being boycotted for a reason other than the fact that they are Chinese,
American, etc.).

Well, what other reason are we suggesting boycotting them for. I
understood
it was becuase their governments refuse to to as we tell them.

We can't even get our own European governments to do that (RIP democracy)
so
what chance have we got with foreign governments who don't even need us to
vote for them.


When India are added to the equation by 2015 China and India will be
using 3 times more oil than the US.

They might ... but soothsaying aside ...

You cannot dismiss predictions based on the extrapolation of current
trends
without also dismissing the GW argument which is exactly that!



Kyoto is dead in the water. It was never meant to be anything else.

Really? I imagine the learned persons involved in bringing it about,
both
organisational and scientific, must be delighted to know that their
efforts
were always meant to be pointless. I cannot think why they did not ask
you
first before wasting all that time.

Like everything else governments do, it is a sop to try to sell people the
idea that they are doing something about the problem. As always, even if
they succeed in getting woldwide adoption of Kyoto, it will be
ineffective. !

That soothsaying isn't it?

It is a bit of a King Canute exercise after all!

Likewise.



Yes I can ...

Gianna



--
Created on the Iyonix PC - the world's fastest RISC OS computer.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/m.dixon4/

"Adrian D. Shaw" wrote in message
...
Felly sgrifennodd
Alastair McDonald :
If the economy goes wrong, then maybe your children will have to walk to
school. If the climate goes wrong agriculture will be affected.

If the economy goes wrong enough, food supply chains may get affected too.
The result could well be just as bad.

I'm not saying by this which side of the argument I'm on, btw. It's a
balancing act.

If you are suggesting that Kyoto will crash the global economy then
just look and see what affect exceeding the terms of Kyoto has had
on the British economy. Compare that with the US economy, which
has continued to increase its consumption of oil, yet the dollar is
threatening to collapse.

The idea that Kyoto, which will cause the US to reduce its oil imports,
will damage the US economy is palpably false since it will keep
money in the US and make it richer.

Cheers, Alastair.

Felly sgrifennodd
Alastair McDonald :
If the economy goes wrong, then maybe your children will have to walk to
school. If the climate goes wrong agriculture will be affected.

If the economy goes wrong enough, food supply chains may get affected too.
The result could well be just as bad.

I'm not saying by this which side of the argument I'm on, btw. It's a
balancing act.

Adrian
--
Adrian Shaw ais@
Adran Cyfrifiadureg, Prifysgol Cymru, aber.
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, Cymru ac.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/ais uk

Felly sgrifennodd Martin Brown :
In message , Adrian D. Shaw
writes
Since the political will to impose sanctions against countries which pollute
(such as the US) does not appear to be there, I feel my only option is to
stop buying American, and hope that enough people will feel similarly strong
about it to do the same.

I doubt it will do much good.

You may be right, but it certainly makes me feel better. One does what one
can, and I can't really see what else, as an individual, I can do.

Adrian
--
Adrian Shaw ais@
Adran Cyfrifiadureg, Prifysgol Cymru, aber.
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, Cymru ac.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/ais uk

In article ,
Alastair McDonald k
writes:
snip

The idea that Kyoto, which will cause the US to reduce its oil imports,
will damage the US economy is palpably false since it will keep
money in the US and make it richer.

Presumably the US government doesn't agree with that analysis.
--
John Hall
"I look upon it, that he who does not mind his belly,
will hardly mind anything else."
Dr Samuel Johnson (1709-84)

"John Hall" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Alastair McDonald k
writes:
snip

The idea that Kyoto, which will cause the US to reduce its oil imports,
will damage the US economy is palpably false since it will keep
money in the US and make it richer.

Presumably the US government doesn't agree with that analysis.

AFAIK the US government has not done an analysis. As they see it
there is no need as they have no intention of implementing Kyoto.
"Independant" groups have come up with figure of the "cost" but
they were all financed by the fossil fuel industry. It is fairly easy
to calculate the cost of the energy that would have to be saved, and
claim that is the cost to the US economy, but that argument is false.

The money saved would not exit the US economy. It would be
spent on other goods and services. Because of the multiplier
effect, this would expand and not contract the US economy.

There would be losers - the oil industry for one. So with the
President being an oil man that is not acceptable.

Cheers, Alastair.

Yn erthygl , sgrifennodd
Alastair McDonald :
"Adrian D. Shaw" wrote in message
...
I'm not saying by this which side of the argument I'm on, btw. It's a
balancing act.

If you are suggesting that Kyoto will crash the global economy then
just look and see what affect exceeding the terms of Kyoto has had
on the British economy.

OK... it's clear I have to say (and was probably clear anyway from a
previous message of mine in this thread), where I stand. I think we
should pressurise the Americans to sign up to Kyoto. I was merely
pointing out in the above that a downturn in the economy *can* lead
to starvation (it had been asserted, or at least implied, that it couldn't).

But clearly, if we were to abandon all fossil fuels tomorrow, we'd have
big problems (and people would starve, because food would not get to them).
That's why there is a balancing act.

Adrian
--
Adrian Shaw ais@
Adran Cyfrifiadureg, Prifysgol Cymru, aber.
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, Cymru ac.
http://users.aber.ac.uk/ais uk