Mîine au loc alegerile prezidenţiale, dar cîteva comentarii delicioase lăsate de dr pepper m-au făcut să cred că îmi pot permite un off topic în această frumoasă zi de decembrie, chiar dacă România este pe punctul de a se întoarce înapoi în timp cu 20 de ani, prin revenirea PSD-ului la putere.

Aşadar, în timp ce:

BBC-ul se întreabă „Ce s-a întîmplat cu Încălzirea Globală?”

Telegraph ne anunţă că „Subiectul Schimbărilor Climaterice este cel mai mare scandal al vremurilor noastre”

The Times spune că „Datele privind Schimbările Climaterice s-au dovedit a fi false”

şi din nou Telegraph ne spune că scandalul „Climategate este ultimul cui în coşciugul teoriei Încălzirii Globale provocate de activitatea omului”

liderul Green Peace este prins cu mîţa-n sac în legătura cu exagerările Încălzismului Global

…şi multe altele

.

…dr. pepper ne atrage atenţia asupra Oanei de la Evenimentul Zilei şi al ei articol, Ultima şansă de a salva planeta:

Oana, aceasta noua speranta a jurnalisticii si despre cum se traduce climategate in romania:

Un Climatgate

Lumea trebuie să fie pregătită să cheltuiască mai mulţi bani pentru a rezolva problemele mediului, atât prin finanţări publice, cât şi prin noi reglementări în ceea ce priveşte „taxele de carbon”.

Lordul Stern crede că acest summit este „cea mai importantă reuniune de la al doilea război mondial încoace, mai ales prin faptul că are o miză”. Acest comentariu vine în contextul în care Prinţul de Wales a confirmat prezenţa sa la acest eveniment prin care liderilor din peste 170 de state li se va cere să acţioneze împotriva schimbărilor climatice.

„Să nu lăsăm lipsa de încredere, pesimismul şi lipsa de ambiţie să ne împiedice în a acţiona în faţa acestor pericole. În schimb, să avem viziune reală şi lidership, atât în ţările dezvoltate, cât şi în cele în curs de dezvoltare”, a spus Lordul Stern, un fost economist al Băncii Mondiale, care, în 2006, a realizat Raportul Stern, văzut drept cel mai influent document politic asupra schimbărilor climatice din Marea Britanie.

Totuşi, el a admis că atunci a subestimat riscurile încălzirii globale.

În noul său raport la care au lucrat London School of Economics, Universitatea din Leeds şi Consiliul de Cercetare Economică şi Socială, el a calculat ce măsuri trebuie luate în lume pentru a limita creşterea temperaturii şi riscul ca dezastre globale să se producă.

• Reducerea la jumătate a emisiilor de dioxid de carbon care provin din transport şi industrie
• Reducerea anuală a emisiilor de dioxid de carbon şi alte gaze cu efect de seră de la 47 de miliarde de tone în 2010 până la 44 miliarde de tone în 2020
• Uniunea Europeană ar trebui să reducă aceste emisii cu 30% în următorii zece ani
• „Decarbonizarea” electricităţii prin folosirea extinsă a energiilor regenerabile, a maşinilor hibrid şi prin izolarea locuinţelor
• Consumul de carne trebuie redus, la fel şi zburatul cu avionul
• Reciclarea trebuie să se facă pe o scară extinsă
• Ţările bogate trebuie să ofere ajutor financiar celor sărace, mai ales pentru dezvoltarea industriilor energiilor regenerabile
• Introducerea de taxe pe carbon pentru bunurile care poluează, cum ar fi fabricile

Lordul Stern, care este preşedintele Institutului Grantham pentru Cercetarea Schimbărilor Climatice, a declarat că şefii de state prezenţi la Copenhaga trebuie să cadă de acord asupra stabilirii unui fond global pentru a ajuta ţările sărace. Valoarea acestui ajutor ar trebui să fie de cel puţin 30 de miliarde de lire sterline pe an până în 2015 şi să crească la 120 de miliarde de lire sterline pe an după 2020.

…şi The New Scientist, care ne (re)educă cu privire la cele cele cinci crime ecologice pe care le producem zi de zi:

1 Coffee

2 Toilet paper

3 Fast fashion

4 Laundry

5 Food wastage

si, daca va apucati sa cititi comentariile, vi se va face parul maciuca:

Another Eco-crime
Tue Dec 01 17:20:41 GMT 2009 by gaz

You’ve missed the biggest eco-crime BY FAR – having children.

Each child will consume a lifetime of coffee, toilet paper etc AND need a home and transport. They might go on to have children themselves, so compounding the crime into the future.

If you have more than two children (it always amazes me to see so-called “greens” with large families), it doesn’t matter whether you drink cold suffusion for breakfast and wipe your bots on dried leaves, you’re still going to consume more than a materialist couple with only one child.

There’s no guarantee your kids will turn out green either – look at Will and Harry!

Comentariul mă duce cu gîndul la Marea Britanie, în care culmea conştiinţei civice este întrupată de Avortul şi sterilizarea pentru salvarea planetei.

dr pepper:
eu cred ca oamenii astia sunt total nebuni si trebuiesc opriti cumva.
cum? nu stiu, sincer.
si asta pentru ca climategate este tinut ostatic de 14 zile deja
da, climategate care nu se traduce poarta clismei.
si nici nu e vorba de raportul lunatecului lord stern.
si se scrie cu e: climategate.
dar de unde sa stie oana, saraca?
ce e aia si cum se scrie?
ce pretentii sa mai ai de la cititori?
daca presa e plina de ‘telectuali.

Din nou, Evenimentul Zilei ne lămureşte că…

Efectele încălzirii globale: inundaţii, furtuni, uragane, secetă

De ce ar trebui să fie românii interesaţi de acest eveniment şi implicit de încălzirea globală?

Cu toţii auzim din ce în ce mai des vorbindu-se despre încălzirea globală. Mai mult, vedem efectele încălzirii globale: topirea gheţarilor, inundaţii, furtuni, uragane, secetă, incendii etc. În ultimii ani unele dintre aceste efecte au fost prezente şi în ţara noastră. Este un semn foarte clar că încălzirea globală este prezentă şi că ne afectează pe toţi într-o anumită măsură, nu doar pe cei care emit mai mult CO2, ci, în mod egal, pe toţi. Fiind o problemă globală este nevoie de o abordare globală pentru rezolvarea ei, şi de implicarea tuturor. Fiecare persoană poate contribui în acest sens şi cu toţii trebuie să facem acest lucru.

Wikipedia: 2009 Atlantic hurricane season

The 2009 Atlantic hurricane season was below average in activity, with a total of nine named storms and three hurricanes. For the first time since 2006, no storm brought hurricane force winds to the United States, and only four storms made landfall anywhere at tropical storm force. The lack of activity was due to the appearance of El Niño during the summer, causing strong wind shear which inhibited the development of storms.[1]

The season began early with the development of Tropical Depression One on May 28, but for the next two months the Atlantic basin went dormant. On August 12, Tropical Storm Ana developed in the vicinity of the Cape Verde Islands, marking the latest date since 1992’s Hurricane Andrew when the season’s first tropical cyclone was named in the Atlantic basin.[2] Tropical Storm Claudette formed on August 16 and became the first storm of the season, making landfall in the United States early the next morning. Hurricane Bill became the first hurricane and first major hurricane of the season. Hurricane Fred was unusual as it was the strongest hurricane so far south and east in the data record of the National Hurricane Center (NHC), becoming only the third known major hurricane east of 35°W. September’s activity was below average in the basin this season, with only two named storms forming, Erika and Fred. September’s Accumulated cyclone energy (ACE) value was the lowest for the month since 1994, and the sixth lowest for the month since 1944. Ida, a late season storm that struck Alabama, was one of only six tropical storms to make landfall in the United States during the month of November. With only $2.3 million in damage during this season, it was one of the least costly Atlantic hurricane seasons on record.

dr pepper:

deci daca ploua e de la incalzirea globala.
daca nu ploua si e seceta – tot de la incalzirea globala ni se trage.
daca ninge, e soare, e frig, e cald, e umed, e uscat, e torid sau ploua cu ursi polari: exista o singura explicatie: incalzirea globala.

Ce ne mai rămîne de făcut? Nu prea multe.
Toată lumea mîinile sus!!

Mai detaliat despre subiect, aici, O întrebare incomodă şi Moartea Încălzismului Global™ şi aici, Oamenii de ştiinţă au de ales cui sînt datori – ONU sau adevărului

———————————————————————————————————————
4 decembrie, 2009
Copenhaga, Danemarca:

Actualizare #1 Politiken.dk – Parliamentary Speaker: Climate debate derailed?

The Speaker of the Danish Parliament has issued a damning criticism of the climate debate, saying politicians gullibly turn theories into facts.

As the world prepares to converge on Copenhagen for the COP15 Climate Summit, Denmark’s Speaker of Parliament has expressed serious doubts as to the way in which the climate debate has developed.

“The problem is that lots of people go around saying that the climate change we see is a result of human activity. That is a very dangerous claim,” Parliamentary Speaker and former Finance Minister Thor Pedersen (Lib) tells DR.

“Unfortunately I seem to experience that scientists say: ‘We have a theory’ – then that crosses the road to the politicians who say: ‘We know’. Who can be bothered to hear a scientist who says ‘I have a theory’ when politicians go around saying ‘I know’” Thor Pedersen says.

No temperature rise
Thor Pedersen adds that the temperature has not risen in the past decade.

“I’m not saying that in the decade that the temperature has fallen or stagnated is enough to evaluate developments. But one should only say what one knows,” the Speaker adds.

“You should say that although we believed in our models, that the temperature would rise from 1998 to 2008, we have to admit that it has not risen. We cannot explain why it has not risen, but we believe we still have a problem. I’m just asking that people say what they actually know,” Pedersen tells DR.

Pedersen says that a major challenge is how to ensure energy and food to cater for the major population growth the world will be experiencing, and that the COP15 Climate Summit could result in an agreement that reduces the pressure on the Earth.

“We should all shake hands and agree to do everything possible to create good living conditions. That has nothing to do with the climate debate, in which we try to determine the globe’s temperature. It is common sense,” Thor Pedersen says in his interview with DR.
Politiken.dk: Parliamentary Speaker: Climate debate derailed?

4 decembrie 2009

Actualizare #2 The Times – Copenhagen targets not tough enough, says Al Gore

Even if a deal is reached at the UN climate change talks in Copenhagen next week it will only be the first step towards the far more radical cuts that are needed in global carbon emissions, Al Gore, the former US Vice-President, told The Times last night.

Mr Gore said that to avoid the worst ravages of climate change world leaders would have to come together again to set more drastic reductions than those now planned.

“Even a final treaty will have to set the stage for other tougher reductions at a later date,” he said. “We have already overshot the safe levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.”

He insisted that the present goal set for Copenhagen of stabilising world emissions of carbon dioxide at or below 450 parts per million — enough to prevent a rise in average global temperatures of no more than 2C — was insufficient and a safer target would be 350 parts per million.
“Are we doing enough? The answer is obviously no — 450 is not the right target. But it is presently seen as beyond the capacity of governments around the world. We are stretching the capacity of governments even to hit a 450 target.”

“We are gambling with the future of human civilisation in accepting odds that by any definition make our present course reckless . . . But it’s still the most likely path to success.”

Speaking from San Francisco, the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and veteran climate campaigner also raised the pressure on President Obama to offer more stringent cuts in US emissions than the present offer of a 17 per cent reduction by 2020.

Mr Gore said that figure from the US, the world’s second-biggest carbon polluter, was “weaker than it should be” although he expressed sympathy for the challenges that Mr Obama faces in driving tough carbon regulation through a resistant House of Representatives. He said: “I’m glad that he is putting reduction targets on the table. I wish that they were stronger but I recognise the difficulties he faces in the Senate.”

Mr Gore also threw his weight behind calls for a system of international carbon taxes in order to slash fossil-fuel consumption although he warned that huge political obstacles existed to this which meant that it would be many years before such a system could be applied globally.

He said that a system of carbon emissions trading was a more realistic first step on this path and rejected criticism from James Hansen, the pioneering climate change scientist at Nasa, who has condemned both Mr Gore and the Copenhagen meeting for their focus on carbon markets as a solution to climate change.

Mr Gore said: “The correct policy response will include both of these powerful tools. But the degree of political difficulty associated with a carbon tax is a degree of difficulty much higher than the cap and trade approach.”

He also brushed aside questions over the reliability of climate science that have followed the publication last month of leaked e-mails between climate experts. He claimed that the scientific consensus around climate change “continues to grow from strength to strength”. He added: “The naysayers are in a sunset phase with a spectacular climax just before they subside from view. This is a race between common sense and unreality.”

The Times: Copenhagen targets not tough enough, says Al Gore

Actualizare #3 – Preşedintele Cehiei, Vaclav Klaus: „Încălzirea Globală e un mit şi fiecare om de ştiinţă serios spune asta”

Într-un interviu din noiembrie 2009 acordat de Vaclav Klaus revistei National Review:

Discuţia a fost în mare parte despre progresism, comunism şi Uniunea Europeană.

Actualizare #4 dr pepper: ok, it’s show time, grab your beer and your popcorn ????

BBC:

cbs, msnbc, abc – televiziunile din america ‘telectuala ignora in continuare.
what an a**hole declara la sfarsitul emisiunii dl. Andrew Watson, profesor al University of East Anglia despre interlocutorul cel sceptic.
argumentele d-lui Watson?
nu este adevarat ca „scientologii” au modificat datele si au mintit. este irelevant. nu schimba datele problemei.
se incearca defaimarea celor ce propaga religia incalzirii globale.

mda, l’au luat pe NU in brate si merg cu el pana in panzele albe.
mint in continuare cu seninatate.

acum, sincer – oare cati si’ar pierde slujbele bine platite? cati jurnalisti, activisti, politicieni si „oameni de stiinta”? ce se va intampla cu banii ce se duc catre scoli, universitati, proiecte, colocvii, meetinguri, intruniri, conferinte? cum vor demonstra cheltuiala fara numar pe banii celor care muncesc? ce se va intampla cu saracii aia panicarzi ca se duce planeta pe apa sambetei? ma gandesc la aia care au aparut la tv fericiti tare ca nu au folosit hartia igienica si au stat pe intuneric timp de un an.
ce idioti utili fraudei incalziri globale ????
ce se va intampla cu suprataxele ecologice? le vom primi retroactiv inapoi? cine si cum va plati pentru acest furt ( intelectual si financiar)?

Actualizare #5 – Ipocrizia mahărilor care „luptă” pentru mediu înconjurător: 1.200 de limuzine, 140 de avioane private şi caviar pentru toată lumea

On a normal day, Majken Friss Jorgensen, managing director of Copenhagen’s biggest limousine company, says her firm has twelve vehicles on the road. During the „summit to save the world”, which opens here tomorrow, she will have 200.
„We thought they were not going to have many cars, due to it being a climate convention,” she says. „But it seems that somebody last week looked at the weather report.”
Ms Jorgensen reckons that between her and her rivals the total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier. The French alone rang up on Thursday and ordered another 42. „We haven’t got enough limos in the country to fulfil the demand,” she says. „We’re having to drive them in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden.”
And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that number? „Five,” says Ms Jorgensen. „The government has some alternative fuel cars but the rest will be petrol or diesel. We don’t have any hybrids in Denmark, unfortunately, due to the extreme taxes on those cars. It makes no sense at all, but it’s very Danish.”

cititi articolul in intregime aici via Gateway Pundit