Science and Technology news... :: View topic

Roger Coppock · Guest

Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming

ScienceDaily (Oct. 10, 2008) — Contrary to conventional wisdom,
tropical plant and animal species living in some of the warmest places
on Earth may be threatened by global warming, according to an article
by University of Connecticut Ecologist Robert K. Colwell and
colleagues the journal Science.

As Earth>s climate has warmed in recent decades, the geographical
ranges of well-studied bird, butterfly, and plant species in the US
and Europe have moved northward, following the gradual northward shift
of their familiar climates. Other studies have shown that species in
the US and Europe have shifted to higher elevations, as temperature
zones on mountains have moved upward.

In contrast, surprisingly little attention has been given to the
effects of warming climate on tropical plants and animals. Colwell>s
article in Science magazine this week may change that.

The report points out that tropical climates have warmed too (more
than 3/4 degrees Centigrade [1.4 degrees Fahrenheit] since 1975), and
climate models predict an additional increase of more than 3 degrees
Centigrade (nearly 6 degrees Fahrenheit) over the next century in the
tropical forests of Central and South America. This much warming would
shift temperature zones uphill about 600 m (nearly 2000 feet) in
elevation above sea level. Tropical species, like those at higher
latitudes, will likely be driven to higher elevations by these
changes, following the climate zones they are suited for.

Working their way up the forested slopes of a Costa Rican volcano
rising nearly 3000 m (10,000 ft) above the coastal plain, Colwell and
colleagues have collected data on the altitudinal ranges of nearly
2000 species of plants and insects.

They report that about half these species have such narrow altitudinal
ranges that a 600 m (2000 ft) uphill shift would move these species
into territory completely new to them, beyond the upper limits of
their current ranges on the mountainside. But many may be unable to
shift— most mountainside forests in the tropics have been severely
fragmented by human land use.

Meanwhile, tropical lowland rainforests, the warmest forests on Earth,
face a challenge that has no parallel at higher latitudes. [ . . . ]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081009143700.htm

Original article abstract at:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/322/5899/258

Science 10 October 2008:
Vol. 322. no. 5899, pp. 258 - 261
DOI: 10.1126/science.1162547
Global Warming, Elevational Range Shifts, and Lowland Biotic Attrition
in the Wet Tropics
Robert K. Colwell,1* Gunnar Brehm,2 Catherine L. Cardelús,3 Alex C.
Gilman,4 John T. Longino5

Many studies suggest that global warming is driving species ranges
poleward and toward higher elevations at temperate latitudes, but
evidence for range shifts is scarce for the tropics, where the shallow
latitudinal temperature gradient makes upslope shifts more likely than
poleward shifts. Based on new data for plants and insects on an
elevational transect in Costa Rica, we assess the potential for
lowland biotic attrition, range-shift gaps, and mountaintop
extinctions under projected warming. We conclude that tropical lowland
biotas may face a level of net lowland biotic attrition without
parallel at higher latitudes (where range shifts may be compensated
for by species from lower latitudes) and that a high proportion of
tropical species soon faces gaps between current and projected
elevational ranges.

1 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of
Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.
2 Institut für Spezielle Zoologie und Evolutionsbiologie mit
Phyletischem Museum, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Erbertstraße
1, 07743 Jena, Germany.
3 Department of Biology, Colgate University, Hamilton, NY 13346, USA.
4 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of
California, Los Angeles, CA 90950, USA.
5 Evergreen State College, Olympia, WA 98505, USA.

These authors are listed alphabetically.

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: colwell@uconn.edu

Roger Coppock · Guest

On Oct 10, 8:41 am, "tvor" <n...@home.com> wrote:
[quote]"Roger Coppock" <rcopp...@adnc.com> wrote in message

news:32421d7e-5b0d-4c20-bdd8-627c0c389556@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I>d rather it be them than me. I need electricity and gas to live a normal
life so "full steam ahead".
[/quote]
Are you, Tvor, sure that the choice is only "them" and "me?"
Couldn>t you both be on the same planet?

Catoni · Guest

On Oct 10, 11:48 am, "Falcon" <fal...@invalid.net> wrote:
[quote]Roger Coppock wrote:
Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming

Global warming and deforestation. hmmm
Which of these interrelated events is threatening the species more, I
wonder?

--
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
--------------------------------
[/quote]
Just take a look around. You can see the horrible damage previous
global warmings and global coolings did to the world.

The horrible damage done by the last ice age is still with us
today. And Mother Earth will probably never fully recover from the
horrible damage done by the Medieval Warm Period, and the Roman Warm
Period before that.

tvor · Guest

"Roger Coppock" <rcoppock@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:32421d7e-5b0d-4c20-bdd8-627c0c389556@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I>d rather it be them than me. I need electricity and gas to live a normal
life so "full steam ahead".

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ScienceDaily (Oct. 10, 2008) — Contrary to conventional wisdom,
tropical plant and animal species living in some of the warmest places
on Earth may be threatened by global warming, according to an article
by University of Connecticut Ecologist Robert K. Colwell and
colleagues the journal Science.

As Earth>s climate has warmed in recent decades, the geographical
ranges of well-studied bird, butterfly, and plant species in the US
and Europe have moved northward, following the gradual northward shift
of their familiar climates. Other studies have shown that species in
the US and Europe have shifted to higher elevations, as temperature
zones on mountains have moved upward.

In contrast, surprisingly little attention has been given to the
effects of warming climate on tropical plants and animals. Colwell>s
article in Science magazine this week may change that.

The report points out that tropical climates have warmed too (more
than 3/4 degrees Centigrade [1.4 degrees Fahrenheit] since 1975), and
climate models predict an additional increase of more than 3 degrees
Centigrade (nearly 6 degrees Fahrenheit) over the next century in the
tropical forests of Central and South America. This much warming would
shift temperature zones uphill about 600 m (nearly 2000 feet) in
elevation above sea level. Tropical species, like those at higher
latitudes, will likely be driven to higher elevations by these
changes, following the climate zones they are suited for.

Working their way up the forested slopes of a Costa Rican volcano
rising nearly 3000 m (10,000 ft) above the coastal plain, Colwell and
colleagues have collected data on the altitudinal ranges of nearly
2000 species of plants and insects.

They report that about half these species have such narrow altitudinal
ranges that a 600 m (2000 ft) uphill shift would move these species
into territory completely new to them, beyond the upper limits of
their current ranges on the mountainside. But many may be unable to
shift— most mountainside forests in the tropics have been severely
fragmented by human land use.

Meanwhile, tropical lowland rainforests, the warmest forests on Earth,
face a challenge that has no parallel at higher latitudes. [ . . . ]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081009143700.htm

Original article abstract at:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/322/5899/258

Science 10 October 2008:
Vol. 322. no. 5899, pp. 258 - 261
DOI: 10.1126/science.1162547
Global Warming, Elevational Range Shifts, and Lowland Biotic Attrition
in the Wet Tropics
Robert K. Colwell,1* Gunnar Brehm,2 Catherine L. Cardelús,3 Alex C.
Gilman,4 John T. Longino5

Many studies suggest that global warming is driving species ranges
poleward and toward higher elevations at temperate latitudes, but
evidence for range shifts is scarce for the tropics, where the shallow
latitudinal temperature gradient makes upslope shifts more likely than
poleward shifts. Based on new data for plants and insects on an
elevational transect in Costa Rica, we assess the potential for
lowland biotic attrition, range-shift gaps, and mountaintop
extinctions under projected warming. We conclude that tropical lowland
biotas may face a level of net lowland biotic attrition without
parallel at higher latitudes (where range shifts may be compensated
for by species from lower latitudes) and that a high proportion of
tropical species soon faces gaps between current and projected
elevational ranges.

1 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of
Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269, USA.
2 Institut für Spezielle Zoologie und Evolutionsbiologie mit
Phyletischem Museum, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Erbertstraße
1, 07743 Jena, Germany.
3 Department of Biology, Colgate University, Hamilton, NY 13346, USA.
4 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of
California, Los Angeles, CA 90950, USA.
5 Evergreen State College, Olympia, WA 98505, USA.

These authors are listed alphabetically.

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: colwell@uconn.edu

Falcon · Guest

Roger Coppock wrote:

[quote]Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
[/quote]
Global warming and deforestation. hmmm
Which of these interrelated events is threatening the species more, I
wonder?

--
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
---------------------------------

Buerste · Guest

"tvor" <not@home.com> wrote in message
news:48ef7785$0$87073$815e3792@news.qwest.net...
[quote]
"Roger Coppock" <rcoppock@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:32421d7e-5b0d-4c20-bdd8-627c0c389556@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I>d rather it be them than me. I need electricity and gas to live a
normal life so "full steam ahead".

[/quote]
You selfish bastard! You should kill yourself for the sake of the poor
little creatures that have probably only moved out of the test area.

Falcon · Guest

Falcon wrote:

[quote]Roger Coppock wrote:

Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming

Global warming and deforestation. hmmm
Which of these interrelated events is threatening the species more, I
wonder?
[/quote]
Forgot the link
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7662565.stm

Nature loss 'dwarfs bank crisis'
"It puts the annual cost of forest loss at between $2 trillion and $5
trillion. The figure comes from adding the value of the various services
that forests perform, such as providing clean water *and absorbing carbon
dioxide*."

Spooky innit?

--
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
---------------------------------

tvor · Guest

"Roger Coppock" <rcoppock@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:41735d83-d918-4210-931c-98d7472f9e70@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 10, 8:41 am, "tvor" <n...@home.com> wrote:
[quote]"Roger Coppock" <rcopp...@adnc.com> wrote in message

news:32421d7e-5b0d-4c20-bdd8-627c0c389556@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I>d rather it be them than me. I need electricity and gas to live a normal
life so "full steam ahead".
[/quote]
Are you, Tvor, sure that the choice is only "them" and "me?"
Couldn>t you both be on the same planet?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

apparently not. My safe existence requires the burning of fossil fuels
which is apparently threatening theirs.

James · Guest

"Roger Coppock" <rcoppock@adnc.com> wrote in message news:41735d83-d918-4210-931c-98d7472f9e70@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 10, 8:41 am, "tvor" <n...@home.com> wrote:
[quote]"Roger Coppock" <rcopp...@adnc.com> wrote in message

news:32421d7e-5b0d-4c20-bdd8-627c0c389556@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I>d rather it be them than me. I need electricity and gas to live a normal
life so "full steam ahead".
[/quote]
Are you, Tvor, sure that the choice is only "them" and "me?"
Couldn>t you both be on the same planet?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Roger, after stories like that, I wonder what planet you alarmists come from.

Peter Franks · Guest

Roger Coppock wrote:
[quote]Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
...
[/quote]
Then we should have moved to nuclear 30+ years ago.

Thanks to irrational reactionism, we are faced w/ manifold dire conditions.

Nuclear now; save the planet.

Ralph · Guest

Roger Coppock <rcoppock@adnc.com> wrote:

[quote]Contrary to conventional wisdom,
tropical plant and animal species living in some of the warmest places
on Earth
[/quote]
More CO2 in the air means more life, not less. Plants need CO2 like
humans need oxygen. More CO2 means plants grow bigger, faster and in
more places. Coal is ancient rotted vegetation.

obozn · Guest

"Roger Coppock" <rcoppock@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:32421d7e-5b0d-4c20-bdd8-627c0c389556@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
******************************************************

Only "may"????
Sounds like another bunkum extrapolation from debunked climate models!!

Disclaimer

The projections are based on results from computer models that involve

simplifications of real physical processes that are not fully
understood.

Accordingly, no responsibility will be accepted for the accuracy of

the projections inferred from this brochure or for any person>s

interpretations, deductions, conclusions or actions in reliance on this

information.

And further:

Climate model responses are most uncertain in how they represent
feedback

effects, particularly those dealing with changes to cloud regimes,

biological effects and ocean-atmosphere interactions. The coarse spatial

resolution of climate models also remains a limitation on their ability
to

simulate the details of regional climate change. Future climate change
will

also be influenced by other, largely unpredictable, factors such as
changes

in solar radiation, volcanic eruptions and chaotic variations within the

climate system itself. Rapid climate change, or a step-like climate
response

to the enhanced greenhouse effect, is possible but its likelihood cannot
be

defined. Because changes outside the ranges given here cannot be ruled
out,

these projections should be considered with caution.

--

Warmest Regards

Bonzo

: “They don’t tell you, that, in their computer models, it’s assumed
that CO2 drives global warming. In other words, you assume the result
and say the computer model proves we were right. It’s garbage in,
garbage out. If you don’t program the computers to cause temperatures to
rise with CO2, then you have nothing.” Dr. Don J. Easterbrook, Professor
Emeritus Geology, Western Washington University

obozn · Guest

"Roger Coppock" <rcoppock@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:32421d7e-5b0d-4c20-bdd8-627c0c389556@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
******************************************************

Only "may"????
Sounds like another bunkum extrapolation from debunked climate models!!

Disclaimer

The projections are based on results from computer models that involve

simplifications of real physical processes that are not fully
understood.

Accordingly, no responsibility will be accepted for the accuracy of

the projections inferred from this brochure or for any person>s

interpretations, deductions, conclusions or actions in reliance on this

information.

And further:

Climate model responses are most uncertain in how they represent
feedback

effects, particularly those dealing with changes to cloud regimes,

biological effects and ocean-atmosphere interactions. The coarse spatial

resolution of climate models also remains a limitation on their ability
to

simulate the details of regional climate change. Future climate change
will

also be influenced by other, largely unpredictable, factors such as
changes

in solar radiation, volcanic eruptions and chaotic variations within the

climate system itself. Rapid climate change, or a step-like climate
response

to the enhanced greenhouse effect, is possible but its likelihood cannot
be

defined. Because changes outside the ranges given here cannot be ruled
out,

these projections should be considered with caution.

--

Warmest Regards

Bonzo

: “They don’t tell you, that, in their computer models, it’s assumed
that CO2 drives global warming. In other words, you assume the result
and say the computer model proves we were right. It’s garbage in,
garbage out. If you don’t program the computers to cause temperatures to
rise with CO2, then you have nothing.” Dr. Don J. Easterbrook, Professor
Emeritus Geology, Western Washington University

obozn · Guest

"Roger Coppock" <rcoppock@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:32421d7e-5b0d-4c20-bdd8-627c0c389556@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
**********************************************************

Extinction Rate Of “No-Name” Species Is A Shocking 30,000!

Peter Foster

May 30, 2008

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2008/05/30/let-s-hear-it-for-empty-rhetoric.aspx

[…]

Mr. Harper went to Europe. On Wednesday he spoke in Bonn to the summit
on the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

[…]

The Bonn summit was the usual cast of thousands UN gabfest, at which
myriad expensive new bureaucratic initiatives were announced against a
background of ritual doom and gloom. The Convention on Biological
Diversity emerged from the policy swamp of Rio in 1990, along with its
even uglier cousin, the treaty on climate change. The CBD’s modest
commitment is to “preserving life on Earth,” which requires that life on
Earth be seen to be in ever-greater peril.

Climate change is said to threaten a biotic holocaust. This is on top of
the horror of the tens of thousands of species that are already
disappearing annually due to pesky human activity.

Tragically, nobody can name any of these species because although we’re
wiping them out, they haven’t yet been discovered. The carnage is taking
place entirely in computers. This makes “progress” on the issue a bit of
a problem. Still, since enviro-hysteria is about faith not facts, and
votes not reason, Mr. Harper chose to sing in Bonn from the
bio-hymnbook.

“Despite the best efforts of the signatories to the convention,” he
said, “we are still losing wildlife species at an alarming rate.”

Mr. Harper knew he was entirely safe from anybody asking him exactly how
alarming the rate was, because — as suggested — there’s a bit of a range
of opinion on that. The official recorded rate of extinction over the
past 500 years is between one and two species a year. The “consensus” by
UN authorities and their fellow travelers on the annual rate of
extinction of all those No Name species is around 30,000.

That’s quite a difference.

Mr. Harper knew he was not about to be contradicted when he said that
“We must do more if we are to achieve our 2010 objectives for a
significant reduction in the rate of worldwide biodiversity loss.”

Presumably the only way you can reduce a rate of biodiversity loss based
entirely on alarmist assumptions is to change the assumptions. So my
modest prediction is that the 2010 target will be missed, and that we
will henceforth be told we have to redouble well-expensed efforts to
spread ever more gloom and doom, and Western taxpayers’ money.

It is obvious that an expanding human population, and economic growth,
put pressure on the habitats of the millions of other species on Earth.
However, humans also happen to be the only species that cares about
other life forms and seeks to preserve them.

Unfortunately, it is also the only species that has a Machiavellian mind
that exploits human concerns, and human ignorance, in pursuit of power.
The ecosystem for that complex Darwinian struggle is called democratic
politics. Conservatives tend to be more aware of the dangers of those
who seek massive coercive powers to do good, or avert evil.

Radical environmentalists, by contrast, would like to subvert democracy
completely. They want to throw Noah off the Ark.

Mr. Harper’s earnestness on biodiversity was matched by his heartfelt
concern about the alleged European perception that Canada is not
serious — that is, not suicidal — when it comes to climate change
policy.

Media reports suggested that Mr. Harper had to “sell” his climate change
plan to the Europeans, but European electorates are not the slightest
bit interested in anything that Mr. Harper is selling. They are up in
arms about their own politicians’ expensive and pointless schemes.

For example, Gordon Brown’s newest climate change-related transport tax
proposals have led to public and party revolt, and have been called a
“poll tax on wheels.” The poll tax, you may remember, was the measure
that led to the undoing of Ms. Thatcher in 1990. Mr. Brown is no
Margaret Thatcher. Paul Martin, maybe.

Mr. Harper’s climate policy crime is that he has declared less
unachievable targets for Canada than those trumpeted by European
politicians. EU members are still hanging on to Kyoto’s 1990 reference
point for emissions reduction targets, while Mr. Harper is suggesting
that the sensible place to start when discussing future emissions
reductions is right now (or at least 2006). He also wants environmental
programs to be, as he told his London audience yesterday, “realistic,
practical and achievable.”

Is he crazy? That’s not the climate change/biodiversity game at all.

Doesn’t he realize that the point is to stop industrial society as we
know it? Anybody in doubt should just mark the words of Achim Steiner,
head of the UN Environment Programme. In Bonn this week, Mr. Steiner
said “We have a misdirected economic compass — we have arranged our
economies in a way that they destroy their environmental foundations.”
If only he and his retread socialist brethren could have another chance
at “arranging” the global economy.

Mr. Harper vowed on Wednesday to get past the “empty rhetoric” on
climate change action. But then surely empty rhetoric is way better than
self-destructive, nonsensical commitment to the warped projections of
global envirocrats.
--

Warmest Regards

Bonzo

"The great sin of capitalism is its unequal distribution of benefits.
The great virtue of socialism is its equal distribution of miseries."
Winston Churchill

obozn · Guest

"Roger Coppock" <rcoppock@adnc.com> wrote in message
news:32421d7e-5b0d-4c20-bdd8-627c0c389556@n1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
Tropical Rainforest And Mountain Species May Be Threatened By Global
Warming
**********************************************************

Extinction Rate Of “No-Name” Species Is A Shocking 30,000!

Peter Foster

May 30, 2008

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2008/05/30/let-s-hear-it-for-empty-rhetoric.aspx

[…]

Mr. Harper went to Europe. On Wednesday he spoke in Bonn to the summit
on the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

[…]

The Bonn summit was the usual cast of thousands UN gabfest, at which
myriad expensive new bureaucratic initiatives were announced against a
background of ritual doom and gloom. The Convention on Biological
Diversity emerged from the policy swamp of Rio in 1990, along with its
even uglier cousin, the treaty on climate change. The CBD’s modest
commitment is to “preserving life on Earth,” which requires that life on
Earth be seen to be in ever-greater peril.

Climate change is said to threaten a biotic holocaust. This is on top of
the horror of the tens of thousands of species that are already
disappearing annually due to pesky human activity.

Tragically, nobody can name any of these species because although we’re
wiping them out, they haven’t yet been discovered. The carnage is taking
place entirely in computers. This makes “progress” on the issue a bit of
a problem. Still, since enviro-hysteria is about faith not facts, and
votes not reason, Mr. Harper chose to sing in Bonn from the
bio-hymnbook.

“Despite the best efforts of the signatories to the convention,” he
said, “we are still losing wildlife species at an alarming rate.”

Mr. Harper knew he was entirely safe from anybody asking him exactly how
alarming the rate was, because — as suggested — there’s a bit of a range
of opinion on that. The official recorded rate of extinction over the
past 500 years is between one and two species a year. The “consensus” by
UN authorities and their fellow travelers on the annual rate of
extinction of all those No Name species is around 30,000.

That’s quite a difference.

Mr. Harper knew he was not about to be contradicted when he said that
“We must do more if we are to achieve our 2010 objectives for a
significant reduction in the rate of worldwide biodiversity loss.”

Presumably the only way you can reduce a rate of biodiversity loss based
entirely on alarmist assumptions is to change the assumptions. So my
modest prediction is that the 2010 target will be missed, and that we
will henceforth be told we have to redouble well-expensed efforts to
spread ever more gloom and doom, and Western taxpayers’ money.

It is obvious that an expanding human population, and economic growth,
put pressure on the habitats of the millions of other species on Earth.
However, humans also happen to be the only species that cares about
other life forms and seeks to preserve them.

Unfortunately, it is also the only species that has a Machiavellian mind
that exploits human concerns, and human ignorance, in pursuit of power.
The ecosystem for that complex Darwinian struggle is called democratic
politics. Conservatives tend to be more aware of the dangers of those
who seek massive coercive powers to do good, or avert evil.

Radical environmentalists, by contrast, would like to subvert democracy
completely. They want to throw Noah off the Ark.

Mr. Harper’s earnestness on biodiversity was matched by his heartfelt
concern about the alleged European perception that Canada is not
serious — that is, not suicidal — when it comes to climate change
policy.

Media reports suggested that Mr. Harper had to “sell” his climate change
plan to the Europeans, but European electorates are not the slightest
bit interested in anything that Mr. Harper is selling. They are up in
arms about their own politicians’ expensive and pointless schemes.

For example, Gordon Brown’s newest climate change-related transport tax
proposals have led to public and party revolt, and have been called a
“poll tax on wheels.” The poll tax, you may remember, was the measure
that led to the undoing of Ms. Thatcher in 1990. Mr. Brown is no
Margaret Thatcher. Paul Martin, maybe.

Mr. Harper’s climate policy crime is that he has declared less
unachievable targets for Canada than those trumpeted by European
politicians. EU members are still hanging on to Kyoto’s 1990 reference
point for emissions reduction targets, while Mr. Harper is suggesting
that the sensible place to start when discussing future emissions
reductions is right now (or at least 2006). He also wants environmental
programs to be, as he told his London audience yesterday, “realistic,
practical and achievable.”

Is he crazy? That’s not the climate change/biodiversity game at all.

Doesn’t he realize that the point is to stop industrial society as we
know it? Anybody in doubt should just mark the words of Achim Steiner,
head of the UN Environment Programme. In Bonn this week, Mr. Steiner
said “We have a misdirected economic compass — we have arranged our
economies in a way that they destroy their environmental foundations.”
If only he and his retread socialist brethren could have another chance
at “arranging” the global economy.

Mr. Harper vowed on Wednesday to get past the “empty rhetoric” on
climate change action. But then surely empty rhetoric is way better than
self-destructive, nonsensical commitment to the warped projections of
global envirocrats.
--

Warmest Regards

Bonzo

"The great sin of capitalism is its unequal distribution of benefits.
The great virtue of socialism is its equal distribution of miseries."
Winston Churchill


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> The Big Environment Forum	Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2