Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by G8trGr8t, Jul 10, 2013.
He chose to miss it because it would rock his world of smugness.
You're missing my point. In order to actually do anything useful, the whole world needs to be involved. Anything done in piecemeal is either symbolic or an attempt at seeding a snowball. China is certainly costing themselves money by doing either, but they still are. And this was candy's point. That only the US was spending money on this, but that simply isn't true.
Yes, my world of smugness, coming from the guy who refers to other's posts as "absurd" and worlds of "smugness". If you ever want to take the task of understanding climate change seriously, rather than just throw out insults, let me know.
Your point was clear enough but thanks.
Pissing away money on a failed carbon trading scheme sounds splendid! Lets have some more of that.
Didn't seem so with the way that you mischaracterized it, but I'll take your word for it.
I don't recall ever advocating that, so you might want to save your good sarcasm for someone else.
In other words your reading comprehension is lacking and your memory of what you actually wrote and linked is not clear.
Wow you are a pleasant one. No, I meant that I never advocated that solution, which I have not.
You linked and article after referencing Chinas approach and now claim you never supported that approach?
Yes, and I explained it to you above. I was simply trying to show candyman that China is spending money on limiting emissions.
Wrong again... I see that the MAJORITY of scientists now doubt AGW. Read the story in the OP.
and they are collecting billions in fraudulent carbon reduction claims in the process. you need to dig deeper and realize that the chinese are just playing the world and cashing much bigger checks than they are writing when it comes to solar and wind
You really should realize by now that the story in the OP is a false interpretation of a research project. The authors of the study already took apart this article in a comment reply to the article:
I know, they must be commies too for insisting that people interpret their research correctly.
I have no doubt that some companies are gaming the systems, and even that some regulators are captured by special interests. I think the same thing would happen here, if we instituted such a system, but the right would never complain that Shell or Exxon is behind it all. We'd only hear about Obama. Regardless of the scandals, China's paying a price to run these programs.