July 23, 2001
8:56 AM   Subscribe

The world has agreed on a watered-down version of Kyoto. One populous country has declined to have anything to do with it, though. Can you guess which it is?
posted by Mocata (18 comments total)

 
The whole thing is of course a devilish scheme cooked up by the Euro commissars and their co-conspirators in the global scientific community.

The plan is to destroy the world economy, depriving Uncle Sam of vital markets.

Thus weakened, the Land of the Free will be unable to defend itself from Romano Prodi and his hordes of jackbooted bureaucrats.

Guns will be illegalised, as will the Christian religion.
posted by Mocata at 9:10 AM on July 23, 2001


Wake me when countries start ratifying it. I wish they would, but this looks like nothing more than a PR stunt.
posted by harmful at 9:14 AM on July 23, 2001


I love how the BBC puts this image under a statement about US opposition, as if this image perfectly represents all americans and US policy on the matter. There's even a cowboy hat, of course. Thanks, BBC.
posted by mathowie at 9:21 AM on July 23, 2001


Wake me when countries start ratifying it.

I'd love to see what the punishment is going to be for countries who go over their emissions limit. I have a feeling it's going to be:

USA: Wailing and teeth-gnashing from every other ccountry in the world about what bastards we Americans are for slaughtering the Earth and putting Life As We Know It (LAWKI) in mortal jeopardy; snarky editorials in European newspapers about "American Arrogance;" hilariously cognitive-dissonant protests by rich kids sporting Che t-shirts; and heightened world angst over every thunderstorm that manages to knock over an outhouse.

Anyone Else: nothing.
posted by UncleFes at 9:32 AM on July 23, 2001


Mocata: Sounds like a plan to me... where do I send my check, and can it be in US Dollars instead of Euro?
posted by benjh at 9:32 AM on July 23, 2001


Hah - send them your tax refund, Ben!
posted by UncleFes at 9:33 AM on July 23, 2001


PR stunt or no--at least something is being done. Even conversation brings us one step closer to living on a planet that we aren't quickly murdering.
posted by vandoren at 9:37 AM on July 23, 2001


I love how the BBC puts this image under a statement about US opposition, as if this image perfectly represents all americans and US policy on the matter. There's even a cowboy hat, of course. Thanks, BBC.

Actually, that image kind of does represent the US policy on the matter. And if it doesn't represent all Americans, it's a pretty good depiction of how much of the world views us when it comes to the environment.
posted by anapestic at 9:48 AM on July 23, 2001


This will give us a good laugh in 20 years time, when the environuts go back to their old horror stories of "a new ice age" again. The boy who cried wolf, bear, wolf, bear, anyone?
posted by dagny at 10:32 AM on July 23, 2001


Dollars are definitely better than Euros. Especially if the Euro countries ratify and comply with this treaty. Ought to give their economies a nice little boot to the face.

Now that I think about it, these environmental agreements aren't all bad. By raising the cost of doing business in developed countries, those industries which pollute will be more willing to move to undeveloped countries. So you're effectively exporting your pollution. No more yucky industrial wastes in Belgium, they're going to Bangladesh.

Hmmm. That's really going to tick off the anti-globilization mob, but then they already look pretty pissed.
posted by CRS at 10:49 AM on July 23, 2001


Dollars are definitely better than Euros. Especially if the Euro countries ratify and comply with this treaty. Ought to give their economies a nice little boot to the face.

Isn't the dollar desperately overvalued as it is, fuelling its huge balance of trade deficit? Hmm. Buy gold.

mathowie: that image is of the anti-Kyoto protestors mentioned in this thread. It's a pity that the hack working on this piece at News Online simply nabbed it from the top of the image library, but you'd think that Fred Singer's protestors would have at least left their cowboy hats at home.
posted by holgate at 11:34 AM on July 23, 2001


PR stunt or no--at least something is being done. Even conversation brings us one step closer to living on a planet that we aren't quickly murdering.

Environmentalism would probably would be more successful if it were more honest. We aren't murdering the planet--I am quite positive it will survive whatever we inflict upon it. Instead, we will just make it unlivable for humans. Thus, murdering ourselves.
posted by trox at 12:46 PM on July 23, 2001


Wow, I'm quite amazed by everyone's attitude here. I mean do you really all think Kyoto is just a waste of time? As far as I'm concerned there are two points that should be made:
  1. I doubt that world governments involved with trying to ratify the treaty are suggesting that the next ice age is coming if we don't change our evil ways. But we (humans) are pumping greenhouse gases into the environment at an ever increasing rate. We still don't know the size of impact that will have. How is burying our heads in the sand about this going to help?
  2. A lot of fuss is being made about the fact that developing countries are exempt. But as well as being a major polluter, the US is also the richest country in the World. If you guys can't afford to sign up, how are we ever going to persuade developing countries that it's worth their while? It's precisely because of your position that I think the US should be taking a lead in these matters (besides, you seem to have plenty of money for "defence").
Now don't get me wrong. I agree that there are still huge barriers to overcome, particularly in terms of enforcement, but just by taking these first steps we are putting the issue of the environment on the World stage where it belongs. [insert sage comment about every journey beginning with a single step here]
posted by astro38 at 5:29 PM on July 23, 2001


I think the point of the Bonn agreement is, in cricketing terms, to keep the scoreboard ticking over. The set of negotiations that led to the Kyoto protocol began with the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, at which Daddy Bush was a platitudinous participant. And like arms control, environmental negotiations are an evolutionary, not revolutionary process: they depend upon a degree of continuity that extends beyond the vicissitudes of domestic politics. For the relevant departments to have to re-establish first principles would be achingly laborious: and it's that pressure, above all, that shapes the political will.
posted by holgate at 5:57 PM on July 23, 2001


Here's an idea:

Let humanity die. What a waste of time and resources to save this squabbling, bumptious, fratricidal nightmare of a species. Arrogant, contemptuous, self-interested, vicious, efficiently murderous,willing to poison its own offspring for a temporary gain...I say goodbye and good riddance.

After the initial trauma of our death throes (I'll be optimistic here and hope it happens through our blase inaction and not through a nuclear or chemical or bacteriological annihilation, never mind all three) the planet will heal, and life will progress on. Perhaps our related species, Chimps or Orangutans or Mountain Gorillas, will pick up the baton we have so exceedingly and thoroughly dropped and evolve into a species that isn't insane.

We already leave children and the infirm to die on our streets, we allow waste and muck into the water we drink, we engage in pointless conflicts for no clear reason...time to pull the plug.

Die, humanity, die.
posted by Ezrael at 5:13 AM on July 25, 2001


Will you lead the way, Ezrael?
posted by dagny at 6:10 AM on July 25, 2001


Only if I could take you all with me.
posted by Ezrael at 12:38 PM on July 25, 2001


Jesus, did I just type that?

Man, that's it. That's the final straw. I can't take this crap anymore, obviously. I cannot believe I just typed that, and I'm not going to do this to myself anymore. There's just too much going on for me to do this to myself.

Anyway, on the subject of Kyoto: if mankind wants to die, he should do so and decrease the surplus population, in the words of Charles Dickens. I'm sure that someone will see the satirical intent here, the desire to get someone to understand that we have to change.

But I'm not going to stand here screaming anymore. No point to it.
posted by Ezrael at 12:43 PM on July 25, 2001


« Older It's all about the sound....  |  Seventh seal opened, nytimes.c... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments