News24

West blamed for climate change

2012-07-13 22:35

Johannesburg - A meeting of developing nations, including South Africa, ended on Friday with an agreement that the industrialised West was responsible for most climate change.

"Industrialised countries have become industrialised because they used common space - atmosphere," said Luiz Alberto Figueredo Machado, a Brazilian representative.

Machado was speaking at the close of a meeting between Brazil, South Africa, India and China on climate change, ahead of a larger meeting to be held later in Qatar.

South Africa and the other developing nations said the issue of equity was one of the problems that should be addressed ahead of the meeting.

Machado said the problem of equity was one where the developing nations needed more leeway in emitting carbon, as opposed to developed nations which had already industrialised.

Comments
  • trevor.roberts.148 - 2012-07-13 23:47

    What about India and China.When will they get their houses in order.

      michael.deyzel.1 - 2012-07-14 08:14

      Agree, they are the worst polluters. Been to China 3 times. They dont know blue sky's.

  • phae.rayden - 2012-07-14 00:14

    Huh? And you're fighting for the right to cause the same kind of damage? All of you are wrong to put money before the 'health' and survival of this planet, there can be absolutely nothing more important than this.

      ernst.j.joubert - 2012-07-14 18:56

      Well said.

  • Dave - 2012-07-14 01:20

    And so the West take blame for everything.....as usual..... And by the way - just another meeting for an excuse to travel , drink tea (or scotch) and enjoy luxury getaways.

  • Amanda - 2012-07-14 08:32

    What a load of rubbish. Brazil is logging all their trees. China and India are responsible for nearly 40% of emissions. If anything, the West has used technology to clean up their power producing plants, hence why there's no smog in their countries. China doesn't know what a blue sky looks like. This is all about apportioning blame to the richer countries for MONEY. How about cleaning up your countries first before coming out ONCE AGAIN with the begging bowl. And the earth is cooling, so get your facts straight. Bunch of lazy hypocrites.

  • robin.stobbs.9 - 2012-07-14 08:45

    Let's get things into some perspective here. First - this is clearly an attempt by the 'developing countries'(sic!) to load guilt onto the 'first world' in a thinly-veiled attempt at extorting cash. Second - the World's climates (note, it's plural, OK?)have changed ever since there were climates to change and will continue to do so until doomsday! Third - there is no clear scientific evidence proving that man has influenced changes in climates - the world's climates are not becoming hotter by the day, nor is the sea catastrophically rising. Fourth - ALL the World's countries contribute to gross pollution and habitat destruction but this does not equate to so-called climate change.

      ernst.j.joubert - 2012-07-14 11:30

      @Robin: "Second - the World's climates (note, it's plural, OK?)have changed ever sinc........!" In the next 50 years the relentles burning of fossil feuls is going to take us back to conditions that existed when dinosaurs were alive (CO2 levels were 800ppm) in a matter of a few decades as opposed to the millions of years it usually takes. Do you think animals, plants and fish can adapt in time? You are an idiot of the first order. Go back to the stone age you p..k. "Third - there is no clear scientific eviden.........." There is clear evidence. Look it up. The debate is over. It is in the peer reviewed literature you troll. 98% of climate scientists agree that there is strong evidence that greenhouse gasses caused by the burning of fossil feuls is DAMAGING the stability of the climate. DEAL WITH IT!!!

      robin.stobbs.9 - 2012-07-14 12:50

      @Ernst - Personal (ad hominem) attacks are a typical response from the 'backs to the wall' alarmists. In case you are not aware of what this means - An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it. Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as a logical fallacy, more precisely an informal fallacy and an irrelevance. So I treat what you write with the contempt it deserves since it appears that you have not been reading science. 98% of respected climate scientists DO NOT agree on AGW. Scientific debate continues - there is no consensus!

      ernst.j.joubert - 2012-07-14 15:10

      Robin: "98% of respected climate scientists DO NOT agree on AGW. Scientific debate continues - there is no consensus" 1) You havent presented any reference to any peer reviewed research to back up your claims. 2) Al you do is deny every claim being made on AGW. 3) You repeat they same old arguments that have been disproved countless times. 4) Your opinions are not worth the paper they are written on. In one of your previous post's you stated categorically that C02 is not a greenhouse gas, denying a very basic SCIENTIFIC fact (high school science DUH!!!!). Dont talk to me about not reading science.

      robin.stobbs.9 - 2012-07-14 16:38

      @Ernst - and your references are ...? (Don't cough up your questionable list again, please). If you have ever had a scientific paper published you would know that the peer review process is a joke, lacking any objective merit. Yes, of course I deny the claims made for alarmist AGW because none of it is scientifically proven. I have never claimed that CO2 does not have the potential to be a 'greenhouse' gas. What I have said, and very often, is that CO2 is NOT a pollutant but is a very necessary component of Earth's atmosphere. Good old water vapour is by far the most effective 'greenhouse gas' anyway and you can't tax that one! I hope we both live long enough to see that you're wrong! :-) :-)

      ernst.j.joubert - 2012-07-14 18:53

      Robin: "...and your references are ...? (Don't cough up your questionable...." Questionable list? The list that contains the most prestigious Acadamies of sciences in the world is questionable according to Robin Stobbs. "...and your references are ...?" Go to any university library and look up the latest peer reviewed research in climate science journals. Alternatively, visit: http://www.sciencedirect.com/ and for a list of the most prestigious journals go to: http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/mjl/ ".....paper published you would know that the peer review process is a joke, lacking any objective merit." Another baseless accusation. So what do you base your claims on Robin? Peer reviewed literature?? "...is that CO2 is NOT a pollutant but is a very necessary component of Earth's atmosphere." The issue is not with CO2 but with the amount of it in the atmosphere. If there is too much of it too quickly then: 1) it acidifies the oceans i.e. fish start dying on a large scale. 2) The climate changes:Animals and plants cannot adapt in time and become extinct. "Good old water vapour is by far the most effective 'greenhouse gas' anyway and you ca........" Increased CO2 makes more water vapor, a greenhouse gas which amplifies warming. HENCE: Water vapour is also the dominant positive feedback in our climate system and amplifies any warming caused by changes in atmospheric CO2. This positive feedback is why climate is so sensitive to CO2 warming. DUH!!!

  • LanfearM - 2012-07-14 08:54

    What nonsense! Yes the "West" is responsible, so is the "East" and South America better keep their mouths shut too, as they are destroying all their forests and natural environment. This is a global problem, not one caused by only one country or "block of countries". How convenient, let us blame the "evil West" for everything. Easier to do that than to actually work at the problem and come up with solutions.

  • terry.haig.5 - 2012-07-14 09:48

    Here’s an interesting statistic: In Africa, over 800 MILLION hectares of grassland are burned every year. This produces roughly the same amount of climate changing carbon as 4000 cars PER SECOND. Not all the West’s fault. Stop the burning in Africa and we’re half way there.

      fdalana - 2012-07-14 21:14

      that counts for less than 10percent of the total emissions.i'm not saying it is right to emit,but china,india and USA is to blame for most of it.

  • delish7564 - 2012-07-14 09:57

    Blaming the West again, what a surprise, NOT!!!!

  • antin.herinck - 2012-07-14 10:27

    First it's said they are "guilty". What will surely follow is that they "must pay compensation".

  • cyanideandhappiness - 2012-07-15 15:55

    Climate change is a natural occurring thing! Remember how it used to be called "Global Warming", but then studies released showed that the earth cooled over the 10 years since 2000, so the Carbon Tax fundis did what every good marketing company would do and rebranded to "Climate Change" in an effort to save face, to continue to push international carbon taxes and other such control mechanisms! A volcano called Mt Pinatubo in the Philippines exploded in 1991 and data showed that it released more carbon dioxide than the entire human race had in it's history, negating any sort of man made effort to reduce "Carbon Emissions". Truth be told, the sun is going through a very hectic cycle of solar activity, releasing a huge amount of solar radiation that affects the Earths magnetic and physical atmosphere thus creating extreme weather patterns and temperature fluctuations! In a bit of modest irony, I just saw a report about a solar storm that just hit us again this weekend, and can be read here: http://www.news24.com/SciTech/News/Sun-storm-reaches-Earth-20120715 It's your choice if you wish to trust these maniacs who tell you the world is falling apart, tell you it's your fault so you must pay taxes to the elite, but I for one have had enough of these lies. If this was a real problem, we would see a quick transition from fossil fuels and the likes to fight it off, but it just simply isn't our fault. Blaming people for something they don't even understand is just stupidity.

  • pages:
  • 1