Foot-Dragger? No, a Fighter.

Newsweek and Fareed completely ignore their hero's past dark and recent history -which include inciting anti -Americanism, calling for a boycott of American goods, and blaming America for the world's pollution.
Pachuari, a native of India, claims his poor little India and China have very little to do with global warming. But this patriotic flag-waving anti-foreign Republican Administration embraced this guy. Why? I seriously believe Pachuari and Bush made a secret deal - Bush lay's off India, if Pachuari keeps playing the smoke and mirrors game to stop any serious world discussions.
But then came Al Gore. Zakaria's friend would still be just another Bush crony if Gore hadn't stepped in.
Pachuari won part of the prize by default.
And Bush, again, is the real loser.

(Should Fareed's friend today try spewing the same anti-Americanisms, under the new 'rules' his butt would be in Guantanamo.
Hmmm, I wonder if the Right would want his habeas rights restored? )

beliePachuari

And I remember when the media was going bonkers over what some scientists insisted was a coming catastrophe because of our exploding population - mass starvation, drought, etc... As far as I'm concerned, the mass media is like the little boy who cried wolf, only this time, they really mean it. If it wasn't an impending disaster, nobody would want to read about it, so their interests are definitely not pure. One other thing, as has been generally noted, the Earth has been getting warmer since the last ice age. That's just the way it works. And finally, yes, by all means, let's still get to work and stop polluting. I don't need an excuse such as global warming to do what I know to be right.

Wolf!!!!!

Tide is turning?

I thought the debate was over, that there was no more discussion, that we were going to crush manbearpig without further analysis:P-

Completely undaddressed in this interview is the question of whether observed global temperature changes are to any degree the result of humn-induced increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. In this connection, the evidence is scanty at best, and there is a strong case to be made that global temperature is determined in large part by cloud cover, which is in turn hugely influenced by the extent of cloud "seeding" by cosmic radiation. The varying size of the solar magnetic field (which extends out at times to three times the distance of Pluto's orbit) by differentially deflecting cosmic radiation, is the master rheostat for terrestrial cloud cover. Carbon dioxide has little or nothing to do with it.

I never fail to be amused at the arrogance of the human race. We can control the planet's evolution? Oh, that's a good one! Horse-hockey!! This planet will warm and cool in a pattern of its own design. Since when did we get to determine what is the optimal temperature of the planet? Snake oil salesmen like Gore should just admit that they are guessing but that would be tantamount to asking Johnny Rotten to sing for Journey; it'll never happen. Yes, we should be good stewards of the environment but this planet is quite durable. It'll outlast us.

Global warming is a natural, planetary process that has recurred throughout history. It is not mad-made and therefore cannot be "fixed"; however, that doesn't mean that we can't/shouldn't look for good solutions to make ourselves more environmentally friendly and less dependent on fossil fuels, but, at the same time, we shouldn't be forced to bankrupt ourselves in the process.

Global warming is a natural, planetary process that has recurred throughout history. It is not mad-made and therefore cannot be "fixed"; however, that doesn't mean that we can't/shouldn't look for good solutions to make ourselves more environmentally friendly and less dependent on fossil fuels, but, at the same time, we shouldn't be forced to bankrupt ourselves in the process.

Global warming is a natural, planetary process that has recurred throughout history. It is not mad-made and therefore cannot be "fixed"; however, that doesn't mean that we can't/shouldn't look for good solutions to make ourselves more environmentally friendly and less dependent on fossil fuels, but, at the same time, we shouldn't be forced to bankrupt ourselves in the process.

Global warming is a natural, planetary process that has recurred throughout history. It is not mad-made and therefore cannot be "fixed"; however, that doesn't mean that we can't/shouldn't look for good solutions to make ourselves more environmentally friendly and less dependent on fossil fuels, but, at the same time, we shouldn't be forced to bankrupt ourselves in the process.

From what I can determine, Rajendra Pachauri has a degree in industrial engineering. I would have been more impressed had he a more hard-core background in geology or earth-science. it seems a lot of his time has beeen spent in policial and administrative lines of work. I think this has to be considered when he speaks. Mr. Gore has always come off to me as a pop-biologist, pop-geologist. Perhaps Rajendra Pachauri is also.

Hey, let's just stop trying to assign blame to Bush, the coal industry, China, India, the tooth fairy or whoever and just fix the problem. We have the capability to do it. What we lack is the political will. Not only here, but world wide. The naysayers can scream all they want. The science is pretty solid. We need to start taking the science and apply it to long term solutions. What's it going to take? Florida under water?

Here is another simple calculation a high school kid could do. If we stop burning fossil fuels to generate electricity we will reduce green house emissions by 30 to 40%. Replace ALL of our coal and gas fired plants with nuclear powered ones and we will almost halt the increase in CO2 emissions in our atmosphere ( the oceans and soil already sequester almost half of CO2 emissions every year). All we need to do is build 1000 to 1500 nuclear plants (we already have 500 in the world) globally to accomplish this goal.
I don't like the solution either environmentalists but it is the only one we have. Right now we are getting the worst of both worlds. The Co2 emissions from coal plants and the nuclear waste from nuclear powered plants. I'd rather just have the nuclear waste problem

The United States should be very cautious before buying in to these "internationalist" approached to global warming. There is a decidedly anti-US bias that is confirmed in the above interview. First, and foremost, it is important to decode the "financial and totality transfers from north to south" statement; basically it means the US will have to pay A LOT of money to the "Third World". Secondly, why is the US obligated to pay to reduce CO2 emissions in China? Seems as if they could skim a billion or three off of their efforts to become the world's dominant industrial power to avoid choking in their own effluent. Third, now that China has become the world's biggest CO2 polluter, all of a sudden the "per capita" figure is important. If one is concerned with CO2 as a pollutant, absolute tonnage matters, not how you divide it up - Unless one is determined to make the entire problem the fault of the United States and George Bush and demand reparations.

Mr. Pachauri is dead wrong about thinking clean coal is a partial solution to global warming. Here in the United States, the coal lobby wo do everything to convince us that we can have it both ways. Everyday, the Earth receives enough solar radition to eqaul all of our fossil fuel reserves. Yet we we still want to boil water to produce steam to generate electricity. Stop trying to put bandaides on a sore that wont heal. Wind, solar, tidal and wave energy coupled to a society that uses energy efficiently by insulating and designing green buildings using LED light technology solves almost the entire warming problem. Add the emerging lithium ion battery technology that is less than two years away to power a car 350 miles on a single charge with a 10 minute recharging time and the whole problem is solved.

Alvin
St. Louis, Mo

If the calculations are so simple that a high school kid could do them, then it is obvious why the current president of the Unted States can't do them. Maybe he should hire some high school kids.

Enter Your Comment

"Well, the calculations are so simple that even a high school kid can do them."

Does that kid charge as much as the IPCC Eurocrats?