If Copenhagen fails

Hallo Alfie · 18th December 2009, 04:18 PM

Coepnhagen appears to have failed to set any realistic, achievable and binding targets from much of what I read and heard today.
Agreements appear to be mere lip service rather than anything meaningful.

Assuming for the moment this is the case, what does that say about about the opinions of those making the decisions? Do they in fact question the reality of AGW? Was it simply political gain, opportunism and/or failed negotiation around those that doomed the talks? A combination of these and other issues?

And what of the ramifications? Will there be more talks, when and on what exactly? Or does AGW fall by the wayside for the next decade or so, as an unpopular and unsuccesful political stunt?

XBoxWarrior · 18th December 2009, 06:31 PM

Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie

Coepnhagen appears to have failed...blah, blah, blah...

try some Skoal?

theprestige · 18th December 2009, 06:55 PM

If Copenhagen fails, we're all doomed.

In fact, we were all doomed when Kyoto failed.

Thunder · 18th December 2009, 07:23 PM

if Copenhagen fails, I could care less.

cornsail · 19th December 2009, 04:34 AM

Originally Posted by parky76

if Copenhagen fails, I could care less.

So you care a non-zero amount.

geni · 19th December 2009, 05:00 AM

Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie

Coepnhagen appears to have failed to set any realistic, achievable and binding targets from much of what I read and heard today.
Agreements appear to be mere lip service rather than anything meaningful.

Assuming for the moment this is the case, what does that say about about the opinions of those making the decisions? Do they in fact question the reality of AGW? Was it simply political gain, opportunism and/or failed negotiation around those that doomed the talks? A combination of these and other issues?

It means that politics is the art of the posible and expecting people to make major changes in the short term with longer term payoff does not fall into that category.

Francesca R · 19th December 2009, 05:23 AM

Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie

Assuming for the moment this is the case, what does that say about about the opinions of those making the decisions?

Nothing by itself.

Quote:

Do they in fact question the reality of AGW?

They might but you can't conclude that from the outcome of the summit

Quote:

Was it simply political gain, opportunism and/or failed negotiation around those that doomed the talks? A combination of these and other issues?

To some extent it is an age-old collective action problem which is based on the simple prisoner's dilemma model. It is the reason why "public" goods are hard to extract in the desired amount from voluntary groups.

In other words, without a central world authority, inter-governmental co-operation is hard, and "victories" are few. AGW deniers, or sceptics who think nothing should be done, have this on their side and probably always will.

Quote:

And what of the ramifications? Will there be more talks, when and on what exactly? Or does AGW fall by the wayside for the next decade or so, as an unpopular and unsuccesful political stunt?

Public support for it will prevent that happening IMO. The lack of a good deal really does not reflect the lack of desire for one.

a_unique_person · 19th December 2009, 05:37 AM

Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie

Or does AGW fall by the wayside for the next decade or so, as an unpopular and unsuccesful political stunt?

Non sequitor. Action on AGW can fail for several reasons, not just the one you prefer.

Just thinking · 19th December 2009, 06:52 AM

I hope we have learned a lesson from all this ... but I don't fall into the category of "Hope and Change".

It appears that James Burke was essentially correct many years ago.

Undesired Walrus · 19th December 2009, 07:12 AM

Originally Posted by parky76

if Copenhagen fails, I could care less.

Why?

varwoche · 19th December 2009, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie

Coepnhagen appears to have failed to set any realistic, achievable and binding targets from much of what I read and heard today. Agreements appear to be mere lip service rather than anything meaningful.

Easily predictable. For anything else to have occurred would have been a huge surprise.

Quote:

Assuming for the moment this is the case, what does that say about about the opinions of those making the decisions?

It says that it's exceedingly difficult to achieve international cooperation on complex, costly issues.

Quote:

Do they in fact question the reality of AGW?

This is ridiculous speculation.

Quote:

Or does AGW fall by the wayside for the next decade or so, as an unpopular and unsuccesful political stunt?

In terms of the science, of course not. In terms of the prominence of the issue on the international stage, that will naturally wax and wane along with events.

Let's hope you aren't insinuating what you seem to be insinuating -- that the science is a political stunt. Otherwise not only are you promoting an anti-science agenda, but doing so based on hugely idiotic political meta facts.

applecorped · 19th December 2009, 11:53 AM

"Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is never try"

Homer Simpson

Hallo Alfie · 19th December 2009, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

Non sequitor. Action on AGW can fail for several reasons, not just the one you prefer.

Which option do you prefer? I asked for others in the assumption that I haven't covered everything.

Originally Posted by varwoche

This is ridiculous speculation. .

Really? please explain.

Originally Posted by varwoche

Let's hope you aren't insinuating what you seem to be insinuating -- that the science is a political stunt. Otherwise not only are you promoting an anti-science agenda, but doing so based on hugely idiotic political meta facts.

You seem surprised I am skeptical of AGW? Wow!
Millions/billions are you know.

I am not suggesting science is a political stunt - that is your paranoid and incorrect deduction. I am suggesting a possibility that the politics and religious zealotry that follows after the science is a political stunt.

18th December 2009, 04:18 PM	#1
Hallo Alfie Alexithymically superadjusted Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 10,009	If Copenhagen fails Coepnhagen appears to have failed to set any realistic, achievable and binding targets from much of what I read and heard today. Agreements appear to be mere lip service rather than anything meaningful. Assuming for the moment this is the case, what does that say about about the opinions of those making the decisions? Do they in fact question the reality of AGW? Was it simply political gain, opportunism and/or failed negotiation around those that doomed the talks? A combination of these and other issues? And what of the ramifications? Will there be more talks, when and on what exactly? Or does AGW fall by the wayside for the next decade or so, as an unpopular and unsuccesful political stunt?
	__________________ Alfie is a real goose. Lionking http://forums.randi.org/member.php?u=14601 'Sex by surprise is a form of "rape" unknown outside of Sweden.' Bit Pattern http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...91#post8776491 'Show me a young conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains.' Francois Guizot Last edited by Hallo Alfie; 18th December 2009 at 05:27 PM.

18th December 2009, 06:55 PM	#3
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,576	If Copenhagen fails, we're all doomed. In fact, we were all doomed when Kyoto failed.
theprestige Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 8,576

19th December 2009, 05:37 AM	#8
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,326	Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie Or does AGW fall by the wayside for the next decade or so, as an unpopular and unsuccesful political stunt? Non sequitor. Action on AGW can fail for several reasons, not just the one you prefer.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

19th December 2009, 06:52 AM	#9
Just thinking Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 5,169	I hope we have learned a lesson from all this ... but I don't fall into the category of "Hope and Change". It appears that James Burke was essentially correct many years ago.
	__________________ Our greatest challenge is not just to ask the important questions, but to recognize the meaningless ones. Last edited by Just thinking; 19th December 2009 at 06:53 AM.

19th December 2009, 07:12 AM	#10
Undesired Walrus Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: London Posts: 10,886	Originally Posted by parky76 if Copenhagen fails, I could care less. Why?
	__________________ Man's material discoveries have outpaced his moral progress. - Clement Attlee, 1945

18th December 2009, 06:31 PM	#2
XBoxWarrior Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Down in the Treme... Posts: 1,232	Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie Coepnhagen appears to have failed...blah, blah, blah... try some Skoal?

18th December 2009, 07:23 PM	#4
Thunder Banned Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Queens Posts: 34,947	if Copenhagen fails, I could care less.

19th December 2009, 04:34 AM	#5
cornsail Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: ohio Posts: 2,693	Originally Posted by parky76 if Copenhagen fails, I could care less. So you care a non-zero amount.

19th December 2009, 05:00 AM	#6
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: UK Posts: 26,564	Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie Coepnhagen appears to have failed to set any realistic, achievable and binding targets from much of what I read and heard today. Agreements appear to be mere lip service rather than anything meaningful. Assuming for the moment this is the case, what does that say about about the opinions of those making the decisions? Do they in fact question the reality of AGW? Was it simply political gain, opportunism and/or failed negotiation around those that doomed the talks? A combination of these and other issues? It means that politics is the art of the posible and expecting people to make major changes in the short term with longer term payoff does not fall into that category.

19th December 2009, 05:23 AM	#7
Francesca R Girl Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London EC1 Posts: 11,825	Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie Assuming for the moment this is the case, what does that say about about the opinions of those making the decisions? Nothing by itself. Quote: Do they in fact question the reality of AGW? They might but you can't conclude that from the outcome of the summit Quote: Was it simply political gain, opportunism and/or failed negotiation around those that doomed the talks? A combination of these and other issues? To some extent it is an age-old collective action problem which is based on the simple prisoner's dilemma model. It is the reason why "public" goods are hard to extract in the desired amount from voluntary groups. In other words, without a central world authority, inter-governmental co-operation is hard, and "victories" are few. AGW deniers, or sceptics who think nothing should be done, have this on their side and probably always will. Quote: And what of the ramifications? Will there be more talks, when and on what exactly? Or does AGW fall by the wayside for the next decade or so, as an unpopular and unsuccesful political stunt? Public support for it will prevent that happening IMO. The lack of a good deal really does not reflect the lack of desire for one.

19th December 2009, 09:12 AM	#11
varwoche Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Puget Sound Posts: 7,230	Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie Coepnhagen appears to have failed to set any realistic, achievable and binding targets from much of what I read and heard today. Agreements appear to be mere lip service rather than anything meaningful. Easily predictable. For anything else to have occurred would have been a huge surprise. Quote: Assuming for the moment this is the case, what does that say about about the opinions of those making the decisions? It says that it's exceedingly difficult to achieve international cooperation on complex, costly issues. Quote: Do they in fact question the reality of AGW? This is ridiculous speculation. Quote: Or does AGW fall by the wayside for the next decade or so, as an unpopular and unsuccesful political stunt? In terms of the science, of course not. In terms of the prominence of the issue on the international stage, that will naturally wax and wane along with events. Let's hope you aren't insinuating what you seem to be insinuating -- that the science is a political stunt. Otherwise not only are you promoting an anti-science agenda, but doing so based on hugely idiotic political meta facts.
	__________________ To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot (and/or Fat Jack)

19th December 2009, 11:53 AM	#12
applecorped Rotten to the Core Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 10,655	"Kids, you tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is never try" Homer Simpson
	__________________ All You Need Is Love.

19th December 2009, 02:23 PM	#13
Hallo Alfie Alexithymically superadjusted Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 10,009	Originally Posted by a_unique_person Non sequitor. Action on AGW can fail for several reasons, not just the one you prefer. Which option do you prefer? I asked for others in the assumption that I haven't covered everything. Originally Posted by varwoche This is ridiculous speculation. . Really? please explain. Originally Posted by varwoche Let's hope you aren't insinuating what you seem to be insinuating -- that the science is a political stunt. Otherwise not only are you promoting an anti-science agenda, but doing so based on hugely idiotic political meta facts. You seem surprised I am skeptical of AGW? Wow! Millions/billions are you know. I am not suggesting science is a political stunt - that is your paranoid and incorrect deduction. I am suggesting a possibility that the politics and religious zealotry that follows after the science is a political stunt.
	__________________ Alfie is a real goose. Lionking http://forums.randi.org/member.php?u=14601 'Sex by surprise is a form of "rape" unknown outside of Sweden.' Bit Pattern http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...91#post8776491 'Show me a young conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains.' Francois Guizot