First off, Don Surber points out that Canada has figured out that Kyoto Protocols were not about reducing the planet's carbon footprint:
The National Post said Prime Minister Stephen Harper won a victory over the Kyoto Protocol at a meeting of the the Commonwealth nations (nee, the British Empire) meeting in Uganda.
Canada succeeded in watering down a resolution backing Kyoto. Prime Minister Stephen Harper said, “Canada’s view is we need binding targets on all nations.”
Reported Mike Blanchfield: “The Kyoto protocol exempts developing nations, including major emitters India and China, from commitments to reduce greenhouse gases. Canada had insisted on Friday that it would sign no agreement in Kampala unless any targets included all major emitters. Disagreement on this issue may explain the vague nature of Saturday’s declaration. It called for a post-Kyoto agreement to reduce greenhouse gases but spoke only of ‘long term aspirational goals for emissions reduction to which all countries would contribute’.”
And therein lies the intellectual dishonesty of the Kyoto Protocol. If the world were in such peril from carbon dioxide, then all nations would reduce their emissions, not just the West and Japan.
Bonus quote from his post that is just too cool to leave out:
A friend once explained the difference between the United States and Canada as this: Americans view the outdoors as a place to play and have fun; Canadians respect it as a dangerous place that has things that can eat you.
Christopher Booker notes the following in the Telegraph:
The scare over global warming, and our politicians' response to it, is becoming ever more bizarre. On the one hand we have the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change coming up with yet another of its notoriously politicised reports, hyping up the scare by claiming that world surface temperatures have been higher in 11 of the past 12 years (1995-2006) than ever previously recorded.
This carefully ignores the latest US satellite figures showing temperatures having fallen since 1998, declining in 2007 to a 1983 level - not to mention the newly revised figures for US surface temperatures showing that the 1930s had four of the 10 warmest years of the past century, with the hottest year of all being not 1998, as was previously claimed, but 1934.
The Whistler at Say Anything points out:
Clearly if carbon dioxide was the force the UN and Al Gore say it is then the Earth couldn’t have been cooling in the last 9 years. They can’t explain why the Earth went through a 30 year warming trend before world war two, then experienced a thirty year cooling trend. Then the warming trend started again which it appears despite all the rhetoric has ended.
Remember kids, reducing pollution is a good thing. Doing so by buying car that has several hundred pounds of toxic heavy metals in it that produced more of a carbon footprint in its manufacturing than building a H2 Hummer would produce is (and costs more to produce) not the way to do it.