Dismiss Notice
You are browsing this site as a guest. It takes 2 minutes to CREATE AN ACCOUNT and less than 1 minute to LOGIN

Copenhagen 2009: The Climate change meeting

Discussion in 'International Forum' started by Pape, Dec 2, 2009.

  1. Pape

    Pape JF-Expert Member

    Dec 2, 2009
    Joined: Dec 11, 2008
    Messages: 5,536
    Likes Received: 11
    Trophy Points: 0
    In 2012 the Kyoto Protocol to prevent climate changes and global warming runs out. To keep the process on the line there is an urgent need for a new climate protocol. At the conference in Copenhagen 2009 the parties of the UNFCCC meet for the last time on government level before the climate agreement need to be renewed.

    Therefore the Climate Conference in Copenhagen is essential for the worlds climate and the Danish government and UNFCCC is putting hard effort in making the meeting in Copenhagen a success ending up with a Copenhagen Protocol to prevent global warming and climate changes.

    The conference in Copenhagen is the 15th conference of parties (COP15) in the Framework Convention on Climate Change. The recent meeting in United Nations Climate Change Conferences was held in December 2007 in Bali.


    Kyoto protocol: Annex I countries agreed to reduce their collective greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2% from the 1990 level by 2012. Emission limits do not include emissions by international aviation and shipping, but are in addition to the industrial gases and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).

    Source: http://www.erantis.com/events/denmark/copenhagen/climate-conference-2009/index.htm
  2. SamJet

    SamJet Senior Member

    Dec 8, 2009
    Joined: Jul 22, 2009
    Messages: 165
    Likes Received: 2
    Trophy Points: 0
    I can say that the summit in copenhagen is of fools since everybody knows the solution to global warming, WHY DON'T THEY GO TO THEIR HOME AND PLANT MORE TREES?
  3. Laface77

    Laface77 JF-Expert Member

    Dec 8, 2009
    Joined: Jul 9, 2008
    Messages: 461
    Likes Received: 62
    Trophy Points: 45
    Tell your president who just landed from Cuba and already disclosed his plan to go to Copenhagen while he allows the so called wawekezaje to go on degrade our environments.
  4. Mchaga

    Mchaga JF-Expert Member

    Dec 8, 2009
    Joined: Apr 11, 2008
    Messages: 1,372
    Likes Received: 5
    Trophy Points: 135
    clever but it needs more than that...
  5. Mchaga

    Mchaga JF-Expert Member

    Dec 8, 2009
    Joined: Apr 11, 2008
    Messages: 1,372
    Likes Received: 5
    Trophy Points: 135
    Hacked E-Mail Is New Fodder for Climate Dispute

    Published: November 20, 2009

    Hundreds of private e-mail messages and documents hacked from a computer server at a British university are causing a stir among global warming skeptics, who say they show that climate scientists conspired to overstate the case for a human influence on climate change.

    The e-mail messages, attributed to prominent American and British climate researchers, include discussions of scientific data and whether it should be released, exchanges about how best to combat the arguments of skeptics, and casual comments — in some cases derisive — about specific people known for their skeptical views. Drafts of scientific papers and a photo collage that portrays climate skeptics on an ice floe were also among the hacked data, some of which dates back 13 years.

    In one e-mail exchange, a scientist writes of using a statistical “trick” in a chart illustrating a recent sharp warming trend. In another, a scientist refers to climate skeptics as “******.”

    Some skeptics asserted Friday that the correspondence revealed an effort to withhold scientific information. “This is not a smoking gun; this is a mushroom cloud,” said Patrick J. Michaels, a climatologist who has long faulted evidence pointing to human-driven warming and is criticized in the documents.

    Some of the correspondence portrays the scientists as feeling under siege by the skeptics’ camp and worried that any stray comment or data glitch could be turned against them.

    The evidence pointing to a growing human contribution to global warming is so widely accepted that the hacked material is unlikely to erode the overall argument. However, the documents will undoubtedly raise questions about the quality of research on some specific questions and the actions of some scientists.

    In several e-mail exchanges, Kevin Trenberth, a climatologist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, and other scientists discuss gaps in understanding of recent variations in temperature. Skeptic Web sites pointed out one line in particular: “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t,” Dr. Trenberth wrote.

    The cache of e-mail messages also includes references to journalists, including this reporter, and queries from journalists related to articles they were reporting.

    Officials at the University of East Anglia confirmed in a statement on Friday that files had been stolen from a university server and that the police had been brought in to investigate the breach. They added, however, that they could not confirm that all the material circulating on the Internet was authentic.

    But several scientists and others contacted by The New York Times confirmed that they were the authors or recipients of specific e-mail messages included in the file. The revelations are bound to inflame the public debate as hundreds of negotiators prepare to negotiate an international climate accord at meetings in Copenhagen next month, and at least one scientist speculated that the timing was not coincidental.

    Dr. Trenberth said Friday that he was appalled at the release of the e-mail messages.

    But he added that he thought the revelations might backfire against climate skeptics. He said that he thought that the messages showed “the integrity of scientists.” Still, some of the comments might lend themselves to being interpreted as sinister.

    In a 1999 e-mail exchange about charts showing climate patterns over the last two millenniums, Phil Jones, a longtime climate researcher at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit, said he had used a “trick” employed by another scientist, Michael Mann, to “hide the decline” in temperatures.

    Dr. Mann, a professor at Pennsylvania State University, confirmed in an interview that the e-mail message was real. He said the choice of words by his colleague was poor but noted that scientists often used the word “trick” to refer to a good way to solve a problem, “and not something secret.”

    At issue were sets of data, both employed in two studies. One data set showed long-term temperature effects on tree rings; the other, thermometer readings for the past 100 years.

    Through the last century, tree rings and thermometers show a consistent rise in temperature until 1960, when some tree rings, for unknown reasons, no longer show that rise, while the thermometers continue to do so until the present.

    Dr. Mann explained that the reliability of the tree-ring data was called into question, so they were no longer used to track temperature fluctuations. But he said dropping the use of the tree rings was never something that was hidden, and had been in the scientific literature for more than a decade. “It sounds incriminating, but when you look at what you’re talking about, there’s nothing there,” Dr. Mann said.

    In addition, other independent but indirect measurements of temperature fluctuations in the studies broadly agreed with the thermometer data showing rising temperatures.

    Dr. Jones, writing in an e-mail message, declined to be interviewed.

    Stephen McIntyre, a blogger who on his Web site, climateaudit.org, has for years been challenging data used to chart climate patterns, and who came in for heated criticism in some e-mail messages, called the revelations “quite breathtaking.”

    But several scientists whose names appear in the e-mail messages said they merely revealed that scientists were human, and did nothing to undercut the body of research on global warming. “Science doesn’t work because we’re all nice,” said Gavin A. Schmidt, a climatologist at NASA whose e-mail exchanges with colleagues over a variety of climate studies were in the cache. “Newton may have been an ass, but the theory of gravity still works.”

    He said the breach at the University of East Anglia was discovered after hackers who had gained access to the correspondence sought Tuesday to hack into a different server supporting realclimate.org, a blog unrelated to NASA that he runs with several other scientists pressing the case that global warming is true.

    The intruders sought to create a mock blog post there and to upload the full batch of files from Britain. That effort was thwarted, Dr. Schmidt said, and scientists immediately notified colleagues at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. The first posts that revealed details from the files appeared Thursday at The Air Vent, a Web site devoted to skeptics’ arguments.

    At first, said Dr. Michaels, the climatologist who has faulted some of the science of the global warming consensus, his instinct was to ignore the correspondence as “just the way scientists talk.”

    But on Friday, he said that after reading more deeply, he felt that some exchanges reflected an effort to block the release of data for independent review.

    He said some messages mused about discrediting him by challenging the veracity of his doctoral dissertation at the University of Wisconsin by claiming he knew his research was wrong. “This shows these are people willing to bend rules and go after other people’s reputations in very serious ways,” he said.

    Spencer R. Weart, a physicist and historian who is charting the course of research on global warming, said the hacked material would serve as “great material for historians.”
  6. K

    Keynez JF-Expert Member

    Dec 9, 2009
    Joined: Feb 12, 2007
    Messages: 308
    Likes Received: 11
    Trophy Points: 35
    Copenhagen climate summit in disarray after 'Danish text' leak

    The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.

    The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.

    The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.

    The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.

    The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".

    A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:

    • Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;

    • Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";

    • Weaken the UN's role in handling climate finance;

    • Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.

    Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations.

    "It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process," said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.

    Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: "This is only a draft but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurting. On every count the emission cuts need to be scaled up. It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed."

    Hill continued: "It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks."

    The text was intended by Denmark and rich countries to be a working framework, which would be adapted by countries over the next week. It is particularly inflammatory because it sidelines the UN negotiating process and suggests that rich countries are desperate for world leaders to have a text to work from when they arrive next week.

    Few numbers or figures are included in the text because these would be filled in later by world leaders. However, it seeks to hold temperature rises to 2C and mentions the sum of $10bn a year to help poor countries adapt to climate change from 2012-15.

  7. K

    Keynez JF-Expert Member

    Dec 9, 2009
    Joined: Feb 12, 2007
    Messages: 308
    Likes Received: 11
    Trophy Points: 35
    Nimetoka kusema hapa juzi, kata oil supply kama kweli tuko serious na hii kitu, itaathiri revenue zetu lakini maybe then watatutake serious. Hata hivyo sidhani kama tuna ubavu huo. Kilimanjaro inakaribia kuyeyuka kabisa, who knows itaathiri kwa kiasi gani utalii. Watu wataendelea kuja kupanda mlima kama hamna kabisa barafu, I doubt it.
  8. Companero

    Companero Platinum Member

    Dec 9, 2009
    Joined: Jul 12, 2008
    Messages: 5,389
    Likes Received: 43
    Trophy Points: 145

    By Mbella Sonne Dipoko

    It was foretold long ago
    That after Noah's deluge
    The next destruction of the world
    Would be by fire
    And can't you feel the heat building up already,
    The global warming up?

    And so to fulfil the prophecy
    Copenhagen is going to be
    Just some more hot air
    Presaging the sparks that would turn
    Into the flames in which the world will be consumed
    And then out of the ashes of ecocide capitalism
    It won't be Christ on His second coming presiding
    On Judgment Day
    But Karl Marx returning like a revolutionary phoenix
    Out of the ashes of the busting bubbles
    Of the lopsided economies
    Of our over-heated world
  9. K

    Keynez JF-Expert Member

    Dec 9, 2009
    Joined: Feb 12, 2007
    Messages: 308
    Likes Received: 11
    Trophy Points: 35

    What you wrote reminds me of Nyerere, he once said 'great ideas never die, they've a tendency to keep on nagging'.
  10. BAK

    BAK JF-Expert Member

    Dec 9, 2009
    Joined: Feb 11, 2007
    Messages: 48,380
    Likes Received: 7,464
    Trophy Points: 280
    Copenhagen: Leaked draft deal widens rift between rich and poor nations

    Climate talks are in disarray barely days into the summit, putting at risk international unity to fight global warming

    • Read the 'Danish text'
    • In pictures: Copenhagen day two

    Lumumba Di-Aping, the Sudanese chairman of the group of 132 developing countries known as G77 plus China, responds to the leak of the 'Danish text'. Photograph: Jens Norgaard Larsen/EPA

    Three hours after the "Danish text" had been leaked to the Guardian, Lumumba Di-Aping, the Sudanese chairman of the group of 132 developing countries known as G77 plus China, spelt out exactly why the poor countries he represents were so incensed. "The text robs developing countries of their just and equitable and fair share of the atmospheric space. It tries to treat rich and poor countries as equal," said the diplomat.

    The text is a draft proposal for the final political agreement that should be signed by national leaders including Barack Obama and Gordon Brown at the end of the Copenhagen summit on 18 December. It was prepared in secret by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" but understood to include the US and Denmark.

    Five hours later, the UN's top climate diplomat had responded. Yvo de Boer said: "This was an informal paper ahead of the conference given to a number of people for the purposes of consultations. The only formal texts in the UN process are the ones tabled by the chairs of this Copenhagen conference at the behest of the parties [involved]."

    But the representatives of developing nations felt betrayed by the intent of the proposals in the draft.
    "This text destroys both the UN convention on climate change and the Kyoto protocol. This is aimed at producing a new treaty, a new legal initiative that throws away the basis of [differing] obligations between the poorest and most wealthy nations in the world," said Di-Aping.

    The existing treaty is the only global agreement that legally obliges rich countries to reduce their emissions.
    Di-Aping is one of the most outspoken of developing country leaders, at once charming and radical.

    What the west had failed to grasp, he said, was the very deep hurt that had been growing steadily since the climate negotiations were effectively taken over by heads of state and were conducted outside the UN, the only forum in which poor countries feel they are equally represented.

    The text is now likely to be withdrawn because of its reception by China, India and many other developing countries. It suggests that rich countries are desperate for world leaders to have a text to work from when they arrive next week.

    Few numbers are included in the text, because these would be filled in later after negotiation by world leaders.
    However, it does seek to hold global temperature rises to 2C, the safe limit according to scientists, and it mentions the sum of $10bn a year in aid to help poor countries cope with climate change, starting in 2012.

    Last night the G77 reaction was seen by some developed world analysts as an exaggerated but fundamentally correct response to the way that the US, the UK and other rich countries have sought to negotiate.

    Development NGOs were particularly scathing in their criticism.
    Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: "This is only a draft, but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurt."

    Hill added: "It proposes a green fund to be run by a board, but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN.

    "That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on [emissions in] developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks."
    A spokesman for Cafod, a development charity with close links to some of the poorest countries in the world, said: "This draft document reveals the backstage machinations of a biased host who, instead of acting as nonpartisan broker, is taking sides with the developed countries.

    "The document should not even exist. There is a UN legal process which is the official negotiating text. The Danish text disrespects the solid, steady approach of the UN process."
    Over the next days several new texts will emerge and out of them a likely contender to be carried by consensus of all the countries. Di-Aping said that the G77 remained committed to the talks.

    "We will not walk out of the talks at this late hour, because we will not allow the failure of Copenhagen. But we will not sign an inequitable deal; we will not accept a deal that condemns 80% of the world population to further suffering and injustice."

    Later this week, the rich countries can expect fresh assaults from the Africa group of countries, the least developed countries group, and the association of small island states. Each is liable to upset the best laid plans of developed world leaders who those groups say appear to place the need to reach an agreement above fully engaging with the poorest countries.
    "We call ordinary people to put the utmost pressure on politicians to come to their senses," said Di-Aping.
  11. Tumain

    Tumain JF-Expert Member

    Dec 9, 2009
    Joined: Jun 28, 2009
    Messages: 3,158
    Likes Received: 6
    Trophy Points: 0
    Nafikiri the whole theory around climate change is "fake",theory kwamba Co2 ndio inasababisha kuongezeka kwa joto duniani -NO

    Naamini hawa watu wana ajenda chafu ili developing countries tusitumia resources zetu oil, gas and nuclear kutengeneza umeme kwa maendeleo yetu badala yake wanataka tutumie upepo (mwakyembe type) ambao hauna uwezo wa kuendesha viwanda! ..I don't believe the motive behind wanaharakati (hidden agenda)

    Nafikiri it is high time kutafuta na ku-develop other theories to test the real cause of climate change..e.g. sun, cloud and the like....

    KILITIME JF-Expert Member

    Dec 9, 2009
    Joined: Nov 17, 2009
    Messages: 267
    Likes Received: 0
    Trophy Points: 33
    Naona coment yako ni anti-West, haina ushahidi kwamba hawa watu wanataka tusitumie resources zetu wakati sio kweli! Nani aliyekataza makaa ya mawe, maji, gesi, mafuta kutumika kwa ajili ya nishati ya umeme? Be realistic please!
  13. Tumain

    Tumain JF-Expert Member

    Dec 9, 2009
    Joined: Jun 28, 2009
    Messages: 3,158
    Likes Received: 6
    Trophy Points: 0
    Ukishaanza kutumia hayo utaongeza Co2, wanaharakati watakuja juu...nakushauri uangalie "climate change swindles" documentary uone motives yao hao jamaa usikurupuke..
  14. Suki

    Suki JF-Expert Member

    Dec 10, 2009
    Joined: Nov 20, 2007
    Messages: 373
    Likes Received: 1
    Trophy Points: 0
    It is actually ''cute'' seeing that some of us are still optimistic about the ''negotiations'' and therefore surprised by the ongoing gauche.
    Tip: An evening at Peder Oxe's can be quite helpful in dealing with inevitable conference frustrations.
  15. K

    Keynez JF-Expert Member

    Dec 10, 2009
    Joined: Feb 12, 2007
    Messages: 308
    Likes Received: 11
    Trophy Points: 35
    Developing Countries Counter To Danish Draft

    Amid raging controversy over leaked draft by the Danish government, emerging economies like India, China, Brazil and South Africa came up with a counter draft which ostensibly takes into consideration the interests of the developing countries.

    Developed vs developing nations:

    Danish draft: Emissions to peak by 2020
    India and others: Don't accept peaking year concept

    Danish draft: No specific proposals for a green fund for developing countries
    India and others: Must set up global climate fund

    Danish draft: Allows developed countries nearly double the carbon emissions (per capita) of developing countries by 2050
    India and others: This is unacceptable

    Following are the key points of the draft known as BASIC draft as put forward by India, China, South Africa and Brazil:

    -BASIC draft counters Danish Draft
    -India, China, South Africa and Brazil party to this draft
    -Agree that increase in temperature should not exceed 2 degrees
    -Developed countries need to undertake ambitious long-term and mid-term quantified emission targets
    -Developed countries to provide sustainable financing and technology to enable voluntary action by developing nations to reduce emissions from deforestation/forest degradation
    -Mechanism for technology development and transfer to be established under the convention
    -Want a global climate fund to be set up
    -Wednesday saw huge controversy at the Copenhagen climate summit after a draft by Danish government was leaked and published by UK based newspaper The Guardian.

    Developing and poor countries protested against the draft which said that global emissions will peak by the end of the next decade, but did not include any emissions targets for 2020 or specific proposals for the creation of a green fund to help the poorest countries.

    The divide between developed and developing countries was clearly visible at the global climate summit on day two.


    Kwa mtazamo wangu hii kitu itaishia kama zile Doha Rounds za Free Trade, wanashindwa kufikia maamuzi, mwisho wa siku, agreements zitakuwa tu bilateral, regional au btwn regions (eg. EU vs SADC/EAC/COMESA/ECOWAS) na siyo chini ya UN mandate, nadhani ndiyo shinikizo wanalotaka kuweka hawa matajiri.
  16. bona

    bona JF-Expert Member

    Dec 10, 2009
    Joined: Nov 6, 2009
    Messages: 3,634
    Likes Received: 41
    Trophy Points: 145
    the secret danish draft by rich countries reveal a very important lesson to all poor countries that no matter how good obama smile is, he is still the leader of imperialism and he is taking it into another level.
    they dont care about anybody just their interest, neither america nor any european countires care about welfare of poor countries, they are all dogs of the same breed and lets dont be fooled by obama skin color he is a mere a coconut, black from outside but white inside.
    needless to mention the draft will go through and we in poor countries will suffer, the only solution for other countries apart from america and european is to form un and economic intergrations of our own and be against these the so called developed countries, they will be crawling begging for our resources.
  17. ngoshwe

    ngoshwe JF-Expert Member

    Dec 10, 2009
    Joined: Mar 31, 2009
    Messages: 4,068
    Likes Received: 10
    Trophy Points: 135
    Rich vs. poor clash at Copenhagen over money

    Negotiators on Wednesday worked to bridge the chasm between rich and poor countries over how to share the burden of fighting climate change, and a top U.S. envoy was to highlight the Obama administration's efforts to curb greenhouse emissions.

    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency head Lisa Jackson, whose agency just gave President Barack Obama a new way to cut back on greenhouse gas emissions, takes to the podium at the U.N. climate conference later Wednesday, headlining a U.S.-sponsored meeting entitled "Taking Action at Home."
    The EPA determined Monday that scientific evidence clearly shows greenhouse gases are endangering Americans' health and must be regulated. That gave Obama a new way to regulate those gases without needing the approval of the U.S. Congress.
    Obama will join more than 100 national leaders converging on Copenhagen for the final days of bargaining late next week.
    China, which has recently overtaken the United States as the world's top greenhouse gas emitter, strongly protested Wednesday a blunder that prevented a top diplomat from entering the vast Bella Center where the 192-nation U.N. climate conference is being held.
    Su Wei, the director general of China's climate change negotiation team, told the meeting he was "extremely unhappy" that a Chinese minister was barred from entry three days in a row.
    Su called the incident "unacceptable" and expressed anger that U.N. climate chief Yvo de Boer was not informed. De Boer pledged to investigate and "make sure it doesn't happen again."
    Meanwhile, small island nations, poor countries and those seeking money from the developed world to preserve their tropical forests were among those upset over competing draft texts attributed to Denmark and China outlining proposed outcomes for the historic Dec. 7-18 summit.
    Some of the poorest nations feared too much of the burden to curb greenhouse gases is being hoisted onto their shoulders. They are seeking billions of dollars in aid from the wealthy countries to deal with climate change, which melts glaciers that raise sea levels worldwide, turns some regions drier and threatens food production.
    Diplomats from developing countries and climate activists complained the Danish hosts pre-empted the negotiations with their draft proposal, which would allow rich countries to cut fewer emissions while poorer nations would face tougher limits on greenhouse gases and more conditions on getting funds.
    "When a process is flawed then the outcome is flawed," Raman Mehta, ActionAid's program manager in India, said of the Danish proposal. "

    A sketchy counterproposal attributed to China would extend the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which required 37 industrial nations to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases blamed for global warming by an average 5 percent by 2012, compared with 1990 levels.
    The Chinese text would incorporate specific new, deeper targets for the industrialized world for a further five to eight years. However, developing countries including China would be covered by a separate agreement that encourages taking action to control emissions but not in the same legally binding way.
    Poorer nations believe the two-track approach would best preserve the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" recognized by the Kyoto treaty.
    In Rome, Greenpeace activists climbed halfway up the Colosseum at dawn Wednesday to press for a historic climate deal at the Copenhagen conference.
    The U.N.'s weather agency unveiled data Tuesday showing that this decade is on track to become the hottest since records began in 1850, with 2009 the fifth-warmest year ever. The second warmest decade was the 1990s.
    Only the United States and Canada experienced cooler conditions than average, the World Meteorological Organization said, though Alaska had the second-warmest July on record.
    Source:Associated Press
  18. Pape

    Pape JF-Expert Member

    Dec 10, 2009
    Joined: Dec 11, 2008
    Messages: 5,536
    Likes Received: 11
    Trophy Points: 0
    sijakusoma mkuu...
  19. Tumain

    Tumain JF-Expert Member

    Dec 11, 2009
    Joined: Jun 28, 2009
    Messages: 3,158
    Likes Received: 6
    Trophy Points: 0
    Mkuu nina maanisha kwamba "theory kwamba carbodioxed (co2) ndio inayosababisha joto duniani ina mushkeli ni feki si kweli!!

    Kuna haja ya kuangalia kwa undani (hidden agenda) ya wanaharakati wanataka watu waishi maisha ya kijima huu ni upuuzi..eti matumizi ya magari, umeme, gas yapunguzwe....

    hawa wanataka less developing countries wasiwe na viwanda milele..ili tuendelee kuwa wategemezi kutoka kwao..

    by they way kuna wanasayansi wengi wenye heshima duniani wanaamini kwamba siyo co2 inayosababisha joto duniani??
  20. Pape

    Pape JF-Expert Member

    Dec 11, 2009
    Joined: Dec 11, 2008
    Messages: 5,536
    Likes Received: 11
    Trophy Points: 0
    oooh, ngoja tusubiri wasemavyo menye kuongea, si nasikia watanzania tumwakilishwa na wajumbe sijui wangapi vile...teh teh teh...kwani wao hawaongei?