I don't get it

Current Events » in reply to Kyoto was signed in 1997

I don't get it

alcaray — 6/30/2005 10:17:56 PM (archived)

Are you guys saying that signing the paper caused all the changes Kyoto called for, instantly to come into effect? If so, you should probably back down from the "billions and billions of economy ruinous dollars" position that you claim the accord would require. It is either simple as pie (to make this piece and your current position work), or it is a screaming mean bitch of a program to implement (your prior position).

Which?

The whole thread (13 posts)

Kyoto update - Tom Brosz - 6/30/2005 4:35:08 AM
- France, Italy, Germany and Britain constitute a large majority of EU's economy - pwokenyaw - 7/1/2005 4:12:43 PM
- Let me get this straight... - alcaray - 6/30/2005 5:51:46 PM
  - Kyoto was signed in 1997 - Tom Brosz - 6/30/2005 9:33:16 PM
    - I don't get it - alcaray - 6/30/2005 10:17:56 PM
      - re: I don't get it - Tom Brosz - 6/30/2005 10:42:02 PM
        
        the gist of my argument is that Kyoto is not in effect yet, so you can't measure its result (n/t) - alcaray - 6/30/2005 10:58:43 PM
        
        Then what the heck was the New Zealand article about? (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 6/30/2005 11:00:33 PM
        
        Mainly about how predictions were out of whack - Tony - 7/1/2005 4:13:15 PM
        
        Well, they should have had a better "plan" going in. ;) (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 7/1/2005 6:56:49 PM
        
        didn't get that far. Waiting to see if the whole thing was a waste of time. - alcaray - 6/30/2005 11:09:47 PM
        
        Obviously, at least half of this conversation is. (n/t) - Tom Brosz - 6/30/2005 11:52:19 PM
- re: Kyoto update - gbaikie - 6/30/2005 5:35:16 AM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (13 posts)