Will Poland become green?

I think you should get together with rafik!!!! You seem to be as norrow minded as each other. Global warming is a bigger danger to us all, than even Bush's war on terror.

Hairball, no need to get your knickers in a twist mate, different people with different opinions that's all :O)

The thing is I know what is happening *says with a smug face*, because my wife has been conducting scientific research on the problem now for the past five years and has just come back from the US, where she has been teaching methods of calculating the changes in the Earth's temperatures, which are related to the cause and effect factor, but no amount of shouting from me will change their minds :O)

I agree with Lesser when he talks about throwing Directives out there at bullet speed for trivial issues but slowly with matters that need urgent attention. I did my thesis on subsidiarity, in laymans terms it means what level of govt is the most appropriate for taking action, i.e Brussels, national govts or local govts. Depending on the area, Lesser has a good point in that regional/local govts often have better data on which to act on. I argued for a special inspectorate body as a conduit between the relevant players as the data was horribly out of date and inaccurately compiled in the old system. I studied the Wild Birds Directive, yeah I know, probably the wrong kind of chicks to be studying given that I was only 22 at the time but hey...! Seriously though, the whole notion of 'direct effect' of Directives threw up all manner of complications for national govts to wrangle with and stew over. Although I don't know specific environmental data/stats for Poland, I know that they acted quickly in snuffing out a potential disaster in Płock (Nov?) through eradicating a lethal strain of bird flu which is more than can be said for China back in 2003 when SARS started to take hold. Poland immediately informed the relevant authorities in Brussels and started taking preventative/prophylyactic measures, 2 of the core environmental principles as laid out in the Amsterdam Treaty (there are 6 in all). Rightfully so, they were applauded for doing so. Poles respect natural beauty so becoming green shouldn't pose too many problems

so far you ,mthe only thing that you have proven is that you can't stand people with different opinions and your only response to that is calling people names.i think you should losen up your hair as this seems to cause a huge pressure on your brain.i know your type of people;stubborn,narrow minded red necks who can't see anything but end of their noses.any arguments can't change your opinion.as you may have noticed (but probably you haven't)i'm not the only one with a similar opinion regarding so called "global rip off" but obviously you are the only one here who knows the truth and follows the right path.you didn't get anything from what i said so that i can't see the point in discussing anything with you.go and chain yourself to another tree or paint a posh woman's furry coat.this is the only thing you can do.i hope that idiots like you will stay away from our green country

I think that most of the gas and foul air comes from the mouth of the politicians here. They should be quarantined

When there are sensible arguments I'm happy to debate. You havn't given any sensible arguments. In you first post you mention some vague "programme" that proved we only produce 4% when there is lots of evidence to sugest otherwise.

You then found a link that sugested sun spot activaty MIGHT affect temperature. But in the same document it also states quite clearly

and I *quote*

He estimates that solar activity is responsible for only 30 per cent, at most, of the warming since 1970. The rest must be the result of man-made greenhouse gases, and a crash in solar activity won't do anything to get rid of them.

And in the next paragraph...

Svalgaard warns: "If the Earth does cool during the next sunspot crash and we do nothing, when the sun's magnetic activity returns, global warming will return with a vengeance."


As to this drivel all I can say is sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never harm me!

Poland likes to protest about things, much like my fellow Scots, so I assume that Greenpeace will have a large support base here. All it takes is dialogue and investment between the relevant interest groups and government to bring about a positive situation. I should be more specific so I will talk about cars. Poland is a little behind, perhaps not due to intentions but more about financial deficiency, than its Western neighbours. Catalytic converters became increasingly used in Britain but Poland had to make do with Ladas and Maluchs which churned out masses of polluting gases like carbon monoxide. Even now, walking around the streets, u can receive a faceful of gas from exhausts. The blame for this cannot be pointed at ur average Pole as they are just buying what they can afford.

Guys, that's 3 of the 4 posting guidelines below broken, u both seem to be intelligent so do the intelligent thing. Well, 2 are very similar, hehehe. Show ur stuff

An average human being produces about 1 gallon of gas(farts)in a day.
Dear hairball!(translate:disillusioned,treehugging'ex-hippie)
Can you give us a life saving solution to this horrible global warming threat? No? I can:
Put a cork in it. No, wait,put two corks in it* ,since your posts are reduced to name calling & screeching(extremly characteristic for distraught liberals eager to cram their gospel down everybody's throats.

* There is a hope,you will implode.....

1 gallon of farts? Hehehe, seeing it in liquid terms, that can hardly be reassuring

again you didn't get the point.
anyway,if you don't want to take any arguments from an average joe like me.click on the link below and try to watch that movie without throwing your pc out of the window.

i'd like to hear your comments
everyone interested in the subject watch it too!

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6772058898203776825&q=global+ warming+swindle

I don't think hairball has balls to watch something that may make him think somebody else has a valid point in this discussion.

i'm afraid it may be true.

btw.i forgot to mention that in my previous post.i'd like you mr PKS driver to listen carefully to what it's being said from the 36th minute onwards

Good video, did not see it whole yet. Climate has always had ups and downs in temperature and we are more at the mercy of our dear Sun and not much also. Industrial development may have made a tiny dent in it, but nowhere near the proven temperature changes through centuries and millenniums.

All this hoopla about 'global warming" seems like a hoax, a fad and a political game playing. Some day it will pass and the media will find some other topic to torment the public with...

thanx eurola.i find it interesting too.i'm afraid that you have just become of of the heretics and may expect to be burnt :(

but that would emit even more CO2!!! :)

It is always possible to put together a panel of economists,climatologists,historians,power-plant engeneers,geographers and so on,give them a grant and tell them to prove something.They will.They will chant "The science is solid!"Troubling are the concerted efforts to achieve complete convergence by means of political and economic force and mass-oriented propaganda.The use of political or emotional coercion is used to silence opponents of a pet theory.

This is an interesting argument about global warming and the risk of non-action.


So you are saying you know better than them? :O)

Very interesting. Especially correlation between temperature and CO2. Rise of temperature causing with significant lag rise of CO2 emissions and not otherwise.


This is just global scare argument. How about such outcome that indeed human can change the climate but currently his influence have positive consequences. So if you would went in opposite direction, catastrophe is also possible in theory.

Beside of that version A, may destroy developing countries, especially Africa. One could draw here catastrophic visions as well.

Ah well lesser, you are welcome to your opinion, but I think I will stick to my wife's and her colleagues scientific facts :O)

That's better! Now your starting to give a better argument. I did watch it all and I found it very interesting. But I still think it's wrong to destroy forrests for profit.

So I apologise for offending you! Sorry

I tend to get very cautious when there is a lot of propaganda going on both sides of an issue like this. Without a doubt there is a media war surrounding global warming. For instance, the global warming deniers camp declared (or at list hinted) that there is a reversal of global temperature patterns since 1998 and 2006 was the coolest year since. Then the global warming believers said that the same period was the warmest in the history. Both are probably true statements, because 1998 was the warmest year on record, so you can see that it is easy for both statements to be true. (By the way 2007 was supposedly following the same patterns as previous years).

Examples of media bickering and semantic battles in the Global Warming media war are prodigious. In this climate of propaganda one has to study the issue him/herself, without relying on the talking heads.

I know that I've already talked about this book in this forum, nevertheless I think it's worth mentioning again - the title is Cool it, the author is Bjorn Lomborg. It's an attention-grabbing read.

i don't really know too much about cutting destroying forrests for profits but cutting down and burning them for agriculture purposes is another "burning" matter.these 2 things have probably a lot in common.

i never said that i do agree with cutting down trees in africa,south america ect.that's why i wrote that the eu, instead of telling us,the citizens that we are guilty of everything and we have to pay more and more so called green taxes it should pay less in subsidies to the eu farmers and buy food from poorer countries eg in africa.these green taxes are not used for anything good.all of them go ,here in the uk,straight to mr browns pocket.

these money could be spend on better tools and more efficient/less poisonous fertilizers=one piece of land can be cultivated for many years.people wouldn't have to burn,or cut down forests.

i also agree with recycling putting filters on chimneys ect.a lot has been done in poland so far and more could be done.waters are much cleaner now,air is less polluted as well because we have invested in newer thechnologies;example?AZOTY SA in pulawy se poland.a chemical plant have killed almost everything in the radious of 2 miles. you wouldn'd see a bird nearby.now this place thriving with life(my friend works there and i know this area)we just need to keep going in this direction.

Yeah this place is amazing now and is no more than 4 klms from my home in Pulawy and I have taken many walks in the forest around it and it is full of wildlife.

Wild boar, deer, and many forms of rare plant species have started in the area, which is a testament to a clean environment; it just shows you what can be done if people try :O)

But as rafik says if you had been here 20 years ago then it was an entirely different story, with people suffering from lung related diseases and total destruction of the Fauna & Flora that surrounded it.

What about this direction global waring?

I just happened to have rather skeptical mind and I often question things when I smell rat,instead to believe blindly any pseudo-scientific drivel (sorry, scientific theory).I just saw today bit of news where Al Gore was called enviroment guru. A fraudster got nobel for science fiction flick.That leaves me in awe...The whole movie is full of fallacies ,he won't debate but he is willing to propagandize'calling sceptics "Global Warming Deniers".

It is not the matter of knowin better,it is the matter of not being bunch of sheep.
The moral self-righteousness of the global warming crussaders should set off some bells.

Oh dear base level!!


Totally agree with you on this one :O)

Will Poland become green?

Only if it becomes envious of others!

Thi is all very interesting . We recycle in Indiana . We just throw our garbage in

the Ohio
river and let someone else down stream worry about it. If it gets to New Orleans then they can build a levy out of it. See it is recycled!

The first step for Poland to became green is to get rid of it's dependence on coal. Coal is by far the worst polluter, especially as far as CO2 goes. That means stop mining it and stop exporting it, in other words: close all the coal minds, power plants, heating stations etc. It won't be easy or painless, that's because Poland's economy is based on coal.

But what's next? Surely you don't want to move out to a cave and sit around a fire? Oh, wait, that's also not an environmentally friendly way...

In my opinion the best bet is nuclear, the only thing is that Greenpeace opposes nuclear too.

So what's your opinion?

I'm now confused. Al Gore had me convinced that we're all going to die a horrable death in the next decade. But Rafik has opened my eye's in a different direction. Maybe it is all a con to grab more money from our taxes. You know, when you think about it. Is it so hard to believe that the Earth getting warmer might have something to do with the sun? And not what fuel man is burning!