Sponsors
Article Circulation
1888PressRelease
New Members
CoulbourneDaisy Bee
Laura Lyons
Softmod Wii 4.3U
Rachid mark
Stephina Suzzane
Good Diet Plan
latitudewhytt
Daniel Ari
warner
Tutorial
Account
Forums
Monday, November 09, 2009
Aussies Go 350 for a Genial Climate
Category: News350 was the of motif of the day in Sydney, Australia, on October 24, 2009, as thousands of Aussies joined a display of peaceful, worldwide public protest against the dangerously high carbon emissions produced by human activities.
The steps of Sydney’s elegant Opera House were occupies by the demonstrators who gathered in protest against the anthropogenic causes of climatic deterioration, People carried placards with ‘350’ inscribed on it, standing for cutting the global carbon emissions from the existing level of about 387 ppm to the minimum safe level of 350 ppm. The protestors also formed a 350 by sitting on the steps in the particular pattern. This was complemented by the chiming of bells, 350 times, at the city’s largest cathedral.
And it was not only the Aussies asking for a cut in global carbon emissions but the protest was observed worldwide, at about 4000 places in more than 180 countries. The public display against high levels of global carbon emissions was meant to call the attention of the world leadership, who are going to discuss a new treaty on climate change in Copenhagen, Denmark, in December 2009. Depending on the agreements reached in Copenhagen, Australia will start cutting its carbon emissions as much as 25 percent over the next 10 years.
October 24’s demonstration marks a major step ahead in global pro-environmental activism whereby millions of human voices call on their leaders to ensure them a planet worth living. The global community caring for environment already has launched their online platform at http://www.350.org/ where organizers attempt to move the world towards finding solutions to global climate crises and issues of environmental importance.
Back to VotingLet’s consider evidence that contradicts some of the terms in this news item, such as:
* dangerously
* climatic deterioration
* minimum safe level
* pro-environmental
* climate crises
Here is the evidence: http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/2005-08-18/dioxide.htm
If you aren’t interested in reading through that one yourself, it basically says that the Earth is used to CO2 levels several times what we have now, and that the Earth is relatively cool, given its past. It doesn’t point out that CO2 is plant food, but that’s another thing to consider.
Finally, I think it’s a good idea to explain why the terms I listed, while contradicted by the evidence, are so widely used. Those terms, as far as I know, have been introduced to the world by governments interested in controlling people’s lives. Scientists might use “dangerously” and “minimum safe level” when they are exploring mechanisms related to very large amounts of energy, but not those other terms - unless they’re trying to earn a grant.