arctic ice increases 60%

Yes, these days it's getting downright balmy in the Antarctic. Why, even gentle ladies are cycling to the south pole.

British women sets new world record for cycling to the South Pole

 

To help keep it all in perspective: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buqtdpuZxvk

 

People are also always in some process of shortening their lives - so by your logic murder shouldn't be an issue right?

 

Climate Protection May Cut World GDP 4% by 2030, UN Says | BLOOMBERG

 

so, on a global scale "only" a loss of 4% would mean what? 300,000,000 additional people are thrown into poverty and starvation. A small price to pay for the UN, but not if you are one of those 300 million.

This would also bankrupt most of the larger employers in the world since the average net profit is in the 2-3 percent range.

This is not a workable solution.

 

Pay now, or pay later. The longer we procrastinate the more expensive the solution.

 

More Americans Don't Believe Global Warming Is Happening | WUNDERGROUND

 

Lemme see...you create your own facts, "300,000,000 additional people are thrown into poverty and starvation", misinterpret "4% cost" as "4% loss", believe employers absorb extra costs of doing business and don't pass them on to customers, and then proclaim that the facts are "not a workable solution".

Tea Party?

 

Ford is trying to make a cost into a big selling feature with the aluminum body F150. 3 additional mpg and it will sell.

 

Times Atlas Apologizes for Global-Warming Error



Publishers of the Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World scrambled Tuesday to correct a controversial statement that Greenland had lost 15 percent of its permanent ice cover over the last 12 years -- an assertion scientists labeled "incorrect and misleading."



http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011...s-for-misleading-greenland-ice-melting-claim/

 

I did not create any facts, I just read what the posting said. A 4 percent cost is huge, and and will result in many companies going bankrupt. If the UN expects all countries to take measures to slow or stop warming, than the will have to find ways that are not so costly or it just will not happen. there is just not that much leeway in the economy. That is a fact.

I have no idea what your "tea party" reference is supposed to mean.

 

Additional 4% cost isn't something that disappers into a black hole. It feeds new growing industry and creates new jobs and revenue. How much of the GPD today goes to the internet and cell phones and related services. Imagine someone suggested in US 1975 using 7% to 8% of GPD for that what reaction he had had Still nobody questions it now. Military expenditures in US are at the same level as this proposed climate protection..
Just don't be late so you don't have to buy your Climate technology from China

 

If You See Something, Say Something | NEW YORK TIMES OP-ED

by Michael Mann, of "Hockey Stick" fame

 

A 'cost' is not necessarily a 'loss'. But, if the (hypothetical) 4% cost is not spent, the (hypothetical) damage, in $ and social disruption (war? poverty, starvation?) could be much more. That is more in line with a real loss.

 

The BBC asks "Is our Sun falling silent?" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25743806