Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 1/10/2013 (1026 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.
Attitude change unlikely
Like all climate alarmists, Gwynne Dyer (IPCC will show 'we are the volcanoes,' Sept. 27) paints a grim picture of the planet's future. Yet the facts show governments, industries and individuals won't take any actions if they interfere with comfort, convenience, costs, profits or re-election chances.
The recent German election saw the Green party suffer a major setback largely because of rising electricity costs. The Greens took a similar hit in the 2011 Canadian federal vote.
The new Australian government has promptly moved to repeal that country's greatly reviled carbon tax as well as to disband its climate change commission. In North America, even if the Keystone XL project is rejected, the U.S. has 37 other pipelines either under construction or being planned, while rail-tank shipments of Alberta crude have increased 47 per cent during the past two years.
Between 2010 and 2035, no fewer than 1,200 new coal plants will have been built, mainly in developing nations that ostensibly have the most to lose from global warming. Despite all the hype and subsidies, only 0.5 per cent of the world's cars and light trucks are hybrids or electrics, and wind and solar currently provide a paltry 1.5 per cent of global electricity generation.
Also, over the past two decades, one climate treaty after the next has achieved virtually nothing in reducing carbon emissions or overall energy use.
So anyone believing the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report will change attitudes or practices is engaged in wishful thinking.
Like wily magicians, fossil-fuel apologists seek to direct our attention to the hiatus in global temperature rise, in order to distract us from the far more ominous changes that are occurring.
The Arctic ice cap is rapidly disappearing, the Greenland glacier is melting and Antarctic ice shelves are crumbling into the sea.
The world's oceans are rising, warming and becoming more acidic, killing the coral reefs and the algae upon which the ocean food chains depend.
Once-frozen methane gas -- a far more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide -- is bubbling to the surface in some northern lakes, and mountain glaciers, along with the summer river flows they once sustained, are vanishing worldwide.
Pine beetles and massive fires are devouring the world's northern forests even as the Amazon dries out, and freak floods and powerful storms have become the new norm.
Canadians must look past self-serving sleight of hand and perceive the great underlying truth that climate science has made crystal clear. Our actions are rapidly transforming this planet and we must immediately decarbonize our societies if we are to survive.
In his Sept. 28 column, Climate debate must be brought down to earth, Peter Christie uses Darwinian evolution as an example of what is "scientifically obvious." Well, macro-evolution (that is, amoeba to mankind) is only obvious if one assumes there is no real God big enough to create everything supernaturally and quickly.
The scientific method cannot be applied to whatever happened in the distant past. Educated speculation is the best science can do. Most believe scientists accept evolution and only fundamentalist Christians and Jews believe in a literal Genesis, but there are thousands of scientists worldwide who have rejected the whole concept of macro-evolution, and believe in a literal six-day creation of the world just 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.
Too many Christians and others question what was intended by the words of Genesis, but virtually all world-class scholars of Hebrew agree the Genesis accounts of creation and the flood were intended to be taken literally as actual history and not as allegory, poetry or parable.
If the commitment to macro-evolution to explain our existence has nearly destroyed any meaningful belief in God, then, consequently, there will be no fear of God, which helps explain the rampant evil and immorality of all kinds that we read about daily in our newspaper.
JOHN M. CRAIG
Smelling the produce
Re: Core grocer needs incentive: report (Sept. 28). Peter Kaufmann's report is just that -- a report from one man. It gives some insight into what was known from the beginning -- the area desperately needs a grocery store.
For those uninformed commentators who have little if any insight into opening a large endeavour, it takes money and incentives.
Think IKEA and then rethink your statements. City councillors need to wake up and smell the produce. They were well informed months ago and still let the ball slip through their fingers.
Peter Kaufmann needs to be commended for delivering a report on time and on budget, a consultant's proper objective. As a document delivering direction and advice, one might reserve comment pending a stringent evaluation of the data presented.
Now, a full 10 minutes later, the data, largely borrowed from public domain and from studies published by other agencies, seems to be complete only in its inconclusive nature.
Are there ways to make a wide range of affordable groceries available to modest-income dwellers downtown? Perhaps looking at increasing the profitability of the dozens of small convenience outlets that already exist could lead to an improved marketplace. Maybe allowing some of them to sell beer and wine could keep them open longer and make them more profitable.
Bolstering the presence, profitability and product range of existing downtown food retailers needs to be investigated. Subsidies to encourage a medium-sized grocer to risk a downtown location won't work because they are too savvy to believe a myth. Any grocery company that doesn't have a more sophisticated and complete consultant's report shouldn't be trusted with public funds.
It's a natural fit
Re: Merged MLCC, Lotteries on track to save millions (Oct. 1). Save them from what, a decent and enjoyable mortal life?
What is coming next, the Manitoba Liquor and Lotteries Health Care Commission, to add "medical" heroin to the corporation mandate?