>>>>One of our erstwhile members here keeps bashing the US for not subscribing to the Kyoto accord.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yep, it's the UN and the One World gang. I believe we are doing much better these days as far as pollution (think Pittsburg in the early 20th century vx today). Sure we are consuming a lot of resources, but I don't imagine it will be too much longer before our alternative fuels start kicking in. There are a lot of promising technologies out there just over the horizon.
>>
>>Well, that's been true for decades, but nothing much has happened.
>>
>>>As for Kyoto, from what I've read, we don't need it. We can do better ourselves.
>>
>>I don't understand this. Kyoto is a set of targets. If you can do better than the Kyoto targets then what was the big deal about signing on? If the Kyoto targets were going to hurt the U.S. economy, then how can you do even better than those targets without utterly destroying the economy. What am I missing here?
>
>You're missing that the "Target" of Kyoto is the US. It places restrictions on the US that the third world countries (the ones that are really polluting) don't have to follow. It also attempts to dictate policy to the US.
>
>I am in favor of doing anything within reason to make our environment better. I am a hunter and fisherman. If the environment goes south, so does my leisure. However, I don't believe in cutting off my nose . . . .


This is "kill the messenger" at its best. You think the Kyoto accord was a plot by those polluting third world countries to drag down the U.S.? You should maybe do some research on which countries generate how much greenhouse gas. Hint: we do way more than our share, 20-25%, as opposed to about 5% of the world's population.

I have no idea what you mean about equating "make our environment better" with being a hunter and fisherman. Can you explain?