Dear Steve,

  I have been thinking a long time about this before you wrote about it in the msg board.It seems that the only people that can REALLY  instil change are the same ones that ignore the problem.They have their own sinister reasons not to change and worse,offer obstacles to change,well,until it is too late.It is a problem that can ONLY be solved if people in power has the political will to change and really do it.

  Too often,we vote people into office and once they get there,they change their agenda to their objectives,and forget the very people that vote them in.In addition,their own party head will command them to his/her own aims and the needs of the voters are no longer valid.That was why people in Canada are so skeptical during the recent election.Nothing has changed.The same old nonsense goes on and on and when good people try to remind the politicians of these good promises that were laid out,the very politicians are now insulated from such misgivings and control the media NOT to discuss it.Of course,the people feel cheated and rightly so to seek redress.Unfortunatedly, this is a world wide problem.

  It seems politicians do NOT learn from history and are not all that wise and so,the disaster comes eventually.It is not what can we do to stop it,it is a matter of time to when it will happen.

    In the meantime,i have grown to accept what i can't change, taken the courage to change whatever i could in my lifetime and hopefully, cultivate the wisdom to know the difference.

   Remember,people should be happy with what they have than be unhappy with what they don't have.

   Peace and Contentment to all....

Hi,

I'm Gabriel I moved from Switzerland (suisse romande part) to Pensacola, FL in January 2006.

I heard about the movie but didn't watch it. ALGore presented this movie at the last Canne festival. I'm going to watch it a soon as I can find it.

Hi guys,this is what i mean when people in power doesn't care at all.

Greens slam G8 over climate change

By Louis Charbonneau

ST PETERSBURG, Russia (Reuters) - Environmental advocacy groups accused the Group of Eight industrial nations on Sunday of failing to take seriously the problems of climate change and the dangers of nuclear energy.

At a summit in St. Petersburg, the leaders of the G8 approved a statement that acknowledged divisions among the world's top economies on promoting nuclear energy and tackling climate change.

But the statement said those who favour nuclear energy -- six of the eight G8 members -- see it as key to providing energy security amid booming global demand and as a clean form of power that can help slow dangerous global warming.

The G8 members are the United States, Russia, Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan.

Tobias Muenchmeyer, an analyst at anti-nuclear environmental group Greenpeace, said acknowledgement of a split did not change the fact that the statement is strongly pro-nuclear.

He said that apart from Germany and Italy, "Bush and Putin and the rest are committed to expanding nuclear technology that at the same time gives countries the nuclear weapons option."

German governments officials said the text was acceptable to Berlin, which has committed to an early phase-out of nuclear energy by the early 2020s, because it emphasised the need to ensure nuclear power plants are safely run.

Nuclear energy, which is making a comeback worldwide, especially in Asia, produces few greenhouse gases and has been hailed by some environmentalists as a good way of protecting the climate while meeting growing demand for electricity.

Critics, however, say there is no good solution for the storage of dangerous nuclear waste. They also say nuclear power plants are vulnerable to terrorist attacks and result in an increased risk of nuclear weapons proliferation.

CLIMATE CHANGE

Alice Slater, president of the GRACE Policy Institute, said it was time to focus on "green" renewable sources of energy, namely solar, wind and hydro power that can stop the climate from changing for the worse.

"People don't get told the story that these things are possible, that the sun, water and wind can work," Slater told Reuters. She pointed to the example of Iceland, which she said has pledged to rely 100 percent on renewable energy by 2050.

Green groups want the G8 leaders to unanimously back the Kyoto Protocol, an agreement on cutting emissions of the "greenhouse gases" blamed for global warming.

It has been hampered by the fact that U.S. President George W. Bush withdrew support for the protocol in 2001.

As expected, the G8 did not back the protocol. Instead it said only "those of us committed to making the Kyoto protocol a success underline the importance we attach to it".

Graham Saul at Oil Change International said the G8 statement predicted a massive increase in demand for fossil fuels over the next quarter century.

"The G8 can't fight climate change and subsidise an expansion of fossil fuels at the same time. This is a complete contradiction and a dramatic failure of leadership on the part of the G8," Saul said.

Saul and other environmentalists' views appeared to get some support from French President Jacques Chirac, who urged G8 members to get serious about protecting the planet.

"We cannot talk about energy security while there is no progress on climate change. Mankind is dancing on the edge of a volcano," Chirac said at the St Petersburg meeting of world leaders in the G8 group of nations.

Kicking and screaming along the way, George W. Bush finally agreed to “seriously consider” German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s proposal to halve worldwide greenhouse-gas emissions and limit the rise in global temperature to two degrees Celsius by 2050 at this week’s G8 conference in Heiligendamm, Germany. In light of scientists’ predictions that a 50 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by mid- century is necessary to percent the worst effects of global warming, Merkel’s proposal seems reasonable…to everyone but Bush, who is concerned of the consequences of such action on the American economy. The G8 also endorsed Bush’s proposal to hold future meetings involving the world’s largest polluting countries, including China and India, to set long-term greenhouse-gas reduction goals. Merkel’s plan directs the United Nations to oversee all climate negotiations.

If I might chime in.   My thoughts are two fold.  One, global warming is a natural act of mother nature, it happens, and there really is very little anyone can do about it.

 On the other hand, the "rate" of our current global warming could and probably is being greatly accelerated by human wastes in the air.  I am not a scientist, and have heard both sides to this debate by those professionals who know alot more than I do. So who to believe?  It clearly,  even to professionals is not a slam dunk case for Global Warming.

Unfortunately, as one poster mentioned earlier, AL Gore is not someone they  would trust.  It will take someone who can be trusted in the eyes at least to Americans adn to the world for that matter. So, having AL Gore as a spokesman for Global Warming is not good thing.

America often referred to as the greatest Nation on earth(egocentrism perhaps), I suppose one would have to define what  parameters  qualify as "greatest". I would say America is a very attractive country with "great" opportunties. I suppose that is what my Swiss ancestors thought when they immigrated to American in 1831.  Anyway, America should have taken the lead in developing alternative fuel  sources many many many years ago.  Unfortunately, the men who rule the world and not just associated with America like it the way it is. Bottom line it is more profitable to them that the world not create alternative fuel sources.  Talk is cheap,and Bush those he has articulated altenative fuel sources has not done very much if anything.  Why?  Oil, Money, Power baby!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Anyway, thanks for letting me share....

Roger O.