Blackberry Curve Damask Cover

climate deteriorates


Two parallel surveys held in Britain and the United States in spring 2010 gave almost identical results: in Britain people believe that the Earth's temperature is rising has increased from 91% to 78% in five years from 2005 to 2010, in California the percentage increased over the same period, from '84% to 74%. They were the first polls after the failure of the Copenhagen Summit, the British researchers attributed the decline to the fact that the winter of 2009-2010 there had been some heavy snow (the one in previous speeches Links we defined "reasoning of the housewife": it takes two days in cold country and say 'come in and tell us all the bales on global warming "). But I think interpretation is insufficient, and we'll be back on the end.
Instead, the data from NASA's newly published say that 2010 was the warmest year in the history of meteorological measurements from 1880 to present; exceeds by 0.01 ° C, the previous record in 2005. The most impressive, though, to get an idea of \u200b\u200bthe general trend is the ranking of the first seven warmest years, ever since 1880 to present: 1) 2010; 2) 2005 3) 1998 4) 2002 5) 2003; 6) 2006 7) 2007.

Meanwhile, the false agreement scribbled at the last minute in Copenhagen, which aims to increase not more than 2 ° C temperature of the planet, without specifying constraints and ways to achieve it (and an increase of 2 ° C corresponds in the various models previsonali possible, to a 50% chance not to have catastrophic consequences, so if the target was reached, would guadgnarsi the opportunity to gamble on heads or tails), is already sidelined by sudiosi, which begin to scenarios predict warming of up to 4 ° C within this century, not at all far from reality, given the continuing inaction of world governments in efforts to reduce CO2 emissions.

So when you heard the sad joke to break the current economic crisis should be measures to boost consumption, there is crying? In this, we must recognize that there are a multitude of heads of government around the world perfectly aligned to our clown.
Blindness, here, is doubly guilty: it adds not see that the current collapse of the market economy is not a cyclical phase that will follow a recovery, but it is a crisis of saturation, and therefore irreversible, and the recipes neoliberal disease and are not a cure, in addition to not wanting to consider the less immediate consequences (now we can no longer even say long-term) consumption in the race continue. The latter is probably a limitation inherent in the very dangerous sitemi Democrats: no Government invest in popularity for reasons which go beyond the next elections.
This limit could be exceeded only in the presence of a conscious and informed citizenship, but (and return to the initial survey) is much easier to get rid of the consciousness of the problems by controlling the information, which makes designing a different future.