This is not only highly offensive it's 100% wrong.
Greenpeace is a bit of a joke nowadays, but originally they were a respected science organisation with lots of very smart and respectable people involved.
Whatever you feel about them though it's important to note that THEY NEVER DID ANY OF THE THINGS WHICH YOU SO CASUALLY ACCUSE THEM OF ABOVE.
- "EarthFirst" spiked trees and put sugar in gas tanks, not Greenpeace.
- Crazy people might put poison out for dogs, but Greenpeace .... not so much
- "burn down your house" are you serious???
I find your posts somewhat interesting when you're talking about Mac stuff, but when you cross over into the political stuff you not only don't know what you're talking about, you're posts are mean, offensive and selfish.
How do you even live with yourself with attitudes like that? What gives you the right to spew this garbage about things and people you know nothing about?
To infer there is no connection between Greenpeace and the groups you mentioned is being intellectually dishonest. Here is a quick read on how they are all related;
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but I laughed when I heard the news someone is willing to fight back against GreenPeace. Something tells me they need to drop the "Peace" side of their name because they seem to be just as militant and the terrorists... which incidentally they are.
I mean these idiots were shining lasers into the cockpit of the boat, something that is illegal.
Those were not from GP. Next time check your facts before making a point. It will certainly make you appear smarter. The group you are talking about is Sea Shepherd. GP even does not condone the way Sea Shepherd operates. Even though I'm not a fan of GP either; your points are off.
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but I laughed when I heard the news someone is willing to fight back against GreenPeace. Something tells me they need to drop the "Peace" side of their name because they seem to be just as militant and the terrorists... which incidentally they are.
I mean these idiots were shining lasers into the cockpit of the boat, something that is illegal.
I once got into a doorstep debate with a GreenPeace representative over their specific treatment of Apple and he had no comeback at all. It was awesome because he wasn't prepared for me.
The quicker GreenPeace leave and stop messing it all up for everyone and leave it to the more astute protestors the better the world will be because clearly the aggressive stance doesn't work, it only causes the victim's back to arch and they fight back as was the case with the Japanese security boat ramming GreenPeace's boat.
I would like to see numbers on GreenPeace's carbon footprint before I listen to those hypocrites.
The ship that got rammed by the Japanese did not belong to Greenpeace. Greenpeace does not use or condone violence.
It is amazing how Steve Jobs turned around the situation so quickly. Instead of being bashed by Greenpeace, the environmental issue has quickly become a selling point for Apple. And a way to gain the public's attention
I find your comments quite extreme as well, but when you address the Mac/M$ situation, you make a few valid points, especially when it comes to the longer lifetime of Macs, their being resold on eBay, while most WinPCs/laptops end up in the garbage dump much more quickly.
It is also true that Greenpeace could have been fairer in representing Apple's ecological footprint in the past.
It all comes down to using well-thought out and fair criteria, rather than being only media-whores.
Among other things I agree that PVC is not such an environmentally friendly material, but it seems silly (if not insincere) to attack its presence in laptops, while in Europe most of the domestic sewer tubing (waste pits, gutters, etc) are made from PVC (they used lead before for tubing thinner than 2in!). In the former case we are talking about minute amounts, in the latter case about huge amounts.
It is amazing how Steve Jobs turned around the situation so quickly. Instead of being bashed by Greenpeace, the environmental issue has quickly become a selling point for Apple. And a way to gain the public's attention
I find your comments quite extreme as well, but when you address the Mac/M$ situation, you make a few valid points, especially when it comes to the longer lifetime of Macs, their being resold on eBay, while most WinPCs/laptops end up in the garbage dump much more quickly.
It is also true that Greenpeace could have been fairer in representing Apple's ecological footprint in the past.
It all comes down to using well-thought out and fair criteria, rather than being only media-whores.
Among other things I agree that PVC is not such an environmentally friendly material, but it seems silly (if not insincere) to attack its presence in laptops, while in Europe most of the domestic sewer tubing (waste pits, gutters, etc) are made from PVC (they used lead before for tubing thinner than 2in!). In the former case we are talking about minute amounts, in the latter case about huge amounts.
most of your points show a junkies need for denial
G P picked on apple because apple was enjoys a special place in many hearts
G P travels to the dumps in asia and africa and india where electronics are taken apart by women and children and see's first hand what is what , has steve gone to these dumps ??
in most countries you would be arrested for exposing children to toxic materials found in electronic devices
yet in these squalid places IT IS STILL A GROWTH INDUSTRY pulling apart these death machines
and apple should have cradled to graved its products yrs ago
a decade ago
apple knew better
they all knew better
they all know better
money and greed
every time idiots like us get a new phone WE also get a new charger and a new battery
WHY THE FUCK CAN'T WE MAKE IT ALL A MINI USB AND MAKE EVERY BATTERY RE CHARGE ABLE ??
i have draws fill with wires and such .
finally sony and europe will make mini usb standard
thousands of kids will thank them
G P was very smart
with a small budget and 20 projects world wide they woke apple up spending very little but using apples own media hype machine
APPLE OWES G P A LARGE DEBT
i am an apple fan boy but in this case fuck apple . money was so important to them that it took green light's flashed on there 5th ave store to wake them up
and thank god apple now sets the standard for cradle to grave products and owning up to a companies footprint on mother EARTH
I do not agree with you,[ and some of the other comments made against Greenpeace]. Most great things happen because of militant activity. The USA was found by militants after the seeking a partnership angle didn't work out.
First, Apple was a fair target by Greenpeace. Apple's campaign was Think Different, and Al Gore sits on Apple's Board. Greenpeace exercised it's first Amendment rights to express it's desire that Apple become more a leader in environmental efforts. Second, Apple seemed to spring into action highlighting Apple's environmental efforts in response to Greenpeace's attacks. In fact, we know that is true because Jobs letter to the public indirectly refers to Greenpeace. Third, the problem with forming partnerships is companies interests are seldomly aligned with doing the right thing. I doubt profit driven companies without the proper motivation are going to produce environmentally responsible policies. If corporations are open to that, then sure partnerships would be great. Fifth, it is hard to find fault with an organization that merely wants corporations to remove toxic materials from the products they manufacturer. I certainly am glad Greenpeace is spending it's time trying to put pressure on corporations. I do not have the time to do it.
With all that said, Greenpeace's initial ranking system was flawed. It was based on corporations ranking on statements of what corporations intended to do in the future. That system worked against Apple because it is more of a take action company as opposed to let us discuss what our future plans may be sort of company. In Greenpeace's defense it probably initially approached companies asking them to disclose their efforts to reduce the toxic materials it uses in their products, and the companies wouldn't cooperate. Accordingly, Greenpeace had to create a system that allowed companies to start thinking about such efforts without making legally binding commitments to actually do anything.
Do you like them, but you don't. We have no need for them. Apple did the right thing because Apple wanted to. If Apple didn't want too, they would not have. It is hard for some people to grasp, but some profit driven companies want to do the right thing. It just takes time because they have to turn a profit in the meantime.
Greenpeace should be dissolved because they have turned into something treacherous and terrorists like. If they would issue reports, rate companies on what they are actual doing, and sit down in rational negotiations, I would have no problem with them.
did a great job of getting apple to clean up its act
apple is held to a higher standard than other companies
as a result i know own a green MBP
and ho acer dell will be screwed if they don't match apple's greeness
G P for all its faults does more for mother earth than most
9
Do you really think they have helped the environment at the end of the day? Wouldn´t they have helped more designing eco-friendly products while holding a real job?
I'm curious about this one. It was bundled with my mac, but I'm hearing a lot of horror stories about the packaging when you bought it in the store.
Was it that bad?
I'm not really sure, but previous posts have lambasted Apple for the clear plastic case the Magic Mouse comes in. I for one like it, though it is made from "recyclable" plastic #7... http://earth911.com/plastic/number-7...out-plastic-7/ which i guess isn't always very recyclable...
I suppose they could have sold them in little cardboard boxes, or brown paper bags, but the point of the clear case was most likely to show off the sleek design of the mouse. Judging by sales numbers, Apple may have been onto something there.
I for one can't bring myself to recycle it or throw it away, even the damn case looks sleek. I'll keep it around for now. It's actually small enough to be used as a protective case for the MM in some situations, but once you've removed the adhesive hat holds the case together, it doesn't say together very well.
I'm not really sure, but previous posts have lambasted Apple for the clear plastic case the Magic Mouse comes in. I for one like it, though it is made from "recyclable" plastic #7... http://earth911.com/plastic/number-7...out-plastic-7/ which i guess isn't always very recyclable...
I suppose they could have sold them in little cardboard boxes, or brown paper bags, but the point of the clear case was most likely to show off the sleek design of the mouse. Judging by sales numbers, Apple may have been onto something there.
I for one can't bring myself to recycle it or throw it away, even the damn case looks sleek. I'll keep it around for now. It's actually small enough to be used as a protective case for the MM in some situations, but once you've removed the adhesive hat holds the case together, it doesn't say together very well.
Our city allows recycling of #7. I guess it depends on how you look at it. If they are using #7, they are already utilizing recycled plastics, so that is a good thing.
Is this the packaging in total, or is there a larger container that holds this?
If Apple really wanted to help the environment, they would stop producing computers for two years and then start again so everyone actually used the ones they had instead of buying new ones for every update when they don't really *need* one.
If Apple really wanted to help the environment, they would stop producing computers for two years and then start again so everyone actually used the ones they had instead of buying new ones for every update when they don't really *need* one.
Wouldn't that be consumers that you need to 'fix', and not Apple?
Wouldn't that be consumers that you need to 'fix', and not Apple?
Which is why Greenpeace fails.. because they don't ask people to change their habits of buying then junking stuff. It's just easier to blame a company for toxic waste and not consumers, b/c then you have a easier target, and consumers don't get alienated by your tactics. Well, now they're alienated anyway, because of the way that Greenpeace still scores electronics makers. It still ranks Apple as 5th in electronics makers on the Greenest Electronics Makers list, because it didn't have a "Public Policy" on environment and such. For that I can't forgive them... that's just arbitrary.
Oh I believe you and you didn't read the effects of a "nuclear winter"
Basically, so much soot gets into the atmosphere that it:
1: Keeps the Earths residue heat in, raising global temperatures, then as heat finally escapes...
2: The Sun is blocked and new heat can't get to warm the Earth, the planet begins to cool A LOT!!! And that's where we are at now, the beginning of the cooling part. Colder winters, cooler summers.
You see depending upon the direction certain parts of Earth is facing the Sun, and the distance, give us our temperatures and seasons. The Earth radiates that excess heat into space like a reflector. If a lot of particles are in the air, it blocks this normal process and causes a imbalance.
The below normal colder temperatures will continue until the soot level in the atmosphere is reduced, but people will burn more to stay warm, prolonging the problem.
So Al Gore is wrong about his point that global temperatures will continue to climb with more harmful emissions, it's more like other way around now. Heat from the Sun can't heat the Earth as well with too much soot in the atmosphere.
Perhaps the reason why those climate emails got hacked, people are getting suspicious.
My theory also explains our recent very cold temperatures when we should be having a very mild winter, right?
I knew what was going to happen all along and live where it's warm, it's been in the 50's now, it's usually in the mid 70's to 80's this time of year, but it's better than what other people are having.
I generally do not read Wikipedia stories on politically controversial topics. Too much agenda-driven info for me to parse.
But it appears that you have not bothered to look at the WMO analysis from the link that I sent you, as is obvious when you blather on about temperatures in the US.
Incidentally, you keep bringing up Al Gore. I have no clue why or how he is relevant to scientific discussion on the topic of climate. You obviously like to pay attention to him. I don't.
Which is why Greenpeace fails.. because they don't ask people to change their habits of buying then junking stuff. It's just easier to blame a company for toxic waste and not consumers, b/c then you have a easier target, and consumers don't get alienated by your tactics. Well, now they're alienated anyway, because of the way that Greenpeace still scores electronics makers. It still ranks Apple as 5th in electronics makers on the Greenest Electronics Makers list, because it didn't have a "Public Policy" on environment and such. For that I can't forgive them... that's just arbitrary.
I would say it's both consumer and manufacturer's faults. Consumers need to recycle or donate old computer hardware, pay attention to disposal requirements, and make green choices when buying. Manufacturers need to be mindful of the waste that they produce, the toxins they introduce into the environment, and the habits of their consumers so that they can adapt their business model to be a little more green friendly.
It's a two way street, and not the fault of just one group or the other.
Appears to have misunderstood Greenpeace rankings. Apple is not greenest overall, just in toxic chemicals criteria. Four other companies do better overall in Greenpeace rankings. Still, Greenpeace is giving Apple its due in this area with separate, if confusing, shoutout.
Comments
Secondly I would like to congratulate Apple for this quick turnaround. Very, very impressive!
This is not only highly offensive it's 100% wrong.
Greenpeace is a bit of a joke nowadays, but originally they were a respected science organisation with lots of very smart and respectable people involved.
Whatever you feel about them though it's important to note that THEY NEVER DID ANY OF THE THINGS WHICH YOU SO CASUALLY ACCUSE THEM OF ABOVE.
- "EarthFirst" spiked trees and put sugar in gas tanks, not Greenpeace.
- Crazy people might put poison out for dogs, but Greenpeace .... not so much
- "burn down your house" are you serious???
I find your posts somewhat interesting when you're talking about Mac stuff, but when you cross over into the political stuff you not only don't know what you're talking about, you're posts are mean, offensive and selfish.
How do you even live with yourself with attitudes like that? What gives you the right to spew this garbage about things and people you know nothing about?
To infer there is no connection between Greenpeace and the groups you mentioned is being intellectually dishonest. Here is a quick read on how they are all related;
http://activistcash.com/organization...131-greenpeace
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but I laughed when I heard the news someone is willing to fight back against GreenPeace. Something tells me they need to drop the "Peace" side of their name because they seem to be just as militant and the terrorists... which incidentally they are.
I mean these idiots were shining lasers into the cockpit of the boat, something that is illegal.
Those were not from GP. Next time check your facts before making a point. It will certainly make you appear smarter. The group you are talking about is Sea Shepherd. GP even does not condone the way Sea Shepherd operates. Even though I'm not a fan of GP either; your points are off.
Did you hear that their ship got rammed by Japanese whaling ships and sunk the other day just off of New Zealand?
Now I'm not one for whaling so I'm not in any support of Japan's whaling crap but I laughed when I heard the news someone is willing to fight back against GreenPeace. Something tells me they need to drop the "Peace" side of their name because they seem to be just as militant and the terrorists... which incidentally they are.
I mean these idiots were shining lasers into the cockpit of the boat, something that is illegal.
I once got into a doorstep debate with a GreenPeace representative over their specific treatment of Apple and he had no comeback at all. It was awesome because he wasn't prepared for me.
The quicker GreenPeace leave and stop messing it all up for everyone and leave it to the more astute protestors the better the world will be because clearly the aggressive stance doesn't work, it only causes the victim's back to arch and they fight back as was the case with the Japanese security boat ramming GreenPeace's boat.
I would like to see numbers on GreenPeace's carbon footprint before I listen to those hypocrites.
The ship that got rammed by the Japanese did not belong to Greenpeace. Greenpeace does not use or condone violence.
Get you facts straight before you blow off.
on yet another occasion.
@MacTripper
I find your comments quite extreme as well, but when you address the Mac/M$ situation, you make a few valid points, especially when it comes to the longer lifetime of Macs, their being resold on eBay, while most WinPCs/laptops end up in the garbage dump much more quickly.
It is also true that Greenpeace could have been fairer in representing Apple's ecological footprint in the past.
It all comes down to using well-thought out and fair criteria, rather than being only media-whores.
Among other things I agree that PVC is not such an environmentally friendly material, but it seems silly (if not insincere) to attack its presence in laptops, while in Europe most of the domestic sewer tubing (waste pits, gutters, etc) are made from PVC (they used lead before for tubing thinner than 2in!). In the former case we are talking about minute amounts, in the latter case about huge amounts.
They are just attention whores!
I certainly don't mind Apple doing the right thing, but SCREW Greenpeace.
I guess revenge is a meal best served cold! Good for Apple, they turned an unfair and selective PR campaign in their favor.
I remember not long ago GP would send out people to the streets to protest against Apple and do nothing with regards to other computer companies.
wrong
G P
did a great job of getting apple to clean up its act
apple is held to a higher standard than other companies
as a result i know own a green MBP
and ho acer dell will be screwed if they don't match apple's greeness
G P for all its faults does more for mother earth than most
9
It is amazing how Steve Jobs turned around the situation so quickly. Instead of being bashed by Greenpeace, the environmental issue has quickly become a selling point for Apple. And a way to gain the public's attention
on yet another occasion.
@MacTripper
I find your comments quite extreme as well, but when you address the Mac/M$ situation, you make a few valid points, especially when it comes to the longer lifetime of Macs, their being resold on eBay, while most WinPCs/laptops end up in the garbage dump much more quickly.
It is also true that Greenpeace could have been fairer in representing Apple's ecological footprint in the past.
It all comes down to using well-thought out and fair criteria, rather than being only media-whores.
Among other things I agree that PVC is not such an environmentally friendly material, but it seems silly (if not insincere) to attack its presence in laptops, while in Europe most of the domestic sewer tubing (waste pits, gutters, etc) are made from PVC (they used lead before for tubing thinner than 2in!). In the former case we are talking about minute amounts, in the latter case about huge amounts.
most of your points show a junkies need for denial
G P picked on apple because apple was enjoys a special place in many hearts
G P travels to the dumps in asia and africa and india where electronics are taken apart by women and children and see's first hand what is what , has steve gone to these dumps ??
in most countries you would be arrested for exposing children to toxic materials found in electronic devices
yet in these squalid places IT IS STILL A GROWTH INDUSTRY pulling apart these death machines
and apple should have cradled to graved its products yrs ago
a decade ago
apple knew better
they all knew better
they all know better
money and greed
every time idiots like us get a new phone WE also get a new charger and a new battery
WHY THE FUCK CAN'T WE MAKE IT ALL A MINI USB AND MAKE EVERY BATTERY RE CHARGE ABLE ??
i have draws fill with wires and such .
finally sony and europe will make mini usb standard
thousands of kids will thank them
G P was very smart
with a small budget and 20 projects world wide they woke apple up spending very little but using apples own media hype machine
APPLE OWES G P A LARGE DEBT
i am an apple fan boy but in this case fuck apple . money was so important to them that it took green light's flashed on there 5th ave store to wake them up
and thank god apple now sets the standard for cradle to grave products and owning up to a companies footprint on mother EARTH
9
I do not agree with you,[ and some of the other comments made against Greenpeace]. Most great things happen because of militant activity. The USA was found by militants after the seeking a partnership angle didn't work out.
First, Apple was a fair target by Greenpeace. Apple's campaign was Think Different, and Al Gore sits on Apple's Board. Greenpeace exercised it's first Amendment rights to express it's desire that Apple become more a leader in environmental efforts. Second, Apple seemed to spring into action highlighting Apple's environmental efforts in response to Greenpeace's attacks. In fact, we know that is true because Jobs letter to the public indirectly refers to Greenpeace. Third, the problem with forming partnerships is companies interests are seldomly aligned with doing the right thing. I doubt profit driven companies without the proper motivation are going to produce environmentally responsible policies. If corporations are open to that, then sure partnerships would be great. Fifth, it is hard to find fault with an organization that merely wants corporations to remove toxic materials from the products they manufacturer. I certainly am glad Greenpeace is spending it's time trying to put pressure on corporations. I do not have the time to do it.
With all that said, Greenpeace's initial ranking system was flawed. It was based on corporations ranking on statements of what corporations intended to do in the future. That system worked against Apple because it is more of a take action company as opposed to let us discuss what our future plans may be sort of company. In Greenpeace's defense it probably initially approached companies asking them to disclose their efforts to reduce the toxic materials it uses in their products, and the companies wouldn't cooperate. Accordingly, Greenpeace had to create a system that allowed companies to start thinking about such efforts without making legally binding commitments to actually do anything.
Do you like them, but you don't. We have no need for them. Apple did the right thing because Apple wanted to. If Apple didn't want too, they would not have. It is hard for some people to grasp, but some profit driven companies want to do the right thing. It just takes time because they have to turn a profit in the meantime.
Greenpeace should be dissolved because they have turned into something treacherous and terrorists like. If they would issue reports, rate companies on what they are actual doing, and sit down in rational negotiations, I would have no problem with them.
lol
I never claimed to be a pacifist...
Hey guys, anybody care to get together for a beer instead of filling this post with rants?
wrong
G P
did a great job of getting apple to clean up its act
apple is held to a higher standard than other companies
as a result i know own a green MBP
and ho acer dell will be screwed if they don't match apple's greeness
G P for all its faults does more for mother earth than most
9
Do you really think they have helped the environment at the end of the day? Wouldn´t they have helped more designing eco-friendly products while holding a real job?
Hey guys, anybody care to get together for a beer instead of filling this post with rants?
I wish..Friday makes for a LONG day... 8)
I'm curious about this one. It was bundled with my mac, but I'm hearing a lot of horror stories about the packaging when you bought it in the store.
Was it that bad?
I'm not really sure, but previous posts have lambasted Apple for the clear plastic case the Magic Mouse comes in. I for one like it, though it is made from "recyclable" plastic #7... http://earth911.com/plastic/number-7...out-plastic-7/ which i guess isn't always very recyclable...
I suppose they could have sold them in little cardboard boxes, or brown paper bags, but the point of the clear case was most likely to show off the sleek design of the mouse. Judging by sales numbers, Apple may have been onto something there.
I for one can't bring myself to recycle it or throw it away, even the damn case looks sleek. I'll keep it around for now. It's actually small enough to be used as a protective case for the MM in some situations, but once you've removed the adhesive hat holds the case together, it doesn't say together very well.
I'm not really sure, but previous posts have lambasted Apple for the clear plastic case the Magic Mouse comes in. I for one like it, though it is made from "recyclable" plastic #7... http://earth911.com/plastic/number-7...out-plastic-7/ which i guess isn't always very recyclable...
I suppose they could have sold them in little cardboard boxes, or brown paper bags, but the point of the clear case was most likely to show off the sleek design of the mouse. Judging by sales numbers, Apple may have been onto something there.
I for one can't bring myself to recycle it or throw it away, even the damn case looks sleek. I'll keep it around for now. It's actually small enough to be used as a protective case for the MM in some situations, but once you've removed the adhesive hat holds the case together, it doesn't say together very well.
Our city allows recycling of #7. I guess it depends on how you look at it. If they are using #7, they are already utilizing recycled plastics, so that is a good thing.
Is this the packaging in total, or is there a larger container that holds this?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32819147@N00/4055330189/
If Apple really wanted to help the environment, they would stop producing computers for two years and then start again so everyone actually used the ones they had instead of buying new ones for every update when they don't really *need* one.
Wouldn't that be consumers that you need to 'fix', and not Apple?
Wouldn't that be consumers that you need to 'fix', and not Apple?
Do you think I was serious?
Apple would go out of business or raise their prices so high consumers would not buy them.
My point is this, GP didn't make Apple do anything. Apple did it because they wanted to or their customer base wanted it.
Wouldn't that be consumers that you need to 'fix', and not Apple?
Which is why Greenpeace fails.. because they don't ask people to change their habits of buying then junking stuff. It's just easier to blame a company for toxic waste and not consumers, b/c then you have a easier target, and consumers don't get alienated by your tactics. Well, now they're alienated anyway, because of the way that Greenpeace still scores electronics makers. It still ranks Apple as 5th in electronics makers on the Greenest Electronics Makers list, because it didn't have a "Public Policy" on environment and such. For that I can't forgive them... that's just arbitrary.
Oh I believe you and you didn't read the effects of a "nuclear winter"
Basically, so much soot gets into the atmosphere that it:
1: Keeps the Earths residue heat in, raising global temperatures, then as heat finally escapes...
2: The Sun is blocked and new heat can't get to warm the Earth, the planet begins to cool A LOT!!! And that's where we are at now, the beginning of the cooling part. Colder winters, cooler summers.
You see depending upon the direction certain parts of Earth is facing the Sun, and the distance, give us our temperatures and seasons. The Earth radiates that excess heat into space like a reflector. If a lot of particles are in the air, it blocks this normal process and causes a imbalance.
The below normal colder temperatures will continue until the soot level in the atmosphere is reduced, but people will burn more to stay warm, prolonging the problem.
So Al Gore is wrong about his point that global temperatures will continue to climb with more harmful emissions, it's more like other way around now. Heat from the Sun can't heat the Earth as well with too much soot in the atmosphere.
Perhaps the reason why those climate emails got hacked, people are getting suspicious.
My theory also explains our recent very cold temperatures when we should be having a very mild winter, right?
I knew what was going to happen all along and live where it's warm, it's been in the 50's now, it's usually in the mid 70's to 80's this time of year, but it's better than what other people are having.
I generally do not read Wikipedia stories on politically controversial topics. Too much agenda-driven info for me to parse.
But it appears that you have not bothered to look at the WMO analysis from the link that I sent you, as is obvious when you blather on about temperatures in the US.
Incidentally, you keep bringing up Al Gore. I have no clue why or how he is relevant to scientific discussion on the topic of climate. You obviously like to pay attention to him. I don't.
Which is why Greenpeace fails.. because they don't ask people to change their habits of buying then junking stuff. It's just easier to blame a company for toxic waste and not consumers, b/c then you have a easier target, and consumers don't get alienated by your tactics. Well, now they're alienated anyway, because of the way that Greenpeace still scores electronics makers. It still ranks Apple as 5th in electronics makers on the Greenest Electronics Makers list, because it didn't have a "Public Policy" on environment and such. For that I can't forgive them... that's just arbitrary.
I would say it's both consumer and manufacturer's faults. Consumers need to recycle or donate old computer hardware, pay attention to disposal requirements, and make green choices when buying. Manufacturers need to be mindful of the waste that they produce, the toxins they introduce into the environment, and the habits of their consumers so that they can adapt their business model to be a little more green friendly.
It's a two way street, and not the fault of just one group or the other.
Complete analysis of how Greenpeace actually ranks Apple: http://vertatique.com/?q=greenpeace-...ree-categories