'Hi Underseal, you think?
When knowing, care to share it with us? :-?

Except that, just like in most of the other things you post, you're wrong. :salute:

Try this list first as the large polluters:

CO2 Emissions (per capita) (most recent) by country
#1 Qatar: 40.6735 per 1,000 people
#2 United Arab Emirates: 28.213 per 1,000 people
#3 Kuwait: 25.0499 per 1,000 people
#4 Bahrain: 20.0253 per 1,000 people
#5 United States: 19.4839 per 1,000 people

Waste generation (most recent) by country
#1 Denmark: 560 kgs per person per year
#2 Netherlands: 530 kgs per person per year
#3 United Kingdom: 480 kgs per person per year
#4 United States: 460 kgs per person per year
#5 Belgium: 450 kgs per person per year
Pollution > Carbon dioxide 1999 (most recent) by country
#1 United States: 1,499,850
#2 Russia: 392,287
#3 Japan: 315,274
#4 India: 293,938
#5 Germany: 216,213
Pollution > Nuclear waste (most recent) by country
#1 United States: 2,100
#2 Canada: 1,340
#3 France: 1,130
#4 Japan: 964
#5 United Kingdom:
And here the countries that work on being green the most..
Environmental agreement compliance (most recent) by country Rank Countries Amount (top to bottom)
#1 Finland: 6.72
#2 Denmark: 6.67
#3 Sweden: 6.54
#4 Austria: 6.33
#5 Germany: 6.27

10 most polluted places in 2006:

Linfen, China, where residents say they literally choke on coal dust in the evenings, exemplifies many Chinese cities;
Haina, Dominican Republic, has severe lead contamination because of lead battery recycling, a problem common throughout poorer countries [image];
Ranipet, India, where leather tanning wastes contaminate groundwater with hexavalent chromium, made famous by Erin Brockovich, resulting in water that apparently stings like an insect bite [image];
Mailuu-Suu, Kyrgyzstan, home to nearly 2 million cubic meters of radioactive mining waste that threatens the entire Ferghana valley, one of the most fertile and densely populated areas in Central Asia that also experiences high rates of seismic activity;
La Oroya, Peru, where the metal processing plant, owned by the Missouri-based Doe Run Corporation, leads to toxic emissions of lead;
Dzerzinsk, Russia, one of the country's principal chemical weapons manufacturing sites until the end of the Cold War [image];
Norilsk, Russia, which houses the world's largest heavy metals smelting complex;
Rudnaya Pristan, Russia, where lead contamination resulted in child blood lead levels eight to 20 times maximum allowable U.S. levels;
Chernobyl, Ukraine, infamous site of a nuclear meltdown 20 years ago; and
Kabwe, Zambia, where child blood levels of lead are five to 10 times the allowable EPA maximum [image].


And the new winner:

AUSTRALIA!
http://www.inhabitat.com/2009/09/11/...-in-the-world/

By what definition, per capita or absolute figures? Or perhaps both?

I do think, therefore I am:DL
Sure, where shall I begin? The nature of Earth and the Solar system? Mathematics? Magnetism? Human anatomy? Newtonian Physics? Psychology? Electromagnetic theory? Relativistic theory? Waveform propogatation? Atomic theory? Gene theory?

Pick one of the above or select any field you choose and I will show you how one (or a few) brilliant minds succeeded in changing the world's view forever.

Does it matter? Well no. Pollution is pollution.

My argument isn't with claims the US is the worst in just about every category. My argument is with your ongoing blanket claims about Evil Americans. There are huge discussions and debates going on here about that concrete level you mention. We fight about it constantly.

Yes, we're number one in per capita CO2 pollution. Guess who's a fairly close number five?
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/en...ide-per-capita

And guess who cuts down more timber per capita than any other nation in the world?
http://atlas.aaas.org/natres/intro_popups.php?p=top

I don't disagree that something should be done, and I don't disagree that America has problems in this area. It just seems to me that you would rather call us names that have an honest discussion of the situation.

Of course it does. I mean, China has about 4 + times the population of the US so it's not that big of surprise if they produce more pollution in absolute figures then the US. And a small country like Qatar may produce more in terms of per capita but a lot less in absolute figures.

Overheard a story about a picture being presented to the Summit.

Its a rather graphic portrayal of a Polar bear with the dead carcass of a young bear firmly clamped in its mouth. A grisly portrayal to say the least.

They then went on to say that Polar Bears natural diet has been disrupted by climate change and have turned to canabilisim.

Hey Mr. Scientist you may want to do a little research into the behaviour of adult male polar bears. They do tend to eat their young given half a chance.. global climate change or not.

The point is that there is alot of blatent falsehoods being presented as factual.

Added link to avoid the inevatible

http://blogs.reuters.com/photo/2009/...urns-cannibal/

China does not practice any type of pollution control at all as well as other countries. So, no it does not matter one ioda. You stated the US is number one in pollution. Flat out. Nothing about per capita or absolute figures. So in your mind it does not matter for the US. The US is just the biggest offender.

Biggest offender? How is that different from being the biggest polluter?

Even if China doesn't employ much environmental standards it's pretty telling that they have only recently caught up with the US in terms of absolute figures despite having 4 + times the population.

Plus, it's the US corporations that have moved their factories into places like China where there are lax environmental codes just so they can cut costs and also to ignore worker rights.

Lions eat their young also. Been going on for centuries. The more the climate peddlers talk the more ridiculas this seems.

Nice twist with the last sentence. This is not about worker rights. :doh: Back to what you stated. US is biggest polluter/offender/a-holes...please do not throw that out there without some supporting documentation or links.

Oh yea that's right because pollution has no effect on workers. You're absolutely right there. :doh:

It primarily about the method and the attitude that you have. No offence, yet most responses that I see from both side (one has to be truthful), is one of the old division between the free market and the "bloody commies" that we Europeans have come to represent. And this is what is irking us the most, the fact that you put everything down on the level of economics. Or on the other hand, on the level of religion, with "Jesus Christ, our only Lord and Saviour". I'm not claiming that this is how the whole of the USA act, yet you're not giving us a better picture, are you? The more Skybird focuses on the issue of the rationalistic method, the more he is attacked for being bias, even though he always presents both sides of the argument. We are not blameless ourselves, yet we do see things from the alternative, non-economic point of view, between GDP and what can be defined as "right".

The USA/Europe argument is the same as the human right/Islam arguments. Both sides use quasi rational methods to support their views. And while neither is correct in doing so, Europe is ready to accept different views and try to solve the difference without too much violent conflict, while Islam is still deeply entrenched in the Quran and the Shari'ah and reason forbid that it should be any different.

I'm finished with this. Since this moment, I'm happily waiting for the Singularity. Whatever it may bring us. It will at least stop the constant bickering about who's stone is stonier and solve the issue for us. With us or without us.

Oh and this.