How's this for jaw dropping...

How's this for jaw dropping, mind-boggling, unintentional irony?

Question to the Bush administration at this year's UN climate change talks:

If you look back over the course of the last few years, is there anything you would have done differently or is there anything you wished had happened but didn't happen?


I wish first that Russia had made its mind up sooner as to whether it was going to join Kyoto or not.

Read the particulars here. (No it won't make anymore sense)

More like this

Things slow down when it snows everywhere. They did when I lived in New York, Chicago, and Madison, WI, and for good reason. There are a few basic rules about driving in snow that everybody adheres to, including being knowledgeable about what your vehicle can and cannot handle. It's a pain, but it…
It's a new year, so that means it's time to take a look back at the previous year. In graphical form, it looks like this: Clears it all up, doesn't it? That's the past year in blog traffic, showing pageviews per day. Integrate it all up, and it comes to 717,254 pageviews. That's kind of mind-…
CLICK HERE FOR UP TO DATE COVERAGE AT THE PRESS CENTER(Download Bracket) PDF | JPG BEN: Welcome, Ladies and Gentleman to the 2007 SCIENCE SPRING SHOWDOWN - the thinking person's ccomplement to the NCAA tournament! Sponsored by the fine folks at ScienceBlogs Basic Concepts. That's right people, it…
I used to play a lot of computer games, and 12-y-o Junior loves them. His gaming experience is of course different from mine back in the day, not only because the games look much better now, but also because of on-line interactivity. There are a couple of developments that surprise me a great deal…

The irony almost makes up for the hypocrisy.

Nothing the Bush Administration says makes any sense. And never did.

This particular response is called "deferment" and "deflection" I think. Respond by not answering the question and deflect into a new direction. There are actually schools you can go to to learn how to do this, most politicians are graduates.

politicians not answering questions and just saying something else is standard stuff, but this is not a case of that at all. There was a option of which question to answer stipulated by the "or". He chose to answer the second question. Fair enough.

Incidentally, Bush had put forward his 'methane to markets' plan earlier as a cost effective strategy to fight global warming.

Kyoto is a waste of time which will be ignored by countries like China while enforced in countries like the US. The result will be industries continuing to move from the clean first world to the horribly polluted, inefficient, developing world which, in the end, will make our problems worse. China will enforce Kyoto with about the same fervor they enforce US copyrights.

Investing a few billion in nuclear power might help, if people were really serious about moving away from fossil fuels, as a willingness to use plutonium. But oddly, few in the environmental movement seem to favor this. Also, iron fertilization of the ocean's dead zones would be helpful, and the resulting algal bloom could be harvested to good effect. But of course, we're then brought to asking whether the goal is to actually reduce CO2 or simply hobble the industrial world. The inconsistency of people's responses strongly suggests the latter.