On a broader scale, using any other decade as comparison, the data showed mixed results across the board, including slightly warmer periods, slightly colder periods. On average, temperatures now are not outside the range of the norm, hence my conclusion; the data doesn't support the idea of global warming. You want to talk carbon emissions, water pollution, climate shift, weather pattern shift, I can't speak for them. But unless you can present actual temperature data that compares a wider range of data, warming is a myth.

Balius

Daimyo Nintendo

Daimyo Nintendo

Nirual

Zero_Beat

Merc_80

To worry about Nintendo and make unfound accusations about them is a example of how enviromentalis are more shaddy and they are against capitalism. Think about it!!!!

Xcite79

If I didn't want people to rebuke or challenge my comments, why would I post them publicly? I'm not trying to take the science out of everything.

I agree that the earth IS getting warmer, but I do not think it is 100% man made. The earth still has ice at the poles which indicates an Ice age - IE we are still leaving one and its going to get much, much hotter. Mankind has added what, 4% co2 to the atmosphere in 200 years of industrialised labour? (I read this in New scientist a few years back so it may be inaccurate now) That other 96% was flying up there before we got our boot in. We are damaging the environment but my point is it's not on a scale that will doom us all water world style.

I think many scientists abuse the issue to scare people, get papers published and make money. I could be wrong and I am no environmental scientist (although my brother is so by reading books and talking to him and his fellows at Cambridge I alter my opinions, hes against global warming as an idea anyway) but people have been crying doom from the 80's and oh look, we're all still alive!

Anyway, you are correct this is a bit off topic and might get me banned so I shall reign it in:

My basic point is that no matter how environmentally unfriendly Nintendo act it's not going to kill us all or doom the planet to boil to death. I'm not the only one on here saying that so please do not single me out for all the venom.

I welcome different opinions and challenges. Just because I have an opinion that goes against the mainstream does not mean I ignore the ideas of others or that I am some Digg troll. I use Reddit anyway :P

EdwinJ85

By the way: science deals with hypothesis, not theory. what the fuck is the worth of investigating thing which are already worked out?
Spending time defending the use of one word or the other is for spinsters, not scientists. They happily call string theory something which is an hypothesis and that they hope to be a fact, and everyone knows it.

first google link:
[usgovinfo.about.com]
In case you didn't know, Science is pretty much the highest journal for non-mathy/CSy science.

shitanuzuki

Also, physical equations (the ones that make you fly planes and so on) are highly nonlinear. So even small variations can have big effects on different variables. Unless you are a newborn you have heard of the stupid butterfly effect (which is a stupid exageration but whatever).

Human impact on things also tend to be fairly nonlinear, because we tend to grow very fast as a population. ever seen curves of population as a function of time? Or curbs of energy consumption? or anything that measures how much we change (positively or negatively) our environment?

Lastly, your last sentnce shows how you understand absolutely nothing about science? Being right depends on a person's opinion, not on their argument?
Go back to high school, dude, seriously.

shitanuzuki

Please, stop listening to Al Gore, and find a REAL scientist, preferably a meteorologist, and listen to what they have to say. There is no consensus, 90% of the scientists will tell you "it's just not happening", or "because the way our system works, it will not make any difference in the end".

Al Gore had lower scores at Yale than George Bush. How does that make you feel.

Also, if there were evidence on the side of "global warming" it would be a theory, and not a hypothesis.

Just because you say it so, doesn't make it so. You're a shining beacon of hypocrisy on the shore of the ocean of ignorance.

Herabec

1 Degree? OH NOES!!! Instead of -57 below zero, it'll be -56! AHH, they ice caps are melting!

Yeah, and that video you see of the icebergs falling into the water? Not because they're melting, that's because the weight of the SNOW that's falling on them is too great for them to hold. That's a result of COLD.

Go find a reputable meteorologist that believes in global warming. Wait, that, by definition, would make him un-reputable.

Herabec

It's about making checkable predictions (ones you can be accountable for), falsifiable experiments and so on. And at that game, global warming people are truly fucking the people on the other side.

The evidence is on the side of global warming. That's as simple as it is. It's not about having a particular opinion, or at least certainly not about completely uninformed opinions.

shitanuzuki

The most annoying part about global warming is that it fails to take into account the SUN! What do you think makes the day's warmer than the nights? Or days and nights at all!?

Also, the ozone "hole" fluctuates 50% on it's own, they juxtapose that we removed 5%. Yip, yip, yip, yahoo. Big deal, there.

Herabec

How did the comments about this article get so wildly derailed?

NitrousO

Tenchuu

yanipheonu

I don't follow the global warming hype either - IMO any temperature changes are part of the cycle of getting cold and hot that the earth goes through every few thousand years.

The dinosaurs lived in the tropical paradise that was...Wales? Obviously we are just getting warm again (if at all) from the last ice age.

We are technically still in an ice age because there is ice at the poles, but don't tell the hippies that. The ice melting is OBVIOUSLY unnatural, evil, and the sins of man coming to get us.

Or just the earth continuing on its ancient cycle again and again doing what it always does: Ignoring the petty squabbles of man.

EdwinJ85

Superstar90

Thank you for quoting the oil company newsletter... but I prefer to get my information from scientists instead. As for the annual temperature changes, here is what Nasa has to say:

[earthobservatory.nasa.gov]

Now I'll stop about this... I'm a fool for even starting it. Nobody listens to anybody on the internet. It's a place to spread your own view on the world to nobody that listens... I should have learnt that lesson years ago. My apologies for trying to share a scientist's view of it all.

The Whaleman

fuchikoma

Why are people defending Nintendo in this case, get your priorities straight. Defending video games over the environment?

PSN ID: Kadaj24

willyolio

junk

There are many reasons to go green, and I'm all for cutting emissions. What I can't endorse is an extensive cleanup effort that costs billions of dollars, attacks the wrong problem, and leaves the world fiscally unable to approach the real problem. Needs more data before one can go tilting at windmills.

Atmospheric science is hit or miss at best. There are too many variables, too many causes of too many outcomes. If a scientist is willing to prove he can predict the temperature a year away, I'll be willing to listen when it comes to ten years.

Balius

juliopalio

@Unknown-User:
The problem with believing that the truth is somewhere in between two arguments is that it lends credence to arguments that are completely fabricated. The arguments against global warming have been largely created by the oil companies to protect their financial interests. Personally, I do think that it may be more relevant to discuss alternative energies for political reasons (dependence on unstable regions for vital resources is unwise), but it does have the additional benefit of assisting the environment. Climate change and the politics of energy, food, and water resources are complex issues that do have a lot of gray area, but those that deny climate change are no more credible than holocaust deniers.

kingofallcosmos

AstraPompeii

AstraPompeii

juliopalio

Unknown-User

I'm no scientist, but that sounds like solid logic to me.

peAr nectAr

We were surprised by the content of the Greenpeace report, given that we take great care to comply with all relevant regulations on avoiding the use of dangerous materials, recycling, etc. As is stated in the manuals of the Wii console and DS Lite, neither product contains latex, lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyl (PBB), or polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE). Additionally, we have been phasing out the use of PVC in our packaging, using a safer, recyclable plastic instead.

We take great care to comply with all relevant regulations on avoiding the use of dangerous materials. All Nintendo products supplied worldwide are designed to comply with relevant global standards. In order to certify that Nintendo products comply with standards for hazardous chemical substances, Nintendo has established the Green Procurement Standards, which require our component suppliers to certify that any parts they deliver do not include hazardous chemical substances, and ensure that Nintendo fully controls its products internally.

Regarding a "take back" program for obsolete products, our products tend to avoid obsolescence as consumers hang on to them long after having upgraded. In addition, consumer demand for used Nintendo products remains high, resulting in very infrequent requests for recycling options. However, for those who wish to recycle, there are a variety of programs available in their local area.

Rechargeable batteries may be taken to most local office supply stores and other disposal centers to be recycled for free. More information may be found on the website below:

[www.epa.gov]

For hardware, there are a variety of websites dedicated to providing information on local recycling options. I've provided a direct link to one of them below:

[www.epa.gov]

For consumers who aren't able to take advantage of local recycling options for either rechargeable batteries or hardware, they may contact us to make arrangements to have it sent in to Nintendo to be recycled by calling 1-800-255-3700. Representatives are available to speak to you between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Pacific Time, seven days a week.

majortom1981

Surely the fact that each Wii unit uses about as much energy as a lightbulb must bump that score to at least a 1.0?

yanipheonu

So in other words, they apply no scientific observation to their studies and grade companies punitively based on emotional reaction. This means that their studies are worthless from an informational point of view. In attempting to cash in on trends and cover video games for attention, they have thrown their credibility out the window. Good job guys! You're on top of trends - and don't matter!

fuchikoma

But no, in modern science theories cannot be proven. Gravity is still a theory that we refer to as a law. Modern science lives on the concept to accept what we cannot prove false, but never stop looking for alternative explanations. But we teach everything as "laws" to begin with, since nobody can start understanding the Universe at a quantum physics level... we need to rely on simple explanations to start with and they're usually referred to as the laws of physics and so on. But the more you learn, the less certain it gets and the more you understand the theories, the more you see how much we do not know.

Charles Darwin for example was horribly wrong on some parts, Carl von Linné even more so... yet we (well not all...) accepted their work for their time until it could be explained better.

The Whaleman

BananaChan

smitty1123

Also as for the Greenpeace- Nintendo deal I do not say it's good for nintendo not saying anything, but for Greenpeace to rate them on a "no data = lowest score" basis is far more wrong, since you have to read the individual reports to se that this is actually the case. Because of this Nintendo is ranked together with companies that they actually have data of, and no comparison in the world is fair between the two. It would have been a lot more effective to remove Nintendo from the comparision graph completely, giving a big fuss about how they refused to disclose any data and pointing fingers to that than putting them on that graph in an utterly unscientific manner. Had they removed them and pointed fingers, Nintendo would have looked bad, but as they do now it's Greenpeace getting all negative attention.

The Whaleman

noliferuin (PSN+XBL)

Arklop

and yes, theories can be proven, thats when you get facts/laws.

noliferuin (PSN+XBL)

Also as for finding a scientific article that doesn't say "pending further research" is not the same thing. If you think it is, you're misunderstood the foundation of modern science. Everything is a theory, nothing can be proved. We can say that it's most likely the sun will rise tomorrow, based on previous observations as well as from gravitational patterns in our solar system... but as a true scientist, we do never ever claim it's guaranteed to happen. Yet we hold it to be true until we can find a theory explaining it even better that says otherwise. The same goes for the global warming, as for now we cannot find anything better to explain the majority of the global warming than human impact. It's a theory, yes. But so is everything we produce. It's journalism and other non-scientists that tries to turn it into facts.

The Whaleman

Benjo

In the defense of greenpeace (which i do not like at all, being very pro-nuclear myself):
They say "we don't know, so they suck". So first, the fact we know this at least acknowledges this is their way of grading. It'd be worse if they pretended they just sucked without disclosing the fact they didn't know anything.
Second, they are consistent with their view of the world (which we may not agree with, but that's a different story): Environment is very important.
Put it that way: if a country refuses to have external inspectors to see how human rights are respected, or say, to see if they are developing weapons of mass destruction, should we just go : " for this country we have no data, so we will pretend we don't care".
Of course nintendo have no incentive for releasing that data. But by refusing to do so they willingfully classify themselves as potential harm to the environment. Wether that matters or not is up to you to decide, but argueing it doesn't matter if they decide to release that info or not is childish fanboyism.

shitanuzuki

noliferuin (PSN+XBL)

Ether02

it's good to look at the other side of the argument sometimes. i turn your challenge back on you, to find out how many of these reports in support of mankind causing global warming include a footnote 'pending further research'. truth is, global warming is such a hot button issue these days, it's difficult for scientists to get funding if it isn't something that can be thrown in the news. does a board of benefactors award funding to scientist A researching the behaviour of light in different strengths of gravity or do they award it to scientist B who claims he can prove global warming is real?

noliferuin (PSN+XBL)

That being said, Greenpeace are still being stupid beyond measure with these "surveys". Instead of "we do not know" they say "they suck". Very mature "journalism" indeed.

The Whaleman

Mister Adequate

frieze

Plus, when I saw gigantic windmills spinning on mountaintops in Spain, I was awestruck. Those things are really cool.

mgy

noliferuin (PSN+XBL)

Whatever. I know Greenpeace does some good stuff, but I've seen too much BS from them lately.

Bokusatsu_Tenshi

I just want to say that both sides are not without usual political slant. One side dismisses it and the other blows it out of proportion. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Unknown-User

TOCATL

Nintendo is just as shiat. Atleast MS and Sony have some transparency they got little to hide, solid policies they can reveal to the public.

All we know Nintendo is buying coltan from African Warlords and nickle from slave miners in India. Good thing I didn't buy a Wii.

SchoolBusDriver

Green-clad Gamer Dude

Green-clad Gamer Dude

The real problem is the real evidence against dwindling petroleum reserves.

Hurry up and bring out the next generation of vehicle propulsion technology!

if threy have to use global warming, so be it.

gimme the utrbo-charged hydrogen battery crusier NOW.

D:

Onizuka-GTO

lanion

Green-clad Gamer Dude

Disposal of rechargeable batteries:
Rechargeable batteries may be taken to most local office supply stores and other disposal centers to be recycled for free. To find a collector site near you, please contact your local solid waste authority or visit: [www.epa.gov]

Disposal of old hardware or accessories:
There are a variety of websites dedicated to providing information on local recycling options. For more information, please visit [www.epa.gov]

If you are not able to take advantage of local recycling options for either rechargeable batteries or hardware, please contact us to make arrangements to have it sent in to Nintendo to be recycled by calling 1-800-255-3700. Representatives are available to speak to you between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Pacific Time, seven days a week."

What more do they want? The two guys from the Wii adverts to drive to your house in their Bullet Bill car, come in for some tea and then take all of your Nintendo products you want to recycle?

Sasuntsi|Davit

i live in england and politicians have enforced laws such as taxes on airline flights to reduce carbon emissions. how much do planes contribute to carbon emissions compared to cars? not much but SURELY they're not just latching onto something people blindly accept to impose taxes, only the evil oil corporations lie about global warming for their own benefit. however you're clearly an expert on the subject cos the government isn't in your mind, so please enlighten me as to why you're so sure i'm wrong?
*sits with coffee and waits for copy-paste wikipedia*

noliferuin (PSN+XBL)

Unknown-User

SpookyTanooki

lanion

BTW American Money is made of 25% linen and 75% cotton, so the forests of the world are safe when Nintendo goes to cash in.

chaosmage89

noliferuin (PSN+XBL)

The problem with electrical goods is that they contain unfortunate chemical nasties. From sourcing, manufacture and disposal- these nasties permanently get into the food supply and water systems, causing things like, y'know, tumors, hideous birth defects, death. Yum.

I love nintendo, but i love cancer free me more. If there is an alternative to having a toxic waggle fest, then nintendo, and every other transnational company, should do it. Its not as if they dont have the imagination or money.

marleycat

This makes me like Nintendo even more; knowing that Greenpeace doesn't.

ncsbert

Greenpeace have a lot of money, surely they can buy a wii and take it apart, trace the source of each component and check with the parts manufacturers for use of toxic chemicals, or even subject it to lab analysis. Nintendo only MAKE about 5 major electronic products (Wii, DS and a few accessories), it's not that big of a chore. But this survey isn't about ACTUAL impact as the publicity implies, it's about companies complying to the whims of an NGO in terms of their information. If this was plublicised as a "Measure of the availibility of information on recycling and chemical use by several electronics manufacturers" that would be well and good, but calling it a "Guide to Greener Electronics" is misleading at best.

Happykraken

AEREC

Nintendo should be forthright and release more information, even if they don't have to, but frankly, it's Greenpeace: I wouldn't want PR from them, even if it was glowing. They're all frightening extremists.

AlexDitto

Man I must use that in future publications when my models fail to complete due to errors in the code. It's science at its best really. "Since all models failed to complete, the harbour seal populations are doomed to die according to my calculations".

All greenpeace does is scanning the sites for environmental policies and apparently not daring to write anything is waaaaaaay worse that admitting to doing something wrong. "Based on a sample of 0 data points (or n = 0 as I'd prefer to say), we conclude that Nintendo is t3h evil!!!! with 0 degrees of freedom and a standard deviation of NaN"

The Whaleman

Personally, I feel such information about measures taken by companies to be 'green' should be made public by law, that way environmentalist companies groups aren't complete douches like Greenpeace could provide the analysis.

Spoiler Duck

dsmx

So If I choose not to undergo a test in some university, they´ll give me a low grade? It´s not like Nintendo asked for approval, so why they undergo them into a test even so?

I can´t go out on the street and call all the women around me dirty because they didn´t were interested on letting me sniffing their necks and panties.

Wyld

@c00ler_dood:Thank you for your completely pointless show of bragging on what a L33T pirate you are. The banhammer will see you now.

Foxstar Sixtail

TKWarrior

PHILOSOPHER541

kazuwacky

zing!

dirtybacon

If Greenpeace did that, then they'd have to admit that they themselves are the biggest cause of environmental damage in the world, thus destroying themselves in the process.

You, sir, are a genius.

Pezdispenser

360 improves most, as environmentally friendly device, with nintendo improving slightly more than sony, who didn't improve at all!

^^^^^now THAT would have been effective journalism.

joelface

Angryrider

Why doesn't Greenpeace harass the game-makers who keep making games that no one will buy? That's a bigger waste of resources than the consoles! I'd like to see the asshats behind "Alvin and the Chipmunks" beaten to death for what they've done to the environment! Movie game tie-in bastards!

ChrowX

Spoiler Duck

xpnet

Greenpeace: Fill in all these forms for us, so we can make a report on your environmental standards.
Nintendo: No. We're not giving that information to you (and our competitors).
Greenpeace: Pleeeeease. We won't use it against you. At least put some info up on your website to let consumers know about how they can use your products in an environmentally-friendly way.
Nintendo: Go away. We're too busy printing money. We don't even have enough time to expand Wii production, let alone deal with you guys.
Greenpeace: You'll be sorry.
Greenpeace Press Release: Nintendo are enviromental vandals! They must be doing all sorts of evil stuff because they won't tell us anything, and they refused to put information on their website when we asked them to!

Marlor

noliferuin (PSN+XBL)

RobTheBuilder

KM91

Kohath

PETA would win, easy. They have a couple videos that compare beef factories to the holocaust.

Keep it classy, PETA.

pagancollective

Seriously though, this is really quite misleading, It's not a guide to which company is greener, it's a guide to which company is best at publicising those portions of it's green policies which this report is interested in. Hell, some of the criteria are questionable to start with; If company X has a recycling policy where I have to ship an 80kg TV across the country for them to recycle it, is that really more efficient than taking it down the road to my council run recycling centre? There's also the fact that all Electronics are not created equal; many people change phones on an annual basis, I still have a working SNES. The existence of a strong aftermarket for gaming products means a gaming-only company like Nintendo or MS doesn't NEED a recyling policy in the same was as Nokia, whos products are obsolete before they're even bought.

It's also misleading to call this "a guide to greener electronics". Toxic chemicals and recycling are a SMALL part of how "green" a company is. What about their policies on sourcing chemicals which are not toxic but which have other environmental impacts (mining of iron ore for example)? Energy efficiency and low-power standby options? overall energy consumption of product? general product lifespan; MS would lose big time on this with the sheer number of replacements they have to make.

I'm not some Zealot, if Nintendo really did legitimately score a zero I'd accept it, but lack of evidence is not evidence of a problem. Lack of policies on PVC and BRFs could be damning, or could mean these materials are not used in the first place.

Happykraken

Captain Impulse

Let's see, there's that one where the teenagers murder a rat and staple a sign onto its corpse, the one where the teenagers dump a bunch of garbage into a park, the one where they steal photos of stillborn children and use them to scare people away from Planned Parenthood, etc etc.

Pezdispenser

Captain Impulse

RobTheBuilder

So, they don't even know.

Ashurahori

Sabre_Justice: Okay, no more long name.

@Balius: What are your smoking ads? Ours here in Australia are more along the lines of 'Smoking makes your insides burn and melt'.

Sabre_Justice: Okay, no more long name.

Pezdispenser

I dunno though, is environmentalism big in Japan? Sony and Microsoft are big international companies in the spotlight, but Nintendo seems more Japan-based and quieter on the press front for the most part.

Sabre_Justice: Okay, no more long name.

Don't folllow anyone.

Like the Anti-smoking ads make not smoking seem so incredibly lame that smoking is the only course of action for those trying to seem hip.

Balius

Captain Impulse

dantheman1000

i'll never buy anything from them again. in fact, i haven't bought any DS games in years. thanks to R4 ^__^

c00ler_dood

Way to show the improvement, Greenpeace. Also, the research done was staggering.

Balius

kwonster

Are you sure? I heard they got such a low score because they needed to use pandas in the production of their DS. Uncomfirmed rumor, though. I just heard it from my friend.

Channing

dunetiger reads kotaku, seems pleased

Granted, I personally wouldn't give the tree hugging hippie freaks at Greenpeace the time of day.

Lyrai

Just thought I'd hijack the thread.

pagancollective

But maybe that's just biased ol' me.

mrbloober

Channing