President Trump declined to participate G7 pledge supporting the Paris climate deal Saturday, making the U.S. the only holdout. Good news?
Good decision. Literally the only thing it's doing is taking our money.
I believe in climate change and protecting the environment firmly, but this deal was not the right way to go about it.
"A thaw is underway in Russia, and it has nothing to do with presidential politics.
Inside a cave in Russia's Ural Mountains, where Europe and Asia meet, a team of UNLV researchers has found evidence of steady warming since the end of the last ice age.
Average wintertime temperatures in the region are warmer today than at any time in the past 11,000 years, said UNLV doctoral student Jonathan Baker, who used precisely dated cave deposits left by melting snow to reconstruct seasonal climate patterns over millennia.
The study, published online last week by the journal Nature Geoscience, contradicts previous research that showed temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere peaking around 8,000 years ago and then cooling again before the start of the Industrial Revolution.
One reason for the discrepancy, Baker said: Earlier climate work was largely based on summer temperature variations, mostly in coastal areas, without the benefit of comparable wintertime data from the hemisphere's continental interior."
Isolation, that's the way to go.
Soon the rest of the world will be instituting sanctions on us.
Worthless if India and China are exempt.
It would be an OK deal if every country was subject to the same restrictions but even China didn't have to come on board until 2030 which is a crock so I'm glad that we pulled out. Anyway climate change is what made the earth - seems to me that's part of nature.
Very good news. We cannot even predict the weather more than a few days out with any sort of precision, yet we are going to destroy economies and lives today on the belief that catastrophic climate change will occur dozens of years in the future? Doesn't make sense to me.
This guy is our president and he has no clue.
Perhaps you're the one with no clue. The agreement does nothing to change the temperature and it'll cost trillions. youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
Okay. You say the agreement does nothing to change the temperature, yet you provide a video that states that it would. And if trump is so against this plan, why does he not introduce a better one? Maybe because he doesn't "believe" in climate change? You can just go somewhere else with your bs. Ain't nobody got time for it.
Not true. It says that for 100 trillion dollars it does almost nothing. Less than a third of a degree. And china and India don't even have to abide by it. They produce a thousand times more pollution than we do. And ours decreases every year. China is going to fire up 3 new coal plants every week for the next 20 years. So, should we destroy our economy and buy Chinese solar cells produced with high pollution coal that will completely offset all the money we spend? Or should we follow Bill Gates's lead and find a better solution? I'll agree with you that coal and oil are horrible polluters and needs to stop. But what will you replace it with? Solar will never be enough. And cars? You need a lot of clean electricity to charge electric cars. It needs to be cheap and clean for people to switch. If it's not cheap, then you're going to destroy poor working class people. They need cheap power or they starve. Ok. Are together on this? Stay with me and I'll show you a way to save us all.
Ok Ben. Here it is. The solution to all our problems. O% Co2 and cheap and clean electricity. So cheap, you could give it away. Imagine free electricity. Almost Nobody would buy a gasoline car again. And no coal or natural gas power plants. Can you imagine how great this would be? Will you listen to this ecologist? youtu.be/IZf6e0ntFrw
Okay, firstly, let's just agree that "does ALMOST nothing" and "does nothing" are not the same thing. Then I will agree with you that there is always a better way of doing anything. But trump pulling out of this plan with absolutely nothing to replace it is just a statement. He is just pandering to a large part of his base that have been lied to by big oil that either climate change isn't happening or that it won't affect us humans. The cost of this is very arguable at around 800 billion. The cost is high now because we are just starting on it. We have completely disregarded this problem until it has snowballed into a more costly problem. The cost should go down as we execute the plan and cut waste from it as we see it. But we can't do that if we don't even commit to a plan. But trump has no problem spending our money on other things, like war perpetuating arms (100+ billion) to Saudi Arabia. It's time to take a true assessment of our priorities and offer solutions, not rhetoric.
Okay you posted this too fast for me. I'm also doing other things today so I might be delayed. But I will check out your link at some point.
So I think we should look at the plan from Bill Gates. He's a progressive and is very smart at economics too. He's got some seriously good ideas. And he's also got a thorium based power plan. I think we should start a grass roots letter writing plan to our congressman to make a serious plan to get us off coal and oil and onto thorium. It makes so much sense. If the power companies that buy coal and oils will see how much cheaper it is to convert to thorium. We won't even have to spend money. They will invest and convert on their own.
👍🏽you'll love it. Nice talking with you. We'll chat later.
Yes I will check it all out. But I will say that I've never heard anything like thorium or any other solution come out of trump's mouth. I applaud you for providing some. But you are not him, and so I stand by my original post. We need to start on something now. And along the way, we can incorporate or switch to some of these other promising, speculative plans.
Okay I'm not totally opposed to nuclear, although it too has its drawbacks. But thorium as fuel is still speculative. It's promising but speculative. We need to take action now though. We can catch our policy up with science once we have a better handle on it can utilize it to our benefit.
I agree. For sure thorium has been proven to work back in the 60's. We should convince these big coal burning power companies that thorium as a fuel will cost them one thousandth the price of coal. Once they see the profits they will pay to have the plants converted. I just flew over 9 coal fired plants along the Ohio river today from Cincinnati. We could keep the miners digging thorium instead of coal. They won't get black lung. There's another scientist that has a good talk. He explains the system better and how we could help the rest of the world have cheap clean power and fresh water. youtu.be/jDqCpfVwdP4
I used to stay out that way for work. There are a bunch of plants along the Ohio. I would see them on my way home on the bridge to Wheeling, WV. and between there and Steubenville. And watching the coal transport trucks hauling around corners throwing coal all over the backroads. It would be great to convert away from the dirty coal industry for sure.
The democrats sure are in agreement about this one.
They don't have a clue. They just follow the lead sheep off the cliff. youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
Climate change has been going on since the beginning of time and mankind is not going to change that one way or the other so get over it.
Thank you President Trump.
Yep. It's a huge waste of money with no change.
You are a huge waste of space :/
Easy. If you start with personal attacks, I'll assume you don't have an argument and have lost the debate.
When you post the same BS link all over the place, I have to assume you are trying to shill instead of having an actual debate :/
Maybe you're the shill. I'm just trying give you a different perspective from the one you have had shoved down your throat. Try being slightly skeptical. Perhaps you're being taking advantage of by the crony capitalists who are profiting of on this.
Capitalists are the ones who profit off of coal and natural gas. My view sure as hell hasn't been shoved down my throat. It was formed after meticulous research on the fact, and based on actual facts rather than alternative facts.
Are you sure? Because a 20 trillion dollars to spend on climate change is a lot more money than any coal company will ever make. And who is going to profit on all these solar cells? Where are they made? China. Hmm. And they don't even have to abide by the rules. See where this is going? A huge scam. I'll tell you what. I'll agree with you that coal and oils are huge polluters. I hate the stink. And we both know it's not good for the environment. So what's the solution? We need to make electricity cheaper than gasoline so people will buy electric cars. And the electricity needs to be from a clean source. That would be a double benefit. So what if we changed the way me make electricity to a source that is cheap and clean. Would you agree with me that everyone could benefit? Bear with me and I'll show you how we can save the world.
Would you listen to an ecologist for a few minutes? Would you listen if he had an idea that would not only save the planet but our economy too. Poor people would benefit the most from this. Ok? Just a few minutes of your time. youtu.be/IZf6e0ntFrw
Did you like it? Imagine electricity so cheap that they could give it away. Nobody would buy a gasoline car again. And no coal or natural gas plants. If we could put some that Paris money into developing thorium power our problem is solved. If you just make energy too expensive, you're going to kill poor people. They will have to decide on food or heat.
Don't know how much money they want from the US so I have no opinion. Maybe there is a go to fund for them.
He is showing the whole world what an idiot he is.
And an embarrassment. Him and his family.
Perhaps you should get some facts first. There are things to do, but the agreement is crap and won't do anything to change the temperature. youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
Not like it matters when you see headlines like 94% of Shell shareholders reject paris agreement.
They're the ones that we have to grovel to.
Here's the real story. youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
Save the earth .. earth will be here looooong after we are gone
Yeah, but I'd like to stay here as long as possible. Climate change threatens that.
Seriously? The climate has changed since day one.
The agreement is crap here's the real story. youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
The climate changes, sure. It is not likely due to humans. But, that's not the issue. The issue is that paying bullshit taxes like the proposed "carbon tax" to a foreign body doesn't do anything. All it does is line the pockets of the "Elite" and they gain more power over us.
"Foreign body"??? What's that?
Groups or organizations usually grounded in politics that are not based in the United States. Some examples are the United Nations, European Union, and North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
Yep. True. youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
Seeing Macron giggle and laugh like an imbecile at Trump's NATO address is despicable. Can't believe this giy won over Le Pen.
Good luck France.
You're thinking of WWII.
Yes. He's not fooled by the Algorite crap.
India and China get a free ride. Till 2030.
Why are Republicans so against renewable energy? We're dependent on oil imports from other countries, and if they want to, they can force our economy to a standstill just by raising the prices. They did it 1973, and they can do it again. Using so much oil makes us weak, and vulnerable to countries like Russia and Saudi Arabia who control the world's oil exports. We have to suck up to brutal dictators who kill their own citizens just for disagreeing with them, all because Republicans want us so dependent on oil.
Why don't Democrats understand that it Republicans aren't against renewable energy. Republicans are against government intervention in the free market. If and win renewable energy becomes cost effective and as efficient at producing energy as fossil fuels, I'll be the first to cheer. But until then, I don't need to government FORCING renewables into the market.
Incidentally, OPEC can't just raise prices whenever they please. They can try. And for a short time, they may be able to hold the prices up. But when they do that, countries start swarming to non-OPEC countries and exports in OPEC countries drop, resulting in OPEC lowering prices to compete. Competition in a global market with a fungible product!
About OPEC, you're right that if OPEC raised prices we could eventually switch to getting all of our oil from Canada and ourselves, but our oil fields are quickly running into diminishing returns (they're going dry). Alaska is the only place in the US that still has untapped oil fields. Canada has plenty of oil potential, but even conservatives there are anti-fossil fuels, so we can't expect them to extract all their oil. We do have the 3rd largest oil reserve in the world (next to Saudi Arabia and Venezuela), but it will quickly run out if we use it.
To your comment about what republicans want, thank you for telling me. I guess I've been misinterpreting all the drill-baby-drill stuff that the republican politicians say for stuff that regular republicans support. In this case, it would be nice if you guys could encourage your congressmen to stop the crony capitalism that is artificially propping up the oil industry.
Republicans want to kiss the Saudis ass and make them rich because they want that oil. They need that oil..
No. That's not it. There's things we can do. But the agreement is garbage. Even Ôbama didn't sign it. youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
I was hoping he'd support it bigly in public (it would be a lie anyway), just to watch the GOPers in DC lose their sh*t.
Consequence of opting out of the Paris Agreement:
195 countries may impose a significant carbon tax on ALL US exports.
These sanctions potentially would equate sanctions imposed on Russia and North Korea.
What? No. youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
Another embarrassing decision. We are losing their respect.
I won't lose any sleep over that fact. I care about what is best for the US. Not about trying to conform to what the rest of the world thinks we should be.
Dear Un: it is not best for the US to continue to rely on petroleum based energy sources and fail to develop renewables. No one thinks that's best for us or the world. Issue is, money 💰💵 & who buys the most political influence. Oil is winning.
Isn't having allies who respect us part of what's best for the US?
There's things we can do. But this agreement was crap. Even Ôbama wouldn't sign it. youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
Trump is rolling back all of the progress that Obama made. What more evidence do Republicans need to know that climate change is real and that the Paris deal can do some good to help fix it?
Too bad climate change isn't mentioned in the Bible.
Not a single prediction that climate alarmist have made has come true. The earth's temperature hasn't risen in 15 years and yet climate alarmists still scream humans are killing the planet. Until the facts support the hype there's no reason to jump on the hysteria band wagon.
What stats are you looking at? Global temperature has increased every year for a long period of time
Dear roll: Turn of Fox News & read a science magazine or journal or just Google "NASA and climate change" or "US Navy & climate change" or any one of hundreds of other sources. Give it a shot what have you got to lose, you voted for Trump.
That's, "turn off Fox news"
There's things we can do, but this agreement was crap. Even Ôbama wouldn't sign it. youtu.be/47bNzLj5E_Q
Excellent, stay away from commitments that hurt the US.
What possible harm could it do? If current models are correct the planet will be unlivable in around 100 years.
How is a transition to sustainable energy a bad thing? Eventually the planet will run out of fossil fuels, and what will we do then? If we don't follow the Paris agreement, we'll be dead in the water, with no way to power 95% of the country. As we run out of oil, it'll get more and more expensive, so switching to renewables now will help us A LOT in the long run, both with national stability, and financially.
The Paris agreement is based on bs. It's a scheme to transfer wealth from the first world to the third and to move toward a one world government.
I do believe in man made climate change but I am not sure to what extent. Climate predictions have been way off many times. Having said that, we will never run out of oil. As oil becomes more scarce, it becomes more expensive so demand drops and demand for alternatives like renewables will increase. It's just a question of wether the government should speed up that process (costs lots of money).
Do we want to get to the point that we're relying on $10/gallon gas? Or do we want to prepare our country for this by investing in renewable energy? It WILL happen one day, you could say it's a question of when, but I say it's a question of what we'll do about it. If we aren't prepared to deal with it when it happens, we're weak and vulnerable.
The Paris climate agreement is about reducing our investment in the unsustainable oil industry, and switching to renewables. There is a part that encourages wealthy countries to help poorer countries afford to make a renewable energy infrastructure, but that's not its main purpose. We are the ones using the most fossil fuels, so it's about us.
People have been touting solar energy for decades, and yet it's STILL not worth the cost. When will it ever be worth it? Governments forcing us to pay more for research and products isn't going to fix it. Look at Solyndra.
Solar energy hasn't reached the point that it's cheaper than fossil fuel power plants in the average state, but to many it's worth it because it's sustainable and better for the environment. Solar panel efficiency has been rising each year, and the more people buy solar panels, the more research that can be done into improving its efficiency further.
Para, what's your idea of renewable energy? Solar and wind? That will never be enough. Listen to this ecologist. He's got the best idea to save us. youtu.be/IZf6e0ntFrw
I hate any politician who is completely Anti-Science!!!
Me too! We finally have one that understand there is plenty of science against man-made climate change and is acting on that science!
There is NO science that denied climate change. GTFO
I didn't say there is science denying the climate changes, did I? Perhaps you were in such a hurry to tell me to "GTFO" (I think I'll stay right here, thanks), you missed the key words "man-made" that I included.
Of course the climate is changing. It's just changing in spite of human activity. Not because of it.
That's incredibly false. Around 99% of scientific abstracts show climate change is man-made.
It's actually really not. Your 99% figure...which has apparently gone up from 97%...is biased and was reached through John Cook coming to 97% of papers/their scientific authors agreeing that humans cause climate change based on a mere 4% of responses to his polling. Hardly a consensus!
There are multiple studies showing it to be anywhere from 90% to 99%.
The 97% agreement is false. You're being led down the path with the other sheep. Here. Educate yourself. youtu.be/SSrjAXK5pGw
You are the one that needs to be educated. Numerous studies show that large majorities of scientists agree that climate change is real, and man-made. Don't post BS YouTube videos.
Here. This one will help you understanding of the problem nuts only 3 minutes. It doesn't deny climate change. youtu.be/OwqIy8Ikv-c
Why would this be good news?
The false promises and lack of accountability make it like a UN program - the US would live up to it's commitment and be the only one holding the bag.
Well said, Coffee & think, The U.S. needs to recognize & avoid bad deals, that mutually benefits everyone but us !
Yes it's good news but I'm really worried he'll break yet another campaign promise and not pull us out of the "agreement". If he doesn't want to do it himself, send it to the Senate to be ratified as a treaty, which it should have been originally, and let them dispose of it. Same with the Iran "deal".
Thank you to the president. We have more important matters to deal with.
These eco-terrorists are bad news. Using fake science to line their pockets. I'm talking to you Al Gore , you schmuck. The Obama youth are a dangerous group. Side by side with code pink, msnbc13 and black lives only matter.
Like spending an extra $50B+ on the military and transferring wealth from the poor to the rich, right? Who needs that "literally the future of the energy industry" eco-crap!
It's called building the military.
The president is actually investing in the country.
Hyl ... explain the transfer of the wealth.
Building the military takes money from taxes and gives it to private weapons manufacturers. The military industrial complex also happens to be one of the most wasteful and inefficient businesses to rely on.
The transfer of wealth has already started from cutting welfare, regulations, etc., but comes full force in Trump's budget proposal, which has further massive cuts to social services and tax breaks ONLY for people making 6+ figures. Guess who has to make up for that budget deficit? You and me. Less social services for us means more we pay out of pocket just to survive and we get nothing in return.
Did you actually look into what the budget is composed of or just read the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC?
Like trying to rape the country. Fuck up healthcare, ruin the tax system even more, bankrupt the poor, put the middle-class in their place, and give his rich wall street buddies a big fat tax free raise.
That type of thing?
Along with all the wonderful derogatory that you seem to find necessary. You sound like just another bleeding heart liberal.
You probably think he's messing everything up because he is turning around everything that you're Obama screwed up.
Hy is high
Climate change shouldn't be a debate, it's been proven real. Why in hell would scientists lie? Just doesn't make sense. Are people really going to trust fake news that claim it isn't real over people educated on climatology?
You just put more thought into your post than all of the climate deniers combined. Remember, by definition half the people are below average intelligence.
I agree that the climate is changing. I also know that God alone is in charge of the climate....not man. We are just here for the short ride(usually 89 years). Chill out. Enjoy your parents and children.
Wait what? I meant that it's ridiculous that some actually believe that scientist would lie, but I don't think that because it doesn't make sense why. Sorry if I was unclear
Crap, I'm embarrassing myself, just ignore my comment, I thought I saw another reply to my comment but it turned out it wasn't
But glockman, how do you know that? How do you know if god made us in charge of the planet on purpose? Plus wouldn't you want to change the planet for you future grandchildren?
Flock man, you just stated the main reason why, in my opinion, Conservative Republicans are the only sizable group so opposed to global warming evidence. They think that their god would never allow humans to destroy his creation. Am I correct? I have a Conservative Christian friend who once told me that there would be no hunger in the world if everyone believed in God. He also believes that a woman who resists rape cannot get pregnant. He told me that about 20 years ago.
Damn spell checker. GLockman, not Flockman.
The fact that you make the statement, Kalderon, that man-caused global warming has been *proven* to be real hurts your credibility. Science doesn't prove things to be true. It proves things to be false. For example, scientists once believed the Earth to be flat. Science proved that it wasn't. But science did not prove it was a sphere. That was a belief, but only recently did science again prove that the Earth is not a sphere, but is in fact slightly oblong; slightly "taller" than it is "wide".
Ideas about math and physics changed with the theory of relativity and again with string theory. To state that man-made climate change has been proven to be true is an asinine statement. There are many climate experts that do not believe humans cause climate change and they have very logical reasons for their conclusions.
And I don't think scientists that believe in man-made climate change are lying. I think they believe what their computer models tell them. But those models are only that. Models. The conclusions they draw are based on a limited number of variables put in to them. Far fewer variables than there are in the real world. And those variables effects on the climate are based on the beliefs of those that program the models.
Kalderon....a little more in depth answer.
unforgiven, science doesn't prove things are true? Where did you get this? Math doesn't prove the earth is (essentially) a sphere? That's going to come as a shock to the students I taught math to over the previous 20 years. Mathematics is built on proofs, it's kinda what we mathematicians do. Your language is imprecise and it's influencing your beliefs. As far as climate change, scientists tend to talk in terms of level of certainty, not absolutes; if the consensus is 99%, I believe it.
It's not 99%.....and quit following the crowd. Before 1920 most of the scientists and astronomers believed our solar system (Milky Way) was the only one in existence. They were wrong then just like they are wrong now.
Yeah, it's called scientific advancement. As more knowledge is acquired and better technologies become available, science advances. Once upon a time there was no internet and willfully ignorant trolls lived in isolation. Now there's the internet and they've been able to use their collective stupidity to elect Trump. So, not all scientific advancement leads to improvement, I'll give you that. Either way, we don't live in a steady state universe.
WOW....that scientific discussion quickly turned political. YOU LOST. WE WON. Get over it.
mrmc, science can only "prove" things within our capacity to understand them based on our current levels of advancement.
99% of scientists once believed the earth was the center of the universe. The science of the time proved it as fact. Or so they thought. As technology and knowledge increased, science did prove that theory to be false.
Incidentally, I'm well versed in math proofs. As a programmer, I took Differential Equations, Calc 3, and Linear Algebra (among others) in college.
You even admit that scientists don't talk in absolutes, but levels of certainly. If something is proven as fact, then it better be 100%. Therefore, science has not *proven* man-made climate change. Many scientists believe it to be true with a high level of certainly. Many others believe it to be false. Either way, humans causing climate change has not be proven.
Too much to respond to, but I don't think you have the capacity to full grasp the concept of scientific certainty. If over 90% reach a consensus, that's good enough for me. The reason I'm more confident in current scientific conclusions than I would have been in the past is dependent upon several factors. We've been able to more effectively utilize data through better technology; computers, data gathering (satellites, EM detection), etc. There are more, too numerous to list. Feel free to employ willful ignorance, I'm just glad that there are people smarter than us who are not engaged in petty arguments.
Your 97% of scientists in agreement is false. Here. Educate yourself. youtu.be/SSrjAXK5pGw
Yeah, like a BS YouTube video is going to change anybody's mind.
Well it won't if you made up your mind that it's BS. How do you know it's BS? Are you more educated than the entire staff that researched and made it findings public in the video? The video didn't say that the agreement won't have zero effect. It said it will have almost no effect. It does say that it will give a drop of .0002 degrees or something. I'm not sure that's worth 100 trillion dollars though.
This is from today's paper "A thaw is underway in Russia, and it has nothing to do with presidential politics.
Inside a cave in Russia's Ural Mountains, where Europe and Asia meet, a team of UNLV researchers has found evidence of steady warming since the end of the last ice age.
Average wintertime temperatures in the region are warmer today than at any time in the past 11,000 years, said UNLV doctoral student Jonathan Baker, who used precisely dated cave deposits left by melting snow to reconstruct seasonal climate patterns over millennia.
The study, published online last week by the journal Nature Geoscience, contradicts previous research that showed temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere peaking around 8,000 years ago and then cooling again before the start of the"
So according to the latest findings, we are warming. We have been warming steadily for the last 11,000 years. I'm sure the pollution isn't helping I'll agree with you that we need to stop burning coal and oil. We need to convert to thorium power. Cheap, clean, safe. Do you watch Ted talks? There's an ecologist who has a really great talk on thorium to replace all that nasty smoky stinking power. It's really good. youtu.be/IZf6e0ntFrw
And if you like the ecologist. Check out this guy. He will give you hope for our future. If we can convince our leaders to promote the coal and oil burning power plants to switch to thorium, we are going to have a very bright and clean future. Bill Gates is also funding this. youtu.be/jDqCpfVwdP4
breck, how do you have enough time on your hands to write this much? As a guy who works for a living, I don't have the time to respond to all of this. Nothing I'm going to say will change your mind, and nothing I say will change yours, so I'll leave you with this; are you willing to take the risk that you may be wrong? If my position is wrong, we'll just have cleaner and cheaper energy sources. If your position is wrong, we face extinction as a species.
Whoa Mr. I never said we don't need cleaner sources of power. We all know that dirty power is bad. We need clean, safe, cheap, abundant sources for power. Right? I'm not sure what you're getting at with your theory being right. What theory? That making solar cells in China with coal fired power and poison from The solar cell manufacturing killing the neighbors around the plant is the best move? No. I don't think that plan that we were supposed to have with the Paris agreement was the best. It's stupid at best. Plus, we were just going to send cash to corrupt governments around the world. That's idiotic. No, develop thorium based power here in the US. Convince power companies that the fuel to power their coal plants is 1000 times more expensive than thorium and they will pay for the switch themselves. Did you watch the last video? Really good. Oh, I'm an airline pilot and only work about 8 to 10 days a month. But it's not really work if you love it.
4 reasons that it's good that we pulled out of the Paris agreement. 1. The Paris Agreement was costly and ineffective.
The Paris Agreement is highly costly and would do close to nil to address climate change.
If carried out, the energy regulations agreed to in Paris by the Obama administration would kill hundreds of thousands of jobs, harm American manufacturing, and destroy $2.5 trillion in gross domestic product by the year 2035.
In withdrawing from the agreement, Trump removed a massive barrier to achieving the 3 percent economic growth rates America is accustomed to.
Simply rolling back the Paris regulations isn’t enough. The Paris Agreement would have extended long beyond the Trump administration, so remaining in the agreement would have kept the U.S. subject to its terms.
Those terms require countries to update their commitments every five years to make them more ambitious, starting in 2020.
Staying in the agreement would have prevented the U.S. from backsliding or even maintaining the Obama administration’s initial commitment of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent.
The Obama administration made clear in its commitment that these cuts were only incremental, leading up to an eventual 80 percent cut in the future.
In terms of climate benefits produced by Paris, there are practically none.
Even if every country met its commitments—a big “if” considering China has already underreported its carbon dioxide emissions, and there are no repercussions for failing to meet the pledges—the changes in the earth’s temperature would be almost undetectable.
2. The agreement wasted taxpayer money.
In climate negotiations leading up to the Paris conference, participants called for a Green Climate Fund that would collect $100 billion per year by 2020.
The goal of this fund would be to subsidize green energy and pay for other climate adaptation and mitigation programs in poorer nations—and to get buy-in (literally) from those poorer nations for the final Paris Agreement.
The Obama administration ended up shipping $1 billion in taxpayer dollars to this fund without authorization from Congress.
Some of the top recipients of these government-funded climate programs have in the past been some of the most corrupt, which means corrupt governments collect the funds, not those who actually need it.
No amount of transparency negotiated in the Paris Agreement is going to change this.
Free enterprise, the rule of law, and private property are the key ingredients for prosperity. These are the principles that actually will help people in developing countries prepare for and cope with a changing climate and natural disasters, whether or not they are caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions.
3. Withdrawal is a demonstration of leadership.
The media is making a big to-do about the fact that the only countries not participating in the Paris Agreement are Syria and Nicaragua.
But that doesn’t change the fact that it’s still a bad deal. Misery loves company, including North Korea and Iran, who are signatories of the deal.
Some have argued that it is an embarrassment for the U.S. to cede leadership on global warming to countries like China. But to draw a moral equivalency between the U.S. and China on this issue is absurd.
China has serious air quality issues (not from carbon dioxide), and Beijing has repeatedly falsified its coal consumption and air monitoring data, even as it participated in the Paris Agreement. There is no environmental comparison between the U.S. and China.
Other countries have a multitude of security, economic, and diplomatic reasons to work with America to address issues of mutual concern. Withdrawal from the agreement will not change that.
Other countries have a multitude of security, economic, and diplomatic reasons to work with America to address issues of mutual concern. Withdrawal from the agreement will not change that.
Certainly, withdrawing from the Paris Agreement will be met with consternation from foreign leaders, as was the case when the U.S. withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol.
However, it could very well help future negotiations if other governments know that the U.S. is willing and able to resist diplomatic pressure in order to protect American interests.
4. Withdrawal is good for American energy competitiveness.
Some proponents of the Paris Agreement are saying that withdrawing presents a missed opportunity for energy companies. Others are saying that it doesn’t matter what Trump does because the momentum of green energy is too strong.
Neither argument is a compelling case for remaining in the agreement.
Whether it is conventional fuel companies or renewable ones, the best way for American energy companies to be competitive is to be innovative and competitive in the marketplace, not build their business models around international agreements.
There is nothing about leaving the agreement that prevents Americans from continuing to invest in new energy technologies.
The market for energy is $6 trillion and projected to grow by a third by 2040. Roughly 1.3 billion people do not yet have access to electricity, let alone reliable, affordable energy.
That’s a big market incentive for the private sector to pursue the next energy technology without the aid of taxpayer money.
The U.S. federal government and the international community should stop using other peoples’ money to subsidize energy technologies while regulating affordable, reliable energy sources out of existence.
The Paris Agreement was an open door for future U.S. administrations to regulate and spend hundreds of millions of dollars on international climate programs, just as the Obama administration did without any input from Congress.
Now, that door has thankfully been shut.
Our "Phoney in chief" must have a death wish for the planet and his grandchildren. Either that or he's dumber than he seems ( which would be hard to believe)!
Think, "pretend"ignorance is bliss for you so enjoy yourself!!!
TractorBoy ...ya silly me for thinking you could explain your idiocy. Noted.
NoThink, with you I need to remind myself of that old saying, " never try to teach a pig to sing, you waste your time and you annoy the pig". Go troll somewhere else...
TractorBoy ... troll? Ya snowflake princess, anyone who dares disagree with you must be a troll!
You have NEVER made a point on SoH. You have never provided proof of any one of your assertions. You clearly want to have the freedom to have your lies unchallenged.
Unfortunately, princess, we have this thing called freedom of speech.
Are you gay or just unsure of your sexual preferences when you categorize those you can't argue with as feminine? I'm in touch with my feminine side but apparently that is something that frightens you!! Get some counseling Stink....oh, NoThink, sorry
TractorBoy ... wait are you suggesting that you can't be a princess? How judgmental of you!!!
Here you've pathetically attempted to portray yourself as an open minded leftist and now, the truth comes out that you're just a small minded sexist!
Oh think, you are such a macho bully I just swoon in trying to engage with you🤡🤡🇺🇸
TractorBoy ... your streak of content free combos unbroken. When you're grown up and want to talk real issues, come on back.
Disgusting. Trump choosing money and personal gain to the world's future, environment, and scientific advancement is just wrong.
Johon ... prove your ridiculous assertion!
This is not good news, it is GREAT news!!!
Axl ... you're right, it's horrible news for your silly little climate hoax.
Think, why is it great news?
Voc ... without funding from the US the lies of man-caused climate change will shrivel.
This is not a poorly scripted, third rate reality show with C list players.
When you're the odd one out of the Group of 7 countries, it's usually not a good thing
So mob rule? That doesn't seem very scientific.
It's a farce anyways.
The climate change nonsense is all about transferring money from the US to developing nations. It's an international welfare scheme. If its adherents actually believed in it then they would change their behavior to reflect that. When algore and people like him quit flying private jets around the world to lecture us then I'll start to take notice.
People can say whatever they want. People lie, manipulate, and deceive for political purposes. It's hard to tell when they actually believe what they're saying. The most accurate gauge for determining what somebody believes is their behavior, not what they say.
Okie, by the time you and Trump take notice, it will be too late for the environment.
Me, Trump, algore, and all of the other talking heads. Be sure to include them. Don't give algore a pass as he flies around the world emitting more co2 than you or I could produce in 2 lifetimes.
Al Gore has nothing to do with climate change. The scientific community overwhelmingly has come to the conclusion climate change is happening and it's human driven.
As always just follow the $money$ Gore & the rest of bogus climatologists have made Billions off this this fraud, while skewing their findings & data, to validate themselves, while shouting down counter research. Do your own research 🐑sheepeople !
So what! You can grow more food during warm weather than Cold. Besides the earth has been both warmer and colder than it is now and there were no humans around. Guess it was dinosaur farts!
I like when people point out that the earth has been hot and cold in the past, as if that's a valid argument. Like scientists don't know that and understand this warming is abnormal.
If you disagree with the entire science community, that's fine but show ur research from the past 40 years, peer reviews, and studies that prove otherwise. If u can't, u opinion comes from ignorance. Sorry to say.
If algore doesn't believe it then why should I? BTW, if you're eating beef, using the internet, or commuting to work, then you don't really believe it either.
Your ignorance is unbelievable but then so is Trump's.
Civil discourse has flown and now its personal insults? On ignore you go.
Judging people by their behavior instead of their statements is both rational and logical. It's too bad that simply stating that causes some to be angry and resort to personal attacks.
I love it!!!
Great news! It's nice to see an elected official doing something good for a change.
So not helping the climate is suddenly a good thing. Even though scientists are saying that if we don't change anything we'll lose over a dozen costal cities and trillions of dollars for damages in the next 100 years in the US alone. trump should be arrested for genocide.
Not helping the climate.
I thought the artic was supposed to be ice free by this year according to the venerated climatologist Al Gore.
Oops never mind.
The scarier sounding the better.
LOL, yeah don't listen to hundreds of scientists. But something tells me they know more than you do.
Please tell me how one "helps" the climate, haha. It isn't exactly a sentient being...
"trump should be arrested for genocide."
Yeah, sounds totally sane and knowledgeable...
Ways to help the environment.
1. Stop deforestation
2. Invest in renewable energy
3. Stop investing in fossil fuel
4. Clean up the oceans
5. Conserve more land for national parks
6. Conserve water
There are hundreds of other examples.
Well trump denying science even though he's putting hundreds of millions of people in direct danger due to climate change isn't exactly a sane thing either.
There's no "the environment" as a sentient being and, as such, it cannot possibly be "helped" or "hurt" in any way.
Not sure what that last clump of words was supposed to be. "Denying" English perhaps?
LOL, you're being a grammar nazi because you don't have any actual arguments. Good job troll.
Not at all, you didn't make any sort of coherent argument to debate, just some nonsense about "helping" the climate or the environment, which is just as nonsensical as saying that you're "helping" a rock or a table.
I'm genuinely interested in knowing what, if anything, you attempted to say in your last word cluster.
You= grammar nazi troll
That last sentence was about trump going against science, even though by doing so he's putting hundreds of millions of people in danger of climate change.
Liberty, Like Chicken Little, I think they're all running around clucking "the sky is falling" & angry because the rest of us won't "cluck" their false premise along with them !
Your ad hominem attacks don't make your attempted argument any more cogent.
Yeah, you're still not making any rational kind of statement with that. Maybe try another angle.
"False premise" Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah hahahahahahahahaha Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahha Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahha hahahaha Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
You're fighting against science here 44.
Your inability to post an actual argument related to the topic is not a concern of mine.
Can you read English. What I'm saying is not hard to figure out.
One cannot "fight against" science. It's an abstract concept used to refer to a process. You can't "fight" if or "help" it or anything of the sort. It's a flat out ignorant and incorrect to say. If you wish to form any sort of cogent sentence, statement, or argument, please tell feee to do so. Otherwise, you're not getting anywhere.
You might as well be saying that you like to "help" rocks by "fighting" math. It just isn't a cogent or sane thing to say.
Just more evidence that you're a grammar nazi and a troll. It's pretty easy for anyone with a brain to figure out what I mean, so stop being a grammar nazi and post an actual argument relevant to the topic or you'll just be proving yourself to be a troll.
My god, I used a synonym instead of the actual word. Oh wait, no one cares except grammar nazi trolls like yourself.
That would have to be projection, haha. Petty name calling aside, an example of a "grammar nazi" would be someone who focuses on using "their" instead or "they're" or a comma being in the wrong spot. You're issue is not in simple grammar or syntax, but in your ability or willingness to form even a cogent statement that could be related to anything applying to the topic or even to reality in general.
As with your statements, if someone made a statement about "helping the ocean" or "hurting a rock," it would make no sense whatsoever and couldn't be construed as a rational statement in any way. Same concept.
Every time I hear another one of the save the planet crowd, I think of the Nobel Peace Prize & Academy Award, bozo🤡 Al Gore, who has a carbon footprint the size Paul Bunyan ! Like most Liberals, he thinks the save the planet rules, apply to the rest of us not them !
Searching for the number of fucks I give about your grammar requirements. I can't find any.
Stop being a grammar nazi and a troll. Post something actually relevant to the topic or get out, or you'll just be proving my point that you are a troll.
What? That's no where near the truth. It's been liberals today and through out all of history that have actually done something to protect the environment.
Oh yeah, all the Liberals always talk it, but just don't walk it !
I think you're a bit confused. Liberal by definition means preferring changes, since the environmentalists movement is a recent thing everyone who did anything to better the environment is classified as a liberal.
Just putting it out there the Clean Air Act. That was done by liberals. All the national parks we have, that was liberals. Every bit of renewable energy we have, that was liberals.
Okay, car. Some arguments against man-caused climate change:
• We've been coming out of a mini ice age since the mid-1800s, so it's natural that the Earth would warm.
• The global temperature has risen about 1.5°F since 1880. But nearly 50% of that increase happened BEFORE any significant greenhouse gasses were being created by man.
• Despite a steady increase in greenhouse gasses, the global temperature actually experienced a cooling between the 1940s and the 1970s.
• Despite the fact greenhouse gas emissions have continued, there hasn't been a significant increase in global temperatures in 18 years.
• According to the average of all the main climate models of the 1990s, the Earth was supposed to be roughly 1°F warmer today than it actually is.
There is mountains of evidence that suggest man-caused climate change is a load of crap!
Car, before claiming that only Liberals have created & protected everything on Earth, get your facts straight, it was a "Republican" President Theodore Roosevelt, that established the National Parks, & was known as a conservationist !
Inthe ... does it ever trouble you that the strength of your position is based on one Australian's assessment of what scientists think might be true?
How does your blind faith in that person sustain you?
Inthe ... here's a primer for you ...
You should go back to history class. Theodore Roosevelt was a liberal president. By definition of what a liberal is, his party affiliation and said party at the time, and most of his actions point to him being a liberal. Don't bring up "conservationist" because that means nothing other than he conserved land, which was and still is a liberal policy.
PragerU. First of all, that's a biased source. Secondly, it even admits that with rising CO2 emissions the earth is heating.
Thirdly, the video is trying to skew the truth. Well not entirely, but there are numerous amounts of plans that say we could switch the majority of our energy sources to renewable in only a decade, in an efficient and cost productive way. Which proves one of the videos main points wrong.
I never said that climate change is solely caused by humans. But there is an obvious human factor. We cut down millions of forests, we polluted the oceans, our meat industry and livestock are causing unspeakable damage, and every climate graph shows that as emissions go up global temperatures go up at a consistent rate. You can't fight a mountain of evidence with a mountain of evidence. Climate change being man made or not is irrelevant but we need to do something now.
Fourthly, is what the video considers to be worth the risk (which is also proof of its right wing bias). The scientific consensus says that within 100 years hundreds countless costal cities will be underwater or unlivable. That will cause hundreds of millions of people being displaced, hundreds of trillions of dollars being needed for damages, and world trade is probably going to suffer (and that's only one of the things scientists say will happen), there's also more wild fires, drought, loss of agricultural productivity, and the extinction of many species of animals). In what world is that "worth it" for cheaper energy today.
How am I the blind one when I'm the one listening to the scientists, while you're listening to conservative economists and biased youtubers.
Inthe ... feeble! Prager provides a platform for thoughtful people to express their views. It is an excellent alternative to the leftist echo chamber.
Focus on the points made. I'm fine with the notion that CO2 may impact temperature, but to what level? You clearly cherry picked the video you appear to hate and missed the main points that of the video that you say is biased.
Please pick a side and stick to it rather than the pathetic random smattering!
"Their views" so their opinions. You're basically admitting your source is biased and favors the right.
"Notion" don't you mean fact.
Did you read my second comment to you? It takes on one of the videos only arguments. That is, that the risks do not outweigh the benefits.
I did pick a side. It's climate change is real, and I've done no random smattering.
Inthe ... who ever said that the climate isn't changing? All of your obfuscating can't cover your silliness.
Your lack on facts here is what is silly.
Car, your a typical Liberal, you obfuscate all reality & facts, so that you Liberals & you only, are the ones, watching out for, saving the planet & all mankind, here I thought it was our creator, not you who was in charge ? Sorry, with your record of success, I'll stick with him !
Being a "typical liberal" I have to bare the burden of having facts. Almost every single piece of environmental protection legislation was proposed and passed by liberals, get over it.
The creator gave man kind free will, that's why horrible events happen for we can see it and find solutions to them without constant need of this creator. Or you think the creator values our lives the same as a normal person values people in the game of Sims, and is playing a cruel joke on all of us 24/7.
Inthe ... none of what you just said proves your silly tinfoil hat theories of the causes of our coming out of the current ice age. Your pompous attitude notwithstanding, none of what you just said proves any of your silly notions.
Facts and the majority of scientists prove it.
Car, I now understand when you say it is proven. You cherry pick the "facts" that support your belief.
You said in your reply that "every climate graph shows that as emissions go up global temperatures go up at a consistent rate." That statement is patently false. As I already said, emissions have been increasing since the start of the 20th century, yet despite the nonstop increase, global temperatures *decreased* between the 1940s and the 1970s.
You also stated that whether the climate is changing as the result of humans or not, we need to "do something now". I think that is the most important thing you've said and makes nearly everything in this thread irrelevant. Based on that statement, you clearly don't care whether humans are actually causing climate change. Because either way, you want us to change our ways. Thus, you are using climate change as a vehicle to scare people into agreeing with you. EXACTLY what liberal politicians are doing. You just exposed the hoax! Thanks!!
In not cherry picking anything but you certainly are only choosing to see one side.
I said it's irrelevant because
1. Climate change is real, get over it
2. There is a human factor supported by almost every single climate study, get over it
3. If we spend time arguing who started it we'll never fix it
4. I don't want a mass extinction like you fact deniers do. Start actually supporting changes or what's ever left of the human race after the floods, fires, droughts, and famines (all scientifically supported) will be after you because you'd be the cause of it.
Inthe ... I get that you were too afraid to watch the video but if you had, you'd know that the majority of scientists don't believe the silly myths that you believe. One "communication specialist" from Australia fudge the numbers to come up with the 97% lie. You really should try to keep up as your myths are debunked.
Inthe ... you still haven't answered the question ... who's saying that the climate isn't CONSTANTLY changing? I know of nobody!
The problem for you and the inconvenient lies of the climate alarmists is that we're smart enough to see thru your slight of hand. The real facts are ...
1. The climate is always changing
2. Over the past 100 years CO2 levels have exploded
3. Over the past 20 years as CO2 has continued its unchecked rise, temperatures are flat to declining.
There is absolutely no scientific basis for the silly assertion that CO2 causes climate change. No evidence!
Think I did watch the video how else did you think I was able to completely discredit it and prove you wrong. I also never said "97%", so get your facts straight.
Hope you're not to blind and biased to see what effect we are causing.
"Flat to declining" that is completely false. In reality we are experiencing temperature rises. Making month after month the hottest month in human history. In fact the 10 hottest years in human history happened since 1998.
"No evidence" keep telling yourself that. In reality the greenhouse effect has caused global temperatures to increase by 1 degree C and it was caused by CO2 as confirmed by over 1000 independent studies.
You're to brainwashed to see the actual facts, and they all say what I've been saying. Climate change is real, and there is a human factor.
Inthe ... the raw temperature data shows the temperatures are declining. Your data has been manipulated by NASA and NOAA to fit the lies.
NASA has admitted to manipulating the data. The sad thing is you are still buying what they're selling.
You have no proof that a majority of scientists believe your silly climate myths.
Inthe ... stop with the idiocy! I never did climate change isn't real, so your repeating that lie to cover your other lie leaves you with NO credibility.
You can not demonstrate what no scientist has shown and that is that CO2 causes our climate to change. To the contrary, life-giving CO2 has actually caused trees and other plants to flourish! Oops!
"Manipulated" you're so brainwashed.
Come back when science actually agrees with you but until then you're a brainwashed little troll.
Inthe ... they admitted it! Wake up!
You're a brainwashed troll.
Inthe ... in sorry you can't deal with the truth. Look it up!
Think, you nailed it again ! I'll bet Inthe, won't look it up. Like Jack Nicholson said, "you can't handle the truth" !
Just looked it up
and it's false.
Someone definitely can't handle the truth here. But I think it's two people. Stop being brainwashed, learn the actual facts instead of your baseless conspiracy theories. Admit the facts there was no data manipulation and there was no slow down in global warming.
Come back when science and facts are actually on your side.
Inthe ... leftist rags support your notion ... who would have guessed that? Ch CL out the raw data ...
what you are arguing does not exist.
Inthe ... keep the delusion alive!
Keep your tinfoil hat on.
George Soros, "owns & operates", snopes, so don't try to blow that manipulator of facts & truth, by us, as being a honest & objective fact checker !
A Pile of 🐂💩!
There is no evidence that can in any way confirm or even suggest that George Soros takes part in Snopes in any way. So what you posted is an outright lie.
Even if it was true I still have factcheck.org which also proves my point. By the way both of those sites are ranked 2 of the most reliable fact checking websites on the Internet. Next time do a bit of actual fact checking before you post something. I have a great site you can use to get started.
I don't Trust anything George Soros, has anything to do with ! The man has a history of pure evil, from his youth, as a Nazi anti-Semitic sympathizer, to funding radical & violent protest groups, & trying to buy elections.
Soros owns Snopes? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Holy shit you Trumptards are silly
AW SHUCKS !, as Liberals say, we've got good Ol' George Soros all wrong, he's just a kindly old Billionaire, who loves, America, gives his money to legitimate charities & just wants us all to be happy, to work together in peace & harmony, for the betterment of our Nation. As Snopes says. FALSE
Inthe ... who'd expect you to focus on fact when your petty nonsense consumes you?
The CO2 levels are skyrocketing. The temperatures are stable or falling. There is NO proof that man's actions are causing the climate to change. The climate has changed for the entire life of the planet, without human intervention. The temperatures two thousand years ago were significantly higher than they are today, and man survived. We are still coming out of the Pleistoceon Ice Age.
"No evidence" you say. If by that you mean an overwhelming amount of evidence than yes. In fact of a massive study of 1,300 independent research groups across the entire world 95% found that human actions do effect the climate. We are experiencing the hottest temperatures in all of human history month after month, year after year.
Accept the facts already. One would think that someone with the username "Think" would have the ability to do so, and not be a lying fact denier.
AW SHUCKS !, as Conservatives say, we've got good Ol' Donny trump all wrong, he's just a kindly old Billionaire, who loves, America, gives his money to legitimate charities & just wants us all to be happy, to work together in peace & harmony, for the betterment of our Nation. As trump says. WRONG
Copy and paste at least fills up spade when you don't have an argument, haha.
1. It's not completely copied
2. I do have an argument
3. That isn't directed to you
4. I'm trying to prove a point
1) You posted three comments full of copied and pasted links.
2) Haven't seen one yet.
3) Neither was the initial comment to which you felt compelled to reply in the first place.
4) Feel free to do so, but you haven't yet.
1. So you have a problem with me sourcing and providing facts and evidence. That's both sad and contradicts your argument that I have no argument.
2. Than you haven't been reading. By sourcing evidence, I do have an argument.
3. The first comment wasn't directed towards anyone, and by being the fist comment in a thread it was supposed to be commented on by anyone.
4. Than you haven't been reading.
Inthe ... it's swell that you found some leftist website with trash links to support your lies.
Explain ... in your own words ... how CO2 levels are correlated to temperatures.
"Leftist" LOL! Did you even look at them? They are scientific research websites, .gov websites, sites from different nations, a university and all of their data has been confirmed and proven multiple times.
"In your own words". What's that going to prove, I already proved it with my sources.
Car your the typical Leftist Liberal, who declare their skewed sources as unassailable, & everyone else's, as totally false, then declare themselves automatic winners, in all subject debates. Your arrogance along with your ignorance are both stunning & appalling !
None of my sources are skewed. I'm just on the side of actual scientific facts that have been well researched, confirmed, and have the support of the majority of the scientific community.
In fact, you were spreading a complete lie to try to discredit one of my sources. So good job spreading lies to discredit facts, just like a typical conservative.
Inthe ... thanks for confirming that you are simply blindly following the government lies.
From a scientific perspective, explain why exploding CO2 levels haven't caused temperatures to rise.
Think, stop confusing Car with the facts, their mind & false narrative is already set !
If you look at my sources they detail that. Now stop being a fact denier and get educated.
Think doesn't have any facts. He does however have lies, misconceptions, conspiracy theories, old disproven science, and bias. If you want to see actual facts check my sources.
Inthe ... I get that you can't explain your position because you don't understand your position. I've read the leftist sources. I also understand the truth.
I'm not afraid of your sources or mine. I look only for the truth. And in this case the truth is that you can't explain the trash that you're pushing. You were told what to think and you're simply unwittingly regurgitating that line.
Thanks for showing all those with the stamina to still be following along that you have no curiosity about your own message.
Think, Well said👍🏻 A Liberal without a train of thought,with facts & a true message. Is kinda like, someone all dressed up, with no place to go !
My sources are not leftist, they are scientific and are back with confirmed research.
Detailed reports of carbon dioxide in the air has led scientists to come up with the green house effect. Research into the chemicals we release into the air have proven that said chemicals reflect heat back to earths surface. To help prove this 1,300 independent studies were commissioned to study it, 95% of said studies came back confirming that chemicals released into the air by humans are in fact causing the planets temperature to increase.
If you actually read my sources you'd know this, but since you're a fact denier you don't. You're not trying to get the truth, you're afraid of it, and you'll support any right wing conspiracy and accuse accurate scientific research of being biased to try to distance yourself from it. The facts and the truth are already there, just look at them.
You spoke too soon.
A hippy ... I hear you. If we're talking clothing analogies, I suggest that these leftists who can't explain their own position are more like the emperor and his/her/it's new "clothes". These precious little snowflakes that've never had an original thought stand their having been told that their clothed in the smartest of ideas, yet they're actually standing their totally naked of original ideas or the ability to explain their most basic of beliefs.
I pity them as they look foolish!
Yep, bare butt naked😳!
People don't seem to understand that we need clean air, water, and soil to survive. There is no planet B.
We have all that already.
Ewok ... what you appear not to understand is that the accord is a farce that will not lead to your objective! Oops!
If there isn't a plan B, then why are some rich folks trying to colonize Mars?
@love, asteroids, black holes, super volcanoes, mega-plagues, etc.
Having another planet to colonize is a good thing , just incase.
I cannot wait till that orange, idiot, is out of office.
You'll be waiting for quite awhile....
Orange is the new black.
Not good news. It's not news to begin with.
So instead we see our planet die. #NotMyPresident
He's literally raping our planet
Mus ... it's laughable that you bought into the doomsday lies of the left. It's hilarious that you think the accord does anything except spend our money on nonsense!
He is your president! Your country elected him! Obama sucked- both as a guy and as president- I had to wait 8 yes til his crappy term was over: give trump a chance!! 🇺🇸🇺🇸
Obama never dug a hole in the earth and put his penis in it.
Weird how you're saying the left is spending money on "nonsense" when they are actually trying to save the planet. While the current administration is spending money on a golf outing every week, security in NYC, and over engorging of the military.
Inthe ... if keeping Mr Trump leads to this much good, then I wish he'd golf every day! Mr Trump in just a couple of months has done FAR more good that the failed former president, MrO, did in eight years.
The president is guarded 24 hours a day for life. Whether he is in the White House or whether he is on the golf course, the cost is marginally the same.
What's curious is that you didn't complain about MrO's many lavish trips to places that he didn't own! You must have been in a coma when MrO spent millions on his month long boondoggle -- with extended family -- to Africa. The price tag on that trip alone was over $60 million. Where was your outrage then?
Inthe ... I get that you may not have graduated high school, but there is also a HUGE difference in scale between the millions spent by presidents to vacation and the trillions that are being wasted on the man-caused climate change lie.
Your position is like pulling up to a gas station in your new Rolls Royce and complaining about the cost of a candy bar. Now don't you feel silly?
"Far more" he's done next to nothing.
"The cost is the same" not when they have to rent golf carts, rent out an entire floor in trump towers (both of which funnel directly into trumps bank account), and have security at trump tower because his wife doesn't want to leave.
trump has spent more than the average cost of 2 years worth of all of Obamas vacations in a few months of his vacations.
Your claim that I didn't graduate college is both baseless and immature.
Climate change is real-fact
There is a human factor- fact
Protecting the environment and thus the lives of everyone of earth is more important than playing golf every week- fact.
You're position is literally providing funds for unnecessary garbage while not funding efforts to protect the environment and all people on earth.
Inthe ... keep your delusions alive.
The thing you can't show is what impact CO2 has on the environment.
By lowering CO2 emissions we can slow it down the effects of climate change, and prevent things before they get too bad.
Inthe ... prove that CO2 is causing climate change. Then prove that your puny changes can alter the wobble of the planet, its orbit around the sun, or solar activity. These factors have more impact on the climate than cow farts.
You've established no proof that CO2 is the driver of climate change as there is NO correlation between CO2 and temperature change. None!
CO2 levels have skyrocketed, yet temperatures have remained flat or dropped -- as in the past 18 years.
You are completely brainwashed. Not only have I already explained it in specific detail, but also provided multiple accurate sources in the other thread.
I've provided data that has been reviewed, researched, and confirmed by multiple scientists, researchers, and organizations. Yet your brainwashing has prevented you from seeing the facts that I already provided.
Stop denying science. Stop denying the facts. The vast majority of scientists agree with what I have been posting because it's factual, and it's their confirmed work and evidence.
I've already proven you wrong. Go look at the facts already. If you once again choose not to the only thing you'll prove is that your a fact denying little troll.
Only if he sticks with it and doesn't flip flop on it. Like every other one of his campaign promises.
Look to congress, know what's going on.
Good for Trump, for not participating in the climate change travesty.
Yea cause every country is wrong huh? It's all a hoax by the darn Chinese!
I mean, most other G7 powers want to be in the pact because they produce very little fossil fuel power and this treaty only strengthens their clean energy industry. Well for us in America it doesn't make sense because we have large fossil fuel reserves and the treaty would destroy those industries. So it's less that they r wrong and more their acting in their own interests. Plus it's not like signing the treaty reduces our use of fossil fuel, it just means we'll import more from less well regulated places.
Bobby what if I told you one can believe the globe is warming, think we should cut pollution, and still think the Paris climate agreement is a bad deal?
Stop looking at the world as 1s and 0s, black and white
Bobby ... so you want to follow the other countries off the cliff ... ha ha ha!
Good, it would've been a massive waste of money
So all the countries are wrong except trump and republicans huh? Makes sense. It's those darn Chinese!
You know what else is a waste of money? Military spending. We spend way too much to take care of other countries. Like trump said "They are taking advantage of us"
Bobby ... what precisely would this ridiculous accord accomplish?
Think, with Liberals, it's not about making substantive progress in National or World affairs, it's about initiating legislation, meetings & conferences that make you feel good about yourself, as you propagate the illusion, that your leading the Nation, along with other countries, who are actually taking advantage of you ! There's no greater threat to our Nation, than a Liberal filled with their own hubris !