Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
Usa Rejects Paris Climate Deal
55 Answers
Good.
The Paris accord was nothing more than an agreement to pour billions of dollars into a massive pot (with virtually no oversight as to how it was spent) in a ludicrous and hyperbolic attempt to try and dial back the Earth's average temperature by 0.17 degrees Celsius by the year 2100.
Apart from the monstrously idiotic claim that the Earth's average temperature can be 'measured' to the accuracy of one hundredth of a degree (given that the poles reach temps of up to -60 degrees C and the equatorial regions reach temps of around +30 degrees C – and the rest of the world have temps everywhere in between these), the idea that man-made CO2 emissions are the driving factor behind global climate change are completely unfounded and not supported by any peer reviewed paper that I am aware of. Even the alarmist IPCC concluded that the likelihood of so-called (unproven) 'man-made' climate change being dangerous to humans was small.
And yet we are seeing the typical doom-mongers proclaiming that the USA exiting the Paris accord is essentially the End Of The World As We Know It.
The USA administration has seen thorough the lies. The real reason for the current CO2 scare is wealth redistribution. Nothing whatsoever to do with the 'environment' nor CO2. The quotes of these behind the scam are telling:
“Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?” - [Maurice Strong, arguably the founder of the current CO2 scare.]
“We cannot change the laws of nature. But we can change our economy. Climate change is our best chance to demand and build a better world.” [Naomi Klein, anti-capitalist]
I could go on and on. I often do.
Also, take a look here...
http:// climate changep redicti ons.org /climat e-chang e-axiom s
… and see if any of these ring true in the reporting of this obnoxious scam that harms those on the lowest incomes the most.
The Paris accord was nothing more than an agreement to pour billions of dollars into a massive pot (with virtually no oversight as to how it was spent) in a ludicrous and hyperbolic attempt to try and dial back the Earth's average temperature by 0.17 degrees Celsius by the year 2100.
Apart from the monstrously idiotic claim that the Earth's average temperature can be 'measured' to the accuracy of one hundredth of a degree (given that the poles reach temps of up to -60 degrees C and the equatorial regions reach temps of around +30 degrees C – and the rest of the world have temps everywhere in between these), the idea that man-made CO2 emissions are the driving factor behind global climate change are completely unfounded and not supported by any peer reviewed paper that I am aware of. Even the alarmist IPCC concluded that the likelihood of so-called (unproven) 'man-made' climate change being dangerous to humans was small.
And yet we are seeing the typical doom-mongers proclaiming that the USA exiting the Paris accord is essentially the End Of The World As We Know It.
The USA administration has seen thorough the lies. The real reason for the current CO2 scare is wealth redistribution. Nothing whatsoever to do with the 'environment' nor CO2. The quotes of these behind the scam are telling:
“Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?” - [Maurice Strong, arguably the founder of the current CO2 scare.]
“We cannot change the laws of nature. But we can change our economy. Climate change is our best chance to demand and build a better world.” [Naomi Klein, anti-capitalist]
I could go on and on. I often do.
Also, take a look here...
http://
… and see if any of these ring true in the reporting of this obnoxious scam that harms those on the lowest incomes the most.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by birdie1971. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I haven't actually taken a great deal, or in fact a small amount of interest in climate change so couldn't comment on the reality of its existence or not but if what Trump was saying about the US paying a higher price either in actual cash terms or economically then I can understand his reason for getting out and wanting to make the 'deal' fairer.
Everything about this post is utterly wrong. Shame on Trump for falling for this short-sighted, ignorant propaganda, putting petty nationalism ahead of wider global interests. And shame on anyone who agrees with him on this. Trump doesn't even agree with you on the source of this "conspiracy" -- you're busy blaming anti-capitalists, he blamed the Chinese, and thought that a little snow proved global warming/climate change wrong. I'm sure even you appreciate the difference between climate and weather...
The Paris agreement wasn't the be-all and end-all of "saving the world", or anything like that. But it was a step in the right direction, and a great starting point for finally tackling one of the most important issues of the day, and acknowledging that human activity can have, will have and continues to have a profound and damaging effect on the planet. Short-term national economic interests shouldn't even register compared to that.
The Paris agreement wasn't the be-all and end-all of "saving the world", or anything like that. But it was a step in the right direction, and a great starting point for finally tackling one of the most important issues of the day, and acknowledging that human activity can have, will have and continues to have a profound and damaging effect on the planet. Short-term national economic interests shouldn't even register compared to that.
I really hate the existence of paywalls that can block meaningful public access to scientific articles. Still, here are a few peer-reviewed scientific articles linking climate change to human activity to a large extent.
http:// www.pna s.org/c ontent/ 106/6/1 704.ful l.pdf
http:// www.atm os-chem -phys.n et/7/22 87/2007 /acp-7- 2287-20 07.pdf
https:/ /www.na ture.co m/nclim ate/jou rnal/v3 /n5/ful l/nclim ate1793 .html
Even this one, going against the curve, still allows for a c. 15% impact of human activity, which is quite significant in the scheme of things.
http:// www.sci encedir ect.com /scienc e/artic le/pii/ S092181 8116304 787
At this point the case for accepting that human activity -- whether it's through CO2 emissions (or CFCs, methane etc), or through large-scale deforestation, or through mass farming techniques, particularly of cattle; or through disrupting just about every other natural cycle we can get our hands on -- is in large part responsible for the current climate change is undeniable. The only question is what to do about it. Whether or not we should try has been asked and answered already.
http://
http://
https:/
Even this one, going against the curve, still allows for a c. 15% impact of human activity, which is quite significant in the scheme of things.
http://
At this point the case for accepting that human activity -- whether it's through CO2 emissions (or CFCs, methane etc), or through large-scale deforestation, or through mass farming techniques, particularly of cattle; or through disrupting just about every other natural cycle we can get our hands on -- is in large part responsible for the current climate change is undeniable. The only question is what to do about it. Whether or not we should try has been asked and answered already.
He suggested he wanted renegotiation didn't he ? A better deal for the US ? So it's just trying to hold the world to ransom then ? Threaten it in the hope of gaining an unfair advantage over the rest of the world ? Well by the time it's sorted hopefully a more reasonable, less selfish, more scientifically minded individual will have taken over leadership of the US, who can get things back on course.
Nothing like a bit of namecalling when you disagree with someone eh Mickey? A numskull - really? You have made billions have you, you have correctly predicted what will happen have you? No, i thought not.
I agree with most of the post. Whether you think mans actions are responsible for climate change or not this agreement is wrong in so many ways so The Donald is right to quash this. Currently the West is going through self flagellation whilst Asia and the East continues the old path grabbing the Worlds economy. Particularly India and China.
I agree with most of the post. Whether you think mans actions are responsible for climate change or not this agreement is wrong in so many ways so The Donald is right to quash this. Currently the West is going through self flagellation whilst Asia and the East continues the old path grabbing the Worlds economy. Particularly India and China.
//And all this just to please the minority of the America population that is thick as him. //
By that you have clearly lost the argument.
For some the agreement is in their interest, which is why China is so keen. It keeps the US paying a lot for it's power while countries like India and China keep building coal fired power stations for their manufacturing industry enabling them to under cut and so cripple Western business.
You are aware I suppose that this agreement is not binding and that the only 'punishment' is 'name and shame' Whist the US would undoubtedly get hit by a name and shame exercise I doubt the Chinese or Indian Governments give monkeys, both their currencies are protected.
Like I said above, no matter what you think of man made climate change this particular agreement is rubbish and just another revenue raiser.
By that you have clearly lost the argument.
For some the agreement is in their interest, which is why China is so keen. It keeps the US paying a lot for it's power while countries like India and China keep building coal fired power stations for their manufacturing industry enabling them to under cut and so cripple Western business.
You are aware I suppose that this agreement is not binding and that the only 'punishment' is 'name and shame' Whist the US would undoubtedly get hit by a name and shame exercise I doubt the Chinese or Indian Governments give monkeys, both their currencies are protected.
Like I said above, no matter what you think of man made climate change this particular agreement is rubbish and just another revenue raiser.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.