Music1 min ago
Us Notifies Un Of Paris Climate Deal Pullout
http://
Trump would appear to be a climate-change denier !
Would any of Trump's dwindling band of groupies, here on AB, like to comment ?
Trump would appear to be a climate-change denier !
Would any of Trump's dwindling band of groupies, here on AB, like to comment ?
Answers
Trump has asserted that it is a hoax in public, on his own twitter feed and elsewhere, multiple times. http://
06:23 Sat 05th Aug 2017
Just look at these astounding predictions;
http://
and it will all be Trump's fault !
http://
and it will all be Trump's fault !
Solar energy employs significantly more Americans than coal does - and, because solar equipment has become significantly cheaper, that number will grow at a faster rate than coal, which is on the decline.
https:/
(Figures are from the US Dept of Energy, whose report is linked, before anyone screeches "NEW YORK TIMES" at me).
So Trump's withdrawal from the Paris agreement is far more consistent with his insane opinion that climate change is a hoax than it is with his narrative about jobs.
What I've seen in this thread is a bunch of people who feel they are on Trump's "side" for whatever reason, and will therefore defend absolutely anything he says or does to the hilt with any mental gymnastics necessary. One could, of course, admire or support Trump for a variety of reasons without needing to defend the indefensible, but that would require effort wouldn't it?
https:/
(Figures are from the US Dept of Energy, whose report is linked, before anyone screeches "NEW YORK TIMES" at me).
So Trump's withdrawal from the Paris agreement is far more consistent with his insane opinion that climate change is a hoax than it is with his narrative about jobs.
What I've seen in this thread is a bunch of people who feel they are on Trump's "side" for whatever reason, and will therefore defend absolutely anything he says or does to the hilt with any mental gymnastics necessary. One could, of course, admire or support Trump for a variety of reasons without needing to defend the indefensible, but that would require effort wouldn't it?
Kromo; I'm not sure everyone who questions the reasons for climate change are necessarily all on Trump's side;
http://
Don't forget our wager though :0)
http://
Don't forget our wager though :0)
Jim, if you agree that more serious changes than we are capable of aren’t going to happen, then Trump is right to put short term interests first, isn’t he? If long term interests are futile, what’s the point in worrying about them? At best it does nothing more than delay the inevitable - and not even in a big way.
Because that seems to be entirely missing the point I was making, which was that the long-term changes that are needed aren't going to happen precisely because people like Trump, who are in the position to (at least try to) make them happen show no desire to. The problem is wider than, and predates Trump, but he's in power in the US now and seems determined to ignore the problem. You can't say he's right to ignore the problem that he himself is pushing to one side...
I suspect that your position is being driven by scepticism that there's really a problem in the first place, which is fair enough on the grounds of consistency, but even aside from that it seems a little defeatist: "we can't solve the problem so why even try?", which never got us anywhere.
I might add that so far whenever we *have* been faced with potential environmental disasters and not let the scale of the problem get to us, we managed to solve them. Perhaps high atmospheric lead levels, Ozone depletion, and deadly diseases such as Smallpox and Polio, are less controversially awful, but in particular with the first two it was actually a huge fight to drive through the changes needed to combat the problem; a few years later, one wonders why it took us so long to get around to it. Climate Change is on a larger scale but once people start taking it seriously I'm optimistic that it, too, can be solved -- or at least mitigated. But it requires political will. 2015 in Paris saw the first step towards that; Trump's move represents potentially a massive backwards step, since the two countries that matter the most are the US and China.
Speaking of which... Khandro, start a thread about China and I'll criticise them there. Since no-one has, I haven't had an opportunity to criticise them. But then you could say the same about North Korea, another topic I've been fairly silent on in AB threads and certainly not because I'm secretly a mouthpiece of Kim Jong-Un.
I suspect that your position is being driven by scepticism that there's really a problem in the first place, which is fair enough on the grounds of consistency, but even aside from that it seems a little defeatist: "we can't solve the problem so why even try?", which never got us anywhere.
I might add that so far whenever we *have* been faced with potential environmental disasters and not let the scale of the problem get to us, we managed to solve them. Perhaps high atmospheric lead levels, Ozone depletion, and deadly diseases such as Smallpox and Polio, are less controversially awful, but in particular with the first two it was actually a huge fight to drive through the changes needed to combat the problem; a few years later, one wonders why it took us so long to get around to it. Climate Change is on a larger scale but once people start taking it seriously I'm optimistic that it, too, can be solved -- or at least mitigated. But it requires political will. 2015 in Paris saw the first step towards that; Trump's move represents potentially a massive backwards step, since the two countries that matter the most are the US and China.
Speaking of which... Khandro, start a thread about China and I'll criticise them there. Since no-one has, I haven't had an opportunity to criticise them. But then you could say the same about North Korea, another topic I've been fairly silent on in AB threads and certainly not because I'm secretly a mouthpiece of Kim Jong-Un.
"Even with the best will in the world we can't continue to live as we do and solve the problem."
Granted, which is why it's so frustrating that Trump seems determined to kick the problem into the long grass. And that does seem to be his motivation, alongside the putative economic benefits: one of Trump's main aims appears to be to see a return to, or a growth of, coal-mining in the US, which is literally the worst way to improve the situation with regards to Climate Change.
Look, if you accept that Climate Change is a problem, and accept that it needs solving, then even if you think it probably can't be solved, then you surely should agree that it *certainly* can't be solved if world leaders don't even bother to try.
Granted, which is why it's so frustrating that Trump seems determined to kick the problem into the long grass. And that does seem to be his motivation, alongside the putative economic benefits: one of Trump's main aims appears to be to see a return to, or a growth of, coal-mining in the US, which is literally the worst way to improve the situation with regards to Climate Change.
Look, if you accept that Climate Change is a problem, and accept that it needs solving, then even if you think it probably can't be solved, then you surely should agree that it *certainly* can't be solved if world leaders don't even bother to try.
"Just look at these astounding predictions;
http://
and it will all be Trump's fault !"
It's strange that these predictions surface just as continental Europe is in the grip of a period of high temperatures. Coincidentally (or rather, not, see later) the UK is experiencing conditions cooler than is usual for the time of year. Coincidence? No. The jet stream is a little farther south than usual (as it is prone to be now and then). Hot air from the Sahara is directed across southern Europe. The UK gets none of this as the jet stream keeps it south of us and we end up with a succession of fronts from the Atlantic. It's called weather.
"The problem is wider than, and predates Trump, but he's in power in the US now and seems determined to ignore the problem."
So why concentrate on Mr Trump then, Jim. What about the Chinese (see my earlier post)? Or are they somehow excused from all of this and can continue to burn coal with impunity?
http://
and it will all be Trump's fault !"
It's strange that these predictions surface just as continental Europe is in the grip of a period of high temperatures. Coincidentally (or rather, not, see later) the UK is experiencing conditions cooler than is usual for the time of year. Coincidence? No. The jet stream is a little farther south than usual (as it is prone to be now and then). Hot air from the Sahara is directed across southern Europe. The UK gets none of this as the jet stream keeps it south of us and we end up with a succession of fronts from the Atlantic. It's called weather.
"The problem is wider than, and predates Trump, but he's in power in the US now and seems determined to ignore the problem."
So why concentrate on Mr Trump then, Jim. What about the Chinese (see my earlier post)? Or are they somehow excused from all of this and can continue to burn coal with impunity?
Jim, You agree that we can’t continue to live as we do and solve the problem but you know as well as I do that we will continue to live as we do, so frankly I can’t see why you’re blaming Trump or anyone else for recognising what you agree you recognise. Personally, I see no point in continuing to pump millions of pounds/dollars/euros into it. What’s it all for? Ultimately nothing.
I'm concentrating on Trump because this thread is about him, NJ.
China's economic growth has gone hand-in-hand with a massive increase in particularly coal consumption -- I'm obviously well-ware of that, and very *** off by it -- but they also seem to have picked up on the idea that renewable sources are good for their economy too, and lately are emphasising that sector more. It's not enough, but ... well, it would be a sad state of affairs if the country most interested in driving forward progressive environmental policy was China, let's put it that way.
China's economic growth has gone hand-in-hand with a massive increase in particularly coal consumption -- I'm obviously well-ware of that, and very *** off by it -- but they also seem to have picked up on the idea that renewable sources are good for their economy too, and lately are emphasising that sector more. It's not enough, but ... well, it would be a sad state of affairs if the country most interested in driving forward progressive environmental policy was China, let's put it that way.
Mikey - dont answer that !
it involves wading thro pages of utter crip that resemble a passchendaele look alike of flanders desolate mud.
I would put it as a mixture of dentufix and chewing gum
it aint worf it ! I tried a few pages and was irresistibly drawn to some accountancy revision - yeah its THAT bad !
you fall into a mud bath and horses scream as they drown in the mud and are sucked under - men on duckboards look on as you struggle not daring to help...
sorry that was a contemporary description of Passchendaele
but it could easily apply to the prose of this thread ....horrible!
dont go there !
it involves wading thro pages of utter crip that resemble a passchendaele look alike of flanders desolate mud.
I would put it as a mixture of dentufix and chewing gum
it aint worf it ! I tried a few pages and was irresistibly drawn to some accountancy revision - yeah its THAT bad !
you fall into a mud bath and horses scream as they drown in the mud and are sucked under - men on duckboards look on as you struggle not daring to help...
sorry that was a contemporary description of Passchendaele
but it could easily apply to the prose of this thread ....horrible!
dont go there !
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.