Trump pulling out of Paris Climate Accord

[Ray From Cleveland]

Did you catch those cyclones on the other side of the world last year though? A couple of them were really intense. Do they not count because they didn't happen in the US?

They do. I was just thinking US. That's my fault. He didn't even imply that.
Yes, there were a couple cat 4s and one or two cat 3s.
There was 3 major hurricanes in 1959
In 1969 there were 5. Even had a cat 5
In 1975 there were 7.
YOU believe we have a new hurricane problem.

No, I don't. What some climatologists are predicting is less frequent but more intense hurricanes. I don't think any of them are actually saying climate change has reached the point to affect that, or that we are anywhere near collecting data to see if that is true or not. Maybe in twenty or thirty years? A bunch more Katrinas and Sandys aren't exactly my hope, either, TN.

Predictions. Exactly. They also predicted cali would be under water and y2k was going to cause a massive computer crash..
Fear mongering. Got to love it.

Predictions. Exactly. They also predicted cali would be under water and y2k was going to cause a massive computer crash..
Fear mongering. Got to love it.

Al Gore was just interviewed the other day and asked about his 10 year predictions which got him a Nobel Prize. Well, those ten years have come and gone, his drastic measures were never implemented and none of his nightmare consequences have occurred:

Wallace reminded Gore that in his documentary he claimed that unless the world “took drastic measures the world would reach a point of no return within 10 years.”

Wallace added that in his publicity of the movie, Gore claimed that if the world didn’t act, man-made global warming would result in a “true planetary emergency.”

Many predictions made by scientists and other climate change alarmists like Gore have failed to come true. For example, in 2007 Gore predicted that the summer Arctic ice in the North Pole would completely disappear by 2013 due to global warming caused by carbon dioxide emissions.

That, however, never came true. The same can be said for many of Gore’s claims and that’s exactly what Wallace confronted him over.

View attachment 131237

All the democrats seem to be good for is getting Nobel Prizes for doing shit. They give them out for talking a good globalist agenda player. Pretty much devalues the Nobel prize for all those who truly deserve it! I bet Trump could literally collapse the Kim Jong-Un regime, reopen the S. China Sea to unfettered traffic, renegotiate all of the US trade deals to boost our economy by a trillion dollars, end drug trafficking between Mexico and the USA, stop terror attacks in the U.S., bring the Middle East together in combating ISIS, Iran's nuclear ambitions and bring peace to the Palestinian / Israeli tensions and they would not even send Trump a Hallmark Thank-You card!

Changes were made & emissions cut so of course his predictions would not be accurate. Howrver, if EWl Dumpster returns us to emissions central, we don't know what the future will hold.

As for Gore, you people keep lying about Gore & the arctic ice, he said arctic ice could be melted by 2013 or 2024.

"Could" - look it up & learn what it means. Our emission are no longer increasing as they once were & have been decreasing party through the efforts of people like Al Gore.

Its like me saying that if you keep eating like a pig, you'll weight 300 pound next year. You go on a diet & then call me a liar.

FLASHBACK: ABC News Warns NYC Will Be Under Water by 2015 Due to Global Warming and Polar Bears Will Fall From Sky

Flashback 1989: UN Predicted Global Warming Would Destroy Entire Nations By 2000

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

They do. I was just thinking US. That's my fault. He didn't even imply that.
Yes, there were a couple cat 4s and one or two cat 3s.
There was 3 major hurricanes in 1959
In 1969 there were 5. Even had a cat 5
In 1975 there were 7.
YOU believe we have a new hurricane problem.

No, I don't. What some climatologists are predicting is less frequent but more intense hurricanes. I don't think any of them are actually saying climate change has reached the point to affect that, or that we are anywhere near collecting data to see if that is true or not. Maybe in twenty or thirty years? A bunch more Katrinas and Sandys aren't exactly my hope, either, TN.

Predictions. Exactly. They also predicted cali would be under water and y2k was going to cause a massive computer crash..
Fear mongering. Got to love it.

Predictions. Exactly. They also predicted cali would be under water and y2k was going to cause a massive computer crash..
Fear mongering. Got to love it.

Al Gore was just interviewed the other day and asked about his 10 year predictions which got him a Nobel Prize. Well, those ten years have come and gone, his drastic measures were never implemented and none of his nightmare consequences have occurred:

Wallace reminded Gore that in his documentary he claimed that unless the world “took drastic measures the world would reach a point of no return within 10 years.”

Wallace added that in his publicity of the movie, Gore claimed that if the world didn’t act, man-made global warming would result in a “true planetary emergency.”

Many predictions made by scientists and other climate change alarmists like Gore have failed to come true. For example, in 2007 Gore predicted that the summer Arctic ice in the North Pole would completely disappear by 2013 due to global warming caused by carbon dioxide emissions.

That, however, never came true. The same can be said for many of Gore’s claims and that’s exactly what Wallace confronted him over.

View attachment 131237

All the democrats seem to be good for is getting Nobel Prizes for doing shit. They give them out for talking a good globalist agenda player. Pretty much devalues the Nobel prize for all those who truly deserve it! I bet Trump could literally collapse the Kim Jong-Un regime, reopen the S. China Sea to unfettered traffic, renegotiate all of the US trade deals to boost our economy by a trillion dollars, end drug trafficking between Mexico and the USA, stop terror attacks in the U.S., bring the Middle East together in combating ISIS, Iran's nuclear ambitions and bring peace to the Palestinian / Israeli tensions and they would not even send Trump a Hallmark Thank-You card!

Changes were made & emissions cut so of course his predictions would not be accurate. Howrver, if EWl Dumpster returns us to emissions central, we don't know what the future will hold.

As for Gore, you people keep lying about Gore & the arctic ice, he said arctic ice could be melted by 2013 or 2024.

"Could" - look it up & learn what it means. Our emission are no longer increasing as they once were & have been decreasing party through the efforts of people like Al Gore.

Its like me saying that if you keep eating like a pig, you'll weight 300 pound next year. You go on a diet & then call me a liar.

FLASHBACK: ABC News Warns NYC Will Be Under Water by 2015 Due to Global Warming and Polar Bears Will Fall From Sky

Flashback 1989: UN Predicted Global Warming Would Destroy Entire Nations By 2000

You gotta love these folks... they derive trends from 10 year periods out of 4,500,000,000 years.

 

[toobfreak]

The Paris Accord is about one thing only: The United States agreeing to go along with a backdoor agenda where we surrender ultimate control of our sovereignty to a globalist entity which can then keep picking us clean of money as they have for years as a subsidy in order to artificially boost their own economies without their actually producing anything real for it! That is why Angela Merkel had that funny look on her face. She realized that between paying the full 2% of their share towards NATO and this, Trump just boosted our own economy while they've taken a huge hit! It won't show up on any front-room ledger, but little by little, Trump is pulling the rug on those who have been giving us short shrift---- playing us for suckers. They understood that other US presidents were on the take to line their own pockets and so were willing to go along, but Trump's pockets are already lined to the teeth! Trump is like a greasy rope that every time one of these blood-sucking nations tries to reposition their grip to get a better hold on us, they slip and fall further. In the process, we get back or get to keep a little more of what we never should have lost in the first place! We get these other country's hands a bit further out of our pockets. Each time it is just another win for the USA. We are redrawing all the lines in the sand with a leader who is actually out to lead with OUR best interests in mind! If he keeps this up, I might just get tired of winning!!!

Ha! Ha! Not!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I get it. When Obama was President you had a freaking fit when he used EOs or negotiated agreements & here you re cheering when El Dumpster does it.

How much shit has your orange hero done against popular opinion & on his own.

What is El Cheeto's polling? How many people agree with his shit?

According to you, he shoulds not do any of this shit.

He lost the popular vote so most Americans don't want his fat ass anywhere near the White House.

He got the popular vote in every state he won. The People's Republic of California is what put Hillary ahead, but we don't elect representatives on popular vote, otherwise, Trump would have concentrated on winning the popular vote instead of the winning the electoral college vote.

Trump put out his agenda when he ran for the office. Polls are BS because you can word a poll to get any kind of result you desire, but you can't do that in an election; in an election, the candidate states their agenda and people vote for that agenda or not.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, I don't. What some climatologists are predicting is less frequent but more intense hurricanes. I don't think any of them are actually saying climate change has reached the point to affect that, or that we are anywhere near collecting data to see if that is true or not. Maybe in twenty or thirty years? A bunch more Katrinas and Sandys aren't exactly my hope, either, TN.

Predictions. Exactly. They also predicted cali would be under water and y2k was going to cause a massive computer crash..
Fear mongering. Got to love it.

Predictions. Exactly. They also predicted cali would be under water and y2k was going to cause a massive computer crash..
Fear mongering. Got to love it.

Al Gore was just interviewed the other day and asked about his 10 year predictions which got him a Nobel Prize. Well, those ten years have come and gone, his drastic measures were never implemented and none of his nightmare consequences have occurred:

Wallace reminded Gore that in his documentary he claimed that unless the world “took drastic measures the world would reach a point of no return within 10 years.”

Wallace added that in his publicity of the movie, Gore claimed that if the world didn’t act, man-made global warming would result in a “true planetary emergency.”

Many predictions made by scientists and other climate change alarmists like Gore have failed to come true. For example, in 2007 Gore predicted that the summer Arctic ice in the North Pole would completely disappear by 2013 due to global warming caused by carbon dioxide emissions.

That, however, never came true. The same can be said for many of Gore’s claims and that’s exactly what Wallace confronted him over.

View attachment 131237

All the democrats seem to be good for is getting Nobel Prizes for doing shit. They give them out for talking a good globalist agenda player. Pretty much devalues the Nobel prize for all those who truly deserve it! I bet Trump could literally collapse the Kim Jong-Un regime, reopen the S. China Sea to unfettered traffic, renegotiate all of the US trade deals to boost our economy by a trillion dollars, end drug trafficking between Mexico and the USA, stop terror attacks in the U.S., bring the Middle East together in combating ISIS, Iran's nuclear ambitions and bring peace to the Palestinian / Israeli tensions and they would not even send Trump a Hallmark Thank-You card!

Changes were made & emissions cut so of course his predictions would not be accurate. Howrver, if EWl Dumpster returns us to emissions central, we don't know what the future will hold.

As for Gore, you people keep lying about Gore & the arctic ice, he said arctic ice could be melted by 2013 or 2024.

"Could" - look it up & learn what it means. Our emission are no longer increasing as they once were & have been decreasing party through the efforts of people like Al Gore.

Its like me saying that if you keep eating like a pig, you'll weight 300 pound next year. You go on a diet & then call me a liar.

FLASHBACK: ABC News Warns NYC Will Be Under Water by 2015 Due to Global Warming and Polar Bears Will Fall From Sky

Flashback 1989: UN Predicted Global Warming Would Destroy Entire Nations By 2000

You gotta love these folks... they derive trends from 10 year periods out of 4,500,000,000 years.

They also have very short memory.

 

[iceberg]

Weather Questions & Answers

Thanks, but I have a question: Why are so many of the weather reporting articles from 2014 based on 2013 data and prior? I noticed that, too, when I was looking at articles. Does it really take that long to compile data?

dunno. i just like to look up blanket statements and see how valid they may or may not be. i hear storms are getting worse and maybe they are. but i've seen horrible storms a lot through life and not just recently.

i've also seen not long ago the left and science say a mini ice age is coming. oops.

it's hard to believe someone and take them seriously when they rage to a point and then keep changing the name of it to fit another potential possibility.

Well, when it takes them three years and running to compile their data, I guess we'll all be running on "old news." You are too bright to believe that because there have been horrible storms in the past it somehow argues that climate change may bring about fewer but more intense storms. You know it is an average over years. You know that averages include minor and major storms. You KNOW that, so why are you arguing such a goof ball third grade statement from Bear?

I don't remember the mini ice age thing--I remember something about everyone getting cancer from a hole in the ozone and then we stopped selling aerosols for the most part. Predictions and the "latest" scientific theories are frequently proved wrong over time; that is true. We can't deny the climate is changing. We can't deny we are pumping much, much more C02 in the atmosphere than we were 300 years ago. We can't deny C02 increases temps on Earth. So we can reasonably deny what?
- That we can do anything about it
- How much we should pay/sacrifice/contribute toward an attempted solution

Those are the only real bones of contention I see available.

We can't deny we are pumping much, much more C02 in the atmosphere than we were 300 years ago. We can't deny C02 increases temps on Earth. So we can reasonably deny what?

Aside from the fact that the Earth has zillions of tons more CO2 than we do, Aside from the fact that obviously we are putting CO2 into the air via industrialization that simply wasn't there 150 years ago, the inarguable point is that CO2 is still a minute trace gas, still a very WEAK greenhouse gas, our output pales in comparison to what the Earth itself puts out just from natural sources like volcanos and venting from the sea floor, our output over the past 150 years is but a blink in the eye compared to the 4.5 billion year life of the planet, and during the first third of our 150 year period, our output was meager (industrialization was just getting started), and over the last third of that period, nations like the USA have developed clean technology to drastically cut back on levels!

And BTW, that "much, much more" you speak of amounts to 100 more atoms of CO2 per million atoms of air.

If anyone really wants to help the planet, forget CO2, forget carbon credits, forget the Paris Accord and concentrate on getting developing countries like China and India the technology to clean up their air of the FULL SPECTRUM of pollutants, not just CO2, for true air quality.

If anyone really wants to help the planet, forget CO2, forget carbon credits, forget the Paris Accord and concentrate on getting developing countries like China and India the technology to clean up their air of the FULL SPECTRUM of pollutants, not just CO2, for true air quality.

Well, since Trump just pulled us out of the only agreement that began to take steps toward that goal, I guess we can't. It's pretty arrogant, imo, to demand it of China and India but not agree to any contributions on our part, especially since we are the #2 emitter of C02 on the planet. But yeah, let's just bully India and China and blame them for everything, pretend we can "make them" clean up their environment. That's what the Paris Accords were meant to begin. Except what's good for the goose is good for the gander. And Trump won't play that way.[/QUOTE]
except trump said he "would" play *if* it were an even playing field.

how is it ok for india and china to not even start cutting back until 2030? and since it's just an ... agreement w/o penalty or bindings, if they decide not to - what can you do? our money is gone and all those clamoring for DO SOMETHING NOW don't seem to care 2 of the biggest players said... "later"

if this is that important, we all start now. otherwise, what is *really* driving all this?

 

[toobfreak]

The way a liberal agenda works is like this.

You start out with a legitimate study that shows a positively-improving, down-turning trend.

Liberals get together in teams to dissect it for analysis on how they can use it for their needs:

The identify the one portion of the study which they can skew to their end adding in a bit of false information. Then they go on TV, newspaper, websites and message boards like this one and present the "newly uncovered, dramatically alarming evidence" as if it were the whole entire result of the study!

THIS JUST IN! The Weather Channel in cooperation with Al Gore and Michael Moore have just released this new, irrefutable data from an iron clad certified government study showing that the world is going to pot and by the year 2027, all the sea ice will melt, all coastal cities will be underwater and polar bears will be selling lemonade, jet-skis and sunglasses if we don't sign the Paris Accord immediately and be damn glad we did!!!

Then they send out their useless minions to get on message boards to call anyone who argues the efficacy of the results an "idiot dolt Trumpbot of el Cheetos the fat-ass who refuses to see the facts before his face!"

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

This proves you and your buddy Todd don't know what in the world what this topic is all about.
Yes they are not choking with CO2 but the emissions are releasing to the atmosphere is dangerous to the earth. And Coal industry is one of the culprits.
China just shut down 103 of their coal plants is a good progress. At the same time they are going after their factories of air pollutants and smogs.

Yes they are not choking with CO2 but the emissions are releasing to the atmosphere is dangerous to the earth. And Coal industry is one of the culprits.

Yes, they should spend their money cleaning up their dangerous emissions and stop wasting it on CO2 reduction.
Of course, based on their non-commitments under the Paris accords, they already decided not to waste their money on CO2 reduction, eh?

China just shut down 103 of their coal plants is a good progress

They shut down 103 plants that were generating power? Are you sure?

They were planned & cancelled.

Thanks, I noticed his error too.

They did shut down the plans to build them. Dipstick.

They didn't shut down any plant.
They emitted just as much the day after they said they scrapped their plans.
That's no progress at all.

Thanks for highlighting charwin's error. Moron.

 

[OldLady]

That's what the Paris Accords were meant to begin.

No, that's not what it was meant for. Global Warming (or climate change as you call it) is a leftist agenda. The Democrats want to obligate us to that leftist agenda no matter who has power such as the case today. Thank goodness Trump refused to go along with it.

Besides, the leftist outrage has nothing to do with global warming, it has to do with the Republicans tearing apart DumBama's liberal agenda piece by piece. Had Bush come out with the Paris Accord, you would be applauding Trumps actions today.

You guys are all SICK turning this into a purely political issue. It is global, it is real, and it's going to fry your ass same as mine. If it were leftist tree huggers only, why did every country in the world agree? Anyone turning this into a political issue has real problems distinguishing reality.

 

[sartre play]

Think the usual will happen, put head in sand until its at your door step, then blame the other guy.

 

[Rustic]

Man-made climate change does not exist... Florida should be under water right now according to climate scientists...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's what the Paris Accords were meant to begin.

No, that's not what it was meant for. Global Warming (or climate change as you call it) is a leftist agenda. The Democrats want to obligate us to that leftist agenda no matter who has power such as the case today. Thank goodness Trump refused to go along with it.

Besides, the leftist outrage has nothing to do with global warming, it has to do with the Republicans tearing apart DumBama's liberal agenda piece by piece. Had Bush come out with the Paris Accord, you would be applauding Trumps actions today.

You guys are all SICK turning this into a purely political issue. It is global, it is real, and it's going to fry your ass same as mine. If it were leftist tree huggers only, why did every country in the world agree? Anyone turning this into a political issue has real problems distinguishing reality.

You guys are all SICK turning this into a purely political issue.

It is a political issue.
Your side wants to use the "threat" of global warming to increase government power.
To spend trillions on windmills and solar power and place further restrictions on the US economy.

If they truly wanted useful, carbon-free power that worked 24/7, they'd support more nuclear energy.

It is global, it is real, and it's going to fry your ass same as mine.

If that were true, they'd push nuclear. They don't, because it's not.

If it were leftist tree huggers only, why did every country in the world agree?

It makes them feel good. Like they're doing something useful. Instead of just wasting money.

 

[OldLady]

That's what the Paris Accords were meant to begin.

No, that's not what it was meant for. Global Warming (or climate change as you call it) is a leftist agenda. The Democrats want to obligate us to that leftist agenda no matter who has power such as the case today. Thank goodness Trump refused to go along with it.

Besides, the leftist outrage has nothing to do with global warming, it has to do with the Republicans tearing apart DumBama's liberal agenda piece by piece. Had Bush come out with the Paris Accord, you would be applauding Trumps actions today.

You guys are all SICK turning this into a purely political issue. It is global, it is real, and it's going to fry your ass same as mine. If it were leftist tree huggers only, why did every country in the world agree? Anyone turning this into a political issue has real problems distinguishing reality.

You guys are all SICK turning this into a purely political issue.

It is a political issue.
Your side wants to use the "threat" of global warming to increase government power.
To spend trillions on windmills and solar power and place further restrictions on the US economy.

If they truly wanted useful, carbon-free power that worked 24/7, they'd support more nuclear energy.

It is global, it is real, and it's going to fry your ass same as mine.

If that were true, they'd push nuclear. They don't, because it's not.

If it were leftist tree huggers only, why did every country in the world agree?

It makes them feel good. Like they're doing something useful. Instead of just wasting money.

WRONG ANSWER!!!
You can't ALL be this thick.
But I don't suppose anyone will admit it, because you all have to defend Trump's decision, good or bad, thick or thin, snow, sleet or hail, rich or poor, etc. etc.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's what the Paris Accords were meant to begin.

No, that's not what it was meant for. Global Warming (or climate change as you call it) is a leftist agenda. The Democrats want to obligate us to that leftist agenda no matter who has power such as the case today. Thank goodness Trump refused to go along with it.

Besides, the leftist outrage has nothing to do with global warming, it has to do with the Republicans tearing apart DumBama's liberal agenda piece by piece. Had Bush come out with the Paris Accord, you would be applauding Trumps actions today.

You guys are all SICK turning this into a purely political issue. It is global, it is real, and it's going to fry your ass same as mine. If it were leftist tree huggers only, why did every country in the world agree? Anyone turning this into a political issue has real problems distinguishing reality.

You guys are all SICK turning this into a purely political issue.

It is a political issue.
Your side wants to use the "threat" of global warming to increase government power.
To spend trillions on windmills and solar power and place further restrictions on the US economy.

If they truly wanted useful, carbon-free power that worked 24/7, they'd support more nuclear energy.

It is global, it is real, and it's going to fry your ass same as mine.

If that were true, they'd push nuclear. They don't, because it's not.

If it were leftist tree huggers only, why did every country in the world agree?

It makes them feel good. Like they're doing something useful. Instead of just wasting money.

WRONG ANSWER!!!
You can't ALL be this thick.
But I don't suppose anyone will admit it, because you all have to defend Trump's decision, good or bad, thick or thin, snow, sleet or hail, rich or poor, etc. etc.

WRONG ANSWER!!!

Obama didn't want more government control of everything?

Why don't the greens support nuclear energy if CO2 is the death of us all?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That's what the Paris Accords were meant to begin.

No, that's not what it was meant for. Global Warming (or climate change as you call it) is a leftist agenda. The Democrats want to obligate us to that leftist agenda no matter who has power such as the case today. Thank goodness Trump refused to go along with it.

Besides, the leftist outrage has nothing to do with global warming, it has to do with the Republicans tearing apart DumBama's liberal agenda piece by piece. Had Bush come out with the Paris Accord, you would be applauding Trumps actions today.

You guys are all SICK turning this into a purely political issue. It is global, it is real, and it's going to fry your ass same as mine. If it were leftist tree huggers only, why did every country in the world agree? Anyone turning this into a political issue has real problems distinguishing reality.

Let me tell you something, the Democrats don't do anything unless it benefits them, their party, or their voters.

Do you really think that Democrats were so concerned about people not having healthcare? Do you think the Democrats and Obama really felt 20 million people were going hungry when they doubled the food stamp role? Do you really think they are concerned about helpless crime victims when they talk about gun control? Do you really think that Democrats are so concerned about people from other countries needing a new place to live and their compassion is why they want to bring them here? Think again..........

The Democrats won't pick up a quarter off the sidewalk unless they benefit somehow, and that includes energy. A Democrat politicians dream is to have total control over the American people. The only two vestiges stopping them are healthcare and energy. Once they have total control over those two things, they will have total control over all of us.

So how are they going to do it? The Paris Accord is one great place to start. First they have to scare the hell out of people like you telling us we are all going to burn. Most of their climate gadgets are inaccurate, their theory is just that...a theory, but they are going to take baby steps until they get what they want just like every other issue.

If they were so concerned about pollution, they would have supported fracking since it's fracking that brought down our carbon emissions the most. They would get rid of ethanol since making ethanol causes more pollution than making gasoline, plus it increases the cost of our groceries since we are burning up our food supply.

 

[charwin95]

To get every country* in the world to agree that we should ALL clean up the environment for the planet's sake was a big accomplishment.

Still, only words. A non-binding agreement. Just talk is all it is. No accountability, no enforcement, no way to verify.

The U.S., the second largest polluter on the planet actually spearheaded the effort.

Then all the better that we step out of it! Still the same bad idea no matter, just another attempt to globalize socialize one-worldize our country.

The countries with economies large enough agreed to help out the countries that are still heating by campfire. This is the spirit of cooperation rarely if ever seen in the history of this planet before. Then, along comes Trump and says "I don't want to pay anything toward this" even though we are the #2 polluter--who cares? It's cheaper to pollute. Our coal miners need jobs. And just like that, we're out. And YOU are PROUD of that?

Yep! First, we are not the #2 polluter, don't know where you got that crap, and if all the other countries still want to do it, NOTHING STOPPING THEM! JUST QUIT TRYING TO STICK ME WITH THE BILL! The US Taxpayer is SICK AND TIRED of carry the world on our shoulders. The Accord won't make a damn bit of an effect, it would cost us hugely, and besides, Trump made it clear he would be all open to it if it can be worked out different that we aren't screwed in the ass. DAMN PROUD TO HAVE A PRESIDENT stand up for me like that and take it in the chin because it was the right thing to do for the USA.

First, we are not the #2 polluter, don't know where you got that crap,
I don't know where you've been that you DIDN'T know we were the #2 polluter. I've heard some places say we're #1, but I'll go with the EPA and what is said in my local paper this morning.

Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data | US EPA

Yes but is that adjusted for population???

It's one planet, one atmosphere. Explain why the populations matter as to the amount of greenhouse gasses entering the atmosphere.

The data is skewed against the USA due to its size and number of people! Of course we appear a bigger polluter than we are, if we didn't have such good technology, we would pollute much more. And India while contributing 7% is a much bigger polluter considering the small size of the country and population.

View attachment 130663

China produces nearly a THIRD of the world CO2 emission yet is GROWING and not affected by the ACCORD.
India, despite its small size producers almost as much as all the countries of the EU combined.
Yes, we produce 14%, considering our population and size, pretty damned good compared to the tiny EU (look at a map).
Tiny Japan producers almost as much as all of Russia!
If you want to say 14% is still 14%, fine, but to cut our CO2 by 20% would be DEVASTATING to our economy, MASSIVELY EXPENSIVE. Now is not the time with our economy already weak and when the benefits of doing so are HIGHLY debatable. Even the PA predicts only a minuscule improvement over a century!
Not a good deal to CRIPPLE ourselves while China and India run away Scott free producing nearly 40% of the total global amount and INCREASING.

Let's take a look at air quality in BEIJING CHINA:


View attachment 130664



Now let us take a look at New Delhi India:


View attachment 130665


Now, let us take a look at an American City like Chicago, one of our largest:


View attachment 130667


Any questions? Pure numbers and statistical data can be deceiving.

Yes you have a problem. No No No No and NO.
Your pictures are very misleading and very wrong comparison.
New Delhi, India is several hundred miles away from the ocean water. Beijing China is approximately 120 miles away a from the ocean water.
Chicago is next to a big body of water Lake Michigan and its windy blowing smog to inland city like Iowa. How often do you see a smog next to a body of water? See picture.
Other picture is from Riverside and San Bernardino, Ca. smog coming from Orange County Ca.
Now you compare those pictures to New Delhi and Beijing.

This is San Bernardino and Riverside County, Ca

 

[charwin95]

The whole world signed and agreed to this accord except Nicaragua and Syria. The whole world supports Obama.
Today the whole world is laughing at Trump and blasting Trump as a ignorant who claim this is hoax here and over seas. That's a fact.
BTW his EPA chief cannot even answer direct questions from his news briefing today. That's a fact.

If the whole world signed onto this farce, why the need for the US to do it too? Seems like those countries will do just fine without us.

US is the second worst polluters. We are the leader not a backward follower. We now at level of Syria and Nicaragua. Even China the worst polluters sign on to this accord.

Maybe you should get your facts right:

Air pollution from industrial activity isn’t just an environmental concern—it’s a major public health problem, too.

In a report (pdf) released Tuesday (Sept. 27), the World Health Organization (WHO) found that 92% of the population breathes air with unhealthy levels of pollutants. WHO collected air quality data from 3,000 locations across the globe and looked for concentrations of fine particulate matter, including sulfates, nitrates, mineral dust, and black carbon, which are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter—about 1/1000 of a millimeter, or the width of a credit card. Both indoors and outdoors, these particles work their way into the lungs when we breathe, and can cause cardiovascular disease like lung cancer, stroke, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Every country has terrible air pollution, but these are the world’s worst

Now, if you click on the link (and I doubt you will) you can scroll down to the bottom of the page where they list the countries from worst to best. Just so you don't waste too much of your precious time, I suggest you scroll quickly to find the US.

Of course China signed onto it. They don't have to do shit until 2030, and even then, who knows if they'd honor it.

You are very funny Ray. LOL. You are telling me that air is polluted. So we need to do something. Correct? What are you trying to tell me? You need to look at this real link and the problem Ray.

List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions - Wikipedia

View attachment 130754

China. They don't do shit till 2030 is a lame and dumb excuse from Trump as a good example of LYING to Americans.
Technically yes they don't do anything till 2030 because that is the allowance they negotiated with the accord. But in REALITY that is incorrect. They are choking to death right now. What made you and Trump think they are not doing anything right now?
If someone has a cancer (China) is this person going to wait 13 years to get treatments? Wrong. If they waited 13 years to do something------- What do you think will happen to them? Chinese are not that stupid.
They are building several hydro electric dam like in Brahmaputra, three gorges dam and others. This year they scrapped 103 coal power plant which I heard this news in 2015 when they are still in planning stage. They are also doing a lot of improvements about smog from cars and other factory polluters. That is just the start.

The End of Coal Is Near: China Just Scrapped 103 Power Plants

Technically yes they don't do anything till 2030 because that is the allowance they negotiated with the accord.

Yes, Trump was correct.

But in REALITY that is incorrect.

Wrong, as you just admitted, Trump was correct.

They are choking to death right now.

They aren't choking on CO2.

What made you and Trump think they are not doing anything right now?

The Paris Accord.

They are also doing a lot of improvements about smog from cars and other factory polluters.

You mean they're spending their money on real pollution instead of wasting it on CO2?
Exactly.

Your rebuttal is pure garbage. You cut and paste and cherry pick my rebuttal-------- then pick up a sentence to fit your philosophical agenda.
You must be new here because only rookie will make this kind dumb rebuttal.

 

[charwin95]

The whole world signed and agreed to this accord except Nicaragua and Syria. The whole world supports Obama.
Today the whole world is laughing at Trump and blasting Trump as a ignorant who claim this is hoax here and over seas. That's a fact.
BTW his EPA chief cannot even answer direct questions from his news briefing today. That's a fact.

If the whole world signed onto this farce, why the need for the US to do it too? Seems like those countries will do just fine without us.

US is the second worst polluters. We are the leader not a backward follower. We now at level of Syria and Nicaragua. Even China the worst polluters sign on to this accord.

Maybe you should get your facts right:

Air pollution from industrial activity isn’t just an environmental concern—it’s a major public health problem, too.

In a report (pdf) released Tuesday (Sept. 27), the World Health Organization (WHO) found that 92% of the population breathes air with unhealthy levels of pollutants. WHO collected air quality data from 3,000 locations across the globe and looked for concentrations of fine particulate matter, including sulfates, nitrates, mineral dust, and black carbon, which are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter—about 1/1000 of a millimeter, or the width of a credit card. Both indoors and outdoors, these particles work their way into the lungs when we breathe, and can cause cardiovascular disease like lung cancer, stroke, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Every country has terrible air pollution, but these are the world’s worst

Now, if you click on the link (and I doubt you will) you can scroll down to the bottom of the page where they list the countries from worst to best. Just so you don't waste too much of your precious time, I suggest you scroll quickly to find the US.

Of course China signed onto it. They don't have to do shit until 2030, and even then, who knows if they'd honor it.

You are very funny Ray. LOL. You are telling me that air is polluted. So we need to do something. Correct? What are you trying to tell me? You need to look at this real link and the problem Ray.

List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions - Wikipedia

View attachment 130754

China. They don't do shit till 2030 is a lame and dumb excuse from Trump as a good example of LYING to Americans.
Technically yes they don't do anything till 2030 because that is the allowance they negotiated with the accord. But in REALITY that is incorrect. They are choking to death right now. What made you and Trump think they are not doing anything right now?
If someone has a cancer (China) is this person going to wait 13 years to get treatments? Wrong. If they waited 13 years to do something------- What do you think will happen to them? Chinese are not that stupid.
They are building several hydro electric dam like in Brahmaputra, three gorges dam and others. This year they scrapped 103 coal power plant which I heard this news in 2015 when they are still in planning stage. They are also doing a lot of improvements about smog from cars and other factory polluters. That is just the start.

The End of Coal Is Near: China Just Scrapped 103 Power Plants

They don't believe anything said by scientists.

Very Sad.
They don't even believe that the Chinese government are spending $100s of billions doing their best to improve their air quality, land and emissions. Very sad.
Because of business and my employees we've been traveling to Beijing in last 20+ years. I have a company condo Beijing.
My rough estimate------ the Chinese government realized or woke up they have a serious is around 2005.

 

[Markle]

NASA has a better view than climate change deniers that have their heads up their ass.
Dramatic Nasa images show the staggering loss of ice at the south pole | Daily Mail Online

As you know, Professor Phil Jones was the center of the Global Warming Scam at East Anglia University. Their program was considered the epitome of Global Warming Information. The disclosure of thousands of e-mails proving their efforts to conceal information discredit and even prevent opposing views from being published has wrecked the scam, hopefully forever. Data used by the United Nations IPCC and NASA findings came from EAU.

14th February, 2010

Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995

Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing (it has now been disclosed that all the “raw data” was DUMPED!

There has been no global warming since 1995

Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes

Phil Jones admitted his record keeping is 'not as good as it should be.

WHAT????

[…]

Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.

Phil Jones has said that he considered suicide for his part in this worldwide scam.

Let us also recall: The e-mails leaked in the fall of 2009 allow us to trace the machinations of a small but influential band of British and US climate scientists who played the lead role in the IPCC reports. It appears that this group, which controlled access to basic temperature data, was able to produce a "warming" by manipulating the analysis of the data, but refused to share information on the basic data or details of their analysis with independent scientists who requested them -- in violation of Freedom of Information laws. In fact, they went so far as to keep any dissenting views from being published -- by monopolizing the peer-review process, aided by ideologically cooperative editors of prestigious journals, like Science and Nature.

We learn from the e-mails that the ClimateGate gang was able to "hide the decline" [of global temperature] by applying what they termed as "tricks," and that they intimidated editors and forced out those judged to be "uncooperative." No doubt, thorough investigations, now in progress or planned, will disclose the full range of their nefarious activities. But it is clear that this small cabal was able to convince much of the world that climate disasters were impending -- unless drastic steps were taken. Not only were most of the media, public, and politicians misled, but so were many scientists, national academies of science, and professional organizations -- and even the Norwegian committee that awarded the 2007 Peace Prize to the IPCC and Al Gore, the chief apostle of climate alarmism.

Climategate U-turn: Astonishment as scientist at centre of global warming email row admits data not well organised | Daily Mail Online

 

[bripat9643]

we don't know where the warming is coming from.

The FRAUD of Global (non) Warming is the deliberate misinterpretation of the URBAN HEAT SINK EFFECT on the SURFACE GROUND TEMPERATURE SERIES, the only series showing any warming in the RAW (unFUDGED) DATA.

As urban areas grow, they warm on the surface, as trees, grass and rocks are replaced with highways, warm buildings, factories etc.


The Urban Heat Island Effect


"The sun and the city make for dangerous heat. It's called the Urban Heat Island Effect.

It causes temperatures in the city to be 1 to 10 degrees warmer than in rural areas.

Asphalt, buildings, and the lack of trees create a hotter environment for people in urban areas."


And, so, if you just measure temps in the center of growing urban areas, you get "warming" even though the ATMOSPHERE is NOT WARMING....

Scientists take this into account. When they do, you morons have a fit.

Make up your mind.

No they don't, douche nozzle.