Trump Withdraws from Paris Climate Accord

[RavenHawk]

17 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

Well that's not really true. Pollution and global warming started with the industrial revolution, that being America and Europe. The Chinese and Indians have come later on. Above all... America has a moral obligation to leed by example. Of course IMO Trump lacks all moral fibre and sense of fair play. Trump apparently now says he intends to renegotiate the terms of the Paris convention. 

Generally the guy's a jerk in my eyes. 

That's not really true.  Pollution and global warming has been going on since climate started.  The Industrial Revolution was arguably from about 1750 to 1850.  We were still in a cooling period.  Since 1850, began a new warming period (which we are still in).  Considering that the IR spanned a climate trough, there was no radical change in climate, even when you factor in the 800 year lag between CO2 and temp.  And that seems to be a maximum between one peak to the next trough.

 

America’s moral obligation is to its people.  I would say that Trump took the lead to expose this sham.  The Paris Accord is hardly fair play.  It’s Trump’s duty to at least try to make a better, fair deal.  His duty is to protect Americans.

[Wickian]

2 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

That's not really true.  Pollution and global warming has been going on since climate started.  The Industrial Revolution was arguably from about 1750 to 1850.  We were still in a cooling period.  Since 1850, began a new warming period (which we are still in).  Considering that the IR spanned a climate trough, there was no radical change in climate, even when you factor in the 800 year lag between CO2 and temp.  And that seems to be a maximum between one peak to the next trough.

 

America’s moral obligation is to its people.  I would say that Trump took the lead to expose this sham.  The Paris Accord is hardly fair play.  It’s Trump’s duty to at least try to make a better, fair deal.  His duty is to protect Americans.

If there were penalties for countries who squandered their charity money equal the cost that the first world countries are paying and a viable method of oversight so the numbers couldn't be fudged when review time came around, the deal could at least not be called an obvious scam.

[docyabut2]

48 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

...nothing could be further from the truth. Technology is being led by American companies. 

We all know  America was one of the first  Industrial countries to prosper and now China says it their  turn.  I don't know about anyone else, but just about  most of the products are bought in the US are from China ,that I looked at.  Of which isn't right, we got to get those jobs back  for our people to prosper again.  I know America wants to cradle to china is because they have the biggest population of peoples to feed  and  prevent them from going to war. but its about time we pull out of all there trades deals that are not fair to the American people, China has laugh saying we own the American people     

Edited June 2, 2017 by docyabut2

[Gromdor]

I don't get it.  There is no penalty for just ignoring it.  Why the big song and dance about quitting it?

[RavenHawk]

32 minutes ago, Michelle said:

Before the Industrial Revolution, our planet’s atmosphere was still untainted by human-made pollutants.

Man has been polluting for at least 150,000 years.

 

At least, that’s what scientists thought until recently, when bubbles trapped in Greenland’s ice revealed that we began emitting greenhouse gases at least 2,000 years ago.

Try looking at the Vostok Ice Cores.  That goes back almost 800,000 years.  In the last 500,000 years, temp has peaked 5 times (in line with the Milankovich cycles).  We have passed the last peak.  The Holocene has thrown a wrench into the pattern but there is still nothing to indicate that the natural constrictions will encourage a new peak out of cycle so soon (within 8000 years).

 

Célia Sapart of UtrechtUniversity in the Netherlands led 15 scientists from Europe and the United States in a study that charted the chemi­cal signature of methane in ice samples spanning 2,100 years. The gas methane naturally occurs in the atmosphere in low concentrations. But it’s now considered a greenhouse gas implicated in climate change because of emissions from landfills, large-scale cattle ranching, natural gas pipeline leaks and land-clearing fires.

Methane is absorbed by the oceans and then is released.  This has occurred in Human history many times killing thousands at a time.  How many millions of Buffalo roamed the plains before Man showed up?  I would think that is many times larger than the largest cattle ranch.  Oil and gas naturally seep from the oceans and the ground, that’s how Man discovered it in the first place.  Massive natural fires ravaged the land before Man walked up straight.  Nature pollutes more than Man does.

[Dark_Grey]

15 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Why the big song and dance about quitting it?

 

Because the MSM will take anything, literally anything Trump does or says and make it equal to the Holocaust

Edited June 2, 2017 by Dark_Grey

[Gromdor]

I don't get why Trump even brought it up.  Ignore it and nothing happens.  Going  on TV and declaring that you are leaving just creates the media headlines and gives the world the impression that the word of the US is valueless because of how we change presidents. 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Gromdor
grammar

[Unusual Tournament]

55 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

That's not really true.  Pollution and global warming has been going on since climate started.  The Industrial Revolution was arguably from about 1750 to 1850.  We were still in a cooling period.  Since 1850, began a new warming period (which we are still in).  Considering that the IR spanned a climate trough, there was no radical change in climate, even when you factor in the 800 year lag between CO2 and temp.  And that seems to be a maximum between one peak to the next trough.

 

America’s moral obligation is to its people.  I would say that Trump took the lead to expose this sham.  The Paris Accord is hardly fair play.  It’s Trump’s duty to at least try to make a better, fair deal.  His duty is to protect Americans.

With all due respect Raven... India and China even though big polluters now have contributed a very small percentage of the overall damage to the environment. Of course, I can't deny that global warming hasn't been occurring way before the onset of the industrial revolution but the biggest beneficiarys has been America and Europe. And they stand to lose the most also. By adhering to the agreed emissions target America would be looking after their people. Try not to confuse Trumps pride with what is in the best long term interests of the world, including America's.

[docyabut2]

Quote

Do you know just much of our land is own by China, they even own a sea port. Forget the damm climate changes, we `ve got to get our sovereignty back .

 

[Likely Guy]

1 minute ago, docyabut2 said:

Do you know just much of our land is own by China, they even own a sea port. Forget the damm climate changes, we `ve got to get our sovereignty back .

You'll have to buy it back. They bought and paid for it.

[AnchorSteam]

Before everyone goes flying off the handle,  how about the man's own words?

Got 30 min. to hear him out?

 

So, he leaves the possibility of going back into it, with a fair deal for the USA.  Has anyone mentioned that? 

Do the Partisans who call him "#45" even care?

Trump enumerates his reasons backed by numbers, why isn't anyone else doing that?

 

And I also noticed, the rest of the world calls it a Treaty. It is called an accord here... maybe because it would take the Senate to ratify it instead of the stroke of one man's pen in this country.  

Overall, I think it was a good move, one that will be good for America and make the rest of the world be a little more honest with us.  If the USA is crushed economically, we won't be mush good to the rest of the world, now will we? The people who think that degrading America is the best way to benefit the rest of the planet will have to explain why they think so, it really makes no sense to me.

[GlitterRose]

Is anybody really surprised by this? Really?

[Likely Guy]

10 minutes ago, AnchorSteam said:

 

Trump enumerates his reasons backed by numbers, why isn't anyone else doing that?

His numbers come from a report paid for by the oil & coal industries. Not a non-partisan source.

[GlitterRose]

4 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

His numbers come from a report paid for by the oil & coal industries. Not a non-partisan source.

Why anyone still believes him while his lips are moving...I'm just flabbergasted by this.

I mean, just what kind of high level sorcery is he pulling off here?

Edited June 2, 2017 by ChaosRose

[Likely Guy]

10 minutes ago, ChaosRose said:

Is anybody really surprised by this? Really?

Not at all really. It's an appeal to his base.

Now America is one of only three countries that isn't implementing the agreement. The other two are Nicaragua (because they felt it should be binding) and Syria which is embroiled in a civil war.

The cheese stands alone.

Edited June 2, 2017 by Likely Guy

[AnchorSteam]

22 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

His numbers come from a report paid for by the oil & coal industries. Not a non-partisan source.

Got any links to back that up?

And why are we to assume that those sources are automatically wronger than the Global Warmers that have been wrong about every projection they have ever tried to sell us? 

[Likely Guy]

53 minutes ago, AnchorSteam said:

Got any links to back that up?

And why are we to assume that those sources are automatically wronger than the Global Warmers that have been wrong about every projection they have ever tried to sell us? 

I heard it on the radio today, but I'll see what I can find.I'm on dial-up. *Jeopardy theme*

Later.

Trump’s vision of a hobbled America, ransacked by pointless environmental regulation, draws upon a highly disputed study published in March. National Economic Research Associates has done work for front groups for coal companies in the past and this study was at the behest of the American Council for Capital Formation, which counts Exxon Mobil, the American Petroleum Institute and Charles Koch as major donors.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2017/jun/02/presidents-paris-climate-speech-annotated-trumps-claims-analysed

 

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Likely Guy

[kartikg]

USA should have stick to the Accord for at least another 5 years, USA companies would have made money then on because most countries would buy solar panels and the prices of electric cars which is dominated by American companies would had good chance of entering countries like India China Brazil with competitive prices. by pulling out it gives poor countries with an excuse to pollute more. 

[Likely Guy]

2 minutes ago, kartikg said:

USA should have stick to the Accord for at least another 5 years, USA companies would have made money then on because most countries would buy solar panels and the prices of electric cars which is dominated by American companies would had good chance of entering countries like India China Brazil with competitive prices. by pulling out it gives poor countries with an excuse to pollute more. 

...or develop their own technologies and not buy it from the US.

[RavenHawk]

2 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

With all due respect Raven... India and China even though big polluters now have contributed a very small percentage of the overall damage to the environment.

That’s misleading.  China has far out stripped us in pollution and how long do you think it’ll take at this rate before the “damage” China accumulates surpasses us as well?

 

Of course, I can't deny that global warming hasn't been occurring way before the onset of the industrial revolution but the biggest beneficiarys has been America and Europe. And they stand to lose the most also.

And?  At least our future remains in our hands.

 

By adhering to the agreed emissions target America would be looking after their people.

For one thing, this agreement is non-binding, which means that nations are not going to follow this.  On top of that, China isn’t even mandated to meet any emissions target.  You’re worried about collusion with Russia.  The Paris Accords is collusion with China.  It benefits them at our expense.  How is that ‘looking after our people’?  It’s not.  The Paris Accords is the world wide globalist version of the EU.  Trump is our version of Brexit.

 

Try not to confuse Trumps pride with what is in the best long term interests of the world, including America's.

They are one in the same.  That is why we elected him.  We elected him to be President of the United States, not the World.  Obama was too interested in Globalism.  Hilary never cared about the Forgotten Man.  That is why she lost, not the long list of excuses she peddles.

[Raptor Witness]

I thought it was an interesting choice of words, how Governor Jerry Brown used the word "command" yesterday in a BBC interview, when speaking of Trump pulling out of the Paris agreement.

Jerry Brown on Donald Trump: “He can't command weather. He can't command climate.”

https://thediplo.com/2017/06/01/california-governor-jerry-brown-on-donald-trump-he-cant-command-weather-he-cant-command-climate/

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Raptor Witness

[preacherman76]

Screwing America while everyone else gets a pass seems to be a common theme for some time now. Just look at NATO. 

So this is a good thing. Maybe they will actually come up with a deal that really curbs pollution. Instead of just draining our wealth and our putting people in the poor house. 

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

10 hours ago, Dark_Grey said:

Are they? How much did they pledge?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/31/china-eu-climate-lead-paris-agreement

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/03/china-takes-leadership-climate-change-trump-clean-power-plan-paris-agreement/

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/03/30/chinas-strongest-statement-yet-climate-action/

http://indianexpress.com/article/explained/indias-climate-change-goals-ambitious-but-achievable/

https://www.nrdc.org/experts/india-leads-climate-action-trump-withdraws-paris

[kartikg]

As far as I know India started importing more and more solar panels from both usa and China to meet it commitment of Paris accords. It was a win win situation for all parties because the exporters were making money and the importers creating jobs for installation and maintenance of those plants. Ignoring all this lets agree that usa was compromising more than others but these are some decisions that need to be taken for the common good, let's just say all other 193 countries inspired by this pull out and start burning fossil fuels, what if south American countries start chopping amazon for cultivation and timber or some countries killing some endangered species for profit? 

[kartikg]

continuing above post, I am not advocating any socialist or charity when I say fund poor countries to implement non polluting infrastructure, it's in our own self intrest that climate change should be stopped and funding some poor countries is lot cheaper than anything else in long run.