Trumpt**** support the Presidents decision to leave the Paris agreement
-
GHG emissions from volcanic sources make up less than 1% of emissions from human activities. Volcanoes generate about 200 million tons of CO2 annually, on the other hand 24 billion tons of CO2 is produced annually from anthropogenic sources.
So natural sources can't be blamed for climate change.
-
Let me get this straight. Scientists all over the world from every country are mostly in agreement that climate change is real.
Trumptards completely disregard all of that science because the guy who sells steaks at the mall tells them to. It's a world gone mad…...
News about this administration makes my blood boil on a daily basis. We are literally in the twighlight zone.
Yes, pod people like you are extremely scary.
What makes my blood boil is the fear mongering by the left and the blind knee jerk reactionary you, and others show in this thread.
-Trump wanted to re-negotiate the treaty. He thought that it wasn't fair for the U.S.
-Nope, non-negotiable.
-Okay, we're out.
-OMG YOU HATE THE ENVIRONMENT, ARE ANTI-SCIENCE AND LITERALLY BRINGING ABOUT THE "APOCOLYPSE" (also racist, because we can't waste an opportunity to call your racist).Here is CNN saying that Trump is bringing about the apocolypse:
Here is the ACLU calling Trump racist for not ratifying the treaty because reasons?
I wrote dozens of papers in college about saving the environment, conserving water and minimizing waste. I ride my bike everywhere, don't own a car by choice, and do everything I can to minimize my carbon footprint. And you? I guarantee you have a larger footprint than I do, and 99% chance you own a car. So don't even bother telling me that I'm anti-environment for supporting Trump and his decision.
When your leftwing media and institutions can't even discuss this in a rational manner without spilling their spaghetti everywhere, there's a problem, and it's not Trump. It's the pod people, who blindly believe anything the big glowing box dictates to you, not recognizing that hey, maybe there's so god damn nuance.
-
Once signed, the next step in the ratification process is to send the treaty to the US Senate
The Paris Agreement's authority derives from the [desc=United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change]UNFCCC[/desc] treaty which the Senate ratified 25 years ago.
Time to celebrate!!!
You're a little early to the party. The withdrawal from the Agreement doesn't take effect until November, 2020.
Just in time for the new administration to stop the withdrawal.
-
Pulling out of this agreement has further pissed off the Germans, who have invested over $1 billion in my state for the BMW plant here in South Carolina. He's also made other negative statements about countries that have invested in our country and have been providing jobs for people here. If the Germans decide to pull their support and their investments in our country because of this and other bad actions by our president, my state is going to lose those important investments. That plant employs a lot of people here and is a plus for this state's economy. The South Carolina Republican Party, as well as the Georgia Republican Party, are meeting with their members this weekend to determine whether or not to continue to support this president because he is driving Southern states who voted for him toward recessions in incoming years.
"America 1st?" More like America bankrupt just like his raggedy businesses.
-
We should reject this deal because it's not in our interests. Period. It does nothing to curb the two biggest polluters on Earth today: India & China. They've only agreed to cap how much more pollution they'll emit, but they continue increasing the amounts yearly under the agreement despite the fact China is so polluted you can't even see China from space.
Then, there's the wealth redistribution aspects to the agreement whereby first world nations agree to pay third world nations for climate change, which is not in any national interest. The truth about climate change is that the Earth is getting overpopulated. Europe and North America addresses that policy already. Look at the size of families in most first world countries. However, those issues aren't being addressed in the third world, nor are they part of any Paris Accord.
I'm for measures to tackle climate change, but I'm not going to endorse any deal that (a) not in our national interests and (b) fails to address the root of climate change.
-
He is just supporting Syria and Nicaragua.
-
We should reject this deal because it's not in our interests. Period. It does nothing to curb the two biggest polluters on Earth today: India & China. They've only agreed to cap how much more pollution they'll emit, but they continue increasing the amounts yearly under the agreement despite the fact China is so polluted you can't even see China from space.
You know, according to liberals, that makes you a racist.
Only whitey can do anything wrong.
-
We should reject this deal because it's not in our interests. Period. It does nothing to curb the two biggest polluters on Earth today: India & China. They've only agreed to cap how much more pollution they'll emit, but they continue increasing the amounts yearly under the agreement despite the fact China is so polluted you can't even see China from space.
Not true: China has signed to reduce by 60% till 2030 its emissions, 40% for europe and a mere 28% for US . Read the agreement first.
-
We should reject this deal because it's not in our interests. Period. It does nothing to curb the two biggest polluters on Earth today: India & China. They've only agreed to cap how much more pollution they'll emit, but they continue increasing the amounts yearly under the agreement despite the fact China is so polluted you can't even see China from space.
Not true: China has signed to reduce by 60% till 2030 its emissions, 40% for europe and a mere 28% for US . Read the agreement first.
I'm sure you are statement is accurate, but you are forgetting something.. There is no way that China would adhere to that agreement. They don't follow the rules, they never have, and they never will. Being a communist country, their government controls everything including the media 100%. At the moment, they are behaving themselves. It's in their best interest to behave themselves because countries like the USA are their customers. However, they do whatever the hell they want to in their own country, and there is virtually nobody there that is going to contradict them. Their government could say tomorrow that they have cut emissions 99%.. and who is going to say otherwise?
By the way, the USA already does have a lot of emission control laws in place. Countries like China have virtually none. So cutting our emissions even further is a lot tougher than them doing anything at all.
Also.. other countries utilize nuclear power plants far more than we do. Nuclear power is a great way to reduce CO2 emissions, but has the danger of nuclear contamination.
-
GHG emissions from volcanic sources make up less than 1% of emissions from human activities. Volcanoes generate about 200 million tons of CO2 annually, on the other hand 24 billion tons of CO2 is produced annually from anthropogenic sources.
So natural sources can't be blamed for climate change.
I checked.. and you are CORRECT about the CO2 emissions!
Thanks for sharing that.
I blame the History Channel for having shows suggesting that the planet is doomed by volcanoes, calderas, earthquakes, etc.As for climate change. It is still unclear what is causing that, and if the changes are negative or positive.
Where I live, the winters used to get bitterly cold for a time.. and no longer do. The summers used to get blistering hot.. but no longer do. There used to be severe hurricanes and tropical storms frequently.. and there no longer are. There used to be months when it would be pissing rain every day, and that doesn't happen anymore.I'd say that something more important than worrying about climate change is how the oceans are being polluted. That is being ignored.
-
Once signed, the next step in the ratification process is to send the treaty to the US Senate
The Paris Agreement's authority derives from the [desc=United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change]UNFCCC[/desc] treaty which the Senate ratified 25 years ago.
Time to celebrate!!!
You're a little early to the party. The withdrawal from the Agreement doesn't take effect until November, 2020.
Although you are technically correct, there is something that must be pointed out. When it comes to making contributions in FUNDING things such as the Paris Agreement, and NATO.. the overwhelming contributor is the USA. If the USA pulls out, it's dunzo. Other countries don't honor the agreements they make anyway.
-
Fred is right. The Paris agreement is dead now.
-
Fred is right. The Paris agreement is dead now.
I don't know if we should or shouldn't be happy about that..
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login