Vatican Compares Trump To Flat-Earthers Over His Climate Agreement Withdrawal

  • Thread starter Thread starter randomuser
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You can’t fight climate change. Co2 is emmitted by people and animals! It is BS that it is some scary greenhouse gas. Water vapor is a green house gas and necessary for climate change. It is all BS about Co2 and creating confusion. Confusion is not science
 
You can’t fight climate change. Co2 is emmitted by people and animals! It is BS that it is some scary greenhouse gas. Water vapor is a green house gas and necessary for climate change. It is all BS about Co2 and creating confusion. Confusion is not science
The amount of greenhouse gases given off by our bodies and livestock is balanced off by the amount of carbon and water taken in by said organisms’ life functions.

It’s the GGs (far greater in amount) produced by our combustion technology that the environmental sector is having a cow, pun intended, about.

ICXC NIKA
 
The amount of greenhouse gases given off by our bodies and livestock is balanced off by the amount of carbon and water taken in by said organisms’ life functions.

It’s the GGs (far greater in amount) produced by our combustion technology that the environmental sector is having a cow, pun intended, about.

ICXC NIKA
Wasn’t the rain supposed to be acid by now? Another lie from the global warming myth people
 
Wasn’t the rain supposed to be acid by now? Another lie from the global warming myth people
In case you haven’t noticed, the reduction of acid rain was one of the environmentalist success stories. The reason it has reduced is that regulations now require scubbers on power plants in the midwest. The problem has been solved, thanks to the environmental activists.

Your comments about animals contributing to the CO2 problem betray a lack of understanding of the carbon cycle.
 
There are viable alternatives to fossil fuels,heck N. Tesla could have powered the entire globe with some of his creations, but the kind of energy he was experimenting with, would have been disastrous for the energy industry. They are more interested in something that can be metered out to the people.

If we keep going with this same mindset, we will never get anywhere.

btw, where are the Teslas of our time? Its pretty strange to me we never even hear anyone inventing and coming up with such great things as Tesla did in his time.
 
There are viable alternatives to fossil fuels,heck N. Tesla could have powered the entire globe with some of his creations, but the kind of energy he was experimenting with, would have been disastrous for the energy industry.
Now that** is** a myth.
 
There are viable alternatives to fossil fuels,heck N. Tesla could have powered the entire globe with some of his creations, but the kind of energy he was experimenting with, would have been disastrous for the energy industry. They are more interested in something that can be metered out to the people.

If we keep going with this same mindset, we will never get anywhere.

btw, where are the Teslas of our time? Its pretty strange to me we never even hear anyone inventing and coming up with such great things as Tesla did in his time.
Whenever Tesla is mentioned it is met with laughter and its a myth. Leaf just chimed in. It no use
 
Vatican Compares Trump To Flat-Earthers Over His Climate Agreement Withdrawal

*The decision has even drawn the wrath of the Vatican, which Trump visited just last week. Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo, head of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, made his critical remarks known in an interview with Italian newspaper La Repubblica.

“Thinking that we need and must rely on coal and oil is like claiming that the Earth is not round. It’s an absurdity brought forward only to make money,” Sanchez Sorondo stated. “I believe that oil lobbyists are behind this decision. They are pushing for it. Big oil is pulling Trump’s strings and he can’t oppose them, although this doesn’t mean he wants to.”*
iflscience.com/environment/vatican-compares-trump-to-flatearthers-over-his-climate-agreement-withdrawl/
If the leftist were really worried about global warming they would demand that China lower its leveld to their 2005 levels at the exact same restrictions placed upon the USA. The USA 2015 levels are 12% below our 2005 and we need to lower that to 26-28% by 2025. China doesnt have to meet any reductions until 2030. And under no circumstances whatsoever should any country that sign the agreement be allowed to produce any more CO2 than they do that day they signed the agreement. Also under no circumstances whatsoever should the United States be required to pay whatsoever to any organization any country any one an time anywhere one single penny. trump did the right thing. he made it very clear he’s willing to sign an agreement in which the United States is treated fairly.
 
If the leftist were really worried about global warming they would demand that China lower its leveld to their 2005 levels at the exact same restrictions placed upon the USA. The USA 2015 levels are 12% below our 2005 and we need to lower that to 26-28% by 2025. China doesnt have to meet any reductions until 2030. And under no circumstances whatsoever should any country that sign the agreement be allowed to produce any more CO2 than they do that day they signed the agreement. Also under no circumstances whatsoever should the United States be required to pay whatsoever to any organization any country any one an time anywhere one single penny. trump did the right thing. he made it very clear he’s willing to sign an agreement in which the United States is treated fairly.
👍 I don’t think these critics know what’s in the Paris Accord. They are jumping on a bandwagon of " Trump just killed the world" which couldn’t be further from the truth!
 
If the leftist were really worried about global warming they would demand that China lower its leveld to their 2005 levels at the exact same restrictions placed upon the USA. The USA 2015 levels are 12% below our 2005 and we need to lower that to 26-28% by 2025. China doesnt have to meet any reductions until 2030. And under no circumstances whatsoever should any country that sign the agreement be allowed to produce any more CO2 than they do that day they signed the agreement.
People who would like to make progress would not follow your suggestion. If nations in the developed world were to say to developing nations: you need to meet the same stadards of us, on the same time scale the response would be: no deal; the proposal would likely been seen as a scheme to thwart development so as to maintain an advantageous disparity, rather that one aimed at gaining global cooperation to mitigate a global environmental threat.
Also under no circumstances whatsoever should the United States be required to pay whatsoever to any organization any country any one an time anywhere one single penny.
We and other developed nations support developing nations to incent and assist their participation in what is perceived to be an important, global effort. We do this in our own self interest, as we have arguably the most to lose if they do not particpate.
trump did the right thing. he made it very clear he’s willing to sign an agreement in which the United States is treated fairly.
Unfortuately, he does not seem to have established sensible criteria of “fairness”.
 
People who would like to make progress would not follow your suggestion. If nations in the developed world were to say to developing nations: you need to meet the same stadards of us, on the same time scale the response would be: no deal; the proposal would likely been seen as a scheme to thwart development so as to maintain an advantageous disparity, rather that one aimed at gaining global cooperation to mitigate a global environmental threat.

We and other developed nations support developing nations to incent and assist their participation in what is perceived to be an important, global effort. We do this in our own self interest, as we have arguably the most to lose if they do not particpate.

Unfortuately, he does not seem to have established sensible criteria of “fairness”.
This, imo, makes no sense and is just more blame America
 
Then they should find a job that allows them to live more cheaply and with a smaller footprint.

Oh wait, doesn’t this sound just as emphatic as people who have no sympathy for minimum wage employees?
No, because minimum wage isn’t meant to support a family; it’s meant for entry-level positions, and the idea is that you should have enough ambition and common sense to try to move up instead of flipping burgers for the rest of your life.

The economy hasn’t recovered to the point where people can find jobs wherever they want. My wife searched for eight months before finding one, and that was half an hour away. Thanks to the globalists, North America is still in an economic tailspin.
 
No, because minimum wage isn’t meant to support a family; it’s meant for entry-level positions
And yet there are heads of family who are working minimum wage jobs. And no, it is not all their fault for lack of ambition. Sometimes it is just lack of a better alternative.
 
Blame? We were doing the right thing.
Not imo. It penalized us and extorted money from us, which Obama was happy to just give away. The freebies for the world are over hopefully
 
In case you haven’t noticed, the reduction of acid rain was one of the environmentalist success stories. The reason it has reduced is that regulations now require scubbers on power plants in the midwest. The problem has been solved, thanks to the environmental activists.

Your comments about animals contributing to the CO2 problem betray a lack of understanding of the carbon cycle.
I didn’t say it was a problem. I said its not a problem because people and animals emit CO2 and that is natural. Its not a problem, its nature, a trade off between us, animals and plants. I thought this was at least basic science.
 
We don’t have to “rely” on wind and solar to benefit greatly from them. We can simply do what we are already doing - use them when they are available and use other energy sources when they are not.
Not according to the radical enviro-left, we can’t. The Luddites want to eliminate ALL coal-fired plants regardless of whether we can replace them or not. They also want to eliminate nuclear power and make everyone use solar and wind exclusively. Don’t tell me I’m wrong; I’ve had plenty of arguments with people on exactly this topic.
There is lots of debate over whether fracking does any damage at all, so I’m not sure what you are intending to imply by this comparison. Why not compare it will something whose damage is known? But wind turbines do not do very much damage at all. They do kill a few birds, but cats that we keep as pets and that run wild actually kill 1000 times as many birds as wind turbines. We could add enough wind turbines to meet 100% of our energy needs and still not come close to the damage done by cats.
They also destroy farmland; the vibrations caused by the turbines drive away the earthworms needed to replenish the farm soil, make it difficult for people living nearby to sleep properly, kill hundreds or even thousands of birds (including those ever-so-precious endangered species) and operate at half-efficiency most of the time.

If the left was serious about using wind farms, they would put them where they would actually get wind 100% of the time: off the Atlantic coast and in the lakes. But that would ruin the vacation viewspots for the elitists, and we can’t have that. So instead they shove them in farm country, because the plebs don’t matter.
Not true. Many on the “left” are perfectly willing and in fact encourage the development of safe nuclear energy.
Then why do they fight so hard against any of them actually being built?
On the contrary, the Chinese expect to make a killing in the international market for renewable energy because the US has ceded that market to them.
They aren’t using themselves, though, are they? They’re now buying oil from Canada because Obama nixed the Keystone Pipeline to satisfy his eco-buddies. The Chinese are great at lip-synching the environmental mantras, but they don’t abide by them. If you don’t believe me, take a look of Beijing.
That’s not the fault of the alternative energy technology. That is the fault of poor contract negotiations.
‘Poor’ contract negotiation? Try corrupt contract negotiation. One of the biggest contracts was handed to the future president of the provincial Liberal party. Then he became the president of the federal Liberal party after that, while collecting $85,000/day from Ontario taxpayers on a guaranteed 20-yr contract. That wasn’t poor negotiation; that was political kickbacks to a donor.
Having a small access path to the wind turbines for occasional maintenance does not “ruin” very much croplands. Most of the land around the towers remains productive.
No, it doesn’t, at least not for long. See ‘earthworms’ above. I live in one of those rural areas, and the farmers have been complaining for years about it. The turbines also ruin the water table, which these farmers need to drink. It’s the one topic that appears in every single issue of the weekly local paper, and absolutely nobody outside government wants anything to do with it.
…only for people who are allergic to the far-off “whoosh-whoosh” sounds of the blades.
Yeah, I don’t think so. Again, I live in a wind-farm area.

humanfaceofwindturbines.ca/index.php/health-problems-from-turbines/health-problems
Across rural Ontario, people are suffering from sleep disorders, depression, and a wide range of spin-off health issues, such as…
  • excessive tiredness * headache * stress, distress * migraines, hearing problems * tinnitus * ear pressure * unexplained bloody noses * dizziness * vertigo * nausea * vomiting * visual blurring * irritability * tachycardia * problems with concentration and memory * panic episodes associated with sensations of internal pulsations or quivering when awake or asleep * heart palpitations * anxiety * overall reduced quality of life.
(to be continued)
 
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
This is not quite true. Ontario is paying generators of alternative energy the difference between what they promised them and what the energy is worth on the open market. New York is not getting any of that money. This does, however, point to more bad deals negotiated by a government which amounts to a subsidy. But if that subsidy were dropped, alternative energy would still grow at a slower rate because in the long run it is (or will be) profitable.
Yes, it is true. Even the most liberal newspaper in Canada is complaining about it.

thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/2012/08/06/why_are_we_paying_ny_to_take_our_electricity.html
If you are an electric utility operating in New York, you may have actually been paid dozens of times over the past year to take power from Ontario.

If you are an Ontario resident, however, the prognosis is that your power bill will just keep going up and up. What’s going on here?
…in your opinion.
Mine? No. Macron and Merkel? Yes.

apnews.com/0da0d9b1f90c427eb15d7781f8c84fee/The-Latest:-Germany%27s-Merkel-regrets-Trump-decision-on-pact?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP
The leaders of France, Germany and Italy say the Paris climate accord cannot be renegotiated as President Donald Trump has demanded.
French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Italian Premier Paolo Gentiloni said in a joint statement Thursday that they take note “with regret” the U.S. decision to pull out of the 2015 agreement.
The three leaders say they regard the accord as “a cornerstone in the cooperation between our countries, for effectively and timely tackling climate change.”
They added that the course charted by the accord is “irreversible and we firmly believe that the Paris Agreement cannot be renegotiated.”
Macron, Merkel and Gentiloni say they remain committed to the deal and will “step up efforts” to support the poorest and most threatened nations.
And of course, there’s the text of the agreement itself…

cnsnews.com/news/article/cnsnewscom-staff/paris-climate-deal-calls-international-transfer-wealth
“Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention,” says Article 9 of the draft agreement.
“As part of a global effort, developed country Parties should continue to take the lead in mobilizing climate finance from a wide variety of sources, instruments and channels, noting the significant role of public funds,” says the draft.
The draft agreement sets a goal for developed countries to dole out at least $100 billion per year by 2020.
 
More enlightened city planning could fix that (such as providing more low-cost housing in areas close to where people work).
Great idea! Let’s build even more slums! Nothing says urban development than low-income housing! Because nothing bad ever happens in low-income housing.
In the few days since Trump announced the pull-out from the Paris Accords, we have seen just the opposite.
Publicly. Let’s see what actually happens. Because without the gravy train to support them, the other haves aren’t going to let their economies get totaled to satisfy the enviro-nuts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top