• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kerry warns the US has 9 years to avoid worst climate consequences

I doubt you even know what he's talking about. You just hear "nine years" and picture water world and tell yourself he's a loon

Conservatives have an inherent inability to understand that when someone says something, it doesn't automatically mean that they are saying what the conservative interprets in their own thick skull. They are utterly opposed to understanding what someone says when it does not fit with their own individual interepretation. They refuse to listen to people, instead living in their own deluded world in their mind which has no basis in reality. This is yet another example of such.
 
If we were discussing poop, which we are not... We are discussing the By percentage, the two major leaders by percent of this planet. China and India.
ONCE AGAIN, if your neighbor poops in their yard, does that mean it is ok for you to poop in yours?
(if you notice, the link I provided shows the U.S. at #2, and considering your population vs that of China and India, you would be NUMBER ONE on a per capital basis).
I prefer a clean backyard myself, what about you?
 
Jealousy is a cruel master. Kerry married into money and you are livid about it.

John Kerry was always part of that scene and got access to the Kennedy family while he was at Yale. He is born of Forbes family line.
 
Let it come. I put in a 14 kW propane generator when we moved here. I've seen what the weather can do. We were lucky in Cleveland we sat through a 100 mph horizontal snowcane. But when the town started giving me grief over a building permit to install it, I did some research. My suburban area has seen extended (multi-day) power outages about every 2-3 years. I have 2 big propane bottles & can exist for over a week before I need a delivery.

I took the precaution of investing in a generator that also adds to the sales value of my house. Hurricane Sandy was also a wakeup call for what the weather can do.

The people in TX with generators will obviously make out better than those without.
My area sees those outages too. Last August we were out for five days. Im adding Tesla Powerwall batteries to my solar array.
 
If you have oceanfront property, you should consider selling rather than bequeathing to your heirs. No?
 
If you have oceanfront property, you should consider selling rather than bequeathing to your heirs. No?
No when Uncle Sam helps cover Home Insurance.
 
You know the climate extremists said that in 1992. What happened? They said we only had 10 years to fix it and even thought the data didn't support it they said we didn't have time to wait and see what the data did say. LOL. Still saying it.
That is not only a lie but you ignore the fact that the U.S. still has the highest CO2 emissions per person of any large country . China is 45th.

https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/10296/economics/top-co2-polluters-highest-per-capita/
Here's John Kerry. Get you information from the source instead of the climate alarmist and the liberal media.
 
We have been involved in a globalist agenda since at least 1945. NATO, SEATO, the UN, several treaties. Get used to it. If you have evidence that debunks the climate science, write it up, testify, get thee to Glasgow in November. Take Inhoff and Trump with you-- and a snowball. Expose the hoax invented by the Chinese. A windmill-weary world waits on your wisdom.
🤣
In the very response you started pissing yourself over I gave you 6 decades worth of climate propaganda and lies. Your only response is "of course we are being ****ed...I LIKE it and you should learn to like it to!"
 
This is all a load of garbage.

"In 1967, we were all going to die from famine by 75. In 1969, we were all going to die from pollution in 1989....In 1970, we were all going t engage inwater and food rationing by 1974."
This has nothing to do with climate change and is completely irrelevant.

"in 2009, Gordon Brown said that forget about 8 years...we had fewer than FIFTY DAYS to save the planet"
He was referring to the Copenhagen gathering. Fifty days to work out a solution, not fifty days until doomsday. Christ.

Global cooling was a conjecture bandied about in the 1970's but never really got much traction, most scientists even then, thought that if anything, the world would be getting warmer:
"global cooling was never more than a minor aspect of the scientific climate change literature of the era, let alone the scientific consensus"

The rest is a bunch of unsourced claims made by a mysterious "they". I suspect those predictions are equally irrelevant.
Seems the only people that are desperate to remain ignorant to history are the same ones that swallow the shit they have been spoonfed for decades.

You got a little on your chin BTW...you might want to dab it off.
 
John Kerry is a ****ing tool. This rich **** wad jets all over the world because he runs cia assets in every country he can hide money in.

Look up: Plutocrat and there's a photo of Lurch.
 
If you can’t see what is going on around you, I can’t help you. Everyone is operating under the premise that it’s a game of musical chairs and they think that there will be an empty chair for their well-fed behind, when the music stops....

Why do you think there is so much interest in finding life-sustaining planets within our reach?

And yet instead of teaching our children to look for answers schools only teach them a bunch of politically correct tripe.
 
Global warming is a documented phenomenon. Any statement about what we must do by when is based on assumptions, which may or may not be true. Such statements are great for threads in which some posters tell others, 'But you don't understand ... .' or to declare that this or that person's intelligence is exceeded by that of a paramecium, but for little else.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.
 
What does this mean? The technology isn't there for what? We already have a meaningful and growing proportion of energy generation in the country coming from renewables. The technology isn't there for what? Going 100% renewable? Who here is arguing that we need to go to 100% renewable energy today? And even if that was the argument, it isn't about the technology, which is there, it's about the infrastructure, which would need to be invested in. Regulators have long dealt with the secular decline of coal and transition towards renewables and LNG. Infrastructure is being invested in that transition as we speak. Solar and wind generation sources are going online as we speak and the transition towards renewables will march forward as more investment in such infrastructure is committed. The fact that you think there's going to be some "moment" where "technology" makes it "possible" for us to switch to renewables shows that you're ignorant of the fact that the transition is already happening. The fact that you'd take something so obviously beneficial to literally everyone and make it some kind of political issue is just absolutely and monumentally stupid to be honest. The only reason that conservatives think this is a problem is because they believe everything their media machine tells them, and their media machine is funded by dinosaur fossil fuel losers that are increasingly relegated to the dustbin of history. Look at how much right wingers talk about coal as if it's some kind of relevant issue, when Arby's ffs employs more than twice as many people as the entire coal industry.


I am not the one making the argument that 'the switch' has to be made by an arbitrary date. That is being done by the defenders of the various protocols. Last week Mr. Kerry joined the long list of people who have thrown out such arbitrary numbers.
Should wind or solar become more efficient and cheaper to be used for generating energy, then it will be used as the main source of energy production. Right now, it isn't more efficient.
 
You know that we have been warned about the consequences of burning fossil fuels for at least 50 years without any meaningful response. Our time is up and there are no more excuses. We need to wean ourselves off fossil energy in the next decade starting with gasoline use.

No, we need to ween ourselves off fossil energy when, and only when, a reliable alternative becomes available. If we do it too soon, there will be widespread starvation and people who need to heat their homes or freeze to death will indeed freeze to death.
 
I'm pretty sure that Kerry's job is not to set examples. It is to make progress in reducing the world's CO2 pollution and grounding his private jet is not going to do that. You are just jealous that he found a rich wife and you didn't.


Since when are national leaders not supposed to set an example? Is that something new since the 2020 election? You've been screaming for the last year that Trump wasn't setting a good example by his refusal to wear a mask everywhere he went. Why now are you now changing your stance on that?
 
Last edited:
No, we need to ween ourselves off fossil energy when, and only when, a reliable alternative becomes available. If we do it too soon, there will be widespread starvation and people who need to heat their homes or freeze to death will indeed freeze to death.
We will never see a period when we don't need gas and oil. However, technology will advance and we may eventually be able to more substantially supplement our energy needs with other so called green energy sources.

Right now the technology is not there and there's no telling when it will be ready.
 
We will never see a period when we don't need gas and oil. However, technology will advance and we may eventually be able to more substantially supplement our energy needs with other so called green energy sources.

Right now the technology is not there and there's no telling when it will be ready.

Correct, but I find it easier to agree that we need to ween ourselves only after we can without starving and/or freezing. That puts the ball in their court to come up with alternatives. I wish them luck, but in the meantime ..........
 
Correct, but I find it easier to agree that we need to ween ourselves only after we can without starving and/or freezing. That puts the ball in their court to come up with alternatives. I wish them luck, but in the meantime ..........
I don't agree that we need to "ween" ourselves off of fossil fuels. What we need to do is supplement our use of fossil fuels as much as technology allows when it's ready.

Atomic energy is where our efforts should be concentrated.
 
I don't agree that we need to "ween" ourselves off of fossil fuels. What we need to do is supplement our use of fossil fuels as much as technology allows when it's ready.

Atomic energy is where our efforts should be concentrated.

I'm in complete agreement. I just find it easier to agree to a goal that I know they'll never accomplish. It sends them on a fool's errand in the hope that it shuts them up for while.
 
I doubt you even know what he's talking about. You just hear "nine years" and picture water world and tell yourself he's a loon
He is using this cause for self serving reasons and the left falls for it everry time.
 
Back
Top Bottom