Should America have stayed in the Paris Climate Accord?

[DA60]

Should America have stayed in the Paris Climate Accord?


Thoughts?

 

[Beaudreaux]

Voted no, because the option of "Allow the Senate to debate and vote on whether to confirm it as a lawful treaty" wasn't one of the options.

 

[Hawkeye10]

It is clear to me at this point that most of oBAMAS WORK WAS CRAP, SO VERY VERY LIKELY THIS DEAL IS BAD FOR aMERICA....but since I dont know that this particular deal sucked I say "unsure"

tyvm

:2wave:

 

[Parrish]

MEGA. Make Europe Great Again

Looks like the US is in the Dark Ages.

 

[Carjosse]

It is clear to me at this point that most of oBAMAS WORK WAS CRAP, SO VERY VERY LIKELY THIS DEAL IS BAD FOR aMERICA....but since I dont know that this particular deal sucked I say "unsure"

tyvm

:2wave:

It wasn't even a deal though...

 

[PoS]

Im on the fence in regards to climate change simply because there is not enough data whether the rising temperature is man-made or cyclical. Freeman Dyson said that the whole issue is a land management problem, not an environmental one and we can easily put less carbon in the air by using better farming techniques. In this case I think Trump is right.

 

[Threegoofs]

Im on the fence in regards to climate change simply because there is not enough data whether the rising temperature is man-made or cyclical. Freeman Dyson said that the whole issue is a land management problem, not an environmental one and we can easily put less carbon in the air by using better farming techniques. In this case I think Trump is right.

No- there's overwhelming data that the rising temperature is virtually all due to man.

It's not a scientifically debatable point.

 

[Hawkeye10]

It wasn't even a deal though...

Well we cant call it a hold up, screwing America was so fine with Obama it might well have been his idea.....we have long been the major funder of the globalists expansion program just as Germany pays for the EU...the question though is this: Do we get our monies worth"?

Trump decided that the answer is no.

I dont know that he is wrong.

 

[Parrish]

The DoD believes it.

 

[Manc Skipper]

The damage done to international cooperation is immense.

 

[Carjosse]

Well we cant call it a hold up, screwing America was so fine with Obama it might well have been his idea.....we have long been the major funder of the globalists expansion program just as Germany pays for the EU...the question though is this: Do we get our monies worth"?

Trump decided that the answer is no.

I dont know that he is wrong.

Basically it was a non-binding commitment to reduce emissions with a set of guidelines. I have no idea how that could possibly negatively affect America in anyway. All pulling out accomplishes is making the US an international pariah. What Trump said by pulling out is that America cannot be trusted to meet its international commitments.

 

[PoS]

No- there's overwhelming data that the rising temperature is virtually all due to man.

It's not a scientifically debatable point.

Nope. Majority of scientists claim that its "likely" that humans are causing it, but it is not 100% confirmed. And in the end the effects of CC are exaggerated and overblown. Some parts of the world are getting hotter, but not everywhere.

 

[Carjosse]

Nope. Majority of scientists claim that its "likely" that humans are causing it, but it is not 100% confirmed. And in the end the effects of CC are exaggerated and overblown. Some parts of the world are getting hotter, but not everywhere.

Nothing in science is 100% confirmed, but climate change is a generally scientifically accepted fact. The Earth's mean temperature is rising and so are water levels, you live in the part of the world most vulnerable to climate change.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Basically it was a non-binding commitment to reduce emissions with a set of guidelines. I have no idea how that could possibly negatively affect America in anyway. All pulling out accomplishes is making the US an international pariah. What Trump said by pulling out is that America cannot be trusted to meet its international commitments.

Clearly you are forgetting about the transfer of funds from the so-called rich countries (for instance America though we are deep into debt so we are in fact not rich) to the so-called poor countries.

 

[CriticalThought]

It is irrelevant. Trump accomplished the equivalent of investing in stone age tools when the rest of the world is moving to bronze. He claims the world was laughing at us, but truth is that now they pity us. We are missing the boat to invest in the energy of the future so that maybe a few coal miners can dig a bit longer rather than move on into other parts of the industry. He said he was protecting the workers, but in reality, he is serving a handful of billionaires at the potential expense of America's reputation. This is the decision that people will come to remember in the next election and will be just as palatable as the Iraq War became in our last election, if not worse.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Nothing in science is 100% confirmed, but climate change is a generally scientifically accepted fact. The Earth's mean temperature is rising and so are water levels, you live in the part of the world most vulnerable to climate change.

So was that eating cholesterol is bad for us for what was it 40 years...to name just one example.

 

[Carjosse]

Clearly you are forgetting about the transfer of funds from the so-called rich countries (for instance America though we are deep into debt so we are in fact not rich) to the so-called poor countries.

You also do not understand how sovereign debt works, a country's debt especially that of developed countries is not at all like household debt.

 

[PoS]

Nothing in science is 100% confirmed, but climate change is a generally scientifically accepted fact. The Earth's mean temperature is rising and so are water levels, you live in the part of the world most vulnerable to climate change.

1. The previous poster claimed that it is not debatable, so thanks for agreeing with me. Science is always debatable.

2. The effects of CC are overblown. The so-called models these scientists were using a few years ago were proven wrong. Many of them claimed we would be living in Waterworld by now.

 

[Lakryte]

Im on the fence in regards to climate change simply because there is not enough data whether the rising temperature is man-made or cyclical. Freeman Dyson said that the whole issue is a land management problem, not an environmental one and we can easily put less carbon in the air by using better farming techniques. In this case I think Trump is right.

There is an enormous amount of data. More CO2 means more climate change. Burning fossil fuels releases more CO2. Therefore burning fossil fuels means more climate change. Not a hard concept to grasp.

 

[Hawkeye10]

You also do not understand how sovereign debt works, a country's debt especially that of developed countries is not at all like household debt.

Notice how you avoid the issue at hand and jump into an insult and a tangent instead.

We know why that tends to happen.

 

[Carjosse]

So was that eating cholesterol is bad for us for what was it 40 years...to name just one example.

It still is, high cholesterol is still bad for you. According to current research and currently observable statistics the Earth is warming, you can choose to deny it all you want but it is still fact unless you you can disprove all of their research. Do you refuse to believe that vaccines do not work and cause autism because it is studies that say vaccines are effective? Do you think that chemotherapy does not affect cancer?

 

[Perotista]

Should America have stayed in the Paris Climate Accord?


Thoughts?

I'm not bothered one way or the other. President Obama made the agreement, it was between him and the others in Paris. Since it wasn't ratified by congress, it was just a presidential agreement which could be abided by or tossed by any new incoming president. The Obama administration agreed to it, so I think the Obama administration was bound by it, but not the country. For the United States to be bound, it would have had to be ratified by congress.

Since it wasn't, Trump can do as he pleases. I really don't care.

 

[Carjosse]

Notice how you avoid the issue at hand and jump into an insult and a tangent instead.

We know why that tends to happen.

It is not an insult, you do not understand how sovereign debt works if you think because the US has debt it makes it poor.

 

[Lakryte]

So was that eating cholesterol is bad for us for what was it 40 years...to name just one example.

The science on climate change is FAR more certain than the science on cholesterol 40 years ago. Overtime, more research in cholesterol showed that certain types of it were actually good. In contrast, over time, climate change research continued to show it was a real and manmade problem. You're comparing apples and oranges.

 

[Carjosse]

1. The previous poster claimed that it is not debatable, so thanks for agreeing with me. Science is always debatable.

2. The effects of CC are overblown. The so-called models these scientists were using a few years ago were proven wrong. Many of them claimed we would be living in Waterworld by now.

Water levels are rising and so is mean temperature, their theories have been proven. You can also debate the effectiveness of vaccines or gravity, does not mean you can just disregard whatever you don't like.