I have to ask about the Paris Climate Agreement

[tuckersdaddy]

Trump just doing what Trump does. Read the art of the deal... Its his play book he is following. If you arent willing to pull out of a deal you will get shafted.. And he is correct with this path. Anybody thats been in buisness or has to borrow money from your inlaws should understand this. The whole UN thing is akin to letting your teenage kid control the family finaces.. You will be eating pizza and playing xbox wearing the latest fasion wear from the card board box you will end up living in. As far as the actual enviroment is concerned, as the tech catches up and becomes competitve its use will increase.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[G-Man]

One good volcanic eruption releases more co2 into the atmosphere than all we have done since the industrial revolution... Co2 is not the problem.. Of it was we would of seen a drastic climate change with the deforestation of North America during the industrial revolution ..  Every thing was burning wood and coal..  And take into account t several volcanic eruptions during the same time period sw Asia.. The big change has occured since plastics have been created.. There are plastic islands that act like giant pool covers in our oceans gyers. They superheat and strengthen currents and they effect the jet stream... Also why the North pole is melting (from warm currents under ice) and the South pole is freezing.. 

Why not solve the plastic problem or even address it?  No money in it.. Solar.and batteries.. Open out mining for lithium and silica.produce far more enviromental dangers than co2 that is absorbed by every blade of grass and green plant in the world... 

[Culvercreek hunt club]

On 6/5/2017 at 0:29 PM, Belo said:

It's very simple. All but 2 countries and now 3 made a handshake deal to better the environment. You may not believe in global warming even though 97% of scientist do. I have a degree in environmental engineering and make my living in the regulations field. I can promise you that the data is real. I can promise you that cutting emissions isn't as hard as you think. I literally have spent 11 years of my life putting simple programs in place to reduce our footprint. And you know what happens when you reduce your emissions? You save money on utilities!

 

 

 

Belo, I see very few that think there is no warming of the earth. The cause is what I see debated to a greater extent. That is where I see the divide AND what the true objective of the accord really was. Fist off it WAS a redistribution of wealth. It was a bad deal for the economy of the US. I don't get why folks are now upset with him pulling out. He said he was going to do it and he did. I guess the public isn't use to a politician doing what they say they would. 

You have a degree in this and I am sure are much better versed than I am, but the history of the earth is written in climate cycles. Some that were a greater deltas in shorter time frames than we are experiencing now. Most before the modern humans even walked the earth. I remember back in elementary school (a long long time ago) there was a crisis that had the news all a buzz and all the scientists were convinced of the facts. They were predicting how we were going to cause a new ice age. 

So these same scientists that can look at history and current data and predict what is going to happen in 2 or 3 or 4 generations have the same information at their finger tips and cant predict this weekends weather with any certainty. I know I know weather vs climate. macro vs micro. blah blah blah. 

[dbHunterNY]

i'm not bothered at all by Trump backing out.  it was a feel good BS waste of money where other countries seemed to be exploiting it.  poor less powerful countries don't have the emissions we do, like not every family household has 3+ cars rolling the streets. they can import the same technology we have.  so it's a silly idea investing money that way i feel.  I do think he should make his reasons known though or at least more readily public knowledge.  Terminator and other hate to say it Liberal folks are riding the action hard as if he clubs baby seals every morning before breakfast.

[The_Field_Ager]

2 hours ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

I see very few that think there is no warming of the earth.

There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3624242/There-IS-a-problem-with-global-warming...-it-stopped-in-1998.html

Also, what is the perfect temperature for the entire planet and how do Warmists  propose to control this global thermostat? 

Edited June 7, 2017 by Papist

[Five Seasons]

On ‎6‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 5:50 PM, philoshop said:

Bow to? Interesting reference and terminology. Please continue.

 

meaning, some (especially papsmear) could benefit from at least reading some viewpoints by other media outlets. Heck, 90% of his stuff is so extreme right it's buried on the internet. You don't have to believe the otherside's view. But it will help enlighten you. So of course conservative outlets will applaud this. Viewers of any media like to feel that they're right. It gets ratings. The real challenge is to try and see it through someone else's lens.

On ‎6‎/‎5‎/‎2017 at 9:16 PM, pt0217 said:

Nothing personal Belo, but this country would be better off if we could get rid of some of the regulators.

No disagreement there. There are some dumb ones. I could present a list to you, and in fact I helped author some ideas that were presented as a white paper to Trump earlier this year on regulations that do nothing but hurt our economy. How many of you can say that?

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 2:04 AM, Doc said:

I guess the reality that even we have limits as to how far we can solely finance every fix to all the worlds ills. It is time for countries to begin taking individual responsibility for cleaning up their share of the mess that they create. We do.

Trump is simply saying that we no longer will play the role of the fool when it comes to matters that impact the entire world. Frankly, I am glad the message is out there now that we no longer supply free meals. Even we have our limits. We have to apply pressure to the different countries to act environmentally responsibly, not supply all the resources to do it for them. I think that is Trump's message and determination, and all I can say is, "it's about time, what took us so long?".

You say America's playing the fool, I would argue that we're leading the way. We're not being petty over what amounts to chump change for our economy and doing the right thing even if it isn't completely equitable. Renegotiating NATO and trade are great opportunities to affect real change that will pay immediate dividends and that's where politics belongs.

 

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 3:39 AM, Adkhunter1590 said:

No issue here with it. I'm all for a clean environment and cutting back emissions as fast as we sensibly and reasonably can. But to fund the entire world to do what we do is just absurd. I can't stand these news people filling the simple minds of your average moron with the idea that we are going to all of a sudden become the biggest polluting country because of this. We are rapidly reducing our pollution every year. Would it be great if the entire world followed suit? Of course, but we can't be expected to pay for it. That's just way too much money to be essentially throwing away because you know damn well a huge portions of it will end up in someone's pocket in a corrupt foreign country.
I'd rather see that money pumped into our companies to create the advanced technology required to keep the future generations clean. And then maybe share/sell such technology with other countries at cost. I'd rather us sell some machinery and stuff at no profit than just hand over billions in cash and hope they do the right thing.

This is where some of you need to educate yourselves on what this is. We are not the only funder of this agreement. And we are the #2 polluter. Don't you think we do owe the world some help?

 

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 8:15 AM, Steuben Jerry said:

Why does the US have to write a check? What about the European countries, don't they have checkbooks? How about NATO countries that are skipping out on their financial agreements? They must have positive checking balances by now.

We don't have deep pockets, we just have record debt and don't need any more.

My Momma taught me to get my house in order first.

I agree with your last sentence. Note again, that many other countries are doing their part. If we wait for everything in politics to be completely fair and equitable and so perfect that not one single soul is upset, we will continue to get nowhere. Just like congress today.

BTW, in 2020 there's a good chance Trump is out anyhow and we're back in the agreement. So again, I don't understand this move.

[Five Seasons]

2 hours ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Belo, I see very few that think there is no warming of the earth. The cause is what I see debated to a greater extent. That is where I see the divide AND what the true objective of the accord really was. Fist off it WAS a redistribution of wealth. It was a bad deal for the economy of the US. I don't get why folks are now upset with him pulling out. He said he was going to do it and he did. I guess the public isn't use to a politician doing what they say they would. 

You have a degree in this and I am sure are much better versed than I am, but the history of the earth is written in climate cycles. Some that were a greater deltas in shorter time frames than we are experiencing now. Most before the modern humans even walked the earth. I remember back in elementary school (a long long time ago) there was a crisis that had the news all a buzz and all the scientists were convinced of the facts. They were predicting how we were going to cause a new ice age. 

So these same scientists that can look at history and current data and predict what is going to happen in 2 or 3 or 4 generations have the same information at their finger tips and cant predict this weekends weather with any certainty. I know I know weather vs climate. macro vs micro. blah blah blah. 

To address your first point, I don't understand how this could be viewed as a redistribution of wealth, many oil companies supported it. Many know we cannot rely on fossil fuels forever, they're finite. The same ENERGY companies were prepared for this and they would and will profit just the same. Yes some coal miners will be out of a job. It happens.

Technology has advanced a lot since you were in elementary school, I could go on and on about some of the tech my own company produces, but point is. We are more self aware than we have ever been. Don't forget it wasn't really that long ago that there were God's in Greece who made things happen... not science.

And to address people being upset. I voted for Trump. I feel I voted for the lesser of 2 evils, but I did it because I feel he was best fit for the job. Really my main point in all this isn't to debate the Paris Climate Agreement, but to hopefully help some of you understand that just because you vote a particular party or stand on a certain side of the aisle doesn't mean you have to believe in all of it. Heck, even papsmear is getting upset that the wall isn't built yet.

Arnold, Megan Kelly, the Bush's, Romney and McCain are all examples of conservatives who aren't exactly in love with this guy and you know what? that's a good thing. I wish the left would do a little more of that and maybe someday we will get some candidates who don't feel they have to thump bibles, discriminate against gays and renounce evolution to get the middle part of the country to vote for them.

There is this the feeling I get with trump where I'm uncertain if it's an act or real. I know he's smart. but some of the things he says and does? I just don't get it... and I'd be lying and so would you all if you didn't agree it made you a little nervous.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

40 minutes ago, Belo said:

To address your first point, I don't understand how this could be viewed as a redistribution of wealth, many oil companies supported it. Many know we cannot rely on fossil fuels forever, they're finite. The same ENERGY companies were prepared for this and they would and will profit just the same. Yes some coal miners will be out of a job. It happens.

Technology has advanced a lot since you were in elementary school, I could go on and on about some of the tech my own company produces, but point is. We are more self aware than we have ever been. Don't forget it wasn't really that long ago that there were God's in Greece who made things happen... not science.

 

.

You can't see how increasing energy cost, whether it be fossil fuels or subsidizing alternative energy is redistribution? The accord allowing other nations that produce products to stay in the fossil game longer than us isn't redistribution? making a lesser nation more cost competitive? 

I see you did grab on the ice age portion but never addressed the previous cycles in earths history. What great evil caused those?

I'd suggest looking at the 800,000 year EPICA data and see the cycles of not only temps but CO2 ,NO and Methane levels. They about mirror depending on the core locations. It also ties about perfectly to the ice ages that have taken place. With more abrupt cycles than we are currently in. 

Edited June 7, 2017 by Culvercreek hunt club

[Five Seasons]

31 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

You can't see how increasing energy cost, whether it be fossil fuels or subsidizing alternative energy is redistribution? The accord allowing other nations that produce products to stay in the fossil game longer than us isn't redistribution? making a lesser nation more cost competitive? 

I see you did grab on the ice age portion but never addressed the previous cycles in earths history. What great evil caused those?

I don't see the cost as anything that is going to "make America great again" no. The economy of smaller countries who may benefit from fossil fuels will not impact US jobs. The real concern is China. No doubt. But what are we going to do? My suggestion is trade. Not just "hey no fair you're polluting". Drive change where you can.

There are no scientist who deny that earths climate isn't cyclical. but 97% agree this is not the result of cyclical change. And honestly the 3% are paid off, just like the scientist who scoffed at the negative affects of leaded gasoline.

I'm not here to argue whether it's real or why it's real. That is a ship that has sailed for many of you and you won't change your mind. I do ask that you read a scientific paper on it though, not an online article. Yes scientific papers are boring. But then you can really make up your mind.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

2 minutes ago, Belo said:

I don't see the cost as anything that is going to "make America great again" no. The economy of smaller countries who may benefit from fossil fuels will not impact US jobs. The real concern is China. No doubt. But what are we going to do? My suggestion is trade. Not just "hey no fair you're polluting". Drive change where you can.

There are no scientist who deny that earths climate isn't cyclical. but 97% agree this is not the result of cyclical change. And honestly the 3% are paid off, just like the scientist who scoffed at the negative affects of leaded gasoline.

I'm not here to argue whether it's real or why it's real. That is a ship that has sailed for many of you and you won't change your mind. I do ask that you read a scientific paper on it though, not an online article. Yes scientific papers are boring. But then you can really make up your mind.

You commented before I posted  my edit. 

I'd suggest looking at the 800,000 year EPICA data and see the cycles of not only temps but CO2 ,NO and Methane levels. They about mirror depending on the core locations. It also ties about perfectly to the ice ages that have taken place. With more abrupt cycles than we are currently in. 

 

 

[philoshop]

1 hour ago, Belo said:

I don't see the cost as anything that is going to "make America great again" no. The economy of smaller countries who may benefit from fossil fuels will not impact US jobs. The real concern is China. No doubt. But what are we going to do? My suggestion is trade. Not just "hey no fair you're polluting". Drive change where you can.

There are no scientist who deny that earths climate isn't cyclical. but 97% agree this is not the result of cyclical change. And honestly the 3% are paid off, just like the scientist who scoffed at the negative affects of leaded gasoline.

I'm not here to argue whether it's real or why it's real. That is a ship that has sailed for many of you and you won't change your mind. I do ask that you read a scientific paper on it though, not an online article. Yes scientific papers are boring. But then you can really make up your mind.

The projected cost to U.S. taxpayers over the next 15 years is something close to 3 trillion dollars, and our domestic job loss is only a part of that. I find it astounding that you would consider that 'chump change' as implied by your previous post.

I do my homework on issues I write and comment about. I stake my positions on the facts gathered therein. You're asking me to do the homework I've already done, and asking me to dismiss that homework because you happen to disagree with it. I've been following this for almost forty years and my conclusion is that Anthropogenic Global Warming/Cooling is a hoax.

I've spoken with computer specialists and programmers from the IPCC who were told directly that they needed to produce code that would give the results they were looking for. It's an economic scam from start to finish.

 

[Five Seasons]

35 minutes ago, philoshop said:

The projected cost to U.S. taxpayers over the next 15 years is something close to 3 trillion dollars,

 

Your cost estimate is false. Your source might be the same sources Trump continually cites which have been debunked over and over. Heck, he denies global warming. That's all I need to know.

I don't think there's a president in history who has cited more debunked studies than him. That's what's scary. The guy reacts like a teenager who just had someone make fun of their momma. I dislike Obama, but at least that guy maintained his composure.

and make up your mind. Are you pissed about the cost or are you denying it's an issue? I've followed the Bills for 34 years, but that doesn't make me eligible to run their front office. I literally studied this stuff in school. Wrote papers on it. 97% of scientist far smarter than I agree that it's a reality. But you followed this and spoke to some computer guys so we should take your word for it?

Do people do bad things? yes. Have studies been doctored by both sides? probably. Doesn't throw the whole argument out the window.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Belo

[The_Field_Ager]

Founder of the Weather Channel says no:

 

 

[Adkhunter1590]

I agree with your last sentence. Note again, that many other countries are doing their part. If we wait for everything in politics to be completely fair and equitable and so perfect that not one single soul is upset, we will continue to get nowhere. Just like congress today.
BTW, in 2020 there's a good chance Trump is out anyhow and we're back in the agreement. So again, I don't understand this has nothing to do with education on the environment or really anything. Your a fool if you think anyone else is going to dump their fair share into this agreement. You may have a college degree in the field, but your degree doesn't give you much common sense. The U.S. Will be the only one pouring our fair share of billions into the pot while everyone else tosses in a nickel here and there. I wonder where else we could see something like this happening....o wait I got it...how about NATO.

This agreement is nothing but a gigantic scam for other countries to suckle at the American economy's tit. The people who dreamed it up knew the public would squabble over the environmental portion while ignoring where all this money goes. Thankfully our new administration can see through the BS and end it.

[Five Seasons]

11 hours ago, Adkhunter1590 said:

19 hours ago, Belo said:

This agreement is nothing but a gigantic scam for other countries to suckle at the American economy's tit. The people who dreamed it up knew the public would squabble over the environmental portion while ignoring where all this money goes. Thankfully our new administration can see through the BS and end it.

You are entitled to your opinion, and I've never disagreed that the agreement wasn't completely equitable. I do, however find it interesting that a bunch of so called outdoorsman care more about a few oil workers in texas and coal miner in west Virginia, than polluting the globe. Fair or not.

BTW, I'd think some of our very prominent anti-Muslim friends on this site would be all for reducing our dependency on foreign oil. It's literally all they have besides opium that is funding their efforts. P.S being the founder of a tv station doesn't mean you're a scientist or do you know what you're talking about. It means you're a businessman.  

[Adkhunter1590]

You are entitled to your opinion, and I've never disagreed that the agreement wasn't completely equitable. I do, however find it interesting that a bunch of so called outdoorsman care more about a few oil workers in texas and coal miner in west Virginia, than polluting the globe. Fair or not.
BTW, I'd think some of our very prominent anti-Muslim friends on this site would be all for reducing our dependency on foreign oil. It's literally all they have besides opium that is funding their efforts. P.S being the founder of a tv station doesn't mean you're a scientist or do you know what you're talking about. It means you're a businessman.  

I do care about the environment and hope we do everything we can to see it preserved for thousands more years. BUT, one country can not be the only ones making the financial burden to see it happen. Every country needs to do their part and pay their own way. For the country's who are too small and poor, well I kinda doubt they pollute enough to really make a difference anyways.

The amount of money the Paris agreement wanted us to fork over is so large, it could be put to use here in the US to increase research and development of clean technology. If we can figure out how to make ourselves clean and cut out foreign oils completely, we will have the upper hand.

But all of this is really kind of a mute point. The new administration isn't discouraging reducing emissions and cutting down on foreign oil. They want us to do everything that was said in the Paris agreement, without having to send everyone else in the world billions of dollars. The media is spinning this as trump is against clean energy and saving the environment. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The left and the media cry when the national debt gets talked about, but don't wanna stop sending everyone else all our damn money. If any democrat had won the election with the intent to truly lower our debt and pulled us out of the deal, the media and liberals would be singing nothing but praise. Like I said before, this reaction is exactly what the people who made up this deal wanted. The true intentions are lost in translation to the average idiot.

[Five Seasons]

I think we will have to agree to disagree. However you saying you want us to do everything we can to see preserve this earth and then going on about why we shouldn't because it isn't fair is vary contradictory. When someone does everything they can within their power, fairness and equity aren't part of the discussion.

[philoshop]

32 minutes ago, Belo said:

I think we will have to agree to disagree. However you saying you want us to do everything we can to see preserve this earth and then going on about why we shouldn't because it isn't fair is vary contradictory. When someone does everything they can within their power, fairness and equity aren't part of the discussion.

If it were actually about fairness, the U.S. would not have been asked to essentially pay for the majority of it while other countries were given our money.

The U.S. has done plenty to reduce our 'pollution' footprint, likely more than most any other nation, because it makes economic sense in a Capitalist society. What seems to be forgotten is that the ideas for alternatives to fossil fuels, and the hard work and 'smarts' involved were largely either started in the U.S., or started in other countries by people educated in the U.S. Personally, I don't believe that's something the U.S. taxpayers should be economically punished for.

We invent and develop it, China steals it, and China is able to produce and sell it because our domestic regulations prevent us from moving forward with the implementation of it. That's not a good plan. That may have been the previous plan, but it's not a good plan for the country.

[Adkhunter1590]

I think we will have to agree to disagree. However you saying you want us to do everything we can to see preserve this earth and then going on about why we shouldn't because it isn't fair is vary contradictory. When someone does everything they can within their power, fairness and equity aren't part of the discussion.

We are doing everything within our power at this very moment. Have you seen what our national debt is right now? I'd say we are tapped right out. Until we have a surplus of trillions of dollars, we can't be shipping out billions. Your taking the terms too literally without injecting some reality. Reality is that this country is broke and we are never going to get out of the hole until we can balance our books better. We are currently at so many economic disadvantages due to poor agreements and deals from previous administrations that we cannot be subjecting ourselves to such massive financial burdens without risking our very existence. Like philoshop said, most all the new clean technology is being created and developed here, but if we string ourselves out so thin, how do you expect this Country to survive into the next several hundred years. If we look back at history, every empire has collapsed at some point in history and most of the time it's due to its economy collapsing. We can not let ourselves fall victim to such an easy concept to avoid. over the course of our existence, we are going to need to choose ourselves over everyone else once and awhile to preserve what we are.