Official Global Warming thread (merged)

[Septic]

The Paris deal did nothing to mitigate or slow climate change, read it.

You should probably read the purpose of the Paris Agreement.

he Paris Agreement builds upon the Convention and – for the first time – brings all nations into a common cause to undertake ambitious efforts to combat climate change and adapt to its effects, with enhanced support to assist developing countries to do so. As such, it charts a new course in the global climate effort.

The Paris Agreement’s central aim is to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Additionally, the agreement aims to strengthen the ability of countries to deal with the impacts of climate change. To reach these ambitious goals, appropriate financial flows, a new technology framework and an enhanced capacity building framework will be put in place, thus supporting action by developing countries and the most vulnerable countries, in line with their own national objectives. The Agreement also provides for enhanced transparency of action and support through a more robust transparency framework. Further information on key aspects of the Agreement can be found here.

 

[hog88]

You should probably read the purpose of the Paris Agreement.

Nice mission statement, now what about the details?

 

[Grand Vol]

No, it's an inconvenience talking point for you apparently, the American exceptionalism is being put on display. When the U.S. is one of three country's opting out and the other three are third world cess pools, it's absolutely worth noting the company you keep.

Nicaragua and Syria.

<sigh> Never mind, you're right. Doesn't matter that if we agreed to it we'd be keeping the same company as many third world cesspools that also ratified it. You're obviously just too damn right.

I bow to your superior analogy making ability. And obviously superior intelligence since you don't want to discuss what I put forward as it's beneath you.

 

[Septic]

If the climate is getting warmer like it has MANY times throughout history there isn't a damn thing we can do to stop or slow it. That ball is already rolling down hill. Only thing we can do is learn to live with it.

If you're looking for an argument to this, I won't.

I'm not in disagreement with this point.

I just find it astonishingly moronic that some people (i.e. Volger) deny it's happening with the abundance of evidence that exists.

 

[allvol123]

You should probably read the purpose of the Paris Agreement.

You literally highlighted a pile of ambiguity in an effort to make your point. You are hilarious.

Posting with impunity! Lol.

 

[PeterNincompoop]

Is that why they've got 15 years to ponder a decision?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/world/asia/china-renewable-energy-investment.html

 

[Septic]

You literally highlighted a pile of ambiguity in an effort to make your point. You are hilarious.

Posting with impunity! Lol.

Hogg implied the Paris Agreement wasn't dealing with climate change. I replied with direct evidence of the reason it exists is specifically to combat climate change.

That's not an "effort" to make a point, it's direct evidence that contradicts his. Try to pay attention.

 

[Grand Vol]

Hogg implied the Paris Agreement wasn't dealing with climate change. I replied with direct evidence of the reason it exists is specifically to combat climate change.

That's not an "effort" to make a point, it's direct evidence that contradicts his. Try to pay attention.

Okay, smart guy...

Of the Paris Agreement, what kind of fines/fail-safes are built in for countries that don't comply? Say the PRC signs it (they did) and later on are found not to be in compliance with said Agreement.

How do the other signature parties deal with that without getting a big "Eff You!" from the PRC? Or what happens if they do get the big "Eff you!" from the PRC? What options are available to them in the aftermath?

 

[Septic]

Okay, smart guy...

Of the Paris Agreement, what kind of fines/fail-safes are built in for countries that don't comply? Say the PRC signs it (they did) and later on are found not to be in compliance with said Agreement.

How do the other signature parties deal with that without getting a big "Eff You!" from the PRC? Or what happens if they do get the big "Eff you!" from the PRC? What options are available to them in the aftermath?

"smart guy", you mad?

First off, I'm not arguing that the Paris Agreement will be or has been effective with regards to stymieing change - You're conflating what I've actually stated with what you want to believe I'm saying. Your last post was nothing more than a fabricated argument to a position I've not taken.

If your point is that that there's no penalty (there's not, it's not binding - clearly), why would trump risk further alienating and thumbing his nose at EVERYONE (except Nicaragua and Syria)?

Since the agreement has no teeth, why risk the continued bad press and terrible international optics?

 

[allvol123]

Hogg implied the Paris Agreement wasn't dealing with climate change. I replied with direct evidence of the reason it exists is specifically to combat climate change.

That's not an "effort" to make a point, it's direct evidence that contradicts his. Try to pay attention.

I think you are doing great for an adolescent. You'll get better.

Stating what your purpose is and showing clear examples of processes to accomplish your purpose are things that are completely separate.

 

[ShowSomePride]

From my understanding Nicaragua is actually invested heavily in renewables. They are currently generating about half of their electricity from renewable sources and have been on record saying they hope to achieve 90% from renewable in the next 5 years. Why they are not part of the Paris accord I cant say. Syria is in a civil war so they get a pass.

 

[hog88]

"smart guy", you mad?

First off, I'm not arguing that the Paris Agreement will be or has been effective with regards to stymieing change - You're conflating what I've actually stated with what you want to believe I'm saying. Your last post was nothing more than a fabricated argument to a position I've not taken.

If your point is that that there's no penalty (there's not, it's not binding - clearly), why would trump risk further alienating and thumbing his nose at EVERYONE (except Nicaragua and Syria)?

Since the agreement has no teeth, why risk the continued bad press and terrible international optics?

Could be he wants to negotiate a real deal and not one who's sole purpose is to weaken our economy.

 

[Grand Vol]

"smart guy", you mad?

First off, I'm not arguing that the Paris Agreement will be or has been effective with regards to stymieing change - You're conflating what I've actually stated with what you want to believe I'm saying. Your last post was nothing more than a fabricated argument to a position I've not taken.

If your point is that that there's no penalty (there's not, it's not binding - clearly), why would trump risk further alienating and thumbing his nose at EVERYONE?

Since the agreement has no teeth, why risk the continued bad press and terrible international optics?

Nope, not mad. Just waiting on your to stop being a condescending ass (as usual) and have a rational discussion.

Now, if said agreement has no teeth and no penalties, what's the point in signing it just to agree with everyone? This is a long term thing that can (will) affect the US economy for decades to come. And will be in force well after Trump is out of office. You don't think another President wouldn't savagely enforce the terms on the US regardless of other nation's non-compliance? You aren't that naive.

Who gives a flying hootie darn whether the "optics" are bad? We are talking about entering into an agreement with nations that may or may not be compliant with said agreement. And could end up hurting our economy in the long run because we are doing "the right thing" by enforcing the Agreement while they choose to thumb their nose at it.

 

[allvol123]

"smart guy", you mad?

First off, I'm not arguing that the Paris Agreement will be or has been effective with regards to stymieing change - You're conflating what I've actually stated with what you want to believe I'm saying. Your last post was nothing more than a fabricated argument to a position I've not taken.

If your point is that that there's no penalty (there's not, it's not binding - clearly), why would trump risk further alienating and thumbing his nose at EVERYONE (except Nicaragua and Syria)?

Since the agreement has no teeth, why risk the continued bad press and terrible international optics?

You think America will alienate itself by pulling out of this stupid deal.

Wow, you'd be funny if you words weren't so naive.

 

[Septic]

I think you are doing great for an adolescent. You'll get better.

Stating what your purpose is and showing clear examples of processes to accomplish your purpose are things that are completely separate.

I provided a link to the source and an excerpt that directly contradicted the assertion. Nothing else was requested or required.

Did you need your hand held or have an adult explain how to interpret the big boy words?

Maybe I should draw you cartoon pictures, is that what you need?

 

[Septic]

You think America will alienate itself by pulling out of this stupid deal.

Wow, you'd be funny if you words weren't so naive.

No, the bozo in chief has already alienated us with our allies, this was just the frosting on the turd cake of his geopolitical ineptitude.

 

[Septic]

Who gives a flying hootie darn whether the "optics" are bad?

You're kidding right?

This potus is in it for the ratings.

He's flailing on every front.

I suspect that every decision he'll make will be one of monetary expedience. For him mind you... As long as he comes out on top.

 

[gcbvol]

From my understanding Nicaragua is actually invested heavily in renewables. They are currently generating about half of their electricity from renewable sources and have been on record saying they hope to achieve 90% from renewable in the next 5 years. Why they are not part of the Paris accord I cant say. Syria is in a civil war so they get a pass.

As I understand it Nicaragua didn't feel the accord went far enough, thus their absence.

 

[Grand Vol]

You're kidding right?

This potus is in it for the ratings.

He's flailing on every front.

I suspect that every decision he'll make will be one of monetary expedience. For him mind you... As long as he comes out on top.

Of course he is...

Ever have a conversation you couldn't turn into anti-Trump nonsense that has no bearing on the current subject?

I thought you were of superior intellect.

 

[Grand Vol]

As I understand it Nicaragua didn't feel the accord went far enough, thus their absence.

Same Nicaragua that wants to build an Atlantic-Pacific shipping canal to rival the Panama Canal?

 

[Septic]

Of course he is...

Ever have a conversation you couldn't turn into anti-Trump nonsense that has no bearing on the current subject?

I thought you were of superior intellect.

lol wat? No bearing?

Trump is reportedly making the decision to pull "us" out of a Agreement we entered into by the former president, I'd say his unilateral decision is directly relevant.

The papers aren't waiting for "America's" decision, they're waiting on Donny.

 

[McDad]

Well, the scientist there are well educated, independent thinkers - so I can see why those on the "right" would believe them to be against them..

When it comes to God, you disagree with well educated, independent thinkers who have faith in God and God's word, right?

Same for me with climate "science".

 

[allvol123]

No, the bozo in chief has already alienated us with our allies, this was just the frosting on the turd cake of his geopolitical ineptitude.

We are about as alienated to our allies as water is to life.

You're getting LG level with the nonsense.

 

[ShowSomePride]

If Trump wanted to pull out of the Paris agreement because he did not like how it was set up and planned instead on the U.S. doing it's own thing towards reducing emissions and moving towards renewables then I would understand.

But he hasn't done that.

 

[ShowSomePride]

So over the last 650,000 years Earth has gone through 7 periods of glacial advance and retreat. 7 periods of cooling, heating, cooling, etc. Within these past 650k years, never has the Earth's atmospheric CO2 levels been above 300ppm. We know this by studying mineral deposits and fossils, but in particular pockets of ancient air stored in glacial ice. The amount of any given element can be determined using what is known as mass spectrometry, a very well documented and used characterization method.

Today, atmospheric CO2 levels are above 400 ppm.

That is very strong evidence for the current change in our climate being abnormal.