Does anyone care that The Paris Agreement will do almost nothing to reduce global warming and will cost the U.S. trillions while shifting jobs from The U.S. to China as well as allowing China to continue to pollute?

Watch this. and before you start going off about how Prager U is not an actual university and it is a conservative biased site, please give us some facts that show this is wrong.

The Paris Climate Agreement Won't Change the Climate - YouTube

Bjorn Lomborg - Wikipedia

Would have to really look into where this man is getting his information from and how he makes his calculations and the like.

Please don't strain the little liberal brain with logic.

Obama's goal was the redistribution of american wealth elsewhere.

His legacy is horrific, and just wait till the spying and leaks get fully revealed.

See I knew someone just couldn't do it. Instead of presenting facts that dispute what is presented you simply attack the source.

What is he saying that isn't true?

Do you deny that he is an expert in the field? The Wikipedia article that you posted seems to verify that he is.

That video posted is by this man. Who just makes a lot of assertions in it. He does not present the facts as you usually are supposed to say how you got those facts if these are just projections of the rise of temperatures in the next 100 years. That's speculation though.

And is he an expert in global warming? No he is not.

So many ways to get around Trump's idiocy.

https://weather.com/science/environm...ccord-decision

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

I would think that many meteorologists know quite a bit about global warming and its effects.

global warming and its effects - Google Scholar

FactChecking Trump’s Climate Speech
 

Climatologist Vs. Meteorologist
 

Actually, Climatologists would know much more than Meteorologists......Climatologist Vs. Meteorologist | Chron.com

Well I like the content of that article. I had a TV weatherman in one of my History classes at the U of Nevada, Reno as a fellow student. Probably in Renaissance History class. He was quite fun and a smart guy. Had learned meteorology in the Armed Forces. Navy?

In just 17 minutes - time difference between this post and your previous post - you have already come to a conclusion about this man's credibility?? Wow!

Finally some rational thought.

It was intended to be a treaty, but BHO knew he could not get it past the Senate. Hence the famous executive order.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Besides assertions, Al Gore made a documentary. And that makes HIM an expert?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Paris Talks
 

None of this makes any difference as we are currently committed to this agreement for the next 3 1/2 years and then guess what??? It is re election time which is what his move is all about--me-me-me.

Paris Climate Agreement
 

Talking about getting our facts straight. The idea that we would have to subsidize China is a complete myth. I would be upset about that too. But after doing some research, the truth is that every country decides for itself what amount of money it wants to spend on this effort. So we would not be subsidizing China. Sounds like another myth from Fox news.

Exactly, and it was his means to deplete our tax revenues by another trillion or more for frivolous NOTHING.

And India, don't forget. Gotta love it when those that have no source for their information will disparage FOX because their news is "conservative."

The problem with you all, is that you don't seem to understand that the other news channels do NOT give the complete array of news. They filter it to fit their agenda. And why not? After all, if you check out many of them, their view is subsidized by Soros. Not a conspiracy theory, because you can GOOGLE his monetary influence in our country to see long lists of his collaboration. Remember, FOX gets their news from AP and Reuters, just like other news outlets. The difference is that the others do not provide as much of the news.

Argue all you wish, but your denying it does not make your view fact. Try to learn how to discern the difference between NEWS and Commentary before running amok.

400 Billion from US tax payers 0.2 degree by 2200 China and India are burning coal and can set there own limits Yes POTUS

Trump is right!
 

Let me preface this by saying I believe president Trump is a man lacking in moral character. There is much I don't like about him. But let's deal with the president we've got. I just read the Paris climate accords and Trump is right that they are vague and offer suggestions with no clear metrics as guides to keeping global rise below 2 degrees. Developed countries are to contribute whatever public money they feel is right for them as well as give to less developed countries. And we all have seen what happens when these poorly run countries get free money! Corruption, thievery, fraud, waste , etc. It is terribly written and unenforceable. Good on him for saying no! If the Gates' and Zuckerbergs of the world want to contribute to the cause it's in there too, that they will accept outside contributions. It doesn't need to be the government doing it, the business can voluntarily limit greenhouse gasses. Thanks Donald!

It helps when actual facts are used. :oops:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...mate-fund.html

sure will be hard to breathe those "savings" or perhaps one could use them on the coast for floatation.....only one Earth, kill it, and it kills us

stupid comment. Our air is cleaner than its been in decades. And man has nothing to do with the global warming myth, other than creating another myth. But, if you want the world to be colder, just nuke it. We'll have a nuclear winter. That work for you?

Innacurate myths that opponents of climate action use to make their case
 

"The No. 2 diplomat at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing resigned Monday, telling staff his conscience would not permit him to formally notify the Chinese that the United States is withdrawing from the Paris climate accord.

David H. Rank, a career Foreign Service officer of 27 years, had been acting ambassador until former Iowa governor Terry Branstad (R) was confirmed as the new ambassador last month. Rank held a town meeting with embassy employees to explain he had offered his resignation and it had been accepted.

As the head of the embassy until Branstad arrives, it was Rank’s responsibility to deliver a formal notification of the U.S. intention to withdraw from the climate pact.

According to a State Department official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to be more candid, Rank was unwilling to deliver the demarche.

He told his staff that as “a parent, a patriot and a Christian,” he could not in good conscience play a role in implementing President Trump’s decision to withdraw, according to a colleague familiar with Rank’s comments."

Senior diplomat in Beijing embassy resigns over Trump’s climate change decision - The Washington Post

Which brings to mind the lack of personnel to serve our country.

IT IS NOT DEMOCRATS BLOCKING OR SLOWING NOMINEES, NO MATTER WHAT THE WHITE HOUSE SAYS...THEY ARE EINS BEHIND IN NOMINATING PEOPLE.

Our state department is a shell right now, and are ill equipped to handle any emergencies

Blah blah blah blah

Ditto


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Now if people will actually read this!!

Why?

"We believe that the human cost of climate change is too great to ignore."

One sided? Balanced? I don't think so.

If you go WAY back...past the last the 1,000 years they use...the earths temperature has been higher...it's also been MUCH colder.

Do you think that the ice ages have stopped and we'll never get another? If you do...then you are ignorant to the natural cycles the earth goes through. If you don't...if you think someday the ice age will be back...as it's been doing FOREVER...then what are you worried about? You're aware that the earth goes through temperature cycles and this too will pass.

CO2 has very little to do with global temperature. The CO2 scare is a scam. They found something to blame the current natural warming on. So they can MAKE MONEY off it.

"Out of the entire atmospheric makeup, only one to two percent is made up of greenhouse gases with the majority being nitrogen (about 78 percent) and oxygen (about 21 percent). Of that two percent, “planet-killing” carbon dioxide comprises only 3.62 percent while water vapor encompasses 95 percent."

Which means...greenhouse gasses makes up only 1-2% of the atmosphere AND CO2 only makes up 4% of that small 1-2% of greenhouse gasses. CO2 makes up 0.04% of the total atmosphere...it's nothing...and it does nothing. WATER VAPOR is what determines heat retention. We pump a LOT of water vapor into the air but evaporation is the biggest contributor.

"The Earth's atmosphere is 78 percent nitrogen, 21 percent oxygen and 1 percent other gases, including about 0.04 percent carbon dioxide."

Man isn't helping... There's a lot more crap being pumped into the air a LOT worse than CO2. And it ain't by us. SE Asia is the biggest contributor to air pollution. China...India...are both causing a LOT of pollution.

No one has proved that man has caused the climate change. As a matter of fact, if liberals did not have something to complain about or some form of protest, they would cease to exist. Climate change is a money maker for scammers, scientists that majored in the wrong subject in college and now need some form of vindication to justify their bad decisions. Like LIberals and their attempt to disparage the president because of their bad choices.