That's why it's a waste of time debating Climate Change when the real problem is pollution. The issues of Pollution must be met first. Originally Posted by Levianon17regarding pollution. if one is going make this an argument, state it so instead of hiding behind climate change. I'm all for having clean air and clean water.
- dilbert firestorm
- 07-11-2021, 02:09 PM
- VitaMan
- 07-11-2021, 02:50 PM
It is a useless straw man argument. All of a sudden we have thousands of experts.
Come back in a million years......or make it a billion.
Come back in a million years......or make it a billion.
- The_Waco_Kid
- 07-11-2021, 03:06 PM
- LexusLover
- 07-11-2021, 03:14 PM
- LexusLover
- 07-11-2021, 03:18 PM
All of a sudden we have thousands of experts. Originally Posted by VitaMan#1: How many "mask" experts do "we" have?
#2: It really doesn't take an "expert" to ask probing questions regarding speculative, politically motivated assumptions and opinions of those who claim it's "science"!
Speaking of THE BARTENDER .... do you believe her?
I recommend you do your part to delay the Earth's demise from overheating ....
... trade in your ride ...
... if you don't, then you really don't believe all that global warming bullshit.
- The_Waco_Kid
- 07-11-2021, 03:32 PM
- dilbert firestorm
- 07-11-2021, 08:09 PM
- Levianon17
- 07-12-2021, 12:32 AM
regarding pollution. if one is going make this an argument, state it so instead of hiding behind climate change. I'm all for having clean air and clean water. Originally Posted by dilbert firestormThe sole argument with Climate Change is a few degree spike in surface temperature over time due to man's use of fossil fuels. Climate involves more than just temperature. Pollution may increase temperature periodically in small increments that's not a change in climate, it's pollution which can be managed.
- LexusLover
- 07-12-2021, 07:17 AM
Pollution may increase temperature periodically in small increments that's not a change in climate, it's pollution which can be managed. Originally Posted by Levianon17It is being "managed" ....
... within the past few weeks I saw a stat revealing that the U.S. contributes about 18% of the pollutants contaminating the atmosphere ....
... no wonder Walmart et al rely on Asian made products, which are cheaper to manufacture because of not only the labor working in contaminated conditions, but also because the manufacturers don't have to worry about "expensive" pollution control modifications and equipment.
Making money to improve the U.S. economy is expensive.
Why is California buying Saudi oil today? I thought they wanted to be fossil free!
- VitaMan
- 07-12-2021, 10:18 AM
The US is the worlds biggest economy. Put 2 + 2 together.
Perhaps we should shut down the US economy......oh, we just did that. How did that go ?
Perhaps we should shut down the US economy......oh, we just did that. How did that go ?
- rexdutchman
- 07-12-2021, 11:10 AM
Funny ( hypocrisy ) is they say this "heat wave" in the west is the worst ever EXECPT for 1913 when death valley was 134 F you known because of the SUVs and people I cant believe anyone still believes the scam
- Levianon17
- 07-12-2021, 03:41 PM
The US is the worlds biggest economy. Put 2 + 2 together.
Perhaps we should shut down the US economy......oh, we just did that. How did that go ? Originally Posted by VitaMan
It fucked things up. Businesses folded, Crime Skyrocketed and the Economy basically went to shit. Biden will try and do it again but not because of a viral outbreak but because of "Climate Change". Remember when you don't do the right thing bad things happen. Nothing but bad things have happened since this geriatric artifact has hit the scene.
- pfunkdenver
- 07-12-2021, 06:20 PM
- oeb11
- 07-12-2021, 08:08 PM
Amazing how fascist DPST's ignore/misremember the facts of the state of teh nation before Comrade Xi released his bioterrorism virus on the world.
Sheeples do love their Xinn and comrade Xi
Sheeples do love their Xinn and comrade Xi
- The_Waco_Kid
- 07-12-2021, 08:16 PM
Hey! While you're prognosticating, can you gaze into that crystal ball you've got, and give me some stock picks??Originally Posted by pfunkdenver
https://news.yahoo.com/staffer-says-...011944202.html
WHO staffer says climate lockdowns may be necessary
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-...an-11619132440
Biden’s 10-Year Climate Plan
He’s committing the U.S. to a far-fetched CO2 emissions goal without a vote of Congress.
April 22, 2021 7:00 pm ET
President Joe Biden speaks during climate change virtual summit from the East Room of the White House on April 22.
Was President Biden trying to impress China’s Xi Jinping at Thursday’s climate pep rally by committing to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by half below 2005 levels by 2030? His pledge tees up sweeping new government controls over the economy of the kind you might see in one of Mr. Xi’s five-year plans. Mr. Biden now has a 10-year version of central economic planning.
Mr. Biden’s virtual world summit was intended to coax China and other emerging countries to make more aggressive emissions reductions. The U.S. accounts for less than 15% of global CO2 emissions, Mr. Biden told world leaders. Emissions in the U.S. and Europe have been falling since 2005 as natural gas and renewables have replaced coal power.
But rising emissions from China have swamped these declines. At the Paris climate summit in 2015, China committed only to begin reducing emissions in 2030, and it has continued to build coal plants and expand industrial production. China’s CO2 emissions increased by more between 2015 and 2018 than the U.K.’s total emissions in 2018 (see nearby chart).
All of the CO2 commitments made in Paris, including Barack Obama’s to reduce U.S. emissions by 26% to 28%, would reduce the Earth’s temperature increase by a mere 0.17 degree Celsius by 2100—not even close to the 1.5 degrees that is supposedly needed to head off doomsday. Yet Mr. Biden now wants to double down on Mr. Obama’s futile climate gesture.
What would the U.S. have to do to achieve Mr. Biden’s new emissions pledge? Start with some perspective. The Obama regulatory fusillade got the U.S. only about halfway to his Paris pledge—and most of the reductions during his Presidency were from natural gas displacing coal in power due to market forces.
Amid last year’s Covid-19 lockdowns, greenhouse gas emissions fell to about 21% below 2005 levels. In other words, even with the economy shut down and a large share of the population stuck at home, the U.S. was less than halfway to Mr. Biden’s goal.
Some green groups have done their own back-of-the envelope analysis of what it would take to achieve Mr. Biden’s 10-year plan. Take a recent Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) report that argues for a “strong whole-of-government approach.” This includes eliminating new gas-powered cars by 2035, presumably by ramping up corporate average fuel economy (Cafe) standards. Mr. Biden has also proposed sweetening federal tax credits for buying electric cars—currently $7,500—but soon consumers will have no choice but to buy them when their gas vehicles expire.
The Biden goal will require the electric grid to be totally rebuilt in 10 years. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the U.S. will also have to double its share of carbon-free power to 80% from 40% today—half of which is now provided by nuclear—to have any hope of achieving Mr. Biden’s pledge.
All coal plants would have to shut down, and natural gas plants would be phased into obsolescence. Wind and solar energy would have to increase six to seven fold. The Obama Clean Power Plan, which the Supreme Court blocked in 2016, looks modest by comparison. It sought to reduce CO2 power emissions by 32%. Most homes would also have to be electrified. So if you like your gas stove, you won’t be able to keep it. Farmers would also have to adopt “climate-smart agriculture and forestry,” EDF says.
Unlike Mr. Xi, the U.S. President doesn’t have legal authority to decree sweeping emissions reductions across the economy. But liberals argue that Section 115 of the Clean Air Act, titled “International Air Pollution,” allows the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate emissions that “may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare in a foreign country.” The catch is that EPA can only do so if there is regulatory “reciprocity” among other nations.
Mr. Biden is essentially doing an end-run around the Constitution, which requires approval by two-thirds of the Senate for the President to enter a treaty. The emissions reductions that foreign leaders pledged on Thursday aren’t legally binding, but Mr. Biden intends to use regulation to bind Americans.
Businesses will be conscripted as foot soldiers in the progressive war on fossil fuels. Mercenaries like Google, Apple and Microsoft have already enlisted. America’s founders believed that the Constitution’s separation of powers would safeguard individual liberty, but this assumes Congress guards its power.
Mr. Biden will face no resistance to his regulatory overreach from Democrats in Congress. They will happily finance his 10-year plan to remake the economy, starting with his $2.3 trillion much-more-than-infrastructure proposal that is the Green New Deal in disguise.