• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

COP 21 Posed to Ratify New Agreement. It's a Fake, says Hansen

Anyone care to wager that the signatories know nothing more about Climate Change than the number 97%.
 
bubbabgone said:
Anyone care to wager that the signatories know nothing more about Climate Change than the number 97%.
Click to expand...

Greetings, bubba. :2wave:

If they are in line to receive money, they probably don't much care what anyone else thinks! :mrgreen:
 
Threegoofs said:
You mean the crystal ball that told us that we would be living in the warmest month of the warmest year of the warmest decade? And the crystal ball, bolstered by basic physics and chemistry, that tells us that over the next century, this will happen with regular occurrence and increasingly challenging consequences?

OK. I will.
Click to expand...

sawyer and 3G.jpg​
 
polgara said:
Greetings, bubba. :2wave:

If they are in line to receive money, they probably don't much care what anyone else thinks! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Got that right.
And the ones (e.g. Obama) who will be contributing our money to this scam get wood dreaming of global government.
 
bubbabgone said:
Anyone care to wager that the signatories know nothing more about Climate Change than the number 97%.
Click to expand...

Probably not, but they do know an awful lot about dollar signs. That's sufficient, I think. That, and caring - sharing and caring. Makes all the difference.
 
bubbabgone said:
Got that right.
And the ones (e.g. Obama) who will be contributing our money to this scam get wood dreaming of global government.
Click to expand...

"It seems to me that if it were economically advantageous to dump fossil fuels, why would there be a need to sign any agreement - every nation would stampede to cut CO2." Unknown speaker...that I agree with!

I note that China and India, among others, have signaled that they intend to keep using coal, BTW. They seem to like the idea of capitalism - and if others want to save the planet from "envirogeddon," have at it with their warmest regards! :lol:
 
[h=1]A Humpty-Dumpty fudge: Ben Pile on Paris[/h] Posted on 17 Dec 15 by Ian Woolley • 3 Comments
Writing for Spiked magazine, Ben Pile has given his assessment of the Paris pantomime: it was, he says, ‘a humpty-dumpty fudge’ so vague that one of its major outcomes will simply be to give ‘more licence to climate champions than a precisely worded document ever could’. More licence, that is, to keep the whole racket rumbling on in … Continue reading →
 
[h=2]COP21 Emission Projections[/h] Dec 23, 2015 – 2:19 PM
In the wake of COP21, I thought that it would be interesting to compare the respective pathways of China and the U.S (and others) based on official data. I still plan to post on this topic, but obtaining official data on the pathways proved much more difficult than I anticipated. Leading into the COP21 conference on October 31, 2015, the UNFCCC Secretariat published its “Synthesis report on the aggregate effect of the intended nationally determined contributions”, the terms of reference of which were described as follows:

The UNFCCC Synthesis Report was 66 pages long. However, it contained zero information on the commitments of the individual countries or even regions. Searching for such information will be the topic of today’s post. Continue reading →
 
Jack Hays said:
[h=2]COP21 Emission Projections[/h] Dec 23, 2015 – 2:19 PM
In the wake of COP21, I thought that it would be interesting to compare the respective pathways of China and the U.S (and others) based on official data. I still plan to post on this topic, but obtaining official data on the pathways proved much more difficult than I anticipated. Leading into the COP21 conference on October 31, 2015, the UNFCCC Secretariat published its “Synthesis report on the aggregate effect of the intended nationally determined contributions”, the terms of reference of which were described as follows:

The UNFCCC Synthesis Report was 66 pages long. However, it contained zero information on the commitments of the individual countries or even regions. Searching for such information will be the topic of today’s post. Continue reading →
Click to expand...

Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

So what is going to be the basis for determining who pays what percentage amount, and how much it's going to be, and who is going to receive said monies, and when, since it's all supposedly "voluntary," and the largest polluters are not on board, if I'm reading correctly! :2mad:
 
It makes liberals feel good.
 
polgara said:
Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

So what is going to be the basis for determining who pays what percentage amount, and how much it's going to be, and who is going to receive said monies, and when, since it's all supposedly "voluntary," and the largest polluters are not on board, if I'm reading correctly! :2mad:
Click to expand...

Greetings, Polgara.:2wave:

I doubt it will ever go into effect.:mrgreen:
 
Jack Hays said:
Greetings, Polgara.:2wave:

I doubt it will ever go into effect.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

What part of the Paris meeting was it that Obama trumpeted as a "success?," or is that just weird propaganda to get people in the US used to the fallacy that we can control climate if enough money is available to accomplish it? When Hansen angrily called it :bs he said a lot in a few words, IMO! :mrgreen: Of course he was hoping for the opposite of what actually took place...
 
polgara said:
What part of the Paris meeting was it that Obama trumpeted as a "success?," or is that just weird propaganda to get people in the US used to the fallacy that we can control climate if enough money is available to accomplish it? When Hansen angrily called it :bs he said a lot in a few words, IMO! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

The "success" was that an agreement was reached.
 
Jack Hays said:
The "success" was that an agreement was reached.
Click to expand...

Jack, if more "agreements" like that occur, where things are voluntary and non-binding, I see divorce rates dropping like a stone! Some good had to come from this... :lamo
 
[h=1]Palestinian Climate Change[/h] Willis Eschenbach / 35 mins ago December 24, 2015

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
Very short post. I read today that Palestine has been granted full member status in the UNFCCC, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
palestine-at-unesco.jpg

I also recall from a few years ago that when Palestine was admitted to UNESCO, the US had to cut off funds to UNESCO because of US law. As an article at the time said, this was the result of “US laws that force an automatic funding cutoff for any UN agency with Palestine as a member” …
Do I see an opportunity for our lawmakers here? Yep. Will they act on it? Possibly not, but if it is indeed the law, seems like they could be forced to act …
Best to all, and I do hope some organization with money and legal resources takes up this question. At least the US could stop pouring money down a rathole, even if the rest of the world continued the lunacy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom