US Pulls out of Paris Climate Accords

[Garnier Fructis]

Okay good, this is progress. Now that we can all the agree the planet isn't doomed and our deaths are not imminent, we can discuss climate change like adults without all the alarmist bullshit designed to scare people into making unnecessary drastic lifestyle changes.

A few degrees change in temperature over the next century will have affects on the planet, both positive and negative. Either way we will adapt, as will other species. If we spent our efforts concentrating on that instead of doing stupid things like trying to alter the planets temperature by switching lights off and driving electric cars then I'd be on board.

Adaptation is easier and less costly to do when the effects are lessened, which is the entire point of mitigation.

And to be frank, most everyone except you guys have been trying to discuss this 'without all the alarmist bullshit.' Because aside from a tiny handful of numbnuts 'on our side,' it's you guys that keep bringing that up.

[Gaidax]

No problem, I have a perfect plan. In about 60-70 years I'll be dead and then it will all be fixed for me. Problem solved.

[Garnier Fructis]

Since the other thread was closed, I'll hijack the topic.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/c...standards.html
http://www.climate-mayors.org/

Was Tumps recent display anything more than a symbolic snubbing of the rest of the world? Should people take their dissent down to the city and state level in a bold act of defiance against the President? Discuss. With 80 percent of the US living in cities and most major cities agreeing to the guidelines of the climate accord, this means that​ most people in the US would be abiding by the rules of the accord in defiance of President Trump. Yes, all major cities in Texas are also following the Paris Accord.

Absolutely. To all the Republicans and conservatives who are mad about this: States' rights, motherfuckers.

[Deleted]

This.

Trump might be a genius. He basically refused to send the money to a random country to subsidize their new solar powered roofs, and now the states here are going to keep up reducing the carbon footprint without any of that cash going overseas for free. The best part is they don't even realize they are doing what he wanted.

They wanted the US to lead by example, this is a great start.

Two oxymoronic words, "Clean Coal".

It's not about "subsidizing random country", it's about stroking the dying coal tycoons.

[Theinquisition]

Two oxymoronic words, "Clean Coal".

It's not about "subsidizing random country", it's about stroking the dying coal tycoons.

100 billion a year is subsidizing.

The funnier part about that, since it is a non-binding, non-enforceable agreement, there is no accountability for those funds.

[Deleted]

100 billion a year is subsidizing.

From the entire developed world until 2020 and not mandatory.

Again, Trump already gave the reason, it's about "clean coal", not about some not mandatory subsides. But don't worry, the rest of the G7 and China will continue to corner the clean tech market and sell it around the world.

By the way, the US pledged to pay 3 billions, but only paid 1. You really need to get your facts straight: http://www.dailywire.com/news/17093/...-aaron-bandler

[Spectral]

Absolutely. To all the Republicans and conservatives who are mad about this: States' rights, motherfuckers.

Are there actually conservatives that care if some city they don't live in decides to have some emissions standard that isn't relevant to said conservative? I guess there might be, that's distinctly just culture war nonsense.

[Garnier Fructis]

Are there actually conservatives that care if some city they don't live in decides to have some emissions standard that isn't relevant to said conservative? I guess there might be, that's distinctly just culture war nonsense.

I guess I could change it to 'people who call themselves conservatives who are mad about this.'

[Deleted]

Are there actually conservatives that care if some city they don't live in decides to have some emissions standard that isn't relevant to said conservative? I guess there might be, that's distinctly just culture war nonsense.

It's an odd thing to be upset about.
As is odd preemptively striking at those windmills.
It's also odd to call their rights "defying"

Come to think of it, it's all so absurd, that I doubt any of it is not culture war nonsense.

[Bumbasta]

Trump´s mind is in the past. Yes, it used to be beneficial to use coal and neglect climate change effects. However, things have changed quickly. A lot of technology and innovation, and thus jobs, are centred around tackling climate issues. The demand for clean&green has risen, meaning that it is economically attractive to participate here. The countries and companies which are focussing on this are a step ahead in the future world economy.

[Theinquisition]

From the entire developed world until 2020 and not mandatory.

Again, Trump already gave the reason, it's about "clean coal", not about some not mandatory subsides. But don't worry, the rest of the G7 and China will continue to corner the clean tech market and sell it around the world.

By the way, the US pledged to pay 3 billions, but only paid 1. You really need to get your facts straight: http://www.dailywire.com/news/17093/...-aaron-bandler

Well if it's not mandatory, whats the damn purpose of being in the treaty.

Seriously, why do we need to be signatories on a agreement that no one can enforce?

Anyway, that 1 billion could have been used here.

[Glorious Leader]

At this point, flat-earthism is basically equivalent to human caused climate change denial with regard to the obvious evidence you have to purposely ignore.

To be fair i dont think even a majority of trump supporters are flatists.

[Kontinuum]

President Donald Trump does believe in climate change and that humans have a role in it, US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley told CNN's Jake Tapper in an interview on "State of the Union."

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/03/po...ntv/index.html

[Deleted]

Anyway, that 1 billion could have been used here.

Those 100 billions from an arms deal aren't enough? Or the coal subsides?

http://energydesk.greenpeace.org/201...sidies-batman/

[Theinquisition]

Those 100 billions from an arms deal aren't enough? Or the coal subsides?

http://energydesk.greenpeace.org/201...sidies-batman/

Being as we're *selling* 100 billion, im okay with that as it will reduce our trade deficit.

As far as coal goes....who said im for coal?

[Deleted]

As far as coal goes....who said im for coal?

Because that's the main reason why Trump is pulling out of the Paris Accords, because of coal jobs.

[Draco-Onis]

Well if it's not mandatory, whats the damn purpose of being in the treaty.

Seriously, why do we need to be signatories on a agreement that no one can enforce?

It's the first step towards setting a global initiative and market for green energy and tackling climate change. The treaty is an initiative for something greater and would have opened up a lot of business opportunities for jobs here in the US. A lot of people are asking the treaty to do things it was never meant to do, it's not that easy to get that many countries together let alone to sign something this historic.

[JohnBrown1917]

I'd say so, given the propensity for Republican controlled state governments to prohibit cities from passing normal legislation cities might pass, such as when Michigan's state government banned cities from banning plastic bags.

Can't have cities infringe upon the glorious free market.

[Draco-Onis]

I think that is an ignorant view when theirs been literally decades of shit science and doom criers since the fucking 70's. Wolf has been cried far to many times and people are skeptical as fuck. Compile that with people who have politicized the issue and who profit from it. People have legitimate reasons to be skeptical. Calling people flat earthers and other derogatory language does more to damage your cause then aid it.

The information is vetted, publicly available, in the case of flat earthers you can literally get live feeds of the world. This is conspiracy theories and lies none of these people have educated themselves on the matter or have the scientific knowledge to even challenge it. Science can be proven wrong, change etc but these people are not after truth, they are paranoid morons chasing boogeymen.

[bowchikabow]

What I find interesting is that in all of this arguing, and people crying "IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD" ... They failed to remember a simple sentence Trump said IN HIS SPEECH.

Paraphrased: "America is not abandoning the accord wholesale. We are willing to come to the table when the accord is redone in a way that doesn't screw over Americans."

While I am not saying it washes away all possible concerns about our non-involvement with G7. To me, it says that he walked away because the deal looked extremely unfair, which.. as a non-binding accord, seems perfectly acceptable. Notice how the local governments and agencies that are crying foul and grandstanding against the President walking away from the deal are NEARLY ALL LEFTISTS. But sure, it isn't political at all right? Like that Dumbass congressman out of California who talked about how more kids will die from asthma, armageddon before 2030. Nevermind that IPCC admits that even if we implented EVERY change and continued through the end of the century... We would gain AT MOST 2/10th of a single degree difference. When accounting for inflation and valuation.. that would mean that TRILLIONS of dollars, which will never be recouped, spent on a less than .5% change in temperature. This is also if we ignore the fact that China has no plans to actually follow through on the accord until near 2030, which basically amounts to them wiping out the progress of the other nations until then.