A Trump team member just compared climate science to the flat-Earth theory

[dvaz]

I am more surprised that a Trump team member WASN'T a flat-earther tbh

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

Yes, it is HIS fault. Not the party responsible for unprecedented obstruction and whose leader in the Senate was on record saying their only goal was to make Obama a one term president.

You forget the midterm elections.

After America got a look at "community organizer" turned President of the United States, the American people chose to elect Republicans in order to balance out Obama's inept and unprecedentedly bad leadership.

[Kujako]

Yes, it is HIS fault. Not the party responsible for unprecedented obstruction and whose leader in the Senate was on record saying their only goal was to make Obama a one term president.

It's ALL his fault. If Obama had only been a Republican, Protestant and White they wouldn't have had to be obstructionists! But he refused!

[javen]

Meh, at the end of the day is there a difference between belief and action?

Obama did close to nothing on climate change.

If it is such a grave concern why so little action on it?

Sure he was able to party it up with Jay-Z, tell the world that if he had a son it would look like Trayvon Martin, send high ranking officials to both Trayvon Martin's and Michael Brown's funeral, golf games, etc, where was the push on climate change?

In the long term wouldn't climate change be more important than Obamacare?

In the long term wouldn't climate change be more important than the improvement of school lunches that was the cornerstone of Michelle's "achievement"?

People can piss and moan about random people who don't believe in climate change, but the real culprits are those that believe it and have done nothing about it.

The President doesn't have a lot of outs when it comes to policy like that, because any meaningful change would come from passing laws to impose environmental regulations, and allocate a portion of the federal budget towards the federal government doing the same. The responsibility for both of which fall to Congress. Obama's essentially got the EPA, which have been working to bring new power plants under better code, but again, to retrofit already existing plants would again take an act of Congress. Unofficially they can also use their visibility to raise awareness of the issue, which he has also done.

It's frustrating because it's a serious issue, but not likely one that both A) has a solution and B) the solution does not impact anyones lifestyle, so there will always be those resistant to change. There's also the fact that people tend to be very hesitant to support solving any issue that is perceived to be caused by themselves, as if it's admitting fault or something, and denial of the problem, means they have nothing to be responsible for

[Garnier Fructis]

Even the Washington Post admits that he said this:
“I’m not suggesting that we’re not affecting the [climate] change — I honestly don’t know, I’m not a scientist.”
But you choose to ignore this quote, why?

Nothing about this article means anything as there are very few quotes with any real context. Anything outside of a quote doesn't mean anything because it's all interpretation.

He suggested that one thing is similar to another thing, and then finished with 'but we're not sure.'

This doesn't make it any better, because even the 'we're not sure' part is wrong. And setting that aside, what he's doing is writing basic weasel words. You imply something and then you finish with something that allows deniability.

It's funny that you mention context, because in context there's no other reasonable interpretation except that he's suggesting it might all be wrong.

[Super Friendly Kitty Cat]

It's ALL his fault. If Obama had only been a Republican, Protestant and White they wouldn't have had to be obstructionists! But he refused!

Obama is/was the President. If he wasn't able to build consensus with the opposition, or convince the American people to vote for Democrats during the mid terms election that would have broadened his ability, then he was without a doubt a terrible leader.

[JohnBrown1917]

Obama is/was the President. If he wasn't able to build consensus with the opposition, or convince the American people to vote for Democrats during the mid terms election that would have broadened his ability, then he was without a doubt a terrible leader.

Hardly his fault most americans are morons.

Infracted

[Belize]

Obama is/was the President. If he wasn't able to build consensus with the opposition, or convince the American people to vote for Democrats during the mid terms election that would have broadened his ability, then he was without a doubt a terrible leader.

So since Trump can't build a consensus, can we already label him as a terrible leader? Because he couldn't even convince the people that actually voted this election to give him the majority of the votes.

[Garnier Fructis]

Obama is/was the President. If he wasn't able to build consensus with the opposition, or convince the American people to vote for Democrats during the mid terms election that would have broadened his ability, then he was without a doubt a terrible leader.

You're gonna have to live with this philosophy every time congress stops Trump, you know. Because if Trump gets blocked by his own party on his more ridiculous proposals, what does that say about his leadership ability? By your criteria he'll be much worse than Obama.

[drakensoul]

Obama is/was the President. If he wasn't able to build consensus with the opposition, or convince the American people to vote for Democrats during the mid terms election that would have broadened his ability, then he was without a doubt a terrible leader.

I create the criteria by which I judge whether or not someone is terrible at something, and then proclaim it so.

If you're not able to understand that climate change is real, then you're without a doubt a stupid person.

Is that really a useful literary device?

[Garnier Fructis]

I create the criteria by which I judge whether or not someone is terrible at something, and then proclaim it so.

If you're not able to understand that climate change is real, then you're without a doubt a stupid person.

Is that really a useful literary device?

Honestly I don't think what you wrote is all that controversial, because most of the skeptics have already moved on from 'it's not happening' to 'it's happening but it's not us.'

[drakensoul]

Honestly I don't think what you wrote is all that controversial, because most of the skeptics have already moved on from 'it's not happening' to 'it's happening but it's not us.'

More pointing out that judging someone as terrible at something because of X/Y loosely related random criteria is a bit myopic.

[PaladinBash]

Obama did nothing and is being blamed for doing nothing. Trump may or may not do anything and damn if he isn't being blamed for doing nothing before given a chance. I don't actually expect him to do anything about it but I find it amusing how people will defend someone who did nothing but damn someone who will probably do nothing.

[Garnier Fructis]

Obama did nothing and is being blamed for doing nothing. Trump may or may not do anything and damn if he isn't being blamed for doing nothing before given a chance. I don't actually expect him to do anything about it but I find it amusing how people will defend someone who did nothing but damn someone who will probably do nothing.

Because Obama actually did something, but he didn't do enough. Trump isn't going to do nothing, he's outlined policies that would make progress in the wrong direction.

[drakensoul]

Obama did nothing and is being blamed for doing nothing. Trump may or may not do anything and damn if he isn't being blamed for doing nothing before given a chance. I don't actually expect him to do anything about it but I find it amusing how people will defend someone who did nothing but damn someone who will probably do nothing.

He did something. You might not have liked what he did, or you may wish he had the congressional arena to do more, but he definitely did something.

Have you?

[Teebone]

Chumpsters: It doesn't count as 'draining the swamp' when you fill it back up with raw human sewage.

[Super Kami Dende]

Yes, it is HIS fault. Not the party responsible for unprecedented obstruction and whose leader in the Senate was on record saying their only goal was to make Obama a one term president.

I mean, aren't the DNC now doing everything they can to try and make Trump a 1 term President? hypocrisy seems to be alive and well.

[Zmaniac17]

Meh, at the end of the day is there a difference between belief and action?

Obama did close to nothing on climate change.

If it is such a grave concern why so little action on it?

Sure he was able to party it up with Jay-Z, tell the world that if he had a son it would look like Trayvon Martin, send high ranking officials to both Trayvon Martin's and Michael Brown's funeral, golf games, etc, where was the push on climate change?

In the long term wouldn't climate change be more important than Obamacare?

In the long term wouldn't climate change be more important than the improvement of school lunches that was the cornerstone of Michelle's "achievement"?

People can piss and moan about random people who don't believe in climate change, but the real culprits are those that believe it and have done nothing about it.

Does nobody on this forum know how to use a search engine before they make false claims?

There were a dozen major things he was able to do. But this by far was the largest. It was the largest because he didn't do it alone. It involves nearly every major country in the world. The U.S. signed the Paris Climate agreement last year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016...climate-change

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-climate-acco/

http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wil...ne-environment

Could he have done more? Maybe. I'm not in a position to determine that. History may judge us harshly for our lack of action. But ultimately it isn't a problem a single person can solve.

[Dug]

Feels before reals these days. Absolutely ass backwards that it's becoming acceptable to deny science. Oh sorry I mean be "skeptical". Don't question their logic though, that hurts their feels and makes them not feel smart.

[Gorgodeus]

Meh, at the end of the day is there a difference between belief and action?

Obama did close to nothing on climate change.

If it is such a grave concern why so little action on it?

Just because you are ignorant of what happens in the world, does not mean nothing happens.

Established the first-ever national carbon pollution standards for power plants, the largest source of carbon pollution in our country. The Clean Power Plan gives states flexible, cost-effective tools to cut carbon pollution from these plants by 32% from 2005 levels by 2030 while preventing thousands of premature deaths and tens of thousands of childhood asthma attacks by reducing other power plant emissions

Set standards to double the fuel economy of passenger vehicles by 2025 and established the first-ever fuel economy standards for medium and heavy-duty trucks

Launched the American Business Act on Climate Pledge, with major American companies voicing support for a strong international climate agreement in Paris and making major new commitments to cut carbon pollution, boost clean energy, and increase low-carbon investment. As of the latest round of pledges in October, 81 businesses — representing all 50 states, 9 million people, and a combined market capitalization of more than $5 trillion — committed to support the Paris climate process

Reduced the Federal Government’s greenhouse gas emissions by more than 17 percent and set a new aggressive goal of reducing federal emissions by 40 percent from 2008 levels by 2025

Announced independent private-sector commitments and executive actions to drive down cumulative global consumption of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), a class of highly potent climate pollutants

Made the largest investment in clean energy in American history, including support for thousands of wind and solar projects, loans for energy technology projects, investments in batteries and other advanced vehicle technologies, and support for large-scale carbon capture and utilization at coal-fired power plants. Resulting in dramatic increases in clean energy – with wind power tripling and solar power increasing by 30 times since the President took office.

Created the Advanced Research Project Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) program, modeled on DARPA, to drive transformational energy research breakthroughs

Approved the first-ever large-scale renewable energy projects on federal public lands

I could go on - there are many more things he did to try to affect climate change. But I think you see the point. Your claim that "he did nothing" is factually 100% incorrect.