America - The Official Thread

[prisonermonkeys]

Allowing China to receive billions in "aide" while still being able to use and build new coal plants helps the planet how?

Because the transition to renewables has to be sustainable. China has less access to renewable energy sources and a much larger population to support. It will take them much longer to switch over. The idea is to allow them to continue to use coal power - with new coal plants being much more efficient than the older ones - to keep up with demand while they introduce more renewables.

 

[Scaff]

Because the Paris Accord is structured so that countries pay based on their carbon output and population. The same formula has been used for each country.

Thats all it should be based on. Allowing China to receive billions in "aide" while still being able to use and build new coal plants helps the planet how?

The next time either of you post a factual claim without a supporting source you get a holiday from GT Planet.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The next time either of you post a factual claim without a supporting source you get a holiday from GT Planet.

I'm sorry, I thought the structure of the Paris Accord was common knowledge. It was an honest mistake; my country has a pretty chequered history with environmental policy, particularly carbon pricing. As such, the details of the Paris Accord were covered pretty extensively by the local media when they were first announced.

 

[fatkrakr]

The next time either of you post a factual claim without a supporting source you get a holiday from GT Planet.

Well then every post from now on needs to contain sources, not just the topics you dont like.

 

[Scaff]

Well then every post from now on needs to contain sources, not just the topics you dont like.

No. Every factual claim should be supported with a credible source, particularly in this area of the site.

It's got nothing to do with my personal view on a topic, as is quite clear given that I gave addressed this across the sides on the topic.

Not do I really see why your toys are leaving the pram. After all if you are so confident with the facts you are using then supporting them with a source will not be an issue.

You seem however to be under the impression that this is up for debate or discussion. It's not.

As such if you are so damn sure of my bias then use the report button, if not then get back on topic.

 

[Dennisch]

Paris Agreement: Donald Trump has 'no understanding' of deal, says former UN climate change chief.

American States To Form "Green Wall" Against Trump's Anti-Paris Actions

Either Trump is really clever and anticipated that his actions will be countered with cleaner environment actions, or as in the first link, he's a bit dumb, and those around him too.

Perhaps having the Donald in the White House will spark an anti Trump action revolution that will accelerate the process towards a lot less air pollution.

Tokamaks for everyone!

 

[Touring Mars]

Either Trump is really clever and anticipated that his actions will be countered with cleaner environment actions, or as in the first link, he's a bit dumb, and those around him too.

Interesting point - I was thinking the same thing this morning, though I seriously doubt that Trump's actions are in any way motivated by any genuine concern for the environment.

 

[Dotini]

Interesting point - I was thinking the same thing this morning, though I seriously doubt that Trump's actions are in any way motivated by any genuine concern for the environment.

Motivations are always the most difficult thing to understand. But in the case of Trump and the scuppering of the Paris accords, I think he was motivated by his desires to improve the US economy, jobs, and thereby his popularity and chances for reelection.

If concerns over the environment are overblown, then no harm done. But if there are real problems with the environment, then we will need a strong economy to address them.

Bottom line: don't worry; be happy.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Either Trump is really clever and anticipated that his actions will be countered with cleaner environment actions, or as in the first link, he's a bit dumb, and those around him too.

We're rarely half as clever as we think we are. Anyone who tells you how clever they are is either lying or kidding themselves. I say this because backing out of the Accords to fool everyone into pursuing cleaner environmental initiatives without telling them seems both ridiculously complicated and impractical.

 

[Dennisch]

Interesting point - I was thinking the same thing this morning, though I seriously doubt that Trump's actions are in any way motivated by any genuine concern for the environment.

Well.

It is something I can see him pull out of his hat. That this was his scheme all along. He seems to be the type of person for it.

And this will all be made public by Sean Spicer.

 

[Famine]

It's all part of the Carbon Oxide Variation Federal Executive Further Eradication scheme.

 

[Scaff]

It's all part of the Carbon Oxide Variation Federal Executive Further Eradication scheme.

At last we all now know.

 

[Dotini]

It's all part of the Carbon Oxide Variation Federal Executive Further Eradication scheme.

Covfefe.
The Trickster-in-Chief plays a magic tune on his twitter pipe, and we all dance to it.

 

[Imari]

Well this us awkward.

Trump being a colossal hypocrite? That's unpossible!

Interesting point - I was thinking the same thing this morning, though I seriously doubt that Trump's actions are in any way motivated by any genuine concern for the environment.

There's always the off-chance that Trump is secretly both a genius and a gifted actor that is playing both the entire US and the rest of the world leaders like a fiddle, acting the fool in order to force them to react in ways that he wants.

That, or he's really as dumb as he looks and everyone else is realising that they're going to have to pick up the slack somehow.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Still awaiting your response to this post @prisonermonkeys. My third request and another member also posted a link to it which you are now deliberately ignoring. Unfortunately it's not optional to respond as I understand it:

No. Every factual claim should be supported with a credible source, particularly in this area of the site.

It's got nothing to do with my personal view on a topic, as is quite clear given that I gave addressed this across the sides on the topic.

Emphasis mine.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Still awaiting your response to this post @prisonermonkeys. My third request and another member also posted a link to it which you are now deliberately ignoring.

Here's one estimate, when ongoing health costs to government services are factored in the fossil cost rises even more. I'm pretty sure this has already been covered in this forum somewhere.

Note: these costs are for SA but the American costs quoted are similar.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Here's one estimate, when ongoing health costs to government services are factored in the fossil cost rises even more. I'm pretty sure this has already been covered in this forum somewhere.

Note: these costs are for SA but the American costs quoted are similar.

I'll wait for the answer from the original poster.

 

[fatkrakr]

No need for that though.

 

[ryzno]

Still awaiting your response to this post @prisonermonkeys. My third request and another member also posted a link to it which you are now deliberately ignoring. Unfortunately it's not optional to respond as I understand it:
Emphasis mine.

I doubt he's going to answer you...

I thought it was pretty obvious what I think of Johnnypenso and why I rarely respond to him.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I doubt he's going to answer you...

Unfortunately for him he has no choice. If you make factual claims you have to back them up. I don't think there's any caveat that you only have to back up you claims when they are requested by people you like. It's fine to not respond to requests to clarify an opinion, facts are on a different level.

 

[fatkrakr]

Unfortunately for him he has no choice. If you make factual claims you have to back them up. I don't think there's any caveat that you only have to back up you claims when they are requested by people you like. It's fine to not respond to requests to clarify an opinion, facts are on a different level.

Clearly its not to much to ask.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Clearly its not to much to ask.

For sure. You know if you and I made a claim that grandiose we'd be called to the carpet for it!

 

[TRGTspecialist]

Oh noes, the liberal GTP media/leftist mods are picking on the conservative members again! So downtrodden. Much oppression. Sad

--------------------------------------------

To Trump's credit with pulling out of the Paris agreement, he is actually doing what he promised to do. Nor is it a blatantly populist measure, because, well, it probably isn't popular............polls suggest a comfortable majority of Americans supported the agreement's purpose and the US' involvement in it. Source, source and source

I have a hard time believing he's sticking to his principles in defiance of large opposition though (hasn't stopped him changing tack on other issues). Alternatively, if Trump has convinced himself that he really did win by a landslide last November, so he thinks everything he promised must be really popular...........Democrats/Trump opponents may be appalled now (feigned or otherwise), but this sort of stuff probably plays into their hands over time.

 

[Joey D]

Oh noes, the liberal GTP media/leftist mods are picking on the conservative members again! So downtrodden. Much oppression. Sad

Fake mods with fake threats, sad. Believe me it'll be beautiful when we make GTP Great Again, it'll be a yuge change, beautiful change, believe me!

To Trump's credit with pulling out of the Paris agreement, he is actually doing what he promised to do. Nor is it a blatantly populist measure, because, well, it probably isn't popular............polls suggest a comfortable majority of Americans supported the agreement's purpose and the US' involvement in it. Source, source and source

The unfortunate thing though is the still many Americans think climate change is either a hoax or isn't accelerated by human activity. Source

Even when there's data like this that shows a correlation between greenhouse gas emissions and an overall rise in the temperature of Earth.

Source

 

[TenEightyOne]

For sure. You know if you and I made a claim that grandiose we'd be called to the carpet for it!

And yet I've provided a source for that argument. That might not be from @prisonermonkeys yet you can see data has been produced that supports such a claim. I'm not sure what makes the claim "grandiose", one of the aims of developers of renewable technology was always to drive the cost down and it's no surprise that they've succeeded. I was in a Siemens wind turbine factory a few days ago and it's very impressive how streamlined the production process is compared to when I last visited one five years ago.

 

[Spurgy 777]

Fake mods with fake threats, sad. Believe me it'll be beautiful when we make GTP Great Again, it'll be a yuge change, beautiful change, believe me!



The unfortunate thing though is the still many Americans think climate change is either a hoax or isn't accelerated by human activity. Source

Even when there's data like this that shows a correlation between greenhouse gas emissions and an overall rise in the temperature of Earth.

Source

The problem with that graph is that you can show any trend you want just by changing the scale. The only way to properly set the scale is to know exact (to a reasonable degree) effect each factor has on the temperature of the planet, for example a 1% increase in CO2 leads to X increase in temperature and as far as I'm aware that's not very well understood and I've never seen any calculations on that talked about. All I've ever seen when it comes to climate change is correlations which are fairly meaningless.

 

[TenEightyOne]

The problem with that graph is that you can show any trend you want just by changing the scale.

Nope, it's the shape of the data which show the trend. All you need to do is show amounts of CO2 and global temperature. The scale's not important.

The only way to properly set the scale is to know exact (to a reasonable degree) effect each factor has on the temperature of the planet

Nope, see above.

for example a 1% increase in CO2 leads to X increase in temperature and as far as I'm aware that's not very well understood and I've never seen any calculations on that talked about.

Here you go, some good links in there. As we've seen very recently in this thread just because one hasn't seen something being talked about doesn't mean that there hasn't been an immense volume of discussion or research on the topic.

All I've ever seen when it comes to climate change is correlations which are fairly meaningless.

And see above. Even Trump feels there's "connectivity" between human activity and climate change - that ought to tell you something

 

[Northstar]

All I've ever seen when it comes to climate change is correlations which are fairly meaningless.

Even if it really is just one giant coincidence it doesn't change the fact we've treated our planet like utter 🤬 to the point where I wonder if any humans will even be alive if/when the real consequences of global warming become known.

 

[polysmut]

Don't know what she expected to happen.

When you hold up a fake severed head of our current President, you can only expect to lose your job and more.

Why? I find that surprising in a country with freedoms that are protected by its constitution and fought for by citizens of every generation.

 

[samurai8juice]

Why? I find that surprising in a country with freedoms that are protected by its constitution and fought for by citizens of every generation.

The Constitution says freedom of speech, not freedom to hold up a fake decapitated head of our current President. One can argue that that's going too far. It's not like there's a revolution going on.