In Slap At Obama, GOP-Led House Moves To Block Steep Cuts To Greenhouse Gas Emissions

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I guess the discussion is over, I did posted a link to energy companies link to the global warming agenda since the 90s. But I am not going to lose my sleep over you claim that you have research my post.

Have a nice day. I am going to the gym to keep myself in shape and healthy so I can survive the political and global agenda crap.

Have fun, but you certainly didn't post any links in this thread. It's not hard to find your posts since you overuse bold so even now I can go recheck all 4 pages rather easily and look for any blue text in your posts. None.

a reply to: marg6043

TRY not to exhale too much CO2...because "green house gases," recycle that water bottle, wash your workout clothes w/"gray water," don't flush, open the refrigerator more than ONCE, or touch your homes thermostat!

Other than that...have a great work out!

(And I think you'd agree that we are NOT that far from those silly caveats becoming govt charged MANDATES!)

originally posted by: Glinda
a reply to: Krazysh0t

President Obama, both in Paris and in dozens of his "the real threat to the world is Climate Change" speeches has EMPATHICALLY stated "the science is settled."

The bigger question is WHY is Obama permitted to continually state this and NOT be questioned about it? Could it be the game is rigged and ANY questioner gets the Scarlet D (Denier!) lable?

The "control the masses" game is rigged right down to the language (denier!!!)

Not question him on it? Where is this rhetoric coming from? I'm pretty sure you are questioning him right now. Though I don't see you actually refuting any of the science, just repeating "the science isn't settled!!!" over and over again like that is enough to actually disprove global warming.

This thread is just priceless.

Trying to use 'science' to justify a political opinion.

LOOOL.

I say good for the GOP.

For blocking Obama and the LEFTS neocon delusions.

I know they aren't doing it out of the goodness of their hearts.

The left pushing climate change has nothing to do with the goodness in their hearts either.

'Saving the planet' all the way to the poor house.

I still say there is a correlation between Islamic terrorism, and the LEFTS push for alternative energies.

The middle east has too much to loose if the church of climatology keeps getting their way.

It doesn't even matter. The point is moot. The administration and republicans passed the TPP, which will virtually cancel, if need be, anything interfering with profits; including the environment.

The whole shenanigan is theater. You sell out the country, then, blame each other...when both parties are the same, corporate puppets.

a reply to: [post=20098173]Krazysh0t[/post

I'm just a lone poster on a webpage...I can question all I'd like to, but I don't have a forum (think main stream media) to actually ask him "why do you say the science is settled."

As to my needing to show you proof that AGW isnt settled science, please note that ALL theories are routinely challenged and studied in the name of research; doctoral studies; hypothesis. All except Anthorpogenic Global Warming--that science is settled, right?

And lastly...getting to your query of refuting Obamas "settled science"'claim--isn't that pretty much what his political
opponents (the Republicans in Congress) are doing?

originally posted by: Glinda
a reply to: [post=20098173]Krazysh0t[/post

I'm just a lone poster on a webpage...I can question all I'd like to, but I don't have a forum (think main stream media) to actually ask him "why do you say the science is settled."

Well there are quite a few Republican politicians who do that very thing, so you are still wrong with your rhetoric.

As to my needing to show you proof that AGW isnt settled science, please note that ALL theories are routinely challenged and studied in the name of research; doctoral studies; hypothesis. All except Anthorpogenic Global Warming--that science is settled, right?

No #. That's how theories work. And again I never made a claim about the science being settled, so don't put words in my mouth. I just want people to actually refute the evidence for a change instead of going on and on about some red herring about "the science not being settled". No one cares if the science is settled or not. Prove the theory is false, that is all that matters.

I spend more time in these threads countering political rhetoric than I do countering evidence against the legitimacy of the AGW theory.

And lastly...getting to your query of refuting Obamas "settled science"'claim--isn't that pretty much what his political
opponents (the Republicans in Congress) are doing?

I dunno, you just said they weren't allowed to do that.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
In Slap At Obama, GOP-Led House Moves To Block Steep Cuts To Greenhouse Gas Emissions

As President Barack Obama worked to hammer out a global climate agreement in Paris, Republicans in Congress moved to block his plan to force steep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. power plants.

The House passed two resolutions Tuesday disapproving Obama's power-plant rules and rendering them inoperative. A measure blocking an Environmental Protection Agency rule for existing power plants was approved 242-180, while a measure blocking a rule on future power plants was approved 235-188.

The votes come after the Senate approved identical motions last month under a little-used law that allows Congress to block executive actions it considers onerous. The measures now go to the White House, where they face almost-certain vetoes. Just four Democrats sided with Republicans to support the measures, which fell far short of the numbers needed to override a veto in both the House and Senate.

Man you gotta love our consistent as always inefficient government. Obama is trying to hammer out a deal on climate change with the rest of the world and our idiotic Congress is working on pulling the rug out from under his feet back home.

And Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., said he wished Obama took the threat posed by "radical jihadists" such as the Islamic State as seriously as he takes what Duncan called a "pseudoscientific threat" posed by climate change.

Bullcrap! Climate change is poised to cause WAY more considerable threat to the entire world's stability than ISIS could ever hope to achieve. What do you think is going to happen when sea levels continue to rise and force millions of people further inland? What do you think will happen when shifting climate patterns create new deserts forcing the people there to either consume more resources or move elsewhere? What do you think will happen when nastier and nastier hurricanes rip through more and more coastal cities?

Oh by the way, China and India have joined the bandwagon. I know many deniers like to talk about why we should do anything about climate change if those two countries aren't. Well there you go. They are.

I hope they block the bungling and deceitful moron, AKA Obama, on EVERYTHING he does, since everything he does has hidden and unspoken purposes attached to them usually. How can you support a lying scum sucking son of a B like Obama, who keeps proving every single day how NOT to run America, and instead, is running the country right into boot hill for lady liberty?

Wait until there is a president that actually knows his job better than his vacation itinerary, and then you can present all your networked left leaning fake problems for entrenching liberals and democrats with high paying jobs, (and even many republicans), while you pretend it is all real, so you can feel good about making the world better, but only made people who have contempt for their supporters, laugh, while they keep cashing that big check you keep signing for them.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Oh by the way, China and India have joined the bandwagon. I know many deniers like to talk about why we should do anything about climate change if those two countries aren't. Well there you go. They are.

I'm not much of a nationalist - but this honestly breaks my heart. That this is my country

If it were only stupidity it would be bad enough. If this were just a (another...) slap at Obama - it would be despicable

These people are putting industry, politics, power and money before the welfare of the planet. When the oceans go they won't have anyplace to spend their god forsaken dollars or anything to rule over either

A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in.

I've been following this global warming, now climate change, issue since about 1990 and now I'm starting to have some issues about some of it.
It has grown into an international trillion dollar industry with various organizations trying to get their hands on the cash at it's core.
Propaganda, hysteria, manipulating data, inaccurate computer models, the pause, it's all there, and on both sides. Personally I think the whole thing is greatly exaggerated.

Interesting article here with a reference to a detailed analysis on what China really thinks about this.

Paris Climate Talks Are Doomed Because China Knows ‘Climate Change’ Is A Hoax

www.breitbart.com...


Reference analysis

Why Beijing will resist demands for abatement

www.thegwpf.org...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'd be ok with this plan, but that plan is Socialist in nature and I'm ok with Socialism. By the way, I started out my time at ATS unsure about Climate Change, but after looking at all the evidence, I can't deny it anymore.

I didn't know that. I think you might be one of the first people that I've heard say that out loud

a reply to: JimTSpock

I already proved your brietbart article wrong in my OP by showing that China IS doing something about Climate Change. That policy was enacted BEFORE China went to this meeting in Paris.

It really is amazing to me that people can write off man-made climate change (or global warming) as "impossible", "a lie", or "a conspiracy", so easily. Well, I guess we are on a conspiracy website, so maybe the last one makes sense here.

The majority of climate scientists agree that man has an impact on the climate. This isn't a room of 20 liberals plotting to overtake the power companies; these are "CLIMATE SCIENTISTS", in that its their job to study the climate. They come from all different backgrounds, from all different countries, and they come to the same conclusion. If the majority doctors told you that you a treatable form of cancer and it involves taking Pill A, would you say to those doctors that you don't believe in Pill A, so you are going with Pill B? Or if the majority of structural engineers said that a certain bridge was not structurally sound, would you drive your family over it?

You often see the number 97% thrown around, but personally, i don't think its that high. Ive seen articles refuting the number, but nevertheless, its still high. But at what percentage of agreement do people say "Hey....maybe we should look into this and maybe do something?"....70%, 60%, 10%, 1%? Pretend your family is on the line. Someone told you that there is a "X" percentage that all of you family, and future family, will have something bad happen to them. What is "X%" that is enough for you to take the threat seriously?

The potential end result, whatever percentage, means catastrophic events, and a much different world than what we know now. There is no do-over, there is no saying "we were wrong" 30 years from now. It'll be too late. I recently had a child a would love to die knowing that our generation left the world in a better place for her; a cleaner place.

On the other hand, what if 50 years from now, we can look back and say "Well, we were wrong on climate change, we had no impact on it." The result is clean energy, and we had it faster than we would have had it by sitting on our rear. Yes, there will be some growing pains during the process. People in the energy sector will lose jobs, peoples power bills might go up, etc. It's going to be a transition period, there's no debating that, but I like the fact that we are doing something about it.

It is sad that it has become a political issue. It shouldn't have come to that.

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'd be ok with this plan, but that plan is Socialist in nature and I'm ok with Socialism. By the way, I started out my time at ATS unsure about Climate Change, but after looking at all the evidence, I can't deny it anymore.

I didn't know that. I think you might be one of the first people that I've heard say that out loud

Lol. There are quite a few things on ATS that I started out having an alternate opinion of that changed as I reviewed more and more evidence. Climate change is one of the more notable ones. I used to be one of the guys who'd always say that I believed in natural climate change but wasn't sure that man-made climate change was real. However, I'M willing to honestly look at evidence telling me I'm wrong and change my opinion if necessary.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Yea. It's getting ridiculous. Just look at some of the responses in this thread. All rhetoric and no substance.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

This is what thinking people do - they think

:-)

This planet is going to have to pull together in ways we haven't even considered yet

I want to believe we can do it

S&F while I'm here Krazy

Is this a conspiracy website? Because almost everyone in this thread seems to think EITHER Democrats OR Republicans are the problem...

Newsflash: It IS a conspiracy! They are all out to get us! This whole partisan politics game is an act! All of this is scripted. Including ISIS. It's all part of the plan. They're all part of a giant machine that will eventually enslave us all. The media, world leaders, terrorism, Islam, the Vatican...all part of the system.

It's amazing how you can never get Repubs and Dems to agree on anything like climate change, but when a horrific, unfair, elitist proposal like the Trans Pacific Partnership rolls around, EVERYBODY gets on board to pass it through!

Wake the # up and realize that neither Democrats nor Republicans will ever help the middle class in any tangible way from here on out.

a reply to: Farlander

To be honest, I could care less about the partisan slant of this issue. The only reason there is a partisan slant is because the Republican party has adopted the position of denial at all costs while maintaining that AGW is a liberal conspiracy (though they never provide definitive proof this is the case). So really your conspiracy angle here is irrelevant. This is proven science. The partisan part is just a distraction to keep us from talking about solutions to it.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I understand where you're coming from but if you dig a bit you'll find things get a lot more murky. The second link I posted is not easily dismissed and China is playing a game here...

I think global warming is real and happening but i'm starting to think it is being exaggerated by various groups and organizations for their own gain both politically and financially. When you start scratching the surface it gets more convoluted and less clear is what I'm seeing. 'The science is settled' is it really... Clearly the computer models used to predict future warming of the much talked about 2C or 4C warming are inaccurate. I don't dispute current observations, well mostly, but future predictions I think may not be entirely accurate and have become a means for financial and political advantage by some entities. Not everything is always as it seems here.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

How dare you bring science in to this discussion? We're talking about people who's worldview is molded and informed by superstition and propaganda.

Dare we expect them to accept sciencey stuff as being true?