It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BREAKING: U.S. O-U-T of Paris Climate Accord

page: 24
74
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 05:52 PM
link   
300 billion in taxpayers dollars going to climate change under the Paris Climate Accord.
But not one line in the accord locks the money into being used to reduce carbon.

The money can be used by the countries that get it for ANYTHING they want.

Iran and the Norks will likely use the money for weapons.
Other third world countries leaders may just put it in there own privet bank accounts.

and NOTHING in the Paris Climate Accord stops them.




posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 06:00 PM
link   
The Paris Agreement, and "man-made" global warming in general, is nothing more than a scam for the 1% to pad their bank accounts. They rake in increased taxes from the middle and lower classes, then pour it into the "green" and "renewable" energy projects, that just so happen to be owned by the same people pushing the global warming agenda. Funny how that works, huh? I think most liberals mean well, but they are being played like a fiddle by the global elites.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Painterz

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Painterz
And you've proven that America's word is literally not worth the paper it is written on, signed in international treaty.



What international treaty? Congress never voted on or approved anything so there is nothing to pull out of in regards a treaty.



The Paris Agreement, the US signed it. And actually it would be illegal for the US to withdraw before 2019 anyway, there is no mechanism to withdraw from the signed agreement before then. So again, Trump is technically lying to people. All he's done today is signalled his intent to withdraw in 2019.


Good lord, you should let the loose cannons on the left know this. They are going nutz!


Very comparable - to me - to the Brexit "divorce settlement" fees
In both cases, terms and costs (investments) were agreed upon
for diverse and varied projects...

Everyone "pays into the common pot"

NO WAY - what if the work aint done !?!

Noooohhhn not all at once !
It's all about your next installements,
That you've signed off on
wth our respective lawyers 'n' bodies ...!

To mutually 'cover' each other

That's nice 'n' rosy, no ?


These next installments are due from everyone


How will Trump and May
explain away, that leaving their particular "club"
will cost the country (mucho beaucoup) money ?
edit on 2/6/17 by Damiel because: quote & imbed badly done : refering to whole rply/rply with gen.obs



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

After posting this:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Nothing much anymore - it's become a stupid label used to conjure up some vision of weirdos in white sheets and then smear everything right of socialism with it.


As for in the post you linked:

So I am wondering what that means, considering people like Rand Paul and Mike lee have heaped praise on the President.


I think I answered that. Any confusion, at that point, is not actually my fault.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: UKTruth

After posting this:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Nothing much anymore - it's become a stupid label used to conjure up some vision of weirdos in white sheets and then smear everything right of socialism with it.


As for in the post you linked:

So I am wondering what that means, considering people like Rand Paul and Mike lee have heaped praise on the President.


I think I answered that. Any confusion, at that point, is not actually my fault.


You missed the earlier conversation before you jumped in - in the wrong place.
Whatever - your usual banality leaves me too sleepy to argue with you anymore.
edit on 2/6/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

No, I did not. I've read the entire thread and it isn't hard to follow.

You asked a question implying that the phrase in question was wrong because of Paul and Lee. You were wrong.

When asked what you thought alt-right meant you parroted something which was also wrong.

Now you want to claim I was not up to speed and play sleeping beauty because there is no rebuttal.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

So what started the conversation about alt-right?

Actually I'll spell it out

Initial comment

Every one apart from those on the alt-right are saying this is a bad move.


My response

What is the alt-right in your mind?


Follow up to me

This thread(link) Kind of sums up my views on the alt-right. I would go further but I can't because apparently it is against ATS policy to criticise too much.


My Response

Interesting.. So you would call Republicans in the house and senate alt right? Many of them are applauding the decision to withdraw from the accord, like Rand Paul and mike Lee for example... Alt right under your definition?


All fairly innocuous at the moment...

...then you enter and it gets weird:

What do you think alt-right means?


I'm seeing another 40 pages of banal comments from you in my future, but I am being nice so I respond anyway

Nothing much anymore - it's become a stupid label used to conjure up some vision of weirdos in white sheets and then smear everything right of socialism with it.


..and then it falls apart with your completely odd comment:

What do you think it originally meant? Since you keep alluding to it being used otherwise.


Me.. scratches head wondering where above I have alluded to anything... my fears of a pointless and weird exchange with you are realised.


edit on 2/6/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

OtherSideOfTheCoin's post about his other thread.

But I replied to your your post, the one where you asked about Paul and Lee.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: UKTruth

OtherSideOfTheCoin's post about his other thread.

But I replied to your your post, the one where you asked about Paul and Lee.


See above. You are wrong. You missed the start of the conversation - just like I said you did.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Great job, President Trump! For the first time in my life I'm proud to be an American.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: rockdisjoint2
Great job, President Trump! For the first time in my life I'm proud to be an American.


I bet you are - I wish we had a leader in the UK with that kind of courage.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:40 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

Another Promise Kept , but being the " Donald " , He Leaves the Door Open for Renegotiation at a Later Date . Good Move , the Climate Accords are just another Way to Bilk the Public out of their Money .



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth
I didn't miss it although I did speed through to catch up.

There is nothing there that changes what I have posted.

ETA: Also talking about banal, there is nothing more banal than taking a figure of speech literally.
edit on 2-6-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
What a utter moron.

Honestly this is just awful, utter crap.

Climate change denial at this level is total insanity, science is not a opinion, we are heading towards a climate disaster and Trump has just put the nail in the coffin.




Then why doesn't China have to do jack #hit about it til 2030, if we're so close to disaster?



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 08:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ms898
a reply to: avgguy


It's a bad decision internationally because countries have lost faith with USAs word. If USA developes a reputation of not honouring promises why make a deal in the first place.

Apart from countries international businesses like stability.


They know we change presidents (agendas) every 4-8 years. This is political grandstanding on their part.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

Carbon dioxide takes center stage in all those commitments.

Again, carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is present in the atmosphere as part of the CO2-O2 cycle that allows life to survive. It is not poisonous at any levels remotely near present atmospheric levels, and is actually beneficial to increased crop yields.

Sulphur dioxide, on the other hand, is the primary component in acid rain, is likely the true culprit behind ocean acidification, provides no advantage to life processes, and is actually quite poisonous in relatively small quantities. Particulate matter causes smog, which irritates the lungs. Carbon monoxide is a deadly asphysiant. These are real problems that are indeed caused by combustion of unrefined coal, but only exist due to impurities and incomplete combustion... both of which can be solved by technology.

Carbon dioxide emissions from hydrocarbons or coal cannot be decreased by technology. It is the end result of complete combustion of carbon in an oxygen atmosphere.

Another issue is, as I stated, the goals are nebulous. The year is fixed (13 years from now; an issue in itself), but the goals state they will 'try' to make certain improvements. The improvements, which center around carbon dioxide emissions, do not affect their more immediate issues like smog... and since improvement capacity is never unlimited, too much emphasis on carbon dioxide could result in too little emphasis on more dangerous issues.

A great deal of China's pollution issues also come from non-atmospheric pollution, like heavy metals used in manufacturing our semiconductors and batteries. These things are extremely toxic and do not dissipate! Yet they are not addressed.

Finally, 'non-fossil' includes nuclear... I consider nuclear a good option, if and only if proper attention to safety is exercised. Otherwise we get situations like Fukushima: a poor design, with insufficient safety research, improperly designed backup systems, and serious waste disposal issues, ran by a company which obviously had no concern over safety. Now there are at least three melted pools of fissioning radioactive material in contact with the waters of the Pacific Ocean, spewing radiation that will continue for thousands of years with no humanly possible way to stop it, or even mitigate its damage.

I'm not.a fan of fossil fuels, but I also recognize that there are much worse things and ways to minimize their impact.

TheRedneck



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 09:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
The Paris Agreement, and "man-made" global warming in general, is nothing more than a scam for the 1% to pad their bank accounts. They rake in increased taxes from the middle and lower classes, then pour it into the "green" and "renewable" energy projects, that just so happen to be owned by the same people pushing the global warming agenda. Funny how that works, huh? I think most liberals mean well, but they are being played like a fiddle by the global elites.


What's wrong with being played by the elites. If you were smart and capable enough of managing global affairs, you would have been able to become one of them. The fact that you're not, is proof your opinions are flawed.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

If I remember correctly, Fukushima like most of Japan is a generation 2 plant. Those designs were built in the 60's and 70's. Engineers have designed much better systems in the previous 50 years. A modern nuclear plant today would be orders of magnitude safer than the early plants that still see the most use.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 09:42 PM
link   
We are f#cked. I volunteer at the zoo as one of the zoo guides that informs visitors about issues with out environment and lets just say we are screwing our planet over more than many people think. Trump doesn't understand basic science. Polluting the air and sea is bad... right Donald? Everyone can agree on that simple fact yet no one does anything to help and its infuriating.



posted on Jun, 2 2017 @ 09:43 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Science is definitely an opinion when it comes from government funded Obama teet sucker scientists, many of whom have been on the dole and paid to lie, which has already been proven by those leaked emails. Obama paid multi-millions to the scam, even billions for the green energy scam and then they filed bankruptcy after cashing the checks.




top topics



 
74
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join