U.S. Politics

[Johnny English]

In order to achieve the long-term temperature goal set out in Article 2,
Parties aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as
possible, recognizing that peaking will take longer for developing country Parties,
and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter in accordance with best available
science, so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources
and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century, on the
basis of equity, and in the context of sustainable development and efforts to
eradicate poverty.

Curious how you extrapolated that into "China and India have no deadlines until 2030". (Also, I don't know why you keep talking about India given they produce considerably less than half the absolute emissions of the US despite having around 4 times the population - their per capita emissions are approximately 12% of the US number.)

We - and by that I mean the US and Canada - are by a massive distance the world's worst offenders, despite being two of the world's most advanced nations. Your attempt at blame shifting to excuse yesterday's action is absolutely ridiculous.

[mj2sexay]

It isn't a bill. It is an international treaty that all but two (now three backwards, halfwit countries with authoritarian Nazi schmucks in power (Nicaragua, Syria and the Trumpdick USA Confefe Banana Republic) agreed to as a start to trying to deal with the climate change overheating of the planet through fossil fuels conflagration.

Only Trump, the Grab our hoo-ha Party, Tommyanne and dcm are happy in their brain dead bubble

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

You're so freaking dumb you validated my point. Thanks?

Once again for those that need a civics lesson, if it was a treaty, it was never properly passed and is void. At the very least JohnnyE offered an explanation as to how he felt a congressional bypass was ok in this instance, but at the same time, live by the executive order die by the executive order.

[sg3]

Well you should be happy now that Pres Dumb$hit unilaterally voided our participation. Enjoy choking and hacking on Trump-caused poisonous water and fumes. You deserve it

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

[MBGreen]

The political threads may need to be moved to the Fight Club forum

[sg3]

http://www.politicususa.com/2017/06/01/cool-obama-returned-annihilated-trump-leaving-paris-climate-accord.html

Sad to have to remember way back to 2016 when the US was blessed with a SANE President

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

[Tommy]

Not true. Canada is, followed by the US. China isn't even close to being the biggest offender.

[Tommy]

Curious how you extrapolated that into "China and India have no deadlines until 2030". (Also, I don't know why you keep talking about India given they produce considerably less than half the absolute emissions of the US despite having around 4 times the population - their per capita emissions are approximately 12% of the US number.)

We - and by that I mean the US and Canada - are by a massive distance the world's worst offenders, despite being two of the world's most advanced nations. Your attempt at blame shifting to excuse yesterday's action is absolutely ridiculous.

Biggest offenders based on what exactly?

[Johnny English]

Biggest offenders based on what exactly?

Per capita stats, which as I already explained are far more relevant than absolute numbers.



https://wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-graphs-explain-world%E2%80%99s-top-10-emitters

[Tommy]

Will you stop with this already?

I've posted it a few times already and not called you out directly on it, but China has demonstratively reduced their emissions already. What they "can" do isn't what they're actually doing.

You're making a hypothetical argument in direct contrast to reality to support your point.

I wouldn't trust any statistic released by the Chinese government. When I lived in HK we got maybe 2 days of sunshine a week and the rest was fog coming from the north.

[bojanglesman]

Show me where that is.

https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_agreement.pdf

I think the individual countries' NDC's aren't listed in the document you posted.  I think they are listed elsewhere.  I found this.

https://www.c2es.org/docUploads/chinas-contributions-paris-climate-agreement.pdf

Either way, as mentioned before, China can't just have a CO2 party until 2029 and magically stop polluting in 2030.  In order to do that they have to gradually work toward the goal over many years, and it will be pretty damn obvious if they aren't trying.

[bojanglesman]

Per capita stats, which as I already explained are far more relevant than absolute numbers.



https://wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-graphs-explain-world%E2%80%99s-top-10-emitters

Is the majority of the Canadian pollution by chance coming from Winnipeg? 

[Tommy]

Per capita stats, which as I already explained are far more relevant than absolute numbers.



https://wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-graphs-explain-world%E2%80%99s-top-10-emitters

We're talking about total emissions that are believed to be causing warming. Even if Canada reduced its emissions by half it wouldn't make much of a difference in the world's stage. That's like saying Sweden is richer than the U.S because their per capital GDP is higher.

[Johnny English]

We're talking about total emissions that are believed to be causing warming. Even if Canada reduced its emissions by half it wouldn't make much of a difference in the world's stage. That's like saying Sweden is richer than the U.S because their per capital GDP is higher.

That's a ridiculous argument (and in fairness you already blew any credibility you might have had in this discussion yesterday with "I'd rather figure out how to live in a warmer world than do anything about stopping happening"), and I've already explained why.

[Tommy]

That's a ridiculous argument (and in fairness you already blew any credibility you might have had in this discussion yesterday with "I'd rather figure out how to live in a warmer world than do anything about stopping happening"), and I've already explained why.

Why is it ridiculous? China's emissions are nearly 20 times that of Canada's and You're calling Canada the biggest offender?

[Johnny English]

Why is it ridiculous? China's emissions are nearly 20 times that of Canada's and You're calling Canada the biggest offender?

Because if the US and Canada were polluting at the same rate as China, global emissions would be significantly reduced. The only sensible metric is to determine how much pollution we can afford per person on the planet, not per arbitrarily defined national boundary, and work to achieve that number. China should be allowed to produce four times as much pollution as the US, because it has four time as many people.