Graphic from the NY Times.
I leave it to the main stream media to supply the many adjectives for this unfortunate decision.
What exactly are these legitimate sources? What turmoil is this country in? And you do realize the US basically set up the UN, along with the IMF and World Bank and other post-WWII structures, that seem to constrain the US to actually further the acceptance and adoption of ideals and practices that not only do we support in theory but that in practice increase our national security?
Almost 200 countries in the world ( except only Syria and Nicaragua) back the treaty; about 92 big city mayors are convinced to go forward with climate change policies, at least one Governor ( in CA) will proceed with their own efforts to deal with climate change, and many major corporate heads (Including Exxon) are convinced. I personally find the science compelling and welcome efforts to find ways to reduce carbon.
There seem to be at least 2 streams of arguments – one about the science of climate change and the second about the economics of climate change. Even within the Trump administrations, various officials have differing views.
The science is not settled either. Some of the scientists that bought into this in the beginning are now saying something far different. But there again, dissenting viewpoints are not heard because it does not fit into the overall scheme. There is too much money to be made in preaching Climate Change.
I have cited resources before. One of my favorites is from Investor’s Business Daily: The alarmists keep telling us their concern about global warming is all about man’s stewardship of the environment. But we know that’s not true. A United Nations official has now confirmed this. At a news conference last week (Feb 2015) in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.’s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
From The Climate Report: “We’re not scientifically there yet. Despite what you may have heard in the media, there is nothing like a consensus of scientific opinion that this is a problem. Because there is natural variability in the weather, you cannot statistically know for another 150 years.” — UN IPCC’s Tom Tripp, a member of the UN IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] since 2004 and listed as one of the lead authors and serves as the Director of Technical Services & Development for U.S. Magnesium.
And yet, regardless of how many people speak out, they are given no credit, no platform or hearing. There is great reason to doubt. Science and economic wherewithal are lacking.
So you haven’t quoted one actual climate scientist. Tom Tripp is a metallurgist who contributed a small portion of the UN’s report (http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=/ci_13165005), and the statement made by Figueres could be read to suggest that China and India don’t have to pollute themselves to progress like the UK and the US did in the past, rather than an assault on the idea of capitalism (which was the editorial opinion of a source called “Investors.com”…).
There are two sides to this decision although no one would know it from the main stream media. There are legitimate sources where you can hear and read dissenting views on this as well as other issues that have this country in turmoil. The mainstream media allows no dissenting viewpoints. The world is not coming to an end because of this decision. Study the agreement and see how one-sided this is. There is nothing binding in the Paris Climate Agreement and no promises for outcome. It’s time to read and think for ourselves – we blindly took a politician’s word that this was a “great deal”. How many read it? The truth is that China and India don’t contribute one penny to anything in this deal and they are the worst offenders of the environment. There are no actual performance metrics to show results when the group meets next time. Frankly, the billions of dollars the US agreed to pay in made me think of the guy who always picks up the checks for everything. An ego trip? Same deal with the UN – a good ol’ boys club with the US as the good ol’ boy who picks up 26% of the tab for 100+ countries. We would borrow money from China or wherever we could get it to meet our part of the agreement and give it to other countries so they can clean up their act. No guarantees, no accountability, and no wisdom. Bottom line, our country is broke and can’t pay the bills of the world. I believe that is the tragedy and it is time to face it.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Claire B. Rubin has 39 years of experience as a researcher, consultant, and educator in the fields of emergency management and homeland security.
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 477 other followers