|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Houston Houston, do you hear me?
William Elliot wrote:
During the Regean era, the USA refused to belive Canada's claim of acid rain. (pollution from USA killing lakes in Canada)... Until pollution from Mexico started to affect some fishing resort in Texas, at which point the USA stopped denying acid rain and struck a deal with the 3 countries. When the USA starts to realise the cost of dealing with the *increase* in weather damage, it will wake up and realise it shouldn't have pulled out of Paris. It will be too late by then. Explain to me what Paris actually does even if your religion is true, given that it essentially puts NO cap on China, the largest producer of greenhouse gasses, or on India? -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Houston Houston, do you hear me?
On Sun, 10 Sep 2017, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Elliot wrote: During the Regean era, the USA refused to belive Canada's claim of acid rain. (pollution from USA killing lakes in Canada)... Until pollution from Mexico started to affect some fishing resort in Texas, at which point the USA stopped denying acid rain and struck a deal with the 3 countries. When the USA starts to realise the cost of dealing with the *increase* in weather damage, it will wake up and realise it shouldn't have pulled out of Paris. It will be too late by then. Explain to me what Paris actually does even if your religion is true, given that it essentially puts NO cap on China, the largest producer of greenhouse gasses, or on India? Paris, a large town in France, does everything that other large towns do - consumes lots of engery and food, makes lots of garbage and sewage and breeds lots of people. Less I blaspheme your religion, isn't pollution wonderful? |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Houston Houston, do you hear me?
On Sun, 10 Sep 2017, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Looks like you're the one wearing a blindfold. I've no more 'denied' that than I've agreed to it. The word I'm using is 'unproven' or 'undemonstrated'. And that is the simple fact. Even the guys who study and predict hurricanes agree that they can't show any causal link between warming, whether human caused or not, and an increase in hurricane frequency and severity. We've got a good crop of hurricanes this year. Hurry and get one for yourself. And this shows just what a brain damaged nitwit you are. "My buddy Trump"? You need to start reading what people actually write rather than what some stupid stereotype in your head would have written. Doth spoke Fowl Mouth |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Houston Houston, do you hear me?
Le 11/09/2017 Ã* 06:47, William Elliot a écritÂ*:
Explain to me what Paris actually does even if your religion is true, given that it essentially puts NO cap on China, the largest producer of greenhouse gasses, or on India? Yes, all those polluters are gently pressed to stop polluting but not much more. But as evidence becomes overhelming, France and China decided to get on the goal of eliminating CO2 emitting transportaion in the far future. Just words, and we go on emitting trillions of tons of CO2 per year and the thi,ng accelerates. The Atlantic is warm now, and it will be warmer in the future. Just because people like you propose to go on polluting, as if nothing is happening, and as this warming could go on forever. Venus is full of CO2. You want that McCall? |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Houston Houston, do you hear me?
jacob navia wrote:
Le 11/09/2017 à 06:47, William Elliot a écrit*: Explain to me what Paris actually does even if your religion is true, given that it essentially puts NO cap on China, the largest producer of greenhouse gasses, or on India? Yes, all those polluters are gently pressed to stop polluting but not much more. But as evidence becomes overhelming, France and China decided to get on the goal of eliminating CO2 emitting transportaion in the far future. One can offer up anything in the "far future". Meanwhile, most of Europe won't meet their Paris Accord goals. Just words, and we go on emitting trillions of tons of CO2 per year and the thi,ng accelerates. The Atlantic is warm now, and it will be warmer in the future. It will also be colder in the future. It's called 'climate'. Just because people like you propose to go on polluting, as if nothing is happening, and as this warming could go on forever. Venus is full of CO2. You want that McCall? This ain't Venus and if you don't know the difference you're too ignorant to be in this conversation. -- "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." -- Thomas Jefferson |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Houston Houston, do you hear me?
On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, Fred J. McCall wrote:
jacob navia wrote: It will also be colder in the future. It's called 'climate'. Wow! Winter will be arriving in a few months. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Houston Houston, do you hear me?
William Elliot wrote:
On Mon, 11 Sep 2017, Fred J. McCall wrote: jacob navia wrote: It will also be colder in the future. It's called 'climate'. Wow! Winter will be arriving in a few months. Exactly. And next summer it will be either warmer or cooler than it was this summer (an exact match being just pretty low odds). Odds are that given current trends it will be warmer, but that's not a given and it has yet to be proven that humans have anything at all to do with it. Again, the two big predictors of hurricane seasons tend to be La Nina/El Nino and the decadal oscillations, not 'warming'. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Houston Houston, do you hear me?
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017, Fred J. McCall wrote:
William Elliot wrote: It will also be colder in the future. It's called 'climate'. Wow! Winter will be arriving in a few months. Exactly. And next summer it will be either warmer or cooler than it was this summer (an exact match being just pretty low odds). Odds are that given current trends it will be warmer, but that's not a given and it has yet to be proven that humans have anything at all to do with it. Nonsense. The 2018 Farmer Almanac isn't yet available. Again, the two big predictors of hurricane seasons tend to be La Nina/El Nino and the decadal oscillations, not 'warming'. Do you have a favorite hurricane? |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Houston Houston, do you hear me?
JF Mezei wrote:
On 2017-09-11 00:33, Fred J. McCall wrote: Explain to me what Paris actually does even if your religion is true, given that it essentially puts NO cap on China, the largest producer of greenhouse gasses, or on India? So you believe Trump and his cronies who consistently put out fake facts? No, I believe the real facts. You, on the other hand, apparently suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome. Paris accord takes into consideration per capita emissions. Well, no. You really need to go read that thing. -- "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." -- Thomas Jefferson |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Houston Houston, do you hear me?
JF Mezei wrote:
On 2017-09-11 00:33, Fred J. McCall wrote: Explain to me what Paris actually does even if your religion is true, given that it essentially puts NO cap on China, the largest producer of greenhouse gasses, or on India? India’s climate pledge, or Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), aims to reduce the emission intensity of its GDP by 30-35% by 2030 and increase its renewable energy capacity five-fold by 2022, with notable contributions from solar and wind. It aims to achieve 40% of its installed electricity generating capacity from non-fossil (defined as nuclear, hydropower and renewable) sources by 2022 and it proposes an aggressive reforestation effort. Yes, net emissions continue to grow. But relative to population or GDP, will not exceed those of western nations such as USA. The US produces a smaller share of world CO2 than it does of world GDP. Nations like India and China, on the other hand, produce a much larger share of world CO2 than they do of world GDP. It is 1 planet with 5 billion people on it. The USA with its 300 million doesn't have the "right" to generate more pollution per capita than other nations. And yes, this means that you have to allow more populated nations to pollute more than the USA which is all the more important to get the USA (and other western nations) to lead by example because western nation pollution ratiosn are what determine the caps for developping nations. The lower the cap, the less their emissions can continue to grow until they reach it. So your view is that a failure to control population allows a country to not have to control CO2 emissions. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AIAA Houston | Al | Space Station | 0 | October 31st 07 07:27 PM |
Houston, You Have a Problem | Danny Deger | Space Shuttle | 101 | July 25th 07 12:07 AM |
Houston, You Have a Problem | Danny Deger | Space Shuttle | 9 | July 21st 07 02:42 AM |
Houston, You Have a Problem | Danny Deger | Space Station | 9 | July 21st 07 02:42 AM |
"Houston, we've got a problem" | jjustwwondering | Policy | 0 | March 7th 04 08:38 AM |