America • Center for American Greatness • Donald Trump • Economy • Energy • Environment • EU • Europe • Greatness Agenda • self-government • The Constitution • The Left • Trump White House

“Pittsburgh Not Paris” Triggers the Eco-Nuts

I have only now stopped laughing. I was going to write about President Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Accord the other day, but the reflexive and hysterical insanity emanating from the anti-Trump eco-nuts had me in stitches. John Kerry (who signed the accord in 2015): “one of the most shameful [decisions] any president has made.” Bill “It’s-not-easy-being-green” McKibben: the withdrawal “undercuts our civilization’s chances of surviving global warming.” Yikes, Bill, really? The billionaire Dem donor Tom Steyer: “a traitorous act of war against the American people.” Wow.

Everyone seemed to be trying to outdo the next fellow in hyperbole. The Daily News reprised a variation on its most famous headline: “Trump to World: Drop Dead.” The angst was international. You don’t need much German to translate the headline from the Berliner Kurier: “Erde an Trump: Fuck You!” And so on.

Trump’s most memorable line—”I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris”—was greeted by the ambulatory jelly that is the mayor of Pittsburgh with categorical repudiation. “Fighting climate change,” said Mayor William Peduto, “will not only save our planet, but save lives.” Try getting your head around that statement when you have a spare hour.

Hysteria on the Left was universal. But as many cooler-headed commentators observed, one of the really amusing things is that the Paris Accord means exactly nothing. Since it requires nothing of its signatories, it will yield nothing from them. As an editorial in The Wall Street Journal pointed out, “amid the outrage, the aggrieved still haven’t gotten around to resolving the central Paris contradiction, which is that it promises to be Earth-saving but fails on its own terms. It is a pledge of phony progress.”

The 195 signatory nations volunteered their own carbon emission-reduction pledges, known as “intended nationally determined contributions,” or INDCs. China and the other developing nations account for 63% of annual global CO2 emissions, and their share is rising. They submitted INDCs that pledged to peak the carbon status quo “around” 2030, and maybe later, or never, since Paris included no enforcement mechanisms to prevent cheating.
Meanwhile, the developed OECD nations—responsible for 55% of world CO2 as recently as 2000—made unrealistic assurances that even they knew they could not achieve. . . . Paris is thus an exercise in moral and social signaling that is likely to exert little if any influence on atmospheric CO2, much less on global temperatures.

Perhaps this is the place to note that CO2 is actually good for Gaia. Plants love the stuff. That’s what they eat. Did you know that the slightly higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere now are actually making the planet greener? Yes, it’s true. And since everyone on the hysterical Left likes to appeal to “science” (the scare quotes are necessary, since most of them know about as much about science as John Kerry or Al “Big-Carbon-Foot-Print” Gore), let me offer them a little instruction manual on the subject, The Climate Surprise: Why CO2 is Good for the Earth. For a very modest consideration and an hour’s reading, they could actually learn a little about the real science of climate change instead of repeating, mantra-like, the dogmatic imprecations that have been passed down to them from their tribal elders.

Trump’s most memorable line—”I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris”—was greeted by the ambulatory jelly that is the mayor of Pittsburgh with categorical repudiation. “Fighting climate change,” said Mayor William Peduto, “will not only save our planet, but save lives.” Try getting your head around that statement when you have a spare hour.

But I digress. If the Paris Accord is mere window dressing, which it is, then why the hysteria?

Two reasons, chiefly. One revolves around that “exercise in moral and social signaling” that the WSJ editorial speaks about. The whole climate change industry is a multinational conglomerate issuing toxic plumes of virtue signaling, stultifying for economies and the truth, but catnip for the virtucrats who are acolytes in this pagan cult. In other words, getting on to the climate change bandwagon makes the disciples of this religion feel better about themselves. It’s a simultaneous absolution and holy communion. It is an invitation to smugness, a recipe for an intoxicating shudder of group narcissism: “We few, we happy few, we band of eco-minded fruitcakes.”

As Holman Jenkins put it, Trump declined to attend their church.

The second reason for the hysteria follows from the one serious effect of the climate accord. It has nothing to do with saving the environment. Every candid observer understands that the real end of the accord is not helping “the environment” but handicapping the developed countries. At its core, the accord is intended as a mechanism to redistribute wealth by hampering countries like the United States from exploiting its energy resources and growing its economy. Hamstring the United States, but let countries like China and India—industrial strength polluters, both—do whatever they want.

But I digress. If the Paris Accord is mere window dressing, which it is, then why the hysteria?


Like many international agreements, the unspoken subtext of the Paris Climate Accord is “hamper America. Grab as much of its wealth as you can. Say it’s in the name of ‘fairness.’”

That’s not going to wash with Donald Trump. In this respect, he has returned to a much more traditional view of the role of president. He is not the president of the world. He is the President of the United States. We seek to get along with others, but his first task is to assure the prosperity and well being of the citizens of the United States. America First.

As Andrew McCarthy and others have pointed out, in withdrawing from the Paris Accord, Trump has also returned to a more traditional—which is to say, a constitutional—view of treaties. The Paris Accord was a treaty. But it was never presented to the Senate for ratification. In this respect, it was just another of Obama’s initiatives to circumvent the Constitution and govern by administrative fiat. The reason that the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority vote of the Senate to ratify treaties is because treaties can deeply affect the the lives of American citizens. McCarthy explains,

The idea is that no international compact should be imposed on the American people unless an overwhelming majority of elected officials in the upper chamber are convinced . . . that the compact serves the national interests of the United States. Not of the world. Not of the Earth. Not along the lines of harming ourselves in order to set an example for China and India that will purportedly be a boon to humanity and the planet. An international agreement must plainly benefit the American people. If it does not, the treaty clause’s operation will reject it.

That attitude, it can almost go without saying, is the deeper reason the Left hates Trump. As he said in his statement withdrawing from the Paris accord, a clean environment is a high priority for him. But on our terms, not on the terms of countries that seek to harm us. “The United States, under the Trump administration,” he said,

will continue to be the cleanest and most environmentally friendly country on Earth. We’ll be the cleanest. We’re going to have the cleanest air. We’re going to have the cleanest water. We will be environmentally friendly, but we’re not going to put our businesses out of work and we’re not going to lose our jobs. We’re going to grow; we’re going to grow rapidly.

How the Left hates that: “We will be environmentally friendly, but we’re not going to put our businesses out of work and we’re not going to lose our jobs. We’re going to grow.” For the Left, being environmentally friendly doesn’t count unless it hurts. The idea is that if you really want to help the environment—as distinct from merely saying that you want to help the environment— you need economic growth. Why? Because only through growth will you have the resources to address the real (as distinct from the imaginary) problems besetting the environment.

Like many international agreements, the unspoken subtext of the Paris Climate Accord is “hamper America. Grab as much of its wealth as you can. Say it’s in the name of ‘fairness.’”

As I say, the last day or two has been delicious. There was the comic exhibition of hysteria, but there was also the embarrassing (though also comic) failure of logic. The United States, it was said, should not abandon its leadership role by refusing to follow what other countries are doing. Er, OK.

But among the many reasons to applaud Trump’s courageous decision to withdraw the 2015 climate accord is the independence it signals about Trump himself.

There are always a lot of rumors and innuendo swirling around the American president. But Trump has suffered from a veritable cloud of malicious rumor. “There’s chaos in the White House.” “His advisers hate each other.” “His advisers hate him.” “This faction is getting the upper hand.” “No, that one is.” And so on. One frequently heard suggestion is that Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, and her husband, Jared Kushner, form a powerful liberal faction that will influence Trump’s policy on a host of contentious social issues, including environmental issues.

Those who like what Trump promised on the campaign trail should be heartened by Thursday’s announcement. Maybe Ivanka and Jared represent a liberal faction among Trump’s advisers, and doubtless, as relatives, they have privileged access to him. But that did not matter. Trump did what he always suggested he would do: he left the agreement not because he is hostile to the environment but because it was a bad deal for America. “We’re getting out,” he said. “And we will start to renegotiate and we’ll see if there’s a better deal. If we can, great. If we can’t, that’s fine.”

My, how the PC Leftists hated that! But Trump was right. The accord was a bad deal for the United States. Perhaps there’s a better deal to be had. If so: terrific. If not, America will follow its own course.

element_content=””]

 

Content created by The Center for American Greatness, Inc is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com

212 replies
  1. Attila_the_hun
    Attila_the_hun says:

    We all know AGW has noting to do with the environment or climate change. And it all has to do with wealth distribution -aka socialism-

    • VictorErimita
      VictorErimita says:

      For some. For many it is a cult. A knd of religion. For others it is simply what they have been told to believe, and they haven’t bothered to question it. For many in the leftosphere it is mainly just another justification for them to assert their own (invented) virtue over the (invented) iniquity of others.

      • Elainebjackson
        Elainebjackson says:

        Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj341d:
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        !mj341d:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash341TopBoxPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!mj341d..,

      • Miek D.
        Miek D. says:

        I have a high school friend (we are both in our early fifties) who, during a recent conversation about global warming, said “I don’t want us pumping millions of pounds of toxic chemicals into the atmosphere.” I was astounded that after twenty plus years of constant media coverage, he did not know that the toxic chemical we are all talking about is CO2. I told him that CO2 is what our bodies exhale and what plants inhale. He didn’t know that, but it didn’t alter his view on AGW.

      • disqus_GpiUsQLtur
        disqus_GpiUsQLtur says:

        You are correct. The Paris Accord was like their Shroud of Turin or a statue of Mary, a religion icon. Scorning that symbol was akin to trashing their religious dogma and canon.

    • Constance
      Constance says:

      Actually, there is Global Warming, as we’re still coming out of a 3.5 million year Cool Period. Average Global Temp is historically 72F, barring the 4 major Cool Periods, and it’s 61F now. However, there’s been 23 interglacials during the current Cool Period, so while the graph shows we’re likely done, there could be another glacial period before we’re out. Glaciers still counts as “man made climate change” I guess. Just an fyi.

  2. iRickie
    iRickie says:

    Increased CO2 production is directly related to higher standards of living. China and India are massively building coal fired electrical plants increasing CO2 production to bring the poor of their countries out of poverty. CO2 is plant food and is harmless to people.

      • Look_A_Squirrel
        Look_A_Squirrel says:

        Try a little science – CO2 is 400 ppm is 0.04% of the atmosphere.
        In order to raise the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere to 0.05%, one would have to burn 1 quadrillion kilograms of carbon, and require that all plant life cease photosynthesis.

        You don’t have to worry about 100% CO2 in the next few millennia.

      • Constance
        Constance says:

        We’re at 400 ppm. OSHA doesn’t consider it an issue at all until 5,000 ppm, US Navy subs try to keep it under 7,000 ppm, and the International Space Station tries to keep it under 10,000 ppm.

        Try breathing pure Oxygen, and see how that works out Andy. PS, don’t try this at home, it kills you.

        • Rayleigh_Scattering
          Rayleigh_Scattering says:

          Maybe you should have left off your last sentence….Andy would have helped the beetles and the soil would become richer. You know, good for the earth lol

          • Tom
            Tom says:

            While culling the stupid may seem appealing, she was probably afraid Andy would literally try it.

  3. WWT
    WWT says:

    Why do you put a heading on your webpage that covers half of the webpage? It’s very annoying.

    • AuntyNF
      AuntyNF says:

      Half the webpage if displayed on a VGA 640×480 resolution screen common for PCs in the early 1980s perhaps… Why not save yourself such annoyances and upgrade yourself into the 21st century?

      …Or were you exaggerating?

  4. burrs
    burrs says:

    ‘not on the terms of countries that seek to harm us’ The UN and all the other foreign bureaucrats, plus most democrats, down low really know that is the ultimate goal of this fraudulent scheme…..the democrats most despicably.

  5. Look_A_Squirrel
    Look_A_Squirrel says:

    World Health Organization report ranks US as having cleanest air on the planet – cleaner than Germany, Italy, Switzerland, the UK, Japan, Austria and France.

    Looks like it’s true – capitalism produces healthiest environments, while socialism kills.

  6. George Dixon
    George Dixon says:

    The Democratic Party’s Envior-Luddites are far more emotional than scientific.
    Their race to display more situational outrage than the last Democrat’s utterance makes clear that they have no clue about the issue but are very well attuned to their emotions.

    They are posturing so as to display their Liberal (lack of) credentials.

  7. Oliver Felts
    Oliver Felts says:

    Tom Steyer, the leftist squawking and pointer-outer, said in the not too distant past that his interest in the flavor of the day for anything to do with earth’s climate name that his first interest was piqued when he realized there was money (lots, lots of green backs) to be made in this particular venture. Sounds like some members of the CC Accord who go to the Paris meetings to be sure they get some (US) money. This was said by a representative of a small island country like Fuji. Can’t remember the name but that’s what was answered when asked if he believed the CC line of propaganda.

  8. inquisitivus
    inquisitivus says:

    CO2 is 0.04% of the atmosphere, a trace gas, as we were properly taught in school. There is much disagreement among scientists on the weight of its affect as a “greenhouse gas”. What’s more, water vapor has a much more significant effect….yet we don’t hear any discussions about reducing water vapor. Furthermore, solar activity obviously has the greatest affect but we can no more control the sun than we c an control water vapor in the atmosphere. This is really about power and control…and of course OUR money.

  9. podrazik
    podrazik says:

    So, is being a ‘Traitorous Deplorable’ the new badge of honor for all of us to wear?

  10. JohnnyFreakinSunshine
    JohnnyFreakinSunshine says:

    Clearly Trump’s statement (“Pittsburgh not Paris”) was (a) an exercise in alliteration and (b) not necessarily to be taken literally but to convey the idea that the President’s first concern is what he thinks is best for Americans….not the world. Leave it to the idiot “journalists” to break it down syllable by syllable in an inane attempt to attack Trump yet again.

    • SECUREOURBORDERSNOW
      SECUREOURBORDERSNOW says:

      JFS: And Pittsburgh Mayor Peduto couldn’t help himself by saying Pittsburgh would continue with the Accord. Forget the fact that residents of Pittsburgh must filter ALL drinking water due to age of water infrastructure but hey let’s worry about the air first. What until Pittsburghers are asked to pay for this BS!

  11. Cjones1
    Cjones1 says:

    Climate change has been occurring long before humankind entered the picture and has been responsible for several extinctions including the dinosaurs.
    Scientists do not agree on how the last ice age ended. CO2 was not a factor or a very small one. Yet many AGW proponents declare with absolute certainty – no debate allowed – that the Earth will undergo uncontrolled global warming because of current CO2 levels and any increases afterward. CO2 levels were 5 times higher during the Eocene and higher throughout most of Earth’s history.
    China, India, and other developing countries knew full well from the Industrial Age that pollution is a problem. When the Cuyahoga River caught on fire and birth defects occurred, developed countries began enacting environmental policies. There were plenty of guidelines and modern industrial innovations that China and India could have implemented. China is so polluted that their food supply is endangered and fishing squabbles have spurred them to imperialist implementation of the Nine Dash Line to secure future good supplies.
    Past climate change history, as scientists have so far discovered, was heavily influenced by combinations of volcanoes, impacts, oscillating wind currents, ocean current thermodynamics, plate tectonics, methane releases from hydrate deposits, sunspot cycles, and Milankovitch orbital cycles.
    If the history of climate change is cyclical, we may well be doomed to relive a Little Ice Age similar to the Dalton or Maunder Minimums starting around late 2019 as the solar sunspot cycle continues a downward trend.
    As our military historians are well aware, climatic changes have caused upheavals and war in the past, but the AGW proponents need to go back to the drawing board because their models have been about as accurate as a bone throwing shaman.
    Trump did the right thing and saved the U.S. bundles of money that would have been wasted on boongoggles profiting friends of Gore, Obama, and others in ventures similar to Solyndra. 
    Chill out and throw another log on the fire.
    The Little Ice Age cometh!

  12. odys
    odys says:

    It was written elsewhere that the hysteria by the gullible warming believers is because they know they cannot counter the economic argument that this will cost trillions, and millions will need to remain in poverty and maybe die. They know that we know this, and so they need to amp up the bleak predictions to try and scare people into supporting them.

  13. julianusrex
    julianusrex says:

    Reduced sunspot activity may well lead to another “Maunder Minimum” and a protracted cooling period. It is time to throw out the whole AGW nonsense and remove from power those who seek to perpetrate the fraud.

    • moderate Guy
      moderate Guy says:

      Not only that, we are going to need all that “pollution” to keep the planet warm and growing food. During the last Maunder Minimum it got so cold, river Thames in London froze every winter solidly enough for people to skate on it.

  14. Phadras Johns
    Phadras Johns says:

    The world, like the Lilliputians, wanted to chain down the leviathan. The leviathan shrugged it’s shoulders, the chains came off, and the world and the Lilliputians are having a hissy fit. Yammer away lefites. Uncle Sammy just awoke from an eight year slumber and he’s kinda pissed off.

  15. Brook Gifford
    Brook Gifford says:

    Recent NASA reports reveal that land mass is sinking due to underground water tables being depleted. See:
    http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-central-valley-subsidence-20170209-story.html
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/rising-sea-or-sinking-land/article/2593167

    More and more semi-arid and arid land is being converted to agricultural to feed the exponential population growth. There are now worldwide water shortages, rivers no longer reach their flood plains, underground water tables are being sucked dry and sinkholes are becoming commonplace. About sixty years ago my father said: The world has to make up its mind – does it want people or fish? How do you answer that simple question, as a social globalist of the New World Order, an environmentalist concerned about climate change, an engineer of locks, levees and dams or perhaps an enlightened response that first defines the problem through meaningful dialog?

    Without dialog – words fail and might prevails.

  16. Rosa1984
    Rosa1984 says:

    Obama knew Congress would never approve Paris Climate Change Club, so he didn’t even try. It was an Executive Order.
    And it cost U.S. $100 Billion/yr. to belong to that club.
    China and India, the biggest climate offenders– were given a “pass” until 2030 to reign in their carbon emissions…

  17. Paul_in_Colorado
    Paul_in_Colorado says:

    The lesson of Orwell’s 1984 is that poor people are easy to control. Making Americans poorer is not a bug in the Progressive agenda – it’s a feature.

  18. Chatmandu7451
    Chatmandu7451 says:

    The only real solution to human caused climate change is the elimination of the human species. I would expect all the liberal/progressive/environmentalist to volunteer and be the first to go. I will wait until my name is called. :o)

  19. David Eisemann
    David Eisemann says:

    So, Trump intends on making America the cleanest while at the same time doing everything in his power to increase coal usage. Did you go to special stupid college?

    • Democrat EBTbaggers
      Democrat EBTbaggers says:

      So leftists intend on making America the cleanest while at the same time doing everything in their power to stop fracking and nuclear power.

      • David Eisemann
        David Eisemann says:

        Both fracking and nuclear power produce pollution. Did you go to the same college?

          • David Eisemann
            David Eisemann says:

            Methane is an energy source, but no, I would recommend, wind, solar, geo-thermal and wave action, to start. As for unicorns, I believe you would get a much higher yield from Trumps hot air.

          • Cossack
            Cossack says:

            You invest heavily in that.
            Call us after you have made your first million, without using my tax money, that is.

          • David Eisemann
            David Eisemann says:

            I’ll do that, as long as you stop major energy companies from getting my tax dollars. Stop all corporate subsidies, compete on a level playing field for once.

          • Rayleigh_Scattering
            Rayleigh_Scattering says:

            Nuclear does not produce pollution, it produces two smaller nuclei and some free neutrons, along with a lot of heat and gamma rays. The new molten salt and fast reactors pretty much produce byproducts no more radioactive than the original uranium…you greenies don’t science much, eh bro?

          • David Eisemann
            David Eisemann says:

            You still need to dispose of the uranium and you have to dispose of the reactor at the end of it’s life. As long as we put it in your backyard, I have no problem with it.

  20. afhack62
    afhack62 says:

    Only Obama, in his infinite wisdom, could have sanctioned US participation in this climate ‘deal’/treaty/whatever that does absolutely nothing for the environment but does create a mechanism of wealth transfer to the usual suspects.

  21. gda
    gda says:

    Can you believe these uneducated nitwits? Trump’s use of “Pittsburgh not Paris” was clearly a clever play on words, a sort of alliteration.

    But the crazies take the bait every time. They think he actually means Pittsburgh, the city. Cue the shrieks from Pittsburgh and the MSM. No doubt they will be seriously arguing about how he could exclude the rest of the country next.

    When will they ever learn.

  22. swek
    swek says:

    american exceptionalism
    we can be alone on every issue we want
    but then, sooner or later there are consequences of acting like a collection of fools.

  23. moderate Guy
    moderate Guy says:

    Trump should insists that any renegotiation of America`s environmental approach will happen in Pittsburgh, so that the eventual treaty, if any, will be called The Pittsburgh Accord. And that will include a clause of Angela Merkel and What-his-name Macron spending an hour each day with their heads buried in compost bins.

  24. swek
    swek says:

    the so-called president wasn’t elected by pittsburg
    he was elected by people who want to pass a clean planet to their children and grandchildren

    and, btw, when the saltwater laps at the putting green at Mar-Lago, he can go f himself

    • olderwiser
      olderwiser says:

      Tee-hee, your comment is self-contradicting. “the so-called president wasn’t elected by pittsburg” (sic) – Okay, you apparently don’t like President Trump. So you try to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the 2016 presidential election. Just plain silly. President Trump won the Electoral College vote by a wide margin, and the result of the national presidential election have been certified as required. “…wasn’t elected by pittsburg”. I assume that you are reminding us that President Trump didn’t win a majority of the votes cast in the City of Pittsburgh. This is an irrelevant fact. Mr. Obama didn’t win a majority in lots of places. He was still the President.

      “he was elected by people who want to pass a clean planet to their children and grandchildren” – Well of course people who voted for President Trump want to pass on a clean planet to future generations. I agree completely.

      “and btw, when the saltwater water laps at the putting green at Mar-Lago, he can go f himself” (sic) No idea how you think that this line can be reconciled with the line immediately above it. Since it is the last thing you wrote, perhaps you were impaired by some substance as you were finishing your comment. In any case, thanks for the compliment in your second line.

  25. castlelrd
    castlelrd says:

    Ottmar Edenhofer, lead author of the IPCC’s fourth summary report released in 2007 candidly expressed the priority. Speaking in 2010, he advised, ‘One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth.

  26. rwisrael
    rwisrael says:

    The bitter part for the “greens” is that Trump did not claim that man made climate change is a hoax, but only that the Paris Accords is an expensive ( for the US) agreement that achieves very little to justify the cost. The greens have had their” it will save the planet ” argument destroyed and Trump went further when he offered to negotiate a more meaningful agreement.He pricked the balloon, because the real deal was that the Paris Accords were a way to extort money from U S citizens and lead to further infringements on the U S Constitution by unelected international groups.He just out gamed them.

  27. Vinny Albanese
    Vinny Albanese says:

    Laughing in stitches about the eco-nuts, huh? the author of this article probably never tended a garden, let alone mowed a lawn. He thinks a magical fairy brings his clean air and water and food to his lungs and stomach. Idiot. Go ahead and laugh. You will be marginalized again soon enough.

    • Cossack
      Cossack says:

      I have a rather large garden and an overlarge lawn to mow, but for the life of me can’t understand what that has to do with your rambling nonsense.

    • Rayleigh_Scattering
      Rayleigh_Scattering says:

      Bahhahahaahahaaa! I grew up eating almost exclusively from our garden and hunting. I can assure you we are laughing profusely and will continue to do so. You peeps know almost nothing about science. Back to the altar with you – purchase your green indulgences to offset your sinful carbon lifestyle! The high priest Algore will show you the way to piety.

      ahahahahahaaa….

    • Cossack
      Cossack says:

      You obviously don’t know shyte about agriculture. You’re a virtue signaling fraud.

    • Silverfiddle
      Silverfiddle says:

      This is not about “clean air.” We are all for clean air and water. The US met the Kyoto quotas without signing on to it. We have reduced pollution and we are one of the cleanest and greenest industrialized nations in the world.

      Also, you completely missed the scientific fact he dropped about CO2.

  28. Birdfish
    Birdfish says:

    GLOBAL WARMING IS A TRUE FACT
    AL GORE WAS 1000% CORRECT
    THE PLANET IS FULL OF GASSES THAT MUST BE STOPPED
    WE MUST BAN OIL, COAL, NUCLEAR AND GAS.
    SAFE WIND AND SAFE SOLAR ONLY
    WE MUST BAN CARS AND USE PUBLIC TRANSPORT
    WE MUST BAN UN NEEDED AIRPLANE TRAVEL
    WE MUST GO GREEN!!!!!!!!

    AND YES WE MUST TAX THE RICH!!!!!

    THIS IS A PLANET RED ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!
    WE ARE ALMOST OUT OF TIME!!!!!!
    THE ICE IS ALL MELTING AND THE WORLD WILL CERTAINLY FLOOD!!!!!!!

    STOP GREENHOUSE GAS!
    MARCH, CHANT, PROTEST AND OCCUPY!!!!!!

    POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!!!

    NOTE: I HAVE A HATEFUL CYBER STALKER. HE CAN SOMEHOW EVEN POST WITH MY SAME NAME. PLEASE IGNORE HIS HATEFUL MOCKINGS

  29. Nosmo King
    Nosmo King says:

    Mind-Blowing Temperature Fraud At NOAA

    The measured US temperature data from USHCN shows that the US is on a long-term cooling trend. But the reported temperatures from NOAA show a strong warming trend.

    Measured : ushcn.tavg.latest.raw.tar.gz

    Reported : ushcn.tavg.latest.FLs.52j.tar.gz

    They accomplish this through a spectacular hockey stick of data tampering, which corrupts the US temperature trend by almost two degrees.

    The biggest component of this fraud is making up data. Almost half of all reported US temperature data is now fake.
    They fill in missing rural data with urban data to create the appearance of non-existent US warming.

    The depths of this fraud is breathtaking, but completely consistent with the fraudulent profession which has become known as “climate science”

  30. Nosmo King
    Nosmo King says:

    “Catastrophic global warming” continues unabated all around us. Not!
    Lets see, we’ve had 18 years of flat temperatures despite the unchecked rise of CO2. Before that, growing evidence suggests that the 1930s was hotter than today. Either way, Mann’s bs portrayal of out of control hockey stick 20th century warming is pure unadulterated baloney. True, CO2 has risen, but temperatures have been flat or falling. The global warming thesis is a joke, an utter joke. A look throughout the historical record shows that there is ZERO evidence (youtube link
    v=WK_WyvfcJyg) that CO2 causes climate warming. ZERO. That’s the actual evidence. Of course, people hear the evidence and just shrug their shoulders and keep on believing.

    This is all anyone needs to know about “Global Warming”

    “It is a powerful convergence of interests among a very large number of elites, including politicians who want to make it seem as though they’re saving the world, environmentalists who want to raise money and get control over very large issues like our entire energy policy, media — for sensationalism, universities and professors for grants. You can’t hardly get a science grant these days without saying it has something to do with climate change. It is a kind of nasty combination of extreme political
    ideology and a religious cult all rolled into one, and it’s taken over way too much of our thought process and way too much of our priorities… Nobody’s saying that the Earth hasn’t warmed a little bit. What we’re saying is there’s no proof that it is human activity that has caused this little bit of warming”-Patrick Moore – Co Founder Green Peace

Comments are closed.