• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

But if we cut emmisions the Chinese won't..... but...

Elfiero

Banned
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
3,622
Reaction score
494
Points
83
I said I won't discuss AGW with you denier kooks anymore since I've long ago discredited every lame argument you guys could dig up from Anthony Watts and his Heartland funded buddies.This is not a discussion for me, just rubbing it in further.

You're welcome.


Chinese President Details Wide-Ranging Carbon Pollution Pledge At White House
BY RYAN KORONOWSKI SEP 25, 2015


The Pope may have left Washington, D.C. after urging the United States to act on climate change at the White House, but the leader of the world’s largest country is in town to talk about some serious climate action of his own.

At a White House press conference Friday afternoon, U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping announced a suite of wide-ranging actions that clarify how serious the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter is about cutting greenhouse gas emissions. These include prioritizing green energy on China’s grid, a cap-and-trade or emissions trading system for China, additional low-carbon financing to developing countries, and emissions standards for heavy duty vehicles. The fact that these announcements were made during the world’s most important bilateral meeting and official state visit lends them further significance.

A Senior administration official told reporters on a call Thursday afternoon that the two leaders would unveil a joint presidential statement on what the world’s two largest polluters will do to actually achieve the carbon pollution targets they agreed upon last year. In that agreement. the U.S. pledged to cut emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. China pledged to peak its carbon dioxide emissions at or before 2030, cap coal use by 2020, and get 20 percent of its energy from non-fossil fuel sources by 2030. This would mean deploying enough renewable energy capacity to power the entire United States — 800 to 1,000 gigawatts.
Until this week, the biggest news of how either country would fulfill those promises came from the release of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, which uses authority granted under the Clean Air Act to require states to cut carbon pollution in the electricity sector.
Friday’s announcement sheds more light on how China will meet or exceed the emissions reduction targets it set last year.

Read the rest below

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/09/25/3705464/us-china-climate-visit-pledges/
 
Ahh grasshoppah, but you assume China will do what they say. When has that ever happened?
 
A pledge? ha ha

It’s easy to "cooperate" when you don’t have to do anything.

The agreement doesn’t call for any action on China’s part for 16 years
 
I said I won't discuss AGW with you denier kooks



Did you mean kooks or gooks?




rko8pe.jpg
 
Last edited:
So says the regime that intends to go home, hack our computer networks, and steal our trade secrets.
Hey Fire of the Elf, something tells me they might be handling the truth recklessly.
 
Wanna see how stupid the EPA really is?


US EPA on Twitter

"Think sunny days are good for plants? Not always. Sunlight causes #ozone to form, which harms foliage, weakens trees.."


https://twitter.com/EPA/status/648969378852151297


hahahahah....read the comments

You guys should issue a regulation that bans this sunlight thing.

I applaud the @EPA for having the guts to stand up to Big Sun.

Now sunlight is pollution. What next? Oxygen?

It's settled, photosynthesis is a myth
 
Didn't they pledge to stop copyright infringement and patent violations too?

I bet you got that from the Koch brothers funded site. Racist. I bet you hate the Chinese almost as much as you hate black people.
 
I liked elfie better when she was Polo43 for a couple of months, and then lied about that fact. Oh, and elfiePoloIQof43:

2_28_15_News_2015CO2_KeelingCurve_720_405_s_c1_c_c.jpg


trend:2015


Global warmers, you got some 'splainin to do ...

Nice insults ambulance chaser. I would like to think you could muster something slightly more intelligent than what the other drooling CONservative baboons are capable of ,but alas it's par for the course

I won't address the racists and the morons that have no arguments just insults.

You on the other hand should know better as me repeatedly handing you your *** on this subject should have been a learning experience.

Now on to the point:

The baseline for temp observations is 30 years. This is because el nino/LA Nina, pdo, etc. Occur on short cycles and a baseline of a shorter length of say....ah ....I don't know.....MAYBE 17 YEARS! Will skew the results Hmmmm....where have I seen a graph like that? Lol...pathetic

Furthermore the hadcrut data is not looked at without combining it with Giss and Mlost because hadcrut does not have coverage in the northern latitudes (important because the arctic is warming faster than anywhere else)

When you consider LA Nina events, lack of northern latitude, and a 17 year baseline (which is laughable) you get what appears to someone ignorant on the subject as cooling.

This is what reality looks like kids

Escalator1024.gif
 
Last edited:
Polo, look at your own graph, idiot.

The temperatures 1998- present have declined, while CO2 levels have skyrocketed.

Global warming computer models - and that is the primary focus of the science known as global warming - did NOT prognosticate temperature decline with rising CO2 levels. Here are the flawed model vs. reality:

CMIP5-90-models-global-Tsfc-vs-obs-thru-2013.png


Let me be your Nietschze ... your global warming god is dead. Move on. Oh, and I apologize if my education level intimidates you. It must be disappointing to be stupid, wrong, lazy and so easily fooled.

In other words, to be you.
 
I said I won't discuss AGW with you denier kooks anymore since I've long ago discredited every lame argument you guys could dig up from Anthony Watts and his Heartland funded buddies.This is not a discussion for me, just rubbing it in further.

You're welcome.


Chinese President Details Wide-Ranging Carbon Pollution Pledge At White House
BY RYAN KORONOWSKI SEP 25, 2015


The Pope may have left Washington, D.C. after urging the United States to act on climate change at the White House, but the leader of the world’s largest country is in town to talk about some serious climate action of his own.

At a White House press conference Friday afternoon, U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping announced a suite of wide-ranging actions that clarify how serious the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter is about cutting greenhouse gas emissions. These include prioritizing green energy on China’s grid, a cap-and-trade or emissions trading system for China, additional low-carbon financing to developing countries, and emissions standards for heavy duty vehicles. The fact that these announcements were made during the world’s most important bilateral meeting and official state visit lends them further significance.

A Senior administration official told reporters on a call Thursday afternoon that the two leaders would unveil a joint presidential statement on what the world’s two largest polluters will do to actually achieve the carbon pollution targets they agreed upon last year. In that agreement. the U.S. pledged to cut emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. China pledged to peak its carbon dioxide emissions at or before 2030, cap coal use by 2020, and get 20 percent of its energy from non-fossil fuel sources by 2030. This would mean deploying enough renewable energy capacity to power the entire United States — 800 to 1,000 gigawatts.
Until this week, the biggest news of how either country would fulfill those promises came from the release of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, which uses authority granted under the Clean Air Act to require states to cut carbon pollution in the electricity sector.
Friday’s announcement sheds more light on how China will meet or exceed the emissions reduction targets it set last year.

Read the rest below

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/09/25/3705464/us-china-climate-visit-pledges/

This might fit your efforts to convince people here;


If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn’t value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?
16593.jpg


BsiJGi6CMAAH2T_.jpg
 
A similar plot idea was already used. The scientists from the State Science Institute worked hard to help the government get more and more control. IIRC, the media helped?
 
A similar plot idea was already used. The scientists from the State Science Institute worked hard to help the government get more and more control. IIRC, the media helped?

The government again? Can you get your head around the idea that it is known globally? We're the only place with creationists and deniers in the industrial world. People who enjoy the fruits of science like no where else still too stupid to understand it.
 
The government again? Can you get your head around the idea that it is known globally? We're the only place with creationists and deniers in the industrial world. People who enjoy the fruits of science like no where else still too stupid to understand it.

Can you get your head around the idea that a lot of the world has a vested financial interest in this aside from "saving the planet"? That somehow the solutions to this apocalyptic crisis all involve shifting wealth and resources from wealthy countries to less wealthy ones, and from businesses to governments, without any real evidence that it's going to solve the crisis or even affect it in any significant way? And that some of the biggest offenders are supposed to be exempt from the solutions for some reason?
 
Last edited:
Top