Results 1 to 3 of 3
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Airbornesapper07

Thread: Report: U.S. Owes the World $1 Trillion for Carbon Emissions

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member Airbornesapper07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    17,543

    Report: U.S. Owes the World $1 Trillion for Carbon Emissions

    Report: U.S. Owes the World $1 Trillion for Carbon Emissions

    David McNew/Getty Images
    PENNY STARR 18 Apr 2019 187 3:02

    The United States owes the world $1 trillion because of the damage it has caused the global economy with carbon emissions.


    Foreign Policy magazine reported:
    Over the past three decades, the United States has made four international commitments to reduce its emissions: at Rio in 1992, at Kyoto in 1997, at Copenhagen in 2009, and at Paris in 2015. Yet ambitious agreements to reduce emissions have in each case been followed by steadily increasing emissions as international promises have failed to turn into domestic legislation.
    As a result, the United States has emitted around 20 billion tons of carbon dioxide more than it has promised to since 1992. By 2025, it will likely overshoot the target by another 5 billion tons. On its own, the 25-billion-ton surplus amounts to more than total Chinese, Indian, and European Union emissions last year. It will cause more than a $1 trillion in damage to the global economy over the coming years, based on an estimate produced by the federal government in 2016 that each ton of emissions causes about $42 of economic damage to the global economy.

    But the report that Foreign Policy relies on, in part, is from Rhodium Group, which comes to different conclusions than the federal Energy Information Administration about U.S. Carbon emissions:
    Carbon dioxide emissions from U.S. energy consumption will remain near current levels through 2050, according to projections in EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook 2019. The AEO2019 Reference case, which reflects no changes to current laws and regulations and extends current trends in technology, projects that U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions will be 5,019 million metric tons in 2050, or 4% below their 2018 value, as emissions associated with coal and petroleum consumption fall and emissions from natural gas consumption rise.
    The magazine analysis claims “recent advances in climate science make it possible to link the damage associated with an extreme weather event to emissions from an individual country.”
    It cites a study in Nature in which the authors use the heat wave in Argentina in 2013 and 2014 as a case study.
    “They credibly find that emissions from the United States made the heat wave 28-34 percent more likely,” the magazine reported on the study, which is only accessible if purchased.
    “With every year that passes, climate change is more devastating,” the magazine reported. “A large and growing majority of Americans want the U.S. government to do its part to limit the damage.”
    “Three decades of climate history suggests that there will be another opportunity for legislation—be it a Green New Deal or something else,” the magazine reported.
    “If not, the prospect of litigation looms large: Someone, somewhere, at some time, will eventually have to pay the price for America’s emissions,” the magazine report concluded.
    Follow Penny Starr on Twitter

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...bon-emissions/
    If you're gonna fight, fight like you're the third monkey on the ramp to Noah's Ark... and brother its starting to rain. Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member Airbornesapper07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    17,543
    how to read this; the next generation of simpletons have been born; Stop breeding MARXIST SIMPLETONS

    PICS — ’Emotional Disruption’: Youth Eco-Activists Cry After Failing to Stop Flights from Heathrow

    Peter Summers / Getty VICTORIA FRIEDMAN 19 Apr 2019892 2:40

    Youth members of eco-activist group Extinction Rebellion have cried after failing to stop flights at London’s Heathrow airport.

    Media reports that some of the activists are as young as 13 years old, with the Metro writing that a number of the teen protestors were crying was because they claimed to have been ‘threatened’ with arrest.
    The green extremist group has held London hostage for the past week, bringing the city to a standstill in exchange for three demands: stopping all greenhouse gas emissions by 2025; the British government declaring a “climate and ecological emergency”; and for the overhaul of the Western democratic system by forcing government policy to be decided by a “Citizens’ Assembly on climate and ecological justice.”



    LONDON, ENGLAND – APRIL 19: Climate protestors hold a demo outside Heathrow Airport on April 19, 2019 in London, England. The climate change activism group, Extinction Rebellion, said they planned to shut down Heathrow airport. (Photo by Peter Summers/Getty Images)


    Plans to protest at one of the world’s busiest airports were leaked on Thursday, after the far-left activists have been gluing themselves to vehicles, trains, and buildings all week.
    Home Secretary Sajid Javid told police to use the “full force of the law,” with Scotland Yard saying they had “strong plans” to respond to any disruption to the travel plans of the 800,000 people planning to fly during the Bank Holiday weekend, with some quarter of a million people set to fly in and out of the airport on Good Friday alone.


    (Photo by Peter Summers/Getty Images)


    Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick said following a meeting with Mr Javid, “I totally condemn any protesters who are stepping outside the boundaries of the law.
    “They have no right to cause misery for the millions of people who are trying to lead their daily lives. Unlawful behaviour will not be tolerated.
    “I expect the police to take a firm stance and use the full force of the law. They have my full backing in doing so.”

    (Photo by Peter Summers/Getty Images)

    Sky News described the protest Friday morning as “small,” where around 20 gathered at a roundabout between terminals two and three, unfurling a banner reading, “Are we the last generation?”
    One activist told the broadcaster, “I don’t want to be the last generation. I’ve told you I’m here out of love and out of fear and from that comes courage, and that’s why I’m here, that’s why I’m here.”



    (Photo by Peter Summers/Getty Images)


    Extinction Rebellion Youth organiser Robin Ellis-Cockcroft, 24, said that while they had failed to cause any actual, real disruption, they had caused “emotional disruption,” and confirmed no more protests were planned at the airport today.
    “This is it. The idea is that we said we were going to disrupt Heathrow,” Ellis-Cockcroft said, according to The Sun. “It’s an emotional disruption. The point of this is reaching people on an emotional level.”
    A Heathrow spokesman confirmed to media that the airport “is currently operating normally.”



    (Photo by Peter Summers/Getty Images)

    https://www.breitbart.com/europe/201...ghts-heathrow/
    If you're gonna fight, fight like you're the third monkey on the ramp to Noah's Ark... and brother its starting to rain. Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #3
    Senior Member Airbornesapper07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    17,543
    Delingpole: ‘Climate Change: The Facts’ Was the BBC’s Biggest Lie Ever

    MANDEL NGAN / AFP / GettyJAMES DELINGPOLE18 Apr 201914688:03

    The increasingly unwatchable and slavishly woke BBC plumbed new depths last night. It gave a prime time slot to a piece of environmental propaganda so blatant, shameless, and dishonest it might just as well have been a political broadcast on behalf of Extinction Rebellion.

    Even the programme’s title was a lie.
    Climate Change: The Facts was a farrago of alarmist cliches, exaggerations, and untruths which have been debunked on numerous occasions.

    It lied about the cause of wildfires; it lied about heatwaves; it lied about storms and floods; it lied about polar melting; it lied about sea levels; it lied about coral reefs; it lied about droughts.
    Yet many viewers may well have been taken in because the programme was presented with breathy earnestness and apparent authority by the doyen of TV wildlife ‘experts’ Sir David Attenborough. And accompanied by the kind of dramatic footage and stirring music guaranteed to bypass the brain and appeal directly to the emotions — as all the most effective propaganda does.
    “If you liked Triumph of the Will then you’re going to love Our Planet,” I wrote recently of Attenborough’s new Netflix series, which uses exactly the same techniques: amazing nature photography; manipulative music; a trembly voiceover making all manner of scientifically dubious assertions in order to scare the viewer into the appropriate state of climate fear.
    But Climate Change: the Facts was more unscrupulous and dishonest still.
    What I found particularly objectionable was its use of emotive trickery to help deceive the viewer into buying its specious arguments.
    For example, on the subject of heatwaves, we were shown heartbreaking footage of thousands of flying foxes (giant fruit bats) in Australia which had dropped dead out of the trees during a particularly hot spell last November in Queensland.
    “There was a deafening sound of babies crying,” said the voiceover of a distraught Australian conservationist, over images of piles of dead bats, and an orphaned baby bat being hand fed some milk from a bottle.
    “This is climate change in action,” muttered an unnamed Australian.
    “We need to wake up!” said another.
    The unwary viewer might easily have been gulled into drawing two erroneous conclusions from this.
    First, that the bats really had been killed by “climate change”. (Which they hadn’t. This was an extreme weather event of the kind which, no doubt, has killed many thousands of flying foxes on previous occasions in history — only without the presence of camera crews to record the incidents.)

    Second, that the world divides into two kinds of people: those who love the planet and cute baby bats and who consequently believe in the urgency of combating climate change; those who don’t give a damn. (Which is another entirely false premise. It is quite possible to care very much about the natural world without buying into the false claims of green-ideology driven, anti-growth, anti-human environmental activists.)
    Paul Homewood has been through its various claims with a fine-tooth comb and found many to be misleading and inaccurate.
    Among his criticisms:

    • Attenborough shows a surface temperature chart of dramatically rising temperatures but a) fails to mention that the more accurate satellite temperature data shows no increase since 1998; b) fails to explain why temperatures rose sharply in the early 20th century, long before CO2 emissions began to rise significantly; c) fails to mention that since the 19th century, Earth has been emerging from the Little Ice Age — probably the coldest period since the end of the Ice Age.
    • The extreme weather bogeyman. Various talking head ‘experts’ assure us that heat waves are getting more intense. But last summer’s heatwave in the UK — cited as evidence of this — was no hotter than the summer of 1976; nor was the recent one in Queensland when temperatures reached 42 degrees C — also cited — anywhere near as bad as the one in 1972 when temperatures reached 49.5 degrees C. In fact, Homewood notes, there is considerable evidence that heatwaves are actually becoming less common.
    • Michael Mann (quoted as an expert witness): “You’re going to get more rainfall, more superstorms, worse flooding. We’re seeing the effects of climate change now play out in real time” Homewood: Maybe one of the most dishonest parts of the programme. Even the IPCC can’t find any long term trends in tropical cyclone activity or flooding. And severe tornadoes are have become much less common in the US.
    • Attenborough: “Rising seas are already displacing hundreds of thousands of people from already vulnerable coastal areas.” Homewood: Pure hyperbole. Where is the evidence to support this claim? Sea levels have been rising steadily since the mid 19th century.
    • On polar ice caps, it is claimed that ice loss from Antarctica and Greenland is “worse than expected”. Homewood: In fact, according to NASA, the Antarctic is actually gaining ice. It is symptomatic of the whole programme, that Attenborough does not mention this inconvenient fact. As for Greenland, I’m not sure what the experts were “expecting”, has any relevance at all. What we do know though, is that temperatures in Greenland are no higher now than they were in the 1930s.
    • Attenborough: “In the last three years, repeated heat stress has caused a third of the world’s corals to first bleach and then die.” Homewood: There is absolutely no evidence for this, and I have not even seen that claimed about the Great Barrier Reef. And as we now know, the death of GBR corals was drastically overstated. Indeed, as scientists like Peter Ridd and local reef experts have long maintained, corals quickly recover from bleaching, which was just as bad in the 18thC.

    In sum, where in reality there is increasing doubt and debate among scientists on the issue of ‘climate change’, this #fakenews documentary pretended the opposite: that the weight of evidence points unquestionably to an imminent climate catastrophe which can only be averted if we take concerted global action now.
    “It may sound frightening but the scientific evidence is that if we have not taken dramatic action in the next decade we could face irreversible damage to the natural world — and the collapse of our societies,” said Attenborough. [Fact check: there is not a single piece of scientific evidence which suggests anything of the kind. Perhaps that’s why he covered himself with the word “could.”]
    “What is happening now in the next few years will profoundly affect the next thousand years,” he declared elsewhere. [Fact check: no it won’t; barely in the slightest. The planet is 4.5 billion years old. It’s perfectly capable of taking care of itself, regardless of our ludicrous delusions otherwise.]
    This isn’t science. This is the purest political activism — and it’s quite extraordinary that the BBC, theoretically committed by its charter obligations to fair and accurate broadcasting, should have allowed itself to be used as a platform for such blatant fearmongering, misinformation, and propagandising.
    The BBC supposedly represents the entire viewing population. (Otherwise, why should we all be forced to fund it with our compulsory annual £154.50 per household licence fee?) Yet here it is speaking on behalf of a narrow clique of mostly metropolitan, left-liberal types who pay lip service to the green religion because it’s such an easy way of publicly signalling their virtue. Those many of us — perhaps the majority of the population — who, with good reason, are sceptical about the global warming scare are treated with utter contempt, as if our opinions don’t matter.

    Anyone with an even rudimentary grasp of the climate debate knows, for example, that Michael Mann, James Hansen, and Naomi Oreskes are key members of the climate industrial complex with a long track record of aggressive political activism on behalf of the environmental movement. Yet here they were being presented by the BBC — and by Attenborough — as if they were dispassionate, wholly trustworthy climate experts.

    Even by the BBC’s abysmal standards, this programme was a disgrace: an insult to the intelligence, a betrayal of the Reithian principles on which the BBC was founded, and a shameless piece of propaganda on behalf of the watermelons who would destroy our civilisation.
    As for Sir David Attenborough, it’s time this whispery voiced, gorilla hugging, walrus scaring Malthusian was recognised for what he is: not as a national treasure but as a national embarrassment long, long past his sell-by date.

    https://www.breitbart.com/europe/201...h-and-the-bbc/
    Last edited by Airbornesapper07; 04-19-2019 at 08:15 PM.
    Beezer likes this.
    If you're gonna fight, fight like you're the third monkey on the ramp to Noah's Ark... and brother its starting to rain. Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-28-2018, 05:02 AM
  2. EPA To Unilaterally Push Cap And Trade On Carbon Emissions -
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-29-2014, 04:26 AM
  3. With Carbon Dioxide Emissions at Record High, Worries on How to Slow Warming
    By JohnDoe2 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-02-2012, 08:43 PM
  4. Genocide-Endorsing Climate Alarmist Calls For Global Tax on Carbon Emissions
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-09-2012, 08:10 AM
  5. Reduce Carbon Emissions and Boost the Economy
    By carolinamtnwoman in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-20-2008, 01:55 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •