Climate Change in the Trump Era

So as a p young guy living in America, my politics are usually regarded as underdeveloped or too simple. But, for this, I request attention. The thing that gets me here isn't that Trump is tickling the nationalist ball-sacks of republicans to not lose support, nor that he has no regard for anyone else in the world. Those things are very bad, but what actually fucking sets me off, is the fact that now, I have to fucking deal with a 70 year-old climate change denier's decision to pull out for the rest of my life. TRUMP JUST SUICIDE BOMBED THE WHOLE FUCKING EARTH

To explain the above statement, I do have a few reasons. First of all, he'll be dead soon enough anyways due to natural causes, falling off his own building, or some other shit, and as such (similar to a suicide bomber) he doesn't have to deal with the consequences. Second, he is doing this for a reason I'd personally say is even stupider and more horrible than a suicide bomber's belief that the Western World is shitty (which is true now due to Trump, Farage, etc.), and that is that he, like some of my hormonal teenage peers, wants to be able to say that he saved America. He let us make our own rules on climate change. And he can get erect knowing that he made the media annoyed, because that's the issue: the media is mean and a non-binding agreement is too much commitment to something made by and for the Chinese.

To any Trump voter, I would implore you to post LITERALLY ANY REASON why this is a good idea that could trump surpass the effects this has on my (and most likely your) generation. This is why, despite some hypocrisy in the Democratic party (that thing about white people supposed to stay home at college for a day made me cringe) I still view myself as a Liberal, because I wouldn't (and I hope you wouldn't) want to be represented by someone purely motivated by egotism and overcompensating for his little wee-wee. Thanks Trump voters, I hope you're fucking ecstatic.
 
Last edited:
money > planet, dumbass
Sometimes I get so mad, I'd like to find every single person who thinks that, and have the men in the white coats take them away to the Happy House. And mind you, that's me being merciful, because these people who believe in a stupid globalist conspiracy over corporations spreading false rumors for profit, and call me names like "hysterical", libtard, and "kook" when I tell them their sources are supported by climate change deniers supported by the Big Oil industry are probably too stupid to live.

Trouble is, it would be immoral to keep them from voting, and affecting our lives. For all I know, maybe we're wrong. Yeah, if we were lucky!
 

Deck Knight

Blast Off At The Speed Of Light! That's Right!
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
So as a p young guy living in America, my politics are usually regarded as underdeveloped or too simple. But, for this, I request attention. The thing that gets me here isn't that Trump is tickling the nationalist ball-sacks of republicans to not lose support, nor that he has no regard for anyone else in the world. Those things are very bad, but what actually fucking sets me off, is the fact that now, I have to fucking deal with a 70 year-old climate change denier's decision to pull out for the rest of my life. TRUMP JUST SUICIDE BOMBED THE WHOLE FUCKING EARTH

To explain the above statement, I do have a few reasons. First of all, he'll be dead soon enough anyways due to natural causes, falling off his own building, or some other shit, and as such (similar to a suicide bomber) he doesn't have to deal with the consequences. Second, he is doing this for a reason I'd personally say is even stupider and more horrible than a suicide bomber's belief that the Western World is shitty (which is true now due to Trump, Farage, etc.), and that is that he, like some of my hormonal teenage peers, wants to be able to say that he saved America. He let us make our own rules on climate change. And he can get erect knowing that he made the media annoyed, because that's the issue: the media is mean and a non-binding agreement is too much commitment to something made by and for the Chinese.

To any Trump voter, I would implore you to post LITERALLY ANY REASON why this is a good idea that could trump surpass the effects this has on my (and most likely your) generation. This is why, despite some hypocrisy in the Democratic party (that thing about white people supposed to stay home at college for a day made me cringe) I still view myself as a Liberal, because I wouldn't (and I hope you wouldn't) want to be represented by someone purely motivated by egotism and overcompensating for his little wee-wee. Thanks Trump voters, I hope you're fucking ecstatic.

Script: https://www.prageru.com/courses/environmental-science/paris-climate-agreement-wont-change-climate

"The cost of the Paris climate pact is likely to run to 1 to 2 trillion dollars every year, based on estimates produced by the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum and the Asia Modeling Exercise. In other words, we will spend at least one hundred trillion dollars in order to reduce the temperature, by the end of the century, by a grand total of three tenths of one degree.

Some Paris Agreement supporters defend it by claiming that its real impact on temperatures will be much more significant than the U.N. model predicts. But this requires mental gymnastics and heroic assumptions."

Listen, you're a young kid and your politics are still forming. Here's best advice I can give you to be politically well-rounded: Any person who works for a government or a university deserves your total and complete skepticism. Research the counter-arguments to any of their claims, then confront them and ask them to justify their position.

Essentially the argument staying in this accord supports is that an negligible and barely observable future impact is worth bankrupting your (our) generation worth trillions of dollars a year, to what end: Merely to make liberal politicians feel good about themselves and get them well-paying paper-pusher jobs in a some climate bureaucracy.

One more video:


The relevant portion starts around 1:22. In the 4.6 BILLION years the earth has been around, the planet has regulated its own temperature. An example he gives is the State of Kansas, which has over the last 40 Million Years been both entirely underwater and under two miles of ice. With ZERO creatures you could identify as a human. The parts per million of CO2 at the time of the dinosaurs was hundreds of times greater than it is today, and yet life including massive vegetative forests thrived. Neither the rate of warming not the ppm of CO2 are death sentences, least of all for humanity which has the intelligence and technology to adapt basically effortlessly relative to any other species in history.

But if you seriously want to believe Trump Suicide Bombed your future, well, stay gullible. Childless European bureaucrats and politicians are depending on your tax dollars to retire in abundance while you struggle under massive taxes, regulations, and laws that restrict your own economic well being and that of any children you might want to have.

EDIT: btw. there were a lot of call-outs towards me in this thread.

Ask yourself something: I'm supposed to be the religious fanatic here. Why is your faith that Al Gore, Leo DiCaprio, rich celebrities who have made ZERO cutbacks to their extravagance, bureaucrats, and politicians aren't just trying to enrich themselves and their friends greater than my faith Jesus is My Lord and Savior?

Because to believe mother Earth will die horribly if not for trillions of dollars to back the actions of the UN and globalist rich people is an absurd article of religious faith.
 
Last edited:

Soul Fly

IMMA TEACH YOU WHAT SPLASHIN' MEANS
is a Contributor Alumnus
^hahahahahahaha. fuck off.



Of course the Paris deal was never going to be enough. We are pretty much irreversibly going to breach the 1 degree mark, the agreement, if followed honestly by all member nations is supposed to barely squeak us below two. The standards are so low that what was at stake here was getting the entire world to agree that climate change was real and at least pledge to a non-binding resolution to act towards it. It's disheartening that it IS so low but well, guess who's lower. the degrees aren't fucking numbers on your home thermostat, on a global level even fractions of a degree have adverse effects on everything from monsoon patterns to crop cycles you nincompoop.


fair warning to anyone who takes the very slick-looking official sounding CGP Grey-esque "Prager U" video seriously, that it's pretty much a batty hard right mouthpiece. How far-right? The guy behind it, Dennis Prager, has among other things has claimed that men cannot rape their wives, and that income inequality is good, and that fossil fuels are the greenest fuel (you must watch that last video is a piece of delusional genius).
You will also notice that these "PragerU" videos come with very sketchy, or zero citations, reliable or otherwise. Thus continuing the streak of Deck Knight posting bullshit without anything to back his claims up.
the second video will be familiar to anyone who's ever read Deck Knight diarrhea on Climate Change denialism, tl;dr: it's the "climate's always been changing" non-statement. again no peer-reviewed research to back it up, just this cocky guy's inspired fiction skills.

You are literally repeating shit multiple people debunked the last time. Shit you conveniently didn't respond to but have the gall to repost as if you're making a fresh, paradigm-changing contribution to the thread. You are like a tape-recorder fucking stuck on loop.

To others: while the guy above is pretty much cancer, and refuses to engage with or develop responses to any evidence to the contrary (check out his past forays into this thread) all I can reasonably ask any doubtful user lurking here to treat the above post with radioactive levels of skepticism. A good place to find accessible discussion, which is solid and backed up by non-partisan evidence from people who actually know what they're doing you can start here: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/6erjjd/rscience_stands_with_the_paris_climate_agreement/
 
Last edited:
Neither the rate of warming not the ppm of CO2 are death sentences, least of all for humanity which has the intelligence and technology to adapt basically effortlessly relative to any other species in history.
I love that the argument is we're intelligent and adaptable when we're purposely deciding not to widen the infrastructure of the green technology we already made. "Adaptability" is already happening, or it should be.
 
Well Deck Knight posted pretty much the same ideas before me but I want to bring my opinions on the matter of the subject.

Yes, Trump made the right choice. Thank goodness he pulled out just in time. I also want to say this: just because we oppose stuff like the Paris Agreement doesn't mean that we hate the environment. Does Donald Trump hate the environment? Maybe yes, maybe no. Just to completely say that Trump pulled us out of the Paris Agreement because "I hate the environment hur durr, lets pull out" is pretty much poor reasoning.


Problem 1: It will harm America's economy to a big effect.

Deck Knight pretty much handled the economic reason so I'll keep this short. The Paris Agreement was going to harm not just America's economy, but it jobs as well.

"Policies adapted from domestic regulations emphasized in the Paris agreement will affect a variety of aspects of the American economy. As a result of the plan, one can expect that by 2035, there will be:

  • An overall average shortfall of nearly 400,000 jobs;
  • An average manufacturing shortfall of over 200,000 jobs;
  • A total income loss of more than $20,000 for a family of four;
  • An aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) loss of over $2.5 trillion; and
  • Increases in household electricity expenditures between 13 percent and 20 percent." source: http://www.heritage.org/environment...l-devastating-economic-costs-essentially-zero
Not only would we lose jobs but also increase our national debt (which i don't know why people are seeming to forget that America still has a big debt atm) while electricity taxes will raise up as well.

Problem 2: The Paris Agreement takes the step in saying that there are problems BUT they don't really have plans to solve said issues that well.

The other problem is that it really isn't going to do anything. I read through the WHOLE thing(https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf) and I found out these 2 things:

-Spit out ideas with no real concrete plan or solution.

OR

-Ideas such as education or deforestation polices that we are already doing just stricter.

The first step of course is addressing that there is a problem but the fact is you have to follow up that problem with solutions and the Paris Agreement doesn't do it that well.

And of course if we waste trillons of dollars for this the CO2 levels are going to just go down by a very slim 0.3% in the next 100 years.

So overall the Paris Agreement was going to make the United States waste a trillions of dollars, harming American jobs that hurt families, while doing what? Lowering three tenths of one degree? Seriously? I'll get it if was way higher but such a extremely small amount in such a long time? I don't really get it at all.



Also one more thing which I see on those who hold a different viewpoint like me on the Paris Agreement. Yes Climate Change is real, we had the Ice Age after all. Yes I want people to use clean energy. Yes I want to lower the harmful effects that humans had done to the environment. But you can't just go off writing off agreements that can harm several people in the process. So yes, Trump overall did the right thing from pulling us out from an Anti-American Agreement.
 

Deck Knight

Blast Off At The Speed Of Light! That's Right!
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Top CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnus
^ Soul Fly Appeal to Authority, Dismissiveness, Attacking the Source on non-related topics.
*Complains About Citing Sources* *Links to Reddit*

Any more Logical Fallacies or Inconsistencies you want to make?

No, I think you should get out of here. PragerU cites their sources, you just don't like them because they don't start from your premise.
The premise they refuse to start from (and shouldn't btw.) is that global warming is catastrophic and only the Paris Accord and governmental agreements like it can address it.
The Paris Accord and others like it have no discernible impact. They are a money laundering scheme for power and control over as much wealth and area as possible. They spend trillions retarding the ONLY economies that can actually mitigate the impacts of pollution and theoretical future environmental events like a super-eruption or meteor strike. Or even the effects we know happen naturally like beach erosion and tectonic shift.

How many doom predictions does it take for the warmists to get wrong before you open your mind to basic skepticism about their intentions?
If someone has to scare you into handing over money because the planet is doomed, and the prediction doesn't pan out, why should you continue believing them?
And why is big oil, which CAN'T tax you a bigger conspiratorial threat against the planet than global governments that CAN? Why does the ability to hold a gun to your head to abide by their policy make them more likely to be telling the truth?
There is so much that is ass backward about the climate believers it defies explanation.

Lets talk about earlier in the thread. I linked to the massive spill the EPA caused, and another poster incidentally posted some images of contaminated systems.
The existence of a government program for something does not mean the issue they are organized around is being addressed. There is no accountability in these programs.

the second video will be familiar to anyone who's ever read Deck Knight diarrhea on Climate Change denialism, tl;dr
: it's the "climate's always been changing" non-statement. again no peer-reviewed research to back it up, just this cocky guy's inspired fiction skills.
You need a peer reviewed study to discern basic reality? Not enough geological evidence for the massive glacier over New England or the Mesosoic Era ocean paths?

I gladly accept the label of climate heretic aka "denier."

Even though I don't deny climate change.

Half of my posts point out only industrialized countries make actual progress on environmental advances.
Do you know who isn't subject to the Paris Accords until 2030? India and China, or in simple terms 2.8 billion people in the two largest growing industrial economies on earth, responsible for most of the emissions put out there.
India and China won't budge because India democratically elects its leaders and won't put a billion people out of a job. China doesn't democratically elect its leaders and it doesn't want a billion person strong civil war.

The only path to address climate disasters is technology, and governments are impediments to that. If Africa were industrialized and using natural gas instead of wood stoves they would be infinitely better off, as would their environments - but "green" pacts like this don't allow them to do that.

Because the purpose of this agreement is not to address the acute problems of an ever-changing climate for which humans have near zero long-term ability to alter. If the planet decides to descend into another Ice Age because Solar Activity suddenly drops, we are screwed.

This Accord manifestly robs the economic opportunity from countries that CAN address these problems to RESTRICT developing countries that can't address the problems from even attempting to do so.


It is a terrible deal for the planet generally and the United States specifically because we're expected to bankroll it; we're the golden goose these countries with declining populations want to milk before they expire without direct descendants.

But in the face of this totally reasonable skepticism is BUT BIG OIL and WE'RE COMMITTING PLANETARY SUICIDE.

Get a grip. For people who supposedly believe in science you think marine life can't adjust to a temperature change over hundreds of years but humanity evolved from ape-like creatures. So one species can adapt to develop entire constructs of language, ideas, and higher intelligence in a relative historical blip but fish can't up mean temperature tolerances over the same period?

Agreeing with bullshit propaganda and totally hyperbole that has made specific doom claims that have routinely and persistently not manifested is NOT Science. It is a belief system where "climate scientists" and "projections" replace "priests" and "dogma" in more traditional equivalents. When the dogma doesn't manifest, the priests claim it's still accurate and they still need your tithe.
 
Last edited:

brightobject

there like moonlight
is a Top Artistis a Community Contributoris a Smogon Media Contributoris a Forum Moderator Alumnus
Trump is already dismantling all sorts of environmental protection policies, not just support for clean energy. People need to stop kidding themselves about his attitude towards the environment. when you are trying to bail out the dead-on-its-feet coal industry instead of giving more to the booming renewable energy sectors u are not being pro-environment. You don't need to be pro or anti global warming to see that cutting the national parks service and deregulating clean water, air, and land acts is anti-environmentally-minded lol.

For one, I could give less of a shit about the Paris Deal in and of itself since it's voluntary anyways, it's just the final step of the anti-environmental policies the Trump Administration has been pushing since the very beginning. But obviously those policies are what people are really talking about when they hold up the us withdrawal from the paris accords. When people yaw about the details of the paris accords the point is either going over their heads or they've purposefully stuck their heads in the ground.

although maybe that's better than talking about how climate change exists and we need to do SOMETHING, ANYTHING, except accepting clean energy and regulating treatment of the environment

Edit: just to be clear the paris accords is one big virtue signal , hold hands and sing kumbaya. its all voluntary and thus flexible. no shit its generic but that also means it cant make or stop any country from doing anything. in reality it is just a general moral commitment to helping alleviate the impacts of carbon emissions on the environment...so even if trump stayed in it would do literally nothing, only complete headasses abroad would go WOW, USA REALLY SHOWING THEIR COMMITMENT TO GLOBAL WARMING RN. So I'm not exactly sympathetic to those screaming their heads off now that trump backed out when it changes nothing about the current course of the US wrt climate change. the paris accords werent gonna save the world guys

Double edit: ppl who think paris is a MASSIVE SCHEME TO ROB THE WORLD OF MONEY are being equally illogical. Like i said, it cant make or stop u from doing anything. its literally an instruction manual that the countries just agreed to read. and its a pretty vague manual too. so stop being paranoid dumbasses
 
Last edited:
Ask yourself something: I'm supposed to be the religious fanatic here. Why is your faith that Al Gore, Leo DiCaprio, rich celebrities who have made ZERO cutbacks to their extravagance, bureaucrats, and politicians aren't just trying to enrich themselves and their friends greater than my faith Jesus is My Lord and Savior?

Because to believe mother Earth will die horribly if not for trillions of dollars to back the actions of the UN and globalist rich people is an absurd article of religious faith.
I would like to refute this part. If your are implying that all people claiming to help the environment are merely trying to gain more money and fame, what stops me from saying all priests and people of religious prominence (except Pope Francis cause he's p chill) are merely trying to gain money from religious offerings. In fact, I think this claim holds more weight than yours from the mere existence of Televangelists (which I will note that I don't know if you genuinely think they care about anything bar money or if you think they work). I could also say that living an extravagant lifestyle doesn't determine anything about their genuine belief in stopping the quickening decay of the earth and the climate change that comes with it. In fact, I'm sure many of they celebrities drive electric cars that can only be afforded because of their lifestyles. I'm not the kind of atheist to try and debate you all day on the existence of a God, but just as you would like me to take everything skeptically, I'd implore you to not form all your claims on the basis of a 2000 year old (or longer if you believe everything in it) book. The Bible may be a cornerstone of your existence, but that doesn't mean you have to base your claims on it. And yes, I do understand that the claims above are made off of something other than the Bible, but I'd like you to tell me with a straight face that these claims came from anywhere other than someone who wanted to prove why their belief in god is still correct.

I appreciate your willingness to actually back up your claims (something many of your fellow Trump supporters seem incapable of doing) and it sucks that we disagree so heavily on this, but just as a healthy skepticism is always good, I think you should see everything as innocent until proven guilty rather than guilty until proven innocent.

Anyways, on to this:
Well Deck Knight posted pretty much the same ideas before me but I want to bring my opinions on the matter of the subject.

Yes, Trump made the right choice. Thank goodness he pulled out just in time. I also want to say this: just because we oppose stuff like the Paris Agreement doesn't mean that we hate the environment. Does Donald Trump hate the environment? Maybe yes, maybe no. Just to completely say that Trump pulled us out of the Paris Agreement because "I hate the environment hur durr, lets pull out" is pretty much poor reasoning.


Problem 1: It will harm America's economy to a big effect.

Deck Knight pretty much handled the economic reason so I'll keep this short. The Paris Agreement was going to harm not just America's economy, but it jobs as well.

"Policies adapted from domestic regulations emphasized in the Paris agreement will affect a variety of aspects of the American economy. As a result of the plan, one can expect that by 2035, there will be:

  • An overall average shortfall of nearly 400,000 jobs;
  • An average manufacturing shortfall of over 200,000 jobs;
  • A total income loss of more than $20,000 for a family of four;
  • An aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) loss of over $2.5 trillion; and
  • Increases in household electricity expenditures between 13 percent and 20 percent." source: http://www.heritage.org/environment...l-devastating-economic-costs-essentially-zero
Not only would we lose jobs but also increase our national debt (which i don't know why people are seeming to forget that America still has a big debt atm) while electricity taxes will raise up as well.

Problem 2: The Paris Agreement takes the step in saying that there are problems BUT they don't really have plans to solve said issues that well.

The other problem is that it really isn't going to do anything. I read through the WHOLE thing(https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09r01.pdf) and I found out these 2 things:

-Spit out ideas with no real concrete plan or solution.

OR

-Ideas such as education or deforestation polices that we are already doing just stricter.

The first step of course is addressing that there is a problem but the fact is you have to follow up that problem with solutions and the Paris Agreement doesn't do it that well.

And of course if we waste trillons of dollars for this the CO2 levels are going to just go down by a very slim 0.3% in the next 100 years.

So overall the Paris Agreement was going to make the United States waste a trillions of dollars, harming American jobs that hurt families, while doing what? Lowering three tenths of one degree? Seriously? I'll get it if was way higher but such a extremely small amount in such a long time? I don't really get it at all.



Also one more thing which I see on those who hold a different viewpoint like me on the Paris Agreement. Yes Climate Change is real, we had the Ice Age after all. Yes I want people to use clean energy. Yes I want to lower the harmful effects that humans had done to the environment. But you can't just go off writing off agreements that can harm several people in the process. So yes, Trump overall did the right thing from pulling us out from an Anti-American Agreement.
If your first point is completely and only backed up by a very partisan "news" source, and your second point isn't even a point that means we should leave, just a point that isn't a positive if we stay, then idk what to say to you. At least Deck Knight's posts take more than 1 fucking sentence to refute. Get some real resources and points and try again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JES

OLD GREGG (im back baby)

old gregg for life
Due to diminished solar activity and the on-going process of coming to terms with how our weather system actually works, there is quite a bit of evidence for those curious to go find that points us in the direction of a new maunder minimum, with the strong possibility of an oncoming "little ice age" according to some scientists.



Also, people who think that the richest people probably never get together or idk maybe have a plan...lol can you be more naive?
 

Soul Fly

IMMA TEACH YOU WHAT SPLASHIN' MEANS
is a Contributor Alumnus
“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge'.”
-Issac Asimov

Soul Fly Appeal to Authority, Dismissiveness, Attacking the Source on non-related topics.
*Complains About Citing Sources* *Links to Reddit*

Any more Logical Fallacies or Inconsistencies you want to make?
you are literally thick. You make Ken M sound intelligent. you haven't even clicked the link have you? If you did you would know every claim, statement, statistic posted there has veritable reviewed sources (the subreddit mandates it). Your's DON'T. I didn't appeal to any authority, just broke down yours. Please don't use words you don't know the meaning of. Especially given the irony. Only charge I admit guilt to is dismissing you. And fuck yeah you deserve that.

You need a peer reviewed study to discern basic reality?
Uhm... yes? lmfao. You clearly don't have a handle on it, if anything. You should go and read shade's post because I'm pretty sure you haven't read that either.

re: India and China:
1. they have per capita emissions much lower than the USA. don't lie. there is ten fold difference between the carbon footprint of a US person and a Chinese person.
2. even if their net emission is larger, they are making much more strident efforts to clean up their acts, which is remarkable given that they are developing countries. Which is very positive, given they have to develop under all sorts of sanctions (even the paris accords put them on the hook post 2030), when EU and Europe were p much free to turn the world into their dustbun when they industrialized. China is still basically the world's factory and the #1 reason why capitalism even functions as it does in the first place and is still developing. And India has budged already leads the charge in solar power despite having one of the most impoverished populations in the world. Both of your statements are inaccurate. Regardless a climate change denialist from US doesn't really have any authority moral, or otherwise to make any comparisons.

re: fauna and shit will adapt
look up extinction rates. more evidence that you haven't read shade's post. Or any post for that matter. I already kind of know you're just gonna claim "species have always been dying", like you have done earlier (and were substantially refuted also, earlier).

I don't need "doom predictions from warmists" you privileged fuck. I live in a society that is literally eroding in front of my eyes due to climate change. I have lived through summers that have gotten consistently hotter. I have seen food prices spiral due to irregular rain. In my line of work I see and record people dying everyday directly and indirectly due to climate change. If by the virtue of some fucked up rationale you are okay with that sort of death as some form of "collateral damage", because cycle of life or some pseudo-intellectual shit....while you live a merry life in a first world country, then fuck you.
Know that the only reason that you can sustain these delusions is because you are lucky to be born in a society and in a class that can more or less insulate itself from the fallout of climate change..... for now, that is.

----
I'll say this once. I really see no more merit in engaging with you. You have repeatedly shown zero reading comprehension or a will to respond with any integrity whatsoever. You just go away for a while and then come back and post the same shit again. No change. No response. No engagement. The same old Kansas analogy, the same old "we'll adapt bullshit", the same old "Africa should industrialize, but they are stuck using wooden sticks #thankyouGLOBALISTS"....
You are a detriment to this thread. You lie, and assert falsehoods almost pathologically, and you are hilariously out of touch with whatever "basic reality" is.

I am all for debate and disagreement but I really think there should be some objective moratorium because you have repeatedly shat on threads in the most shameless manner possible. You literally break cong you're that bad. This is the last time I'm spending this much word count on you, because frankly you're not worth the effort.
 
Last edited:

Chou Toshio

Over9000
is an Artist Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Even Rex Tillerson is against pulling out. REX TILLERSON-- a former CEO of a fucking gas and oil giant-- was fighting for the fucking Paris accords. Apple, Google, Rest of Silicon Valley, GE, IBM, most of Wallstreet-- who the hell benefits from this?

Consumers don't want it, foreign ally's don't want it, businesses mostly don't want it... gdamn

When it's bad for the environment, bad for homeland security, bad for economics & business, and bad for foreign relations... what the hell is left????


It'll be hilarious if this somehow gets spun off as a pro- business move. I mean, even Exxon, Shell... even child-slaving Walmart turned it's nose at pulling out of the Paris accords. lol wtf

When Walmart, Exxon, and Goldman Sach's all say that you're being too evil... lol
 
Last edited:

vonFiedler

I Like Chopin
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
Deck Knight isn't "breaking cong". He's one of the most non-toxic conservatives atm and his opinion doesn't warrant him being personally attacked. If he wasn't posting, this would just be a thread about liberals acting SOOO surprised that Trump pulled out of the accords like of course he fucking pulled out. Is this really the BIG ISSUE or just the big issue of the week? Mostly a rhetorical question, but I'm saving my outrage for the death camps and that's just me. Point is, don't treat everyone who disagrees with you like shit every time. Please.
 

Bughouse

Like ships in the night, you're passing me by
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
avoiding deck knight vs the world because lol I'm not falling into this trap: https://xkcd.com/386/

The long and short of it to me is that the paris agreements really are the least of anyone's concerns in terms of the environment. They were weak goals with no enforcement power, the US has already been on a trend of reducing emissions, and this really shouldn't have surprised anyone anyway. It's much more of an optics issue ie Trump basically just decided to give a middle finger to every other country because he can than it is an actual bad policy outcome. The impact is pretty nonexistent. No other countries are going to leave just because the US did... because again there's no enforcement power for not meeting goals anyway.

Be much more concerned as the Trump administration goes through the administrative rulemaking process to revise Obama's Clean Power Plan. Thankfully, it is already settled law at the Supreme Court that the Clean Air Act in fact mandates regulating CO2 and there are also some judicial review powers related to changing established administrative rules without evidence, which will greatly limit what they can do here, but I wouldn't put it past them to really try to gut it.
 

Soul Fly

IMMA TEACH YOU WHAT SPLASHIN' MEANS
is a Contributor Alumnus
Deck Knight isn't "breaking cong". He's one of the most non-toxic conservatives atm and his opinion doesn't warrant him being personally attacked. If he wasn't posting, this would just be a thread about liberals acting SOOO surprised that Trump pulled out of the accords like of course he fucking pulled out. Is this really the BIG ISSUE or just the big issue of the week? Mostly a rhetorical question, but I'm saving my outrage for the death camps and that's just me. Point is, don't treat everyone who disagrees with you like shit every time. Please.
I am not singling out Deck because he's a conservative, (I also disagree with your infraction but whatever), I have in the past disagreed with many posters from across the political spectrum. But when you systematically and repeatedly refuse to engage with (very valid) points made and keep acting like a broken mouthpiece against all known science then I'm sorry you're cancer. A poster who turns the thread into a painful loop is pretty much the definition of toxic. Good for you if you're "saving your outrage", just don't adjudge others through your emotional tolerance. Some might tightly recognise the normalizing of some dangerous tendencies. I can be outraged by what a President does this week and what he does next week, and the week after. Please don't go around deciding which outrage is worth it.

If you are allowing him just because he is from the other side of the aisle and posts 100+ words then then that's a contrived bias towards neutrality. I very much question your qualitative moderation standards.

A lot of questions have different sides to it. Some don't. If Deck is disagreeing with the efficacy of the Paris Agreement then there is a reasonable discussion to be had about it. Hell, I might even agree with him (!), but debating the reality of man-made climate change is not productive by any stretch of the imagination. Especially if you are deaf to basic refutations.
 
Last edited:

Adamant Zoroark

catchy catchphrase
is a Contributor Alumnus
Trump's gonna be getting tons of negative press covfefe for a while

Okay, really though, all y'all gotta chill. To the climate deniers: Stop. 2014 was the hottest year on record... Until 2015, which was the hottest year on record until 2016 happened, and at this rate I'll be surprised if 2017 doesn't end up being the hottest year on record. I think you can see a pattern here. To everyone freaking out over the withdrawal: Honestly, regarding climate policy, did you think the withdrawal was gonna change anything? Paris isn't even binding, i.e. Trump Administration could easily just ignore it even without withdrawal. As many before me have said, it's just Trump giving everyone else a giant middle finger. What else is new?

There's also the fact that businesses and consumers (for the most part) seem to be against the withdrawal, so it's not like the development of green tech isn't in any real danger. Consumers still want it, businesses are still gonna make it. Trump giving the rest of the world a giant middle finger isn't gonna change that. If anything, he's really just shooting himself in the foot with a move that, for the most part, people disagree with, hurting his chances of reelection and probably also hurting GOP candidates in the upcoming House election.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JES
Point is, don't treat everyone who disagrees with you like shit every time. Please.

No. Alt-rightists like Deck Knight are literal Hitler-heiling Nazis who are literally murdering us. I'm not going to coddle them and I'm not going to abide the Fair And Balanced™ garbage narrative that got us into this mess in the first damn place.

I mean, you wouldn't ask us to coddle members of ISIS, right?
 
Last edited:

vonFiedler

I Like Chopin
is a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
If you are allowing him just because he is from the other side of the aisle and posts 100+ words then then that's a contrived bias towards neutrality. I very much question your qualitative moderation standards.
I don't need to contrive a bias towards neutrality on a competitive pokemon website that fundamentally has no political stance. I just need people to not call each other "cancer" or make 750 word count posts that end with "I don't see a point in talking to you" for what was probably not the first time. You think there's a morality war you have to fight on every front? Great. Fuck those alt-righters. But this is a petty argument on the internet (bughouse beat me to linking xkcd). Well, you do what you gotta do. I'm gonna do what I gotta do.

No. Alt-rightists like Deck Knight are literal Hitler-heiling Nazis who are literally murdering us. I'm not going to coddle them and I'm not going to abide the Fair And Balanced™ garbage narrative that got us into this mess in the first damn place.
Every conservative is alt-right? They aren't exactly hiding here. Attacking every person with any conservative idea (as opposed TO their ideas, which are free game) is tantamount to wanting them all banned from the subforum. And that's not happening.

I want you guys to cool it with this sort of behavior. You've gotten away with it for a bit too long. For the moment, the foot is down.
 

EV

Banned deucer.
You bet your butt mining is relevant to climate change. It's one reason I'm not a fan of hybrids - http://science.howstuffworks.com/sc...-production-waste-offset-hybrid-benefits1.htm - the article basically posits that hybrids have a greater upfront environmental impact due to nickel and lithium mining, but the life of the vehicle tends to make up for it in less gasoline consumption. This benefit lags when you consider plug-in models that tap into electricity generated by coal plants.

Anyway, the article is a little outdated. Maybe things have gotten better by now.

*ducks in anticipation of prius fanboys mob*
 

Chou Toshio

Over9000
is an Artist Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Top Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Anyone read that Bloomburg is going to try to foot the bill to the Paris agreement that the Federal Government won't pay? lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: EV
Anyone read that Bloomburg is going to try to foot the bill to the Paris agreement that the Federal Government won't pay? lol
I heard at least that he was going to try to start a coalition and set an example, even if he's only paying a fraction of what we would be. It's certainly a nice idea and if more focused awareness and resolve comes out of this debacle it's basically accomplishing what the agreement set out to do in the first place.

Climate change will almost certainly be a bigger deal in the next election than it was in this one (I'll confess to thinking we were about as done with climate change denial as we were with open LGBT discrimination in politics, but it was pretty inexcusable for Trump to get away with denying his public stance on climate change being a hoax during a debate for instance), but I'm keeping my fingers crossed that in the short term the issue won't be forgotten so quickly.
 
I've grown up conservative but y'all gotta realize that denying climate change simply because the left supports it is fucking stupid. The well being of our planet is a lot more important than the pettiness of calling the other side wrong. Instead of pulling up YouTube videos maybe go and check out how much of the Amazon Rainforest is already gone, check out how much of the Great Barrier Reef, and other reefs are bleached, go check out how many tigers are left, etc. Sure Kansas has been underwater before you say, let's just put it underwater again, that's great for humanity because it isnt what the liberals want right? Honestly fuck this terrible logic, we need to take action as humans if we want the earth to support our species still.
 
Also if like to address a specific point that deck knight brought up about fish, since I do have white a bit of knowledge there, my family used to raise clownfish, as in mass numbers for selling to wholesalers etc and I've also spent a lot of my life fishing. Fish in general are extremely sensitive to change, and over hundreds of years they can adapt like say Darwin's finches, but not over 30 or 40 years or even a hundred. The comparison of ape to man and fish adapting is completely wrong and just terrible.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top