Paris' 2 CC's surrounded by the UN's olive leaves!

[Malaria_Kidd II]

The Truth About Climate Change by John Stossel




Global Warming Debate by Bill Nye and John Stossel

Chill Out 12:22




MK II

[Riddick]

On September 16, social media lit up with WSJ's news report the Administration is seeking ways to stay in the Paris Climate Treaty. Despite his June 1 announcement that he intended to withdraw, had the swamp finally gotten to President Trump?

The White House quickly shot the report down: The President had not reversed course on withdrawing from the Paris Climate Treaty, that is unless his team strikes “a better deal”.

This exercise was a reminder: The fight ahead of the President’s announced intent to withdraw was intense. He faced enormous pressure from leaders around the world, domestic and international corporate media, multinational corporations, universities, think tanks, and numerous other external forces. The loudest cries were from those who have a vested interest in the $1.5 trillion global climate change industry.

There was also organized internal pressure to flip-flop on his promise to the American people, from Obama holdovers, career staff and even some Trump appointees. The “Remain” crowd are a powerful group including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, former Goldman Sachs official, now chair of the National Economic Council Gary Cohn, and even Trump’s family.

The “Remain” position was strengthened by White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon’s departure in August. Bannon strongly and effectively articulated the case for withdrawing from the Paris deal.

It’s important to understand that the President’s June 1st announcement is not the finish line, but the starting gun for a race that will not conclude until November 5, 2019, when Trump can send a formal letter to the United Nations, given his chosen course of withdrawal. He could withdraw that letter any time before the 2020 elections, as he or a successor could at any time thereafter. This is at best a temporary solution.

Alternatively, the President could withdraw completely from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which Paris not only purports to amend, but clearly rewrites. This would automatically withdraw the U.S. from the Paris treaty effective a year from the date we inform the U.N.

Until the announcement is finalized, preferably in some more durable form than a letter, we remain party to the Paris treaty. As the recent “Remain” crowd “fake news” episode reminds us, powerful internal and external forces continue advocating reversal of Trump’s announced plans, working the entire Swamp — media, diplomats and Congress — winking at U.N. officials to not give up on getting the President to reverse course.

Another point to always consider is why we withdrew from the Paris Accord in the first place. President Trump said it best at his announcement: “The Paris Climate Accord is simply the latest example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the United States to the exclusive benefit of other countries, leaving American workers — who I love — and taxpayers to absorb the cost in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories, and vastly diminished economic production.”

He also alluded to its constitutional infirmity, which no “better deal” can remedy. End Paris, don’t mend it.

In addition to destroying the U.S. economy and killing jobs, Paris will exacerbate “Energy Poverty,” now ravaging Europe. President Obama used to say look to Europe if you want to see the what this agenda holds for the U.S.

We couldn’t agree more.

FULL STORY

[Malaria_Kidd II]

"Alternatively, the President could withdraw completely from the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) which Paris not only purports to amend, but clearly rewrites. This would automatically withdraw the U.S. from the Paris treaty effective a year from the date we inform the U.N."

Well! That's a great idea. But we Americans pay through the nose now, and the 194 (minus 1) signing countries want us to pay even more later! While they wait, watch and then laugh at us again as WE bare the brunt of the cc costs for "changes". Any attempt$ at man-made cc cure$ ain't happening for a "fix" in our lifetime$ or our children'$ lifetime$!

Pollution controls are a whole different matter of fact in progress!

That piece was a super update to add to this cc topic so well viewed to date Riddick! Many thanks!


MK II

[Riddick]

The Trump administration is dismantling President Barack Obama’s climate legacy piece by piece, and this week it’s taking an axe to arguably the biggest piece. In an expected move, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt officially began the process of rolling back the incorrectly named Clean Power Plan.

If the Trump administration is intent on achieving 3 percent economic growth and rescinding costly regulations that carry negligible climate benefits—and if it is concerned about preserving our energy grid—the Clean Power Plan is a must-go.

Using a name that surely message-tested well, the Clean Power Plan had nothing to do with eradicating hazardous pollutants from power generation. The U.S. already has laws on the books to protect Americans’ health from emissions that have adverse environmental impacts. Instead, the Clean Power Plan regulated carbon dioxide, a colorless, odorless, nontoxic gas, because of its alleged contribution to climate change.

Environmentally, the climate impact of the Clean Power Plan would have been pointless. And the economic damages would have been felt through higher energy costs, fewer job opportunities, and fewer energy choices for consumers. FULL STORY

[Malaria_Kidd II]

What a Full Story in a nutshell And it cleared the air on Co2 Riddiick. But the cc alarmists will always claim Co2 kills coral bleached white by making the saline sea water acidic, even 20 years from now!

Coral has a life span, like all living things. Because if it died and then decayed into nothing, the Romans could never have invented CONCRETE So ancient Rome would not be the tourist mecca that it is without it.


MKII

[Malaria_Kidd II]

Residents of shrinking US island reject climate victim label!

By Emily Flitter

TANGIER ISLAND, Va. (Reuters) - This summer, a delegation of Republican climate activists visited Tangier Island, a speck of grassland in Virginia's Chesapeake Bay, to try to convince its 450 residents to take climate change seriously.

At a dinner attended by island residents Aug. 2, the activists from RepublicEn headed by former Republican Congressman Bob Inglis laid out the stakes: The sea level is rising, and some scientists estimate that within decades the island, already suffering severe erosion, will need to be abandoned.

The people of Tangier Island were used to this kind of message. Former Vice President Al Gore, a prominent Democratic climate activist, had given the same speech to islanders three days earlier. They were also used to rejecting it.

Note of interest: For starters one could blame the journalist's general lack of knowledge about America's Eastern Shores! The sideways "duck decoy" in the wooden box is a Canada "goose decoy"!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/residents-sh ... 38228.html

MK II

[Riddick]

Climate Nazis Hail Hard-Hitting Proof-Positive Results Of Federal Government Report
Climate change is real, it's here and we're the cause of it.
---
My take:

[Doka]

IF they are talking about it ...........You can be sure they are already Doing It! All the chemicals they spray Has to come Down Sometime.




We can brighten clouds to reflect heat and reduce global warming. But should we?

Snippet :


Rasch and Majkut are two climate specialists who testified Wednesday before the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, which held a subcommittee hearing on the potential for “geoengineering” — a catchall for proposals to directly cool the atmosphere or pull carbon emissions from it.



THE ENTIRE ARTICLE
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation- ... 47911.html

[Malaria_Kidd II]

Yes Doka the US gov's openly admitting Geo-E and whatever goes up is certainly going to come down. The crippling national debt's mega numbers are just figures to juggle to those way past retirement throw backs, brainwashed for years on cc in Congress.

From the article you posted: "It’s a nightmare scenario that could soon demand an emergency response. What to do?" Notice those two words, "soon demand", if it's got everyone on the coast's in dire straights about rising sea levels. I suggest they keep their "emergency" camera phones charged and at the ready!

My spot on conjecture for liberal ideas like that is this. They collectively are experiencing "Delusions of Grandeur!"

Many thanks for that geoengineering enlightenment in this cc topic so well viewed to date!

Maybe Prince William, is right, but it's not just Africa with too many people! Besides, baseball is NOT America's favorite past time!

Ground Zero's Clyde Lewis got a bit radical last night thinking Prince Wm wants to eliminate people in Africa!

MK II

[Riddick]

Advocacy Über Science:
A Report Made To Order For Climate Fascists Everywhere
From E. Calvin Beisner's Full Article @cnsnews.com -

The U.S. Global Change Research Program (GCRP), a federal interdepartmental effort, has just released its fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA)—after spending $7.9 billion since its last NCA in 2014.

The NCA is a 477-page behemoth that hardly anyone will ever read in its entirety and far fewer will understand. That hasn’t kept the mainstream media from touting its “findings” as gospel truth that demands immediate and drastic response from everybody and his dog.

You’d have thought something interesting had happened. But none of this is interesting. None of it is new. It’s what the GCRP has been saying for years.

What would I have done if I’d had even, say, 1 percent of the GCRP’s budget? For $79 million, I suspect I’d have been able to bring together a team that would have followed one of the basic canons of science: deal with all the evidence, not just what supports your hypothesis (or your agenda).

That’s definitely not what the GCRP did.

As Steven Koonin, Undersecretary of Energy for Science during President Obama’s first term and now Director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University, put it in the Wall Street Journal, the 2017 NCA (just like the 2014) repeatedly cites data supporting its alarmism while ignoring data—sometimes from the very same sources, and sometimes even buried deep inside its own report—that undermine it.

In 2014, the NCA made an art of crying wolf with statistics, reporting Greenland and Antarctic ice loss, for instance, in hundreds of gigatons (Oh, my!) but not revealing that the rate amounted to 0.1 percent and 0.0045 percent per decade, respectively, or a combined 3.3 inches of sea level rise per century.

Koonin cites two examples of data mishandling in the 2017 report:

“The report ominously notes that while global sea level rose an average 0.05 inch a year during most of the 20th century, it has risen at about twice that rate since 1993. But it fails to mention that the rate fluctuated by comparable amounts several times during the 20th century. The same research papers the report cites show that recent rates are statistically indistinguishable from peak rates earlier in the 20th century … .

“The report’s executive summary declares that U.S. heat waves have become more common since the mid-1960s, although acknowledging the 1930s Dust Bowl as the peak period for extreme heat. Yet buried deep in the report is a figure showing that heat waves are no more frequent today than in 1900.”

The NCA assiduously turns a blind eye toward contrary research. For example, a paper by University of Alabama climate scientist John Christy, Weather Channel co-founder Joe D’Aleo, and econometrician James Wallace found that if you control for solar, volcanic, and ocean current variability, you can explain all the global temperature changes over the last 60 years, leaving nothing to blame on carbon dioxide.

“These deficiencies … are typical of many others that set the report’s tone,” Koonin adds.

“Such data misrepresentations,” he says, “violate basic scientific norms. In his celebrated 1974 ‘Cargo Cult’ lecture, the late [Nobel Prize-winning physicist] Richard Feynman admonished scientists to discuss objectively all the relevant evidence, even that which does not support the narrative. That’s the difference between science and advocacy” [emphasis added].

The coming days and weeks will, no doubt, see more revelations of bad science in the NCA. For now, let climate alarmists everywhere celebrate.

---
E. Calvin Beisner, Ph.D., has studied the science and economics of climate change and climate policy for over twenty years and has spoken on it for the Vatican, committees of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, and several of the International Conferences on Climate Change.

[Malaria_Kidd II]

What me worry? Damn sight right! That 7.9 billion $s spent is not from our taxpayer's hard earned $s! It's emanating, except on Sundays, from the mint's printers and OUR brainwashed gov'ment's computer$ via their ghost generated funds!

It's THEIR serial numbered paper money coming out of thin air, not falling off D.C.'s cherry trees, if you will! With a past Dem controlled US Congress and Dem Executive Admin, the climate change alarming talk and in print alone must have added to our debt 1 trillion $s to date

One could suppose every NCA re$earcher has a swimming pool now behind a small mansion! Thanks Riddick for that better view of the real world's siren's sounding loudly on cc. It reads just like Dr. Michael Savage of the Savage Nation radio program, wrote it I've heard him echo this piece so many times since 1999!

Snipet......

"The NCA is a 477-page behemoth that hardly anyone will ever read in its entirety and far fewer will understand. That hasn’t kept the mainstream media from touting its “findings” as gospel truth that demands immediate and drastic response from everybody and his dog.

You’d have thought something interesting had happened. But none of this is interesting. None of it is new. It’s what the GCRP has been saying for years."


NASA sez this news today giving their $atellites work to do on any dull day in outer space.

Nasa map of Earth over 20 years highlights astonishing impact of climate change
Animation captures planet's seasonal fluctuations as seen from space

Tom Embury-Dennis @tomemburyd a day ago 134 comments

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/scien ... 62221.html

Here's a part of just one of 134 comments that proves anyone's brain can be Spic & Spanned with repeated lies so easily!

"2. No one is saying that we should de-industrialise. We need to find ways to reduce our CO2 (and other pollutants) emissions, e.g. through renewable energy."

If Co2 is a pollutant, O2 must be the same air borne menace to avoid breathing!

MK II

[Malaria_Kidd II]

Rinse and repeat, etc. etc.

The Drudge Report - Sunday November 26, 2017

After 30 Years Alarmists Are Still Predicting A Global Warming Apocalypse

http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/25/after ... pocalypse/

To cut the suspense to a prediction. After all the numbered highlights (or lowlights) it ends this way.

The San Jose Mercury News reported June 30, 1989 that a “senior environmental official at the United Nations, Noel Brown, says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

That prediction didn’t come true 17 years ago, and the U.N. is sounding the same alarm today.

To date Al Gorlioni has spent George $oros' cc money (down a) well!


MK II

[Riddick]

After 30 Years Alarmists Are Still Predicting A Global Warming Apocalypse

30 years of forecasting failure? Would you believe such apocalyptic tripe can be traced back even further like NEARLY HALF A CENTURY?



Hysterical extremists have been at it for a long time. So their crystal balls have big cracks in them, that's irrelevent - It's a "just cause"! Just 'cause all their dire warnings have fallen flat, don't think for a minute they're gonna stop now.

[Malaria_Kidd II]

What'ya bet the same cc alarming folks disregard stop signs too!

What a find you've placed here as an early 1969 factoid Riddick! That's appreciated all the way up North to SE WI!

I can only go back to the later seventies listening to radio news icon Paul Harvey on the Noon news. While waiting to unload livestock on the KY-TN border, Paul reported on how a "new study" by scientists, now claim cow flatulence results in global warming. And every few years since then, you'll hear it again!

So the majority of Americans as liberals will pay for cc cures gleefully. And the minority of us American conservatives will begrudge every penny we pay! Knowing all the while a real cure is up to Mum Earth and mainly her son! So there's a play on words, eh?

"Save the planet!" and "Feed the planet!" rallying cries seem to be just falling upon the United States of America's broad shoulders!

Thankfully liberals and conservatives have a few major environmental thoughts in common. We are all for clean water, air, and soil.


MK II

[Riddick]