Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Canuck100

Are humans really responsible for climate change?

Recommended Posts

On 9/21/2019 at 8:42 AM, dialamah said:

Turns out, India is on track to meeting their Paris Accord commitments, one of only a few countries to do so.  One less excuse for "do-nothing" crowd to use justifying inaction.

Even as Trump undermines action to mitigate climate change, a coalition of American States, cities and businesses have formed a coalition to meet the Paris Accord; that coalition represents 65% of US citizens and 70% of GDP and will reduce US emissions between 17% and 24% by 2030.  An admirable example of people who don't sit on their backsides, whinging about "the other guy".

Link.

did you read the story and click at link to read some more?

Sorry for my ignorance, after reading the article(I really read it),  is this another "harry and meghan are flying carbon neutral private because they are climate change activists" story? There is no hard date yet (Then, I am so confused with their back to 2005 stuff). All are projection. 

Quote

We rate India’s 2030 NDC “2°C compatible.”

The “2°C compatible” rating indicates that India’s climate commitment in 2030 is within the range of what is considered to be a fair share of global effort but is not consistent with the Paris Agreement. This approach requires other countries to make deeper reductions and comparably greater effort to limit warming to 1.5°C. If all countries were to follow India’s approach, warming could be held below—but not well below—2°C, and hence would still be too high to be consistent with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C temperature limit. The 2°C compatible category refers to the 2°C goal adopted by the Copenhagen Agreement in 2009, now replaced by the 1.5°C limit in the Paris Agreement, providing a historical reference point and bridge to the Paris Agreement compatible category rating.

If the CAT were to rate India’s NDC based on its conditional target of 40% non-fossil generation, it would still fall into the same “2°C compatible” category.

Ifthe CAT were to rate India’s projected emissions levels in 2030 under current policies, the upper end of the current policy range would fall into the “2°C compatible” category while the lower end would be rated “1.5°C Paris Agreement compatible”.

https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/india/2019-06-17/fair-share/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/15/2019 at 8:27 AM, SpankyMcFarland said:

Without humans, slowly. With humans, well, take a look. 

Don't know man, obama is buying a beachfront property, so we must be fine.:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, egghead said:

did you read the story and click at link to read some more?

Sorry for my ignorance, after reading the article(I really read it),  is this another "harry and meghan are flying carbon neutral private because they are climate change activists" story? There is no hard date yet (Then, I am so confused with their back to 2005 stuff). All are projection. 

 

I read the whole thing, and did not clink on additional links.  For me, the takeaway is that India is at least making the effort, along with States, cities and organizations in the US, while Canada is not - with the full support of people who seem to think that no effort is better than some effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I read the whole thing, and did not clink on additional links.  For me, the takeaway is that India is at least making the effort, along with States, cities and organizations in the US, while Canada is not - with the full support of people who seem to think that no effort is better than some effort.

We do; where are you living?? we are tax to death with the greenhouse gas emissions tax, electric cars  rebate....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, egghead said:

We do; where are you living?? we are tax to death with the greenhouse gas emissions tax, electric cars  rebate....

Lower taxes than the US.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, egghead said:

are you a comedian :rolleyes:

Sorry, you are right ... old news, used to be lower, in 2017, but not anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Sorry, you are right ... old news, used to be lower, in 2017, but not anymore.

And the Liberals led us to a greater deficit than expected, despite 3% GDP growth. It means that if a downturn in the economy happens, the Canadian government wouldn't be able to lower the taxes to give a boost to the economy. It would be hard austerity like Italy, Spain or Greece who took the same pattern as Canada in the late 90s to early 2ks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2019 at 6:20 PM, Shady said:

01643375-4278-44CF-ADBD-0ABEFFA8384D.jpeg

Tragically, people who are dumb enough to believe nonsense like this are allowed to cast a vote that is counted with the same weight of that of a normal sentient adult human.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ReeferMadness said:

Western European countries don't deserve to be lumped in with laggards like Australia and Canada.

I don't know so much.  I just watched Angela Merkel promise to phase out coal use by 2030.

Good job Angela, that'll do it!

Edit>  Maybe something was lost in the translation.  An article I just read says 2038. 

Still, it's good to know one of the leaders in preventing climate change is taking it so seriously.

Edited by bcsapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I don't know so much.  I just watched Angela Merkel promise to phase out coal use by 2030.

Good job Angela, that'll do it!

Edit>  Maybe something was lost in the translation.  An article I just read says 2038. 

Still, it's good to know one of the leaders in preventing climate change is taking it so seriously.

the problem is that at what costs though? Is LNG or Nuclear OK? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, egghead said:

the problem is that at what costs though? Is LNG or Nuclear OK? :)

I was being sarcastic.  I don't actually believe Germany's position to be a positive one. 

As to your question, both.  Why not? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I was being sarcastic.  I don't actually believe Germany's position to be a positive one. 

As to your question, both.  Why not? 

Nuclear :unsure:

Fracking :o

sometimes, SJWs really defy logic :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, egghead said:

Nuclear :unsure:

Fracking :o

sometimes, SJWs really defy logic :rolleyes:

I wouldn't know.  I have no idea what you are talking about.

Which SJW's are defying your logic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I wouldn't know.  I have no idea what you are talking about.

Which SJW's are defying your logic?

Any who aren't disgusted with virtue and who don't agree that being concerned about climate change is complete bullshit.

Egghead's logic is impeccably simple if not completely ignorant.

 

Edited by eyeball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Any who aren't disgusted with virtue and who don't agree that being concerned about climate change is complete bullshit.

Egghead's logic is impeccably simple if not completely ignorant.

 

hey, climate chage is real. I just said people make a hill out of a sand grain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I wouldn't know.  I have no idea what you are talking about.

Which SJW's are defying your logic?

ya, coal is bad, but Nuclear and Fracking are fine :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, egghead said:

ya, coal is bad, but Nuclear and Fracking are fine :lol:

Coal is bad, but nuclear and natural gas are better.

Close your mouth, the flies will get in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, egghead said:

hey, climate chage is real. I just said people make a hill out of a sand grain

If you're so certain you should write a paper and submit it to the IPCC.  Do you realize what would happen if you could demonstrate and prove scientifically that there is no reason whatsoever for concern?  You`d be a shoo-in for the biggest Nobel Peace prize in the history of the prize - you'd receive millions in prize money, schools would be named in your honour, women would be throwing their panties at you.

I for one will definitely be looking forward to the most important scientific news in the history of science.  It'll be kind of exciting knowing that a MLW poster saved us uncountable trillions in wasted money and time fighting a non-existent problem.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I for one will definitely be looking forward to the most important scientific news in the history of science.

You've got your panties ready too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

You've got your panties ready too?

Ouch, got me. Remind me to never go up against you guys again.

Man oh man that stung.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...