If the left, the politicians and the climate change alarmist would ever get over themselves and the Alinsky style propaganda and attacks people might actually listen and get more involved.
I was watching the Greg Gutfeld Show last night and one of his segment’s, interviews was with BjornLomborg . “Not all experts agreed w/ the Paris Accord interviews on Gutfeld”. I replied to his tweet about the interview and asked him to post the interview with BjornLomborg, ( Robert Fleming @roboeamerican
Hope you take the time and find useful what I found. The Paris Climate Agreement Won’t Change the Climate
Climate Change: What’s So Alarming?
This one Presented by RICHARD LINDZEN , Climate Change: What Do Scientists Say?
Is Climate Change Our Biggest Problem?
Excellent article by Bjorn Lomborg
“Bjorn Lomborg is director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, and author of The Skeptical Environmentalist and Cool It.
Like the Kyoto Protocol before it, the drastically over-hyped Paris climate treaty has fallen victim to political and economic reality.
Now that President Donald Trump has officially pulled the United States from the accord, it is time to declare the entire Kyoto-Paris approach to global warming dead and buried. Instead of scrapping over the treaty’s corpse, this is an opportunity to try a new, better and more efficient approach to solving global warming.
Right now, the chances of anything so constructive seem slim. Rhetoric is overheated to the point of absurdity. Environmental campaigners condemn Mr. Trump for dooming the entire planet to a fiery Armageddon, yet claim rashly that the treaty could survive without the United States. It will not, and it should not.
The hyperbole and outrage can’t hide the truth: even with the United States included, the treaty was not going to make much difference to global warming. Its grand rhetoric was never matched by the actual carbon-cutting promises within its pages. A lot was made of the treaty’s fanciful pledge to keep global temperature rises as low as 1.5 C. But that would have been impossible in all realistic scenarios other than a devastating global recession.” Read the rest here.> A path forward after the Paris climate agreement
Another,
“A new peer-reviewed paper by Dr. Bjorn Lomborg published in the Global Policy journal measures the actual impact of all significant climate promises made ahead of the Paris climate summit.
Governments have publicly outlined their post-2020 climate commitments in the build-up to the December’s meeting. These promises are known as “Intended Nationally Determined Contributions” (INDCs).
Dr. Lomborg’s research reveals:
- The climate impact of all Paris INDC promises is minuscule: if we measure the impact of every nation fulfilling every promise by 2030, the total temperature reduction will be 0.048°C (0.086°F) by 2100.
- Even if we assume that these promises would be extended for another 70 years, there is still little impact: if every nation fulfills every promise by 2030, and continues to fulfill these promises faithfully until the end of the century, and there is no ‘CO₂ leakage’ to non-committed nations, the entirety of the Paris promises will reduce temperature rises by just 0.17°C (0.306°F) by 2100.
- US climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by 0.031°C (0.057°F) by 2100.
- EU climate policies, in the most optimistic circumstances, fully achieved and adhered to throughout the century, will reduce global temperatures by 0.053°C (0.096°F) by 2100.” Read the rest here.> Paris climate promises will reduce temperatures by just 0.05°C in 2100 (Press release)
Finally, May 31st 2017
“In his monologue, Greg Gutfeld said President Trump should pull America out of the Paris Climate Agreement.
He said President Obama effectively decided to “spend cash on lottery tickets rather than toothpaste” when he decided to join the global agreement.
Gutfeld said that the measures taken under the agreement will cut global temperatures by less than one-tenth of a degree.
He said that in scientific terms, that number is trivial, but that in “human” terms, the consequences are “homicidal.”
For the same trillions of dollars that the accord will cost, doctors could cure malaria or malnutrition, or supply potable water to every human.
Gutfeld said the accord is “fueled by a lie that the West is so foul that only chucking trillions at a problem will absolve us from our exaggerated sins.”
If you can handle Juan Williams comments watch the clip here.> Gutfeld: Why the Paris Climate Accord Is a Terrible Idea
As always, God bless America and you.
Roberts Thoughts 2 