- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
300 scientists write letter urging Trumpto withdraw from UN climate agency
Posted on 2/24/17 at 12:18 am
Posted on 2/24/17 at 12:18 am
quote:
More than 300 scientists have urged President Trump to withdraw from the U.N.’s climate change agency, warning that its push to curtail carbon dioxide threatens to exacerbate poverty without improving the environment.
In a Thursday letter to the president, MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen called on the United States and other nations to “change course on an outdated international agreement that targets minor greenhouse gases,” starting with carbon dioxide.
quote:
“Since 2009, the US and other governments have undertaken actions with respect to global climate that are not scientifically justified and that already have, and will continue to cause serious social and economic harm — with no environmental benefits,” said Mr. Lindzen, a prominent atmospheric physicist.
Signers of the attached petition include the U.S. and international atmospheric scientists, meteorologists, physicists, professors and others taking issue with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change [UNFCCC], which was formed in 1992 to combat “dangerous” climate change.
The 2016 Paris climate accord, which sets nonbinding emissions goals for nations, was drawn up under the auspices of the UNFCCC.
“Observations since the UNFCCC was written 25 years ago show that warming from increased atmospheric CO2 will be benign — much less than initial model predictions,” says the petition.
Mr. Trump said during the campaign he would “cancel” U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement, which was ratified in September by former President Barack Obama over the objections of Senate Republicans, who argued that the accord requires Senate ratification under the U.S. Constitution.
Myron Ebell, a Competitive Enterprise Institute scholar who led the Trump transition team on the Environmental Protection Agency, told reporters last month in London that the president would pull out of the Paris Agreement.
Advocates for climate change policies have called for Mr. Trump to honor the agreement, under which nations agree to enact policies to keep the increase in global temperatures this century under 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial levels.
Last week the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops reaffirmed its support for the Paris Agreement in a letter to Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, saying the agreement is “urgently needed if we are to meet our common and differentiated responsibilities for the effects of climate change.”
More than 700 companies and investors have signed onto a statement urging Mr. Trump to abide by the Paris accord coordinated by nine environmental groups, including the American Sustainable Business Council, the Environmental Defense Fund and the World Wildlife Fund.
“Failure to build a low-carbon economy puts American prosperity at risk. But the right action now will create jobs and boost US competitiveness,” said the statement on LowCarbonUSA.org. “We pledge to do our part, in our own operations and beyond, to realize the Paris Agreement’s commitment of a global economy that limits global temperature rise to well below 2 degrees Celsius.”
Challenging the catastrophic climate change narrative, Mr. Lindzen describes carbon dioxide as “plant food, not poison.”
“Restricting access to fossil fuels has very negative effects upon the wellbeing of people around the world,” he says in his letter.
“It condemns over 4 billion people in still underdeveloped countries to continued poverty.”
LINK
Posted on 2/24/17 at 12:22 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
To the Global Warming crowd....
Posted on 2/24/17 at 12:50 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Challenging the catastrophic climate change narrative, Mr. Lindzen describes carbon dioxide as “plant food, not poison.”
I really hope that an educated professor wouldn't actually use this phrase and that this is a gross simplification by the article author.
Posted on 2/24/17 at 12:59 am to KamaCausey_LSU
You seem like the grossly simple one in this sitution
Posted on 2/24/17 at 1:11 am to KamaCausey_LSU
quote:
I really hope that an educated professor wouldn't actually use this phrase and that this is a gross simplification by the article author.
Fewer words mean fewer grammar mistakes. You should try it.
Posted on 2/24/17 at 1:56 am to KamaCausey_LSU
quote:
I really hope that an educated professor wouldn't actually use this phrase and that this is a gross simplification by the article author.
I have enough humility to realize that probably all MIT professors are smarter than I am.
Posted on 2/24/17 at 2:04 am to KamaCausey_LSU
quote:
I really hope that an educated professor wouldn't actually use this phrase and that this is a gross simplification by the article author.
Lindzen is a legit published author in the field, although he does take money to do press releases/events where he way overhypes forthcoming papers.
Posted on 2/24/17 at 2:36 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
This makes me giddy with joy!
Posted on 2/24/17 at 2:48 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
300 sounds like a consensus to me.
Posted on 2/24/17 at 3:07 am to TrueTiger
quote:If it's the correct 300, then it's all you need.
300 sounds like a consensus to me.
Posted on 2/24/17 at 4:58 am to SlapahoeTribe
Fork with a Scientist
Posted on 2/24/17 at 5:17 am to KamaCausey_LSU
I tried to google for the contents of this petition and the signees of this petition. But I could only find, the author, Richard Lindzen and the news article. Lindzen is a well known climate skeptic, so his name on the petition is not a big surprise. I'd just like to know who the other 300 scientists are. If the names are reputable or a complete mess like the laughable [ global warming petition projectwhich were mostly made up names or people who weren't related in the climate field.
This post was edited on 2/24/17 at 5:18 am
Posted on 2/24/17 at 5:20 am to TrueTiger
quote:
300 sounds like a consensus to me.
Consensus has nothing to do with science. Accuracy that can be reproduced is science.
Anyone who tells you "X has been decided" is not a scientist or is a scientist looking for grant money.
Everything in science is a working theory subject to change should more information become available.
Posted on 2/24/17 at 5:27 am to SECdragonmaster
quote:
Consensus has nothing to do with science. Accuracy that can be reproduced is science.
Anyone who tells you "X has been decided" is not a scientist or is a scientist looking for grant money.
Everything in science is a working theory subject to change should more information become available.
You're right, consensus isn't science. But, if someone can show a better answer, most scientists will gravitate towards to the more correct answer extremely quickly. This is why man made climate change has endured for so long. Because no one has ever given a better explanation of why the Earth is warming up. Yes, 300 people did sign a petition. But, I have no idea who those 300 are. They could be a physicist who specializes in optics. Like Happer, Trump's science advisor. Unfortunately. just because he has a degree in Physics, even if he's a really smart guy, doesn't make him an expert in climatology.
Posted on 2/24/17 at 6:04 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
But...dat consensus doh!
Posted on 2/24/17 at 6:07 am to Tyrusrex
quote:
You're right, consensus isn't science. But, if someone can show a better answer, most scientists will gravitate towards to the more correct answer
Under normal conditions, this is true.
That's because under normal conditions, research dollars aren't primarily doled out by entities with a vested interest in a particular conclusion.
That's not the case with climate science
Posted on 2/24/17 at 6:14 am to Bayou
quote:
Dey worried 'bout grant cash
Grant Cash was what the whole Climate Change hysteria in Academia was about in the first place.
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News