Thread: President Donald Trump

Originally Posted by Dragonfly

The COP21 agreement is a bit of a gadget for everyone to feel good about it

that said, you have to start somewhere, and that's the purpose of that agreement

might be a bit too late though as we are all doomed, and climate change is already on its way and can't be reversed

and then you have the possible shift of the magnetic pole, long overdue now, that would make things completely hopeless

I am not not so pessimistic.

Originally Posted by Dragonfly

The COP21 agreement is a bit of a gadget for everyone to feel good about it

that said, you have to start somewhere, and that's the purpose of that agreement

might be a bit too late though as we are all doomed, and climate change is already on its way and can't be reversed

and then you have the possible shift of the magnetic pole, long overdue now, that would make things completely hopeless

I agree having a starting point is good but to the benefit the benefit of China and the detriment of the US.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

American jobs,jobs,jobs.

https://mic.com/articles/166378/why-...uments-against

Links from google searches, it's all you got innit.......you're gameless

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Even the UN has stated that the Paris agreement on climate change will have a negligible effect on global warming,costing the US billions.

The UN actually said that the Paris agreement doesn't go far enough.

And it won't progress if one of the chief polluters pulls out, will it now?

Originally Posted by uncle junior

Links from google searches, it's all you got innit.......you're gameless

I didn't realize this was a game, but know I could share links from both liberal and conservative sites on the downfalls of the TPP.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

The UN actually said that the Paris agreement doesn't go far enough.

And it won't progress if one of the chief polluters pulls out, will it now?

If the other chief polluters were to agree to the same conditions as the US I am sure the US would be more likely to join.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

The UN actually said that the Paris agreement doesn't go far enough.

And it won't progress if one of the chief polluters pulls out, will it now?

Paris climate promises will reduce temperatures by just 0.05°C in 2100 (Press release) | Bjorn Lomborg

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Do you know the the history of George Soros?

Perhaps you could share your understanding of his "history". Do include links.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

I am not not so pessimistic.

No you are just a science denying idiot.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Perhaps you could share your understanding of his "history". Do include links.



No you are just a science denying idiot.

i knew you saying you were moving on to greener pastures was just another one of your lies.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

i knew you saying you were moving on to greener pastures was just another one of your lies.

You fcuking bozo I was talking about that specific thread. It had became a retardfest for the likes of the mentally challenged like yourself. Now how about those links to Soro's "history"?

BTW you once again tried to weigh in on climate change and I promptly destroyed your "sources" as usual. Do you ever tire of the constant humiliation?

Originally Posted by RPETER65

If the other chief polluters were to agree to the same conditions as the US I am sure the US would be more likely to join.

What have you been reading? Breitbart?

The Paris Accord is negotiated and if orange cunto wasn't being told what to do by the Koch Brothers the US would still be in it.

They want unfettered rights to pollute the fuck out of the planet as long as they get their billions.

It's not rocket science and only idiotic trumpanzees don't get it.

Added: The US is the ONLY country in the world not in the Paris Accord.

And that's because it's the ONLY one where billionaires like the Kochs can effectively buy administration policy.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

What have you been reading? Breitbart?

That would be his go to "source".

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

What have you been reading? Breitbart?

The Paris Accord is negotiated and if orange cunto wasn't being told what to do by the Koch Brothers the US would still be in it.

They want unfettered rights to pollute the fuck out of the planet as long as they get their billions.

It's not rocket science and only idiotic trumpanzees don't get it.

Added: The US is the ONLY country in the world not in the Paris Accord.

And that's because it's the ONLY one where billionaires like the Kochs can effectively buy administration policy.

Paris Agreement -- China, India, Set Easy Emissions Goals | National Review

Originally Posted by bsnub

That would be his go to "source".

Sorry wrong answer,retry.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Sorry wrong answer

So are you claiming to have never quoted breitbart here? Also still waiting on those links to Soro's "history".

Originally Posted by bsnub

So are you claiming to have never quoted breitbart here? Also still waiting on those links to Soro's "history".

No I am not claiming not to have posted from breitbart,claiming it is not my go to source,big difference.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Paris Agreement -- China, India, Set Easy Emissions Goals | National Review

Yes, you quote a conservative site whose climate "science" comes Iain Murray from the "Competitive Enterprise Institute", which just happens to be funded by the Koch Brothers, Exxon, etc.

You gullible old fool.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Yes, you quote a conservative site whose climate "science" comes Iain Murray from the "Competitive Enterprise Institute", which just happens to be funded by the Koch Brothers, Exxon, etc.

You gullible old fool.

Is the article accurate,if so where it came from is immaterial.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Yes, you quote a conservative site whose climate "science" comes Iain Murray from the "Competitive Enterprise Institute", which just happens to be funded by the Koch Brothers, Exxon, etc.

You gullible old fool.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.a77d6924970e

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Yes, you quote a conservative site whose climate "science" comes Iain Murray from the "Competitive Enterprise Institute", which just happens to be funded by the Koch Brothers, Exxon, etc.

You gullible old fool.

You might want to check your source you are incorrect.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

What have you been reading? Breitbart?

It does not matter what's happening, what matter is how the media report it.

(Tell me what do you read and I will tell you who are you.)

Originally Posted by Klondyke

I will tell you who are you.

*Derp*

The whole thing about providing a link is to support your facts. Putting a link up cuz some guy who wrote an op/ed piece has the same opinion as you accomplishes nothing, except showing everybody who's telling you what to think......trumpanzees whattabuncha bozos.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

You might want to check your source you are incorrect.

Tells me I'm incorrect and then to "prove it" posts a link that shows all the oil companies and Koch playthings that donate to it.

You fucking moron.

Murray Energy Corporation $45,000


Marathon Petroleum $25,000


Devon Energy $15,000


Phillips 66 $10,000


American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity $5,000


American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers $5,000


Emerson Electric $5,000


Koch Companies Public Sector $15,000


Charles Koch Foundation $10,000


Americans for Prosperity $5,000

Plus Exxon have given it around $2 million over the years until they got found out and realised it was bad for their image.