Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
So with less than a quarter of the people, we in the U.S. manage to produce more than half as many emissions. We therefore produce more on an individual basis. We'll continue having no standing to criticize others until we can get our own house in order. India has nearly the same population as China yet produces less than half the emissions we do. Why does India make us both look like crap by either measure? Because India has never been as industrialized. Would you like them to be? Great Britain and Germany have been very industrial so why aren't they topping any lists? What's our excuse? Why have we let China lead the green tech revolution?China has ( 1398/328 ~= ) 4.262 times more people than the us and China could dump ~4.262 times more COs emmissions into the air to equal per capita emmissions .
Rank Country CO2 emissions (total) 1 China 10.06GT 2 United States 5.41GT 3 India 2.65GT 4 Russian Federation 1.71GT 5 Japan 1.16GT
Meaning you can't explain why the temperature didn't rise to at least the predicted temperature of radiative forcing of CO2 let alone why there were no additional positive feedbacks?That's all interesting stuff. But none of that has anything to do with current declines in glaciers around the world. Please try to stick to thread topics or simply start a new thread on the topic of your choice (within "Environment"
Of course I know what per capita means. Do you not believe it relevant to this discussion?" Climate Change Wizard Clueless About A Ratio "
* Analysis On Stupid And The Planet Is Full *
Do you have the slightest clue what a Ratio - Wikipedia is and how to calculate per capita emissions ?CO2 in the atmosphere is not affected by transpiration. It is affected when we take carbon compounds out of the Earth and burn them, creating CO2 and putting it into the atmosphere. And why do you have no comment about China ranking so low on per capita emissions? Weren't you just telling us that China was the worst and deserved 100% of our efforts? You should try admitting you were wrong. It's good for the soul.
Per Capita Emission = CO2 emissions of a country DIVIDED by population of a country .
China population 1.398 billion (2019)
US population 328.2 million (2019)
China has ( 1398/328 ~= ) 4.262 times more people than the us and China could dump ~4.262 times more COs emmissions into the air to equal per capita emissions of the us .
Is the entirety of the liberal arts majors of the left on board with such gawd awful ignorance that they believe shifting CO2 emissions to china based on per capita ratio makes any sense ?
The bid inn and the left are the long are of the ccp and the shifting of industry to china is all about dismantling us infrastructure and enabling chinese communist hegemony .
-- Each Country's Share of CO2 Emissions --
Rank Country CO2 emissions (total) 1 China 10.06GT 2 United States 5.41GT 3 India 2.65GT 4 Russian Federation 1.71GT 5 Japan 1.16GT
GLM !Good! Who wants to live on a glacier?
A motivation to get rid of us industry that has competent purposes for competitive advantage as infrastructure or as domestic product , whether carbon dioxide is produced or not , to avoid consternation by some sanctimonious brow beaters hurling guilt trips of greedy gluttonous degenerates on us public , is absolute stupid fuckery ! ! !So with less than a quarter of the people, we in the U.S. manage to produce more than half as many emissions. We therefore produce more on an individual basis. We'll continue having no standing to criticize others until we can get our own house in order. India has nearly the same population as China yet produces less than half the emissions we do. Why does India make us both look like crap by either measure? Because India has never been as industrialized. Would you like them to be? Great Britain and Germany have been very industrial so why aren't they topping any lists? What's our excuse? Why have we let China lead the green tech revolution?
www.usmessageboard.com
" More Schizoid Lunacy From Population Hoarding Climate Change Grant Writers "
|
* Those That Can Do And Tough Titty Conscripting Self Deprecation Of Lucrative Advantages *
A motivation to get rid of us industry that has competent purposes for competitive advantage as infrastructure or as domestic product , whether carbon dioxide is produced or not , to avoid consternation by some sanctimonious brow beaters hurling guilt trips of greedy gluttonous degenerates on us public , is absolute stupid fuckery ! ! !So with less than a quarter of the people, we in the U.S. manage to produce more than half as many emissions. We therefore produce more on an individual basis. We'll continue having no standing to criticize others until we can get our own house in order. India has nearly the same population as China yet produces less than half the emissions we do. Why does India make us both look like crap by either measure? Because India has never been as industrialized. Would you like them to be? Great Britain and Germany have been very industrial so why aren't they topping any lists? What's our excuse? Why have we let China lead the green tech revolution?
The trump sought to assert state capitalism as a domestic economy more greatly directed by free enterprise , that also included tariffs and tax credits to retain and accrue competitive us domestic industry , which could include emphasis on a green technology revolution .
The trump did not seek to assert state capitalism as a domestic economy more greatly directed by bureaucrats , that also includes measures to alienate and deplete competitive domestic industry based on a climate change revolution .
Which policies of which party more closely parallel which economics system ?
Globalism Of Neoclassical Economics Versus Nationalism Of American School Of Economics
" Globalism Of Neoclassical Economics Versus Nationalism Of American School Of Economics " * Domestic Product Interests Are Not Nurtured But Contracted To The Lowest Global Bidder When Possible * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_economics Neoclassical economics uses the utility...
* Most Industrialized Duh *
The Gilded Age was a period of economic growth as the United States jumped to the lead in industrialization ahead of Britain. The nation was rapidly expanding its economy into new areas, especially heavy industry like factories, railroads, and coal mining.Gilded Age - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Railroad track mileage tripled between 1860 and 1880, and then doubled again by 1920. The new track linked formerly isolated areas with larger markets and allowed for the rise of commercial farming, ranching, and mining, creating a truly national marketplace. American steel production rose to surpass the combined totals of Britain, Germany, and France.[15]
" Climate Change Wizard Clueless About A Ratio "
* Analysis On Stupid And The Planet Is Full *
Do you have the slightest clue what a Ratio - Wikipedia is and how to calculate per capita emissions ?CO2 in the atmosphere is not affected by transpiration. It is affected when we take carbon compounds out of the Earth and burn them, creating CO2 and putting it into the atmosphere. And why do you have no comment about China ranking so low on per capita emissions? Weren't you just telling us that China was the worst and deserved 100% of our efforts? You should try admitting you were wrong. It's good for the soul.
Per Capita Emission = CO2 emissions of a country DIVIDED by population of a country .
China population 1.398 billion (2019)
US population 328.2 million (2019)
China has ( 1398/328 ~= ) 4.262 times more people than the us and China could dump ~4.262 times more COs emmissions into the air to equal per capita emissions of the us .
Is the entirety of the liberal arts majors of the left on board with such gawd awful ignorance that they believe shifting CO2 emissions to china based on per capita ratio makes any sense ?
The bid inn and the left are the long are of the ccp and the shifting of industry to china is all about dismantling us infrastructure and enabling chinese communist hegemony .
-- Each Country's Share of CO2 Emissions --
Rank Country CO2 emissions (total) 1 China 10.06GT 2 United States 5.41GT 3 India 2.65GT 4 Russian Federation 1.71GT 5 Japan 1.16GT
)? The thinking is very shaky. It would be like somebody going for nose-job plastic surgery yet having no teeth.
So with less than a quarter of the people, we in the U.S. manage to produce more than half as many emissions. We therefore produce more on an individual basis. We'll continue having no standing to criticize others until we can get our own house in order. India has nearly the same population as China yet produces less than half the emissions we do. Why does India make us both look like crap by either measure? Because India has never been as industrialized. Would you like them to be? Great Britain and Germany have been very industrial so why aren't they topping any lists? What's our excuse? Why have we let China lead the green tech revolution?China has ( 1398/328 ~= ) 4.262 times more people than the us and China could dump ~4.262 times more COs emmissions into the air to equal per capita emmissions .
Rank Country CO2 emissions (total) 1 China 10.06GT 2 United States 5.41GT 3 India 2.65GT 4 Russian Federation 1.71GT 5 Japan 1.16GT
We need to eliminate GHG emissions. What that costs depends a great deal on you and I. I strenuously suspect that my way of doing it would cost a fraction of the manner you would end up doing it.
What consequence?Because you will do nothing until you are forced by the consequences of warming
What consequence?Because you will do nothing until you are forced by the consequences of warming
A greener planet?!?....Won't that end up absorbing more of the CO2 that all the hand wringing Chicken Littles are all up in arms about?What consequence?Because you will do nothing until you are forced by the consequences of warming
Longer growing seasons.
Fewer cold related deaths.
A greener planet.
A greener planet?!?....Won't that end up absorbing more of the CO2 that all the hand wringing Chicken Littles are all up in arms about?What consequence?Because you will do nothing until you are forced by the consequences of warming
Longer growing seasons.
Fewer cold related deaths.
A greener planet.
not to critique you my friend, but my take on that statement would have been, someone going for a nose-job plastic surgery and coming out with the same nose.Yep.......you'll notice that the climate crusaders talk about the drivel that nobody cares about. Just not big picture guys at all......frankly, I think it is a thinking pathology.
Think about it.........who with any degree of reasoned judgement advocates for spending trillion in taxpayer $$ to fight climate change while China continues to build 2-3 coal plants/month ( and will out to 2030
Plants remove CO2 from the atmosphere but return it when they decompose. The problem CO2 is that being removed from the ground (oil and coal) and put into the atmosphere. It does not get recycled in a timely fashion.A greener planet?!?....Won't that end up absorbing more of the CO2 that all the hand wringing Chicken Littles are all up in arms about?What consequence?Because you will do nothing until you are forced by the consequences of warming
Longer growing seasons.
Fewer cold related deaths.
A greener planet.
There seems to be a flaw in your logic somewhere. If plants return CO2 to the atmosphere when they decompose, then how did all of that carbon get buried in the first place?Plants remove CO2 from the atmosphere but return it when they decompose. The problem CO2 is that being removed from the ground (oil and coal) and put into the atmosphere. It does not get recycled in a timely fashion.A greener planet?!?....Won't that end up absorbing more of the CO2 that all the hand wringing Chicken Littles are all up in arms about?What consequence?Because you will do nothing until you are forced by the consequences of warming
Longer growing seasons.
Fewer cold related deaths.
A greener planet.
Then why hasn't it already happened? CO2 is higher and the planet is warmer. Apparently, the planet IS getting greener but it isn't helping. Here's an article you all should like: As Our Planet Gets Greener, Plants Are Slowing Global WarmingA greener planet?!?....Won't that end up absorbing more of the CO2 that all the hand wringing Chicken Littles are all up in arms about?What consequence?Because you will do nothing until you are forced by the consequences of warming
Longer growing seasons.
Fewer cold related deaths.
A greener planet.
Why yes it would!
Then why hasn't it already happened? CO2 is higher and the planet is warmer. Apparently, the planet IS getting greener but it isn't helping. Here's an article you all should like: As Our Planet Gets Greener, Plants Are Slowing Global WarmingA greener planet?!?....Won't that end up absorbing more of the CO2 that all the hand wringing Chicken Littles are all up in arms about?What consequence?Because you will do nothing until you are forced by the consequences of warming
Longer growing seasons.
Fewer cold related deaths.
A greener planet.
Why yes it would!
