Obama Disses Another Ally

[DaSleeper]

"Alarmists"??? Just who are you speaking to... specifically?

Look in the mirror!

 

[Praxius]

are you struggling with the definition of per-capita?

Certainly not... where I grew up, people kept boasting that Pictou County had the most Pizza Restaurants Per Capita than anywhere else in the world... it was even on Jeopardy. It still amounts to jack and sh*t.... and Jack left town.

All the Per Capita thing does for the environment is twist things to suit one argument or the other. Suddenly Per Capita is more important than Overall Total.

So with that logic, if there are 3 people stuck on an island in the Pacific who continually use an old oil heater to keep warm, burning away piles of oil barrels from a cargo ship that ran aground, and run the engine of that cargo ship to power air conditioners to keep them cool when they need to.... then per capita, they're the worst polluters in the whole world.

Therefore, no other country should worry about their own pollution and their own problems until these 3 people sort their sh*t out.

Makes sense?

I thought not.

Depending on which stats you want to go by, you get very different results as to who's Numero Uno.
Countries with the worst air pollution ranked by World Health Organisation

#1 - Pakistan
#2 - Qatar
#3 - Afghanistan
#4 - Bangladesh
#5 - Iran
#6 - Egypt
#7 - Mongolia
#8 - United Arab Emirates
#9 - India
#10 - Bahrain

Or

Home - Action For Our Planet

#1 - China
#2 - USA
#3 - Russia
#4 - India
#5 - Japan
#6 - Germany
#7 - Canada
#8 - UK
#9 - South Korea
#10 - Iran

Or

Top 5 most polluting countries

#1 - China
#2 - USA
#3 - Brazil
#4 - Indonesia
#5 - Japan

But I suppose none of that matters.

Apparently Australia is the worst of them all solely based on per capita.

B*tch please.
------------------------------------
Here's what really matters regarding Co2 Emissions:

Top CO2 polluters and highest per capita | Economics Help

Highest CO2 emissions by country as of 2010:
#1 - China
#2 - USA
#3 - EU (27)
#4 - India
#5 - Russia
#6 - Japan
#7 - Germany
#8 - Iran
#9 - South Korea
#10 - Canada
#11 - UK
#12 - Saudi Arabia
#13 - South Africa
#14 - Mexico
#15 - Indonesia
#16 - Brazil
#17 - Italy
#18 - Australia
#19 - France
#20 - Poland

Top Co2 Emissions Per Capita (2010)
#10 - Australia
Below the USA

Regardless, Australia has a lot more interest in protecting the Great Barrier Reef than Obama does.

Obama going on about the Great Barrier Reef is much like Paul McCartney going on about Canada's Seal Hunt.... sounds great for getting pats on the back but neither have the first clue about what they're talking about.

 

[BaalsTears]

What's up? No Benghazi fiction to smear him with? Man the lynching has been relentless.

The treatment of Bush set the precedent for Obama. What goes around comes around.

 

[whitedog]

Lost in the shuffle of Obama’s immigration diktat and his sham of a farce of a travesty of a climate agreement with China was his speech about climate change in Canberra, Australia, where Obama went out of his way to insult Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott. Apparently our embassy personnel in Canberra advised Obama against this course, but naturally Obama knows better.
Australian newspaper columnist Greg Sheridan reports on the matter in an article that is behind the newspaper’s paywall (but easily gotten around through Google if you want to), so here are the important excerpts from it:

BARACK Obama defied the *advice of his embassy in Canberra to deliver a stinging attack on the Abbott government’s climate policies in Brisbane last weekend.
​

The US embassy, under the leadership of ambassador John Berry, advised the President, through his senior staff, not to couch his climate change comments in a way that would be seen as disobliging to the Abbott government, sources have revealed. . .

It is normal practice when the US President makes an overseas visit that the ambassador in the country he is visiting is consulted about the contents of major speeches. It is unusual, though not unprecedented, for an embassy’s advice to be ignored.

The Obama speech in Brisbane was added to the President’s program at the last minute. During his extensive talks with Tony Abbott in Beijing at APEC, Mr Obama did not make any mention of a desire to make a speech, or of any of the contentious climate change content of the speech.

Only in Naypyidaw, in Myanmar, immediately prior to the leaders travelling to Brisbane for the G20 summit, did the US party demand that the President make a speech and that it be to an audience of young people. At the speech, the President did not *acknowledge the presence of Governor-General Peter Cosgrove.

Despite repeated Australian requests, White House officials refused to provide a text of the speech to their Australian hosts in advance, and did not provide a summary of what would be contained in the speech.

Mr Obama’s repeated references to the climate change debate in Australia, his accusation that Australia was an inefficient user of energy and his repeated references to the Great Barrier Reef, which has figured heavily in the climate change debate, have led observers to conclude that the speech was a deliberate swipe at the Abbott government.

Historians of the US-Australia relationship are unable to nominate a case of a visiting president making such a hostile speech for the host government.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has accused Mr Obama of speaking in ignorance about the joint plans by the federal and Queensland governments to act to preserve the Great Barrier Reef. She sent a briefing on the reef to the White House after Mr Obama’s speech was delivered. . .

Sources in Washington said the Brisbane speech was a sign of deep divisions within the Obama administration over how to deal with Australia, and over Asian policy generally. . .

Since the Abbott government was elected last September, there has been a group within the Obama administration that wants to take a tougher public line against Canberra on differences over climate change, in particular the decision to abolish the carbon tax.

Washington sources say the figure who ultimately adjudicated on this internal debate was Mr Obama, who recognised that Mr Abbott had been elected with a clear mandate to abolish the tax. . .

Mr Obama has previously had a warm personal relationship with Mr Abbott. The President has been a frequent telephone caller to Mr Abbott, almost always with a request for Australian support for a US policy or initiative, from troops for the Middle East, US trade initiatives in Asia, or important regional diplomatic matters, especially those involving security. On every occasion the US President has asked for help, the Australian Prime Minister has provided it.
​

Doubt that will continue.

Obama Disses Another Ally | Power Line

Its all just a distraction. Regardless of what may or may not happen with dumping carbon into the atmosphere, all of these speeches, these little jibs between each other, hurtin this one's feelins, insultin that one's, ain't gonna make a hills bit of difference.

And besides, whats the worst case scenario, animals die off - in which case, we have nothing to worry about, afterall, ask any rep of God, we're not animals. He made us differnet.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

"Alarmists"??? Just who are you speaking to... specifically?

Specifically, people like you, who will point to agreements made by China and the U.S. that will never be enacted, but use it as fodder to forward your own partisan political views.

 

[EagleSmack]

the only person on a merry-go-round is you; you steadfastly refuse to speak to your use of the label "Alarmist"... and in this particular case it was you using it in a most specific regard as reflects upon climate change negotiations. Again, just name them... a "collective naming them" will suffice; again, just who/what are your "Alarmists" you referred to?

Does being an alarmist hurt your butt that bad?

do some research/reading... edumacate yourself... do some learin'! Turn off Fox News!

C'mon... it's some real good land with lots of potential!

and then Harper Conservatives lied to Canadians... twice... in providing emission reduction commitments to Canadians and then ignoring them. Like I said, several times now, please keep highlighting this lil' nugget you think you're making points on. I relish any opportunity to showcase failed promises Harper Conservatives have made to Canadians concerning emission reduction commitments.

But I love how Canada gave the UN the middle finger and told them what they could do with the $14 BILLION invoice. It was hilarious.

But I suppose none of that matters.

Apparently Australia is the worst of them all solely based on per capita.

B*tch please.
.

Don't sweat it Prax. You know how the Alarmists are when they don't get their way.

 

[waldo]

Don't sweat it Prax. You know how the Alarmists are when they don't get their way.

about that "having the balls" you spoke of; apparently, you don't have the balls to speak to the context you wrote it in... and here, given your avatar, I thought you were a "gyrene"... with big balls! Go figure!

Of course China would. Everyone knows it. Alarmists don't have the balls to go after China or India for that matter.

​

what you won't say, explicitly say, is that you're labeling all the world nation government representatives involved in climate negotiations "Alarmists"... effectively, all the world nation governments represented! :mrgreen: Of course, since you clearly know nothing about the ongoing year-to-year iterative climate negotiations, significant focus/pressure has been placed on both the China/India you highlight... to the point that both have come forward to state they are now willing to accept a negotiated binding agreement - hence, the recent years focus on lead-up negotiations toward the intended Dec 2015, Paris COP 20 binding agreement.

 

[EagleSmack]

about that "having the balls" you spoke of; apparently, you don't have the balls to speak to the context you wrote it in... and here, given your avatar, I thought you were a "gyrene"... with big balls! Go figure!

What do you want me to say?


I'm sorry you're so butthurt?

what you won't say, explicitly say, is that you're labeling all the world nation government representatives involved in climate negotiations "Alarmists"... effectively, all the world nation governments represented! :mrgreen: Of course, since you clearly know nothing about the ongoing year-to-year iterative climate negotiations, significant focus/pressure has been placed on both the China/India you highlight... to the point that both have come forward to state they are now willing to accept a negotiated binding agreement - hence, the recent years focus on lead-up negotiations toward the intended Dec 2015, Paris COP 20 binding agreement.

All the world's governments? Did Canada pony up the $14 BILLION yet?


Alarmists putting pressure on China and India! LMAO. India just told the Alarmists where to stick it recently with regards to Coal.


And considering most of the world has their hand out for money they will gladly get behind the Alarmists.

 

[waldo]

All the Per Capita thing does for the environment is twist things to suit one argument or the other. Suddenly Per Capita is more important than Overall Total.

nice strawman there! Again, I mentioned both total and per capita. I added an emphasis on the per capita metric because it was actually you... yes you... that chose to speak of Australia's presumed energy efficiency given your anecdotal testimony on the number of solar panels and wind turbines you've seen there! Now certainly, per capita isn't a direct reflection on "efficiency", but it does speak to a respective nation's emissions on a population basis... and clearly, Australia is emitting more CO2 per person, than any other nation in the world.

your listing of an assortment of sources speaking to "pollution" is totally misguided. One speaks to "pollution" in a more traditional toxic pollution sense; your others speak to "pollution" in terms of actual CO2 emissions and even within that you don't draw distinction between the one source that focuses on fossil-fuels/cement and the other that also includes land use (re: deforestation).

What do you want me to say?

I want(ed) you to speak to your usage of the label in the context you applied it. Apparently, that was a most difficult thing for you to consider doing!

All the world's governments? Did Canada pony up the $14 BILLION yet?

you're purposely conflating different context. The world governent reference I made was with regard to the ongoing yearly (sometimes several times per year) iterative climate negotiation meetings and the world government representation at those meetings. For some strange reason you want to keep profiling the Harper Conservative government's weasel move to avoid the legally binding penalty that was due given the Harper Conservatives purposeful ignoring of the Kyoto Protocol. But again, yes... Canada, as all other world governments is represented at the ongoing yearly (sometimes several times per year) iterative climate negotiation meetings.

Alarmists putting pressure on China and India! LMAO. India just told the Alarmists where to stick it recently with regards to Coal.

again, you appear to be purposely taking liberty with your use of the label... perhaps this time you might have the gyrene balls to clearly differentiate just who/what you're applying the label to in each of your quoted sentences, hey!

 

[EagleSmack]

A pity you cannot understand what an Alarmists is.


You're not very smart are you? Easily led? Scared easily?


Think we'll all be underwater soon?

 

[Colpy]

BTW, just for intrerest sake, you guys remember St. Al Gore, Nobel laureate, guru of global warming, producer of An Inconvenient Truth, in which he predicted a rise in sea levels measured not in feet, but METRES!!!

Well, here's an inconvenient truth:

Mr. Gore bought a 8.8 million dollar mansion in California....ON THE BEACH.

Global warming is the greatest scam in human history.

Even the guru doesn't believe it.

But he made millions of dollars...................

As for the guys supporting him, I have one thing to say to you:

SUCKER
​

 

[waldo]

BTW, just for intrerest sake, you guys remember St. Al Gore, Nobel laureate, guru of global warming, producer of An Inconvenient Truth, in which he predicted a rise in sea levels measured not in feet, but METRES!!!

Well, here's an inconvenient truth:

Mr. Gore bought a 8.8 million dollar mansion in California....ON THE BEACH.

what? No Al Gore is fat reference?

like shooting fish in a barrel! Colpy, try... uhhh... ocean view! Ya, ocean view! It's a house in the hills of Montecito, California.

 

[EagleSmack]

How's that for a carbon footprint!


And Alarmists bow down to him.

 

[waldo]

How's that for a carbon footprint!

And Alarmists bow down to him.

as I've stated a couple of times recently, Gore clearly holds no active relevance today, but remains a fixation for you denier types, particularly those, like you, who can't actually rise to a level of engaged, meaningful and knowledgeable discussion.

 

[captain morgan]

Gore is fat.

Probably attributable to climate change

 

[waldo]

Gore is fat.

attaboy! What... none of your buttHurtin pics to go along with that?

 

[Colpy]

what? No Al Gore is fat reference?

like shooting fish in a barrel! Colpy, try... uhhh... ocean view! Ya, ocean view! It's a house in the hills of Montecito, California.

20 feet. That is the sea level rise Gore predicted in his idiotic movie........

A little storm surge, and Al will have an ocean view alright...in his living room. If he was telling the truth, which he was not.

To say nothing of the carbon footprint....I forget, is this his second or third huge mansion GW cultists have bought for him??

Another GW guru on a little trip to Brazil....Leanardo DiCaprio:

I wonder if it runs on wind or solar??

Oh....and he flew in 30 beautiful women to party with........they must have come in on hang gliders.

Oh, let's not forget his Tesla.....which taxpayers paid thousands for.....

Or David Suzuki, another con artist....owns four properties, one worth over 8 million bucks.

Or James Cameron:

James Cameron - Hypocrite - YouTube

 

[waldo]

20 feet. That is the sea level rise Gore predicted in his idiotic movie........

A little storm surge, and Al will have an ocean view alright...in his living room. If he was telling the truth, which he was not.

you failed with your "beach-front" play, so... you want a do-over for a house that's located up in the hills?

again, do you fixate on the low-hanging politician/communicator types... so you can avoid any real meaningful and knowledgeable discussion on the related science and positions presented? Perhaps you should ignore Gore and trot out the official position of, for example, the IPCC on projected sea-level rise... and just what areas of the world and what number of affected people are expected to be impacted. Per IPCC AR5, relative to a sampling of emission scenarios:

- for high emissions: a global rise by 52-98 cm by 2100, threatening the survival of coastal cities and entire island nations.

- for aggressive emissions reductions: a global rise by 28-61 cm by 2100, with serious impacts on many coastal areas, including coastal erosion and a greatly increased risk of flooding.

​

of course, significant criticism has been directed towards the IPCC in this regard, because it didn't give what some scientists believe is an appropriate consideration to the affect of melting land ice sheets on Greenland and in Antartica.

 

[EagleSmack]

as I've stated a couple of times recently, Gore clearly holds no active relevance today, but remains a fixation for you denier types, particularly those, like you, who can't actually rise to a level of engaged, meaningful and knowledgeable discussion.

Gore is the leader of the Alarmist movement.

lmfao




They worship this guy.

 

[captain morgan]

attaboy! What... none of your buttHurtin pics to go along with that?

Can't include a butthurt pict every time, takes up bandwidth and we all know that too much bandwidth causes global warming.

... I can appreciate that you do miss it, so next time, just get up and saunter over to the mirror and the a s s -face that is looking back attcha is the best and most graphic butthurt image possible