President Trump created a firestorm with his announcement that he is pulling the United States out of the Paris Climate Change Agreement. The political left along with a long list of other left leaning advocates within government, academia, industry and the media, including elements within other nations are up in arms as a consequence. In this paper we will explore this decision and its real or potential implications.
Here are the president's remarks revealing his decision to withdraw. President Trump's full remarks at CFACT.org.
Here are examples of reactions climate change advocates have rendered regarding Trump's action. https://thefederalist.com/2017/06/01/15-top-reactions-trumps-withdrawal-paris-climate-deal/ As you peruse the comments you will find that little to no factual basis supporting their comments. Their language invokes emotional reactions and denigrates the president rather than offering facts in defense of their positions.
Background. Climate change has been around for thousands of years, some say even longer. However long the earth has been in existence scientists have established that climate change has been a recurring event and at times those events have been massive/catastrophic . They occurred long before man entered the scene and long before man had even a tiny ability to potentially impact global climate. Given what we know about past climate change the ability of human activity to influence such events is at best tenuous. It is a certainty that human activity had no ability to impact the earth's climate until the last 100 years or so. To suggest that in this tiny bit of time as measured against the earth's long existence and recurrent climate changes that human activity is now an established contributor to what is a preposterous proposition. It defies logic to believe human activity is now considered a contributor to changes which have occurred over many thousands of years or more. It should be obvious that claims that we now are prime movers in impacting the earth's climate grossly misrepresents factual history. Substantial evidence offers serious doubts as to the basis for such claims. Efforts resulting from the Paris Accord are estimated to reduce atmospheric C02 by .2 degrees over the next 30 years or so. Is it a reasonable to believe the time, energy and recourses consumed to achieve such a miniscule difference will have any measurable impact? Who decided that and on what basis? Despite the apocalyptic claims by climate change advocates that something must be done the rationale for those claims are woefully inadequate. Common sense suggests a serious unemotional review is necessary. Established facts coupled with the plethora of past failed climate change predictions do not evoke confidence that anyone has any idea how or what, or even if, humans have any capability to influence the mighty forces of nature. But we do know the consequential negative impacts such an undertaking will have on the economic health and welfare of people and nations across the globe. Perhaps these and other reasons contributed to Trump's decision.
I make no claim to special insights or scientific expertise. The discussion offered is garnered from those having such insights and expertise. I also admit to being a climate change skeptic.
This cartoon depiction of what is known about climate changes throughout known history of earth provides a general understanding of what has happened over time. https://xkcd.com/1732/ Climate change is a historical reality.
This item depicts the history from a global warming perspective. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-history-idUSTRE7B02DA20111202 Although unproven the basis for these actions is the presumption that human activity contributes to global warming. CO2 is targeted as a global warming contributor. Providing funds to poor countries to "green" their economies is a proposed solution.
This item discusses the history of thinking that human activity influences the earth's climate. Quote: "Dr. Ball has been a climatologist for more than forty years and was one of the earliest critics of the global warming hoax that was initiated by the United Nations environmental program that was established in 1972 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) established in 1988." And, "CO2, despite being a minor element of the Earth’s atmosphere, is essential for all life on Earth because it is the food that nourishes all vegetation. The Earth has passed through many periods of high levels of CO2 and many cycles of warming and cooling that are part of the life of the planet. “Science works by creating theories based on assumptions,” Dr. Ball notes, “then other scientists—performing their skeptical role—test them. The structure and mandate of the IPCC was in direct contradiction of this scientific method. They set out to prove the theory rather than disprove it.“The atmosphere,” Dr. Ball notes, “is three-dimensional and dynamic, so building a computer model that even approximates reality requires far more data than exists and much greater understanding of an extremely turbulent and complex system.” No computer model put forth by the IPCC in support of global warming has been accurate, nor ever could be. Most of the reports were created by a small group of men working within the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia and all were members of the IPCC. The result was “a totally false picture supposedly based on science.” The revelations of emails between the members of the CRU were made available in 2009 by an unknown source. Dr. Ball quotes Phil Jones, the Director of the CRU at the time of the leaks, and Tom Wigley, a former director addressing other CRU members admitting that “Many of the uncertainties surrounding the cause of climate change will never be resolved because the necessary data are lacking.” The IPCC depended upon the public’s lack of knowledge regarding the science involved and the global warming hoax was greatly aided because the “mainstream media bought into and promoted the unproven theory. Scientists who challenged were denied funding and marginalized. National environmental policies were introduced based on the misleading information” of the IPCC summaries of their reports. ” And, "At the heart of the hoax is a contempt for mankind and a belief that population worldwide should be reduced. The science advisor to President Obama, John Holdren, has advocated forced abortions, sterilization by introducing infertility drugs into the nation’s drinking water and food, and other totalitarian measures. “Overpopulation is still central to the use of climate change as a political vehicle,” warns Dr. Ball. Given that the environmental movement has been around since the 1960s, it has taken decades for the public to grasp its intent and the torrents of lies that have been used to advance it. “More people,” notes Dr. Ball, “are starting to understand that what they’re told about climate change by academia, the mass media, and the government is wrong, especially the propaganda coming from the UN and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” “Ridiculous claims—like the science is settled or the debate is over—triggered a growing realization that something was wrong.” When the global warming advocates began to tell people that cooling is caused by warming, the public has realized how absurd the entire UN climate change argument has been." http://blog.heartland.org/2014/03/a-history-of-the-disastrous-global-warming-hoax/ There seems to be a political motive behind the climate change movement with government interests influencing the outcomes of government funded scientific research.
During a news conference given in February 2015 by then Chairwoman of the UN's IPCC revealed the real purpose behind global warming/climate change initiatives. Quote: "At a news conference last week in Brussels, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism. "This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution," she said." http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/
In March of 2016 former United Nations climate official Ottmar Edenhofer said, "One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with the environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole," said Edenhofer, who co-chaired the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change working group on Mitigation of Climate Change from 2008 to 2015." And, "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy." http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/another-climate-alarmist-admits-real-motive-behind-warming-scare/