>the paris agreement would save mother ear-

...

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_industrialization#Industrialization_of_the_People.27s_Republic_of_China
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane
nytimes.com/2017/06/02/world/asia/chinas-role-in-climate-change-and-possibly-in-fighting-it.html?_r=0
nytimes
archive.is/Gm3VO
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

YOUTUBE TRYING TO INFLUENCE BRITISH GENERAL ELECTION. DISLIKE THEIR VIDEO.

CO2 is food for plants. You are being disingenuous by disregarding percentage of forested territory per capita.

Can plants eat co2 in the atmosphere?

Are India's Co2 emissions from burning their poo to expose of it?

>EU
>country
lmao

Op Btfo

B

This is the correct response. Anybody that chooses to think when presented with the OP would imagine that one year doesn't really fucking matter when The United States has benefitted the most overall from industrialization and also done the most fuckery with globalism.

Good. Feeding plants is a very pro-environmental thing to do.

>Stretching as far back as the 1700s

>What is the individual revolution

NO, OP argument displays that American is heading in the correct direction in CO2 admissions.

Because of fracking and natural gases America can lower CO2.

*Industrial

That releases methane gas.
40 times stronger than CO2 at holding heat.

>By country
>EU
>Country

>by country
>EU
>COUNTRY

>What is grasping straws

Sup Forums is uneducated? Here is two sides of the idiot spectrum with these posts.

What significance does annual carbon pollution have?
If someone gotta pay for it, it should be the guys who put more carbon in the atmosphere.
It's not like the last year's emissions disappear every year so we can only care about this year's emissions.

Sad day when North Korea and Iran care more about our environment than we do. They're still in the pact to save the planet while we bow to the big coal. Tells you a lot about who REALLY cares.

its a country m8
they just dont admit it openly in order not to enrage teh eastern countries who are here just for gibs

China is a developing country. Forcing it to implement unjust rules about environmental protection, rules that the western nations never followed, is nothing more than unfair and underhanded way to impose limits on China's rapid development. Neo-colonialism and imperialism have no place in the 21st century.

Only for 10 years, then it is desolved

Termite release more methane than human do. You should know this since you are close relatives.

>burger education

40 years.
Wanna bet?

What good is it to measure emissions by country since before there was even a theory of the greenhouse effect?
The context to OP's picture is: "Who isn't learning the lesson the most?"

>2009

China's pollution is going up while America's is going down.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_industrialization#Industrialization_of_the_People.27s_Republic_of_China
>Industrialization of China did occur on a significant scale only from the 1950s, in the Maoist Great Leap Forward

>including 200 years of rice farming to spin the percentages

We have been through this turkroach. Total emission don't matter when the goal is to reduce future emissions.
>But it's not fair
The planet doesn't care about fairness, just future emissions.

>.5 of a degree would be saved after 15 years

>saving the world

Well they don't have to stick around, they can just fucking leave.
They haven't contributed a single dime anyway, so if they find so much injustice with it, then they have options.
Your white knighting lacks context.

>X does Y so we should do Y

American (((education)))
You aren't learning
Your manufacturing is being done in poorer countries
... that way you get cheaper products.

Besides would it be fair otherwise?
That is, if you care about being fair
Well that's the graph I have.
Care to find a recent one?
I don't get your point.
Emissions means production.
Production means wealth created.
Wealth means ability to get shit done.

You have the ability to get this shit done because of your wealth( born from production which was born from emissions)

It took hundreds of years to raise the global temperature.
It not gonna be easy to revert it back.

>china makes most of the worlds pollution
>china also producer of the most renewable energy
>china in on the paris agreement and trying to get away from coal
>meanwhile america drops the agreement and wants to go back to using a disgusting outdated energy source instead of constructing more nuclear

I don't think you understand enough about why curbing pollution is important to understand why what you said is retarded

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane

Doesn't fucking matter, were not talking about production and how "unfair" for us to have that much, we are talking about helping the planet. "Fairness" doesn't help the planet. Otherwise you're admitting this isn't really about the planet but rather gibsmedat for your shithole.

>it's oppresive to let chinese people breath fresh air
China is developing faster than most countries. If anything, the status quo benefits them.

>I don't think you understand enough about why curbing pollution is important to understand why what you said is retarded
Explain right now why China and India are not required to change how they operate and maybe I'll take you seriously.

How are you gonna bring everyone to the table without being fair?
For the longest time, American argument against CO2 curbing was that not everyone id willing to participate so it isnt fair.

EU is a fucking country is it

This, China was slavery 20 years ago, poverty 10 years, and pollution now, life is improving.

Now are argument is that gibs to countries that pollute more than us is ridiculous

Let europe bribe the chinese

I'm sorry, but that is completely irrelevant to anything in the comment chain you replied to. I come to this shitty board to argue against antiscience retards, not to argue against whatever idiotic strawmen you cook up to detract from the points. At no point did I say anything about china and india not having to change how they operate. Of course they fucking do.

They don't have a renewable industry in place yet.
Building that will take decades if you don't help. So they won't build it at all.

>We are going to save the Earth and stop climate change!
>But first, we need America to front the majority of the bill...
>and they need to agree to take in any migrants and also cater to anything transgender people demand...
>also China and India do not need to change their pollution output, in fact we plan to pay them to increase it...
>and we need to accept the rights of indigenous peoples...
>but we also need open borders and free immigration...
>sign on the dotted line, please!

Methane breaks down into CO2 you mong.

Goddamnit... At least use an overseas proxy...

Sounds like you can't answer his question. Also why is it not anti-science to consider cumulative co2 generation but not consider the environment's ability to convert that co2 into oxygen? 250 years is a long time for mother Earth to work on our excess co2 from generations passed.

read up: nytimes.com/2017/06/02/world/asia/chinas-role-in-climate-change-and-possibly-in-fighting-it.html?_r=0

The archives have arrived

>nytimes com/2017/06/02/world/asia/chinas-role-in-climate-change-and-possibly-in-fighting-it.html?_r=0
archive.is/Gm3VO

>American argument against CO2 curbing was that not everyone id willing to participate so it isn't fair
They didn't say that because it wasn't fair, but because if they are the only one doing it you're not going to fix the problem so why bother because China would negate their strides forward. That's literally what we arguing right fucking now.
If it's not going to fix the problem, it's not worth it. Fuck your fairness.

Wow, Japan kicks ass. Tiny island really punches above its weight class.

So, in other words, you can't explain it.

>Building that will take decades if you don't help. So they won't build it at all.
This sounds more and more like geopolitical welfare.

What the fuck is CanAus?

>sure I am a rapist but look at this guy, he rapes more than me so I am ok

Sounds like they shouldn't be in control of their land if they can't utilize it properly.

>I don't get your point.

>Years covered in cumulative chart:
1751 - 2009 = 258 years
>Years from 1751 to 2009 that China was industrialized or undergoing statistically significant industrialization
2009 - 1950 = 59 years

Of course China's going to have a smaller percentage of CO2 emissions if they were only industrialized for a fucking fifth of the years covered. If you're gonna do it right, you can only include those 59 years both the US AND China
were industrialized or undergoing industrialization.

No they aren't tall enough to reach there, duh. Read a book

Reminder that there is literally no evidence of humans having any impact on climate change.

Random volcanoes erupting have caused ice ages, humans pumping toxins into the air has made temperatures higher and lower depending on the months and year.

>The only driving factor is CO2

He is partly right, you've got to include the natural carbon dioxide sinks as well.

Did I ever said it didn't? But CO2 is less dangerous than CH4.

you mong

The chart also ignores any natural ability of the environment to breakdown co2 into oxygen. It puts the US on the hook for a carbon footprint that no longer exists.

>EU
>Country

Fake news desu senpai

INDIA 2020 SUPERPOWER

checked

>EU is a country

did Germany win?

I'm not going to answer your question because you asked me a completely irrelevant question to what I was talking about. I even said that they do have to change how they operate, which you appear too stupid to realize.
All manmade co2 is co2 that will not be able to be converted to oxygen, this is because the earth can only consume so much co2, and at this point in the earth's history carbon flux was almost in equilibrium. Most manmade co2 will stay in the atmosphere because the earth already naturally produces about as much as it can take in, that is why it is a problem.

SAD FACT:

the stupid parisagreement didn't include sanctions meaning:

If China, India or Germany or any other country go over the limit, NOTHING HAPPENS to them yet we pay for a fond that will go to countries which don't even meet the requirements.

Yeah, it's stupid and entirely an ornamental agreement.

It is not stupid, it's the deal intention.

Americans never cared about solving. They would participate only if everyone was playing fair and square.
How many billions in foreign aid do you spend every year?
Most goes to weapons and corrupt governments. You are already paying for welfare.
So I don't understand why you don't participate anymore. You were being conned for the longest time.
It takes time which we might not have.
Do you know what cumulative means?
Besides that wouldn't be fair.
You as an American would not except any such deal.
It's not like it didn't trap heat while it was in the atmosphere.
The effects don't just disappear.
They though peer pressure would force countries.

Exactly it's none-enforceable garbage. Even if they all follow what they were suppose to do through changing political climates of several decades (and increase in shitskins who don't give a shit about the planet), their 2 degree target is garbage by their own admission.

Someone is mad because lose gibs.

Well that's just how you feel about it. Even if america did reject it for the wrong reasons I have outlined good reasons too which you failed to respond too adequately.
Go back to your colony.

>So I don't understand why you don't participate anymore.
You're saying this as if I wouldn't opt out of those too.

>cumulative

ha-ha-fucking-ha

That's not true. There has always been an excess of co2 in the environment, even before man. Sometimes it jumped due to major cataclysms and sometimes it stayed a constant level, however there has never been a scenario, where life exists, where co2 approached 0.

Also, how do you know which co2 was created by man and which co2 was created by a cow's fart? This is an argument over what country has contributed to the current excess in co2. Saying that the US has because of excess co2 from 200 years ago is utter bullshit.

Proof: If the US, being the sole creator of co2 during the industrial revolution suddenly stopped creating co2 during the 1900's. That co2 would have been consumed by the environment.

>They though peer pressure would force countries.
Yes because exporting your industry to a single nation then trying to cajole them will work.

>America did the right thing, but still wrong.
Why you want America to be wrong so hard?

>Forcing it to implement unjust rules about environmental protection, rules that the western nations never followed, is nothing more than unfair and underhanded way to impose limits on China's rapid development

The paris accord doesn't force anyone to do anything. It's literally just a publicity stunt.

>Why you want America to be Wong so hard?
Canada, that's why.

look at the graph the co2 and plant ratio will stabilize and we will all be good

source common sense

As far as I can tell Mr. Roach, heat dissipates over time.

It only forces nations to pay.

Based on what data ?

see

I wonder what percentage of CO2 emissions are solely from our military. It's rare you witness even a hint of pollution in the U.S.

Proof provided by T. Chinamen

oh wow i thought india was more methane producing but damn ther you go

it doesn't force them to pay. But the pussy ass people in charge voluntarily give up the money because they are gigantic faggots

Right.

...

Go preach to the Chinese cuz we're done listening.

the thing is that co2 is being put into the atmosphere at a faster rate than the rate at which plants can use it, so he net amount continues to rise instead of being at equilibrium

What did the citizens of Earth mean by this?

Is Africa filled with white republicans or something. wtf

Don't leave me poor!
There are good reasons to reject the deal but will anyone be able to arrange another deal?
How many years did it took to get everyone to agree on this inefficient plan?
You would?
I don't see Trump doing anything about them.
?
So It wouldn't ?

Then why does blankets work smart user?
Could it be that it holds heat?
I don't know.
I found it in a thread in /sci/

>China has over twice the next top CO2 producing country

You guys do realize the world's emission production has been exported to 3rd world countries, right?

So on paper, the US pollution rate appears lower, but when you factor in that we import most of what china produces, the US and other countries' emissions rates shoot back up.