Mother Theresa To Have Words With Trump Over Climate–That Should Do The Trick Then!!
By Paul Homewood
h/t Robin Guenier
Theresa May will raise the issue of climate change with Donald Trump during his upcoming visit to the UK, Downing Street has told BBC News.
The confirmation coincides with UK climate researchers asking the prime minister to "robustly challenge" President Trump on the topic.
In a letter to Mrs May, 250 academics say the president’s "reckless approach is a threat to the whole world".
In 2018, the president accused climate experts of having a "political agenda".
A spokesperson for the UK government said: "The prime minister has raised climate change with the president before and will do so again during his visit.
"Tackling climate change is a priority for the UK. We are driving forward international action through our work at the UN and with our Commonwealth partners, and we’re proud to have offered to host COP26 (the UN climate summit in 2020).
"As the prime minister has said previously, we were disappointed by the US decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement in 2017 and continue to hope they will return."
The academics’ letter was organised by Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute at the London School of Economics (LSE). He welcomed the news that the prime minister would talk to President Trump about climate.
"The prime minister can robustly challenge President Trump about his inaction on climate change with the knowledge that she has the extremely strong support of all the experts who signed the letter," Mr Ward commented.
"We all stand behind her on this issue. I hope she will raise the issue with him in public, as well as privately, so that Americans can see how much the president’s climate change denial is damaging the international standing of the United States.
"It would be a tremendous legacy for Theresa May if she can shift Mr Trump from his position of stubborn denial of the risks of climate change."
The letter was signed by academics and policy analysts from 35 universities and research institutes across the UK.
In it, they ask the prime minister to urge the US president to accept "the overwhelming scientific evidence which shows that climate change is driven by human activities and poses a serious threat to the lives and livelihoods of people all across the world".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48473658
Bob Ward is paid to spread climate alarm on behalf of the left wing Grantham Foundation, and I’ve no doubt that the 250 academics also profit hugely from the whole scam.
But if Ward had bothered to check his facts, he would have realised that Trump’s withdrawal from Paris had nothing to do with hoaxes, it was because the Agreement was worthless. as well as damaging to the US.
Below is the White House statement at the time:
I am fighting every day for the great people of this country. Therefore, in order to fulfil my solemn duty to protect America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord, but begin negotiations to re-enter either the Paris Accord or a really entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers. So we’re getting out. But we will start to negotiate, and we will see if we can make a deal that’s fair. And if we can, that’s great. And if we can’t, that’s fine.
As President, I can put no other consideration before the wellbeing of American citizens. The Paris Climate Accord is simply the latest example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the United States to the exclusive benefit of other countries, leaving American workers — who I love — and taxpayers to absorb the cost in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories, and vastly diminished economic production….
Not only does this deal subject our citizens to harsh economic restrictions, it fails to live up to our environmental ideals. As someone who cares deeply about the environment, which I do, I cannot in good conscience support a deal that punishes the United States — which is what it does -– the world’s leader in environmental protection, while imposing no meaningful obligations on the world’s leading polluters.
For example, under the agreement, China will be able to increase these emissions by a staggering number of years — 13. They can do whatever they want for 13 years. Not us. India makes its participation contingent on receiving billions and billions and billions of dollars in foreign aid from developed countries. There are many other examples. But the bottom line is that the Paris Accord is very unfair, at the highest level, to the United States.
Even if the Paris Agreement were implemented in full, with total compliance from all nations, it is estimated it would only produce a two-tenths of one degree — think of that; this much — Celsius reduction in global temperature by the year 2100. Tiny, tiny amount. In fact, 14 days of carbon emissions from China alone would wipe out the gains from America — and this is an incredible statistic — would totally wipe out the gains from America’s expected reductions in the year 2030, after we have had to spend billions and billions of dollars, lost jobs, closed factories, and suffered much higher energy costs for our businesses and for our homes.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-president-trump-paris-climate-accord/
And as he also might have pointed out, the Paris Agreement imposes no obligation to actually reduce emissions on developing countries, even though they account for two thirds of global CO2.
Unsurprisingly then, global carbon dioxide emissions have continued to climb since the ineffectual Paris Agreement of 2015.
Last year alone they rose by 1.7%, mainly to meet increased energy demand in Asia:
https://www.iea.org/geco/emissions/
If Bob Ward and his chums were genuinely concerned about emissions, surely they would be writing to the leaders of China and India, rather than the useless Mother Theresa!
Comments are closed.
Reblogged this on Climate- Science.
“the overwhelming scientific evidence which shows that climate change is driven by human activities and poses a serious threat to the lives and livelihoods of people all across the world”.
Since this is a bare faced lie to the public surely they should be prosecuted?
“The prime minister can robustly challenge President Trump about his inaction on climate change with the knowledge that she has the extremely strong support of all the experts who signed the letter,” Mr Ward commented.
“We all stand behind her on this issue. I hope she will raise the issue with him in public, as well as privately, so that Americans can see how much the president’s climate change denial is damaging the international standing of the United States.
“It would be a tremendous legacy for Theresa May if she can shift Mr Trump from his position of stubborn denial of the risks of climate change.”
The reality is, of course, that all these “experts” (expert rent-seeking fraudsters and professional shroudwavers every one) wouldn’t piss on Theresa May (or anyone else slightly to the right of Corbyn) if she was on fire.
And if she (or any other Prime Minister) went for 100% renewables no later than next year, (bombing the country back to the stone age) it wouldn’t satisfy any of them for five minutes. Look how they all wrung their hands and earnestly nodded when Saint Greta told them the UK had done “nothing” about climate change.
I predict Theresa May will be somewhat less effective in this meeting with Donald Trum than she has been with Parliament in 2 years of Brexit negotiations.
If anyone has read Trump’s case for objecting to climate change in his book, they will be in no doubt of his resolve, based on common sense practicalities. Nothing to do with the science or politics.
It’s how the concept should be communicated and the guy cuts through all the cr@p in a short paragraph. Well worth a read.
PS His approach to Obama care and education is similarly practical. No one in the US should be deprived of healthcare or education because they are poor.
One would almost think he’s a socialist, except these are Capitalist values.
Marx has a lot to answer for.
****Sorry, short chapter, not “paragraph”.
The British government can’t even stop boats of migrants crossing the channel which could be easily achieved with one simple policy action. How on earth can they do Brexit or solve imaginary dangerous climate change?
We are grossly polluting the planet. The climate is changing, and always will change.
There is no need to try to prove or disprove that one is the result of the other. Both must be addressed. If all the effort and thought put into the arguments were put into fixing some element of either it would be time infinitely better spent.
But perhaps not so well rewarded with grants and publicity, overseas conferences, scientific plaudits………….
Are we grossly polluting the planet? There are some problem areas certainly which should not be ignored. But nature does far worse than man in terms of pollution – that’s why earth is so good at cleaning itself up again!
The flamingo lakes are ‘toxic pollution’ – but nature has carved out a productive use.
Was there no natural oil/tar pollution before man started extracting it – of course there was.
The trouble is that man thinks on too short a timescale. The hysteria over plastic pollution is a prime example – unsightly yes, but despite all the crazy advocacy ‘science’, it’s not a serious threat to anything – an occasional hapless big-eyed creature suffering through plastic is emotive, but not the end of the planet, and you could find suffering just as bad dished out by nature.
The deep irony is that ocean plastic pollution, and much serious real pollution and habitat destruction currently being perpetrated, is all a result of ‘green’ policies.
Thanks Mr Grim, nice to see someone with a simple common-sense approach to life, thus in touch with the real world for a change.
I’ve been saying that for many years now. It’s the same with the other big myth – the one which kicked-off the whole climate change / glow-bull warming hoax: Overpopulation. With our current technologically advanced society (powered by reliable coal, gas and nuclear generation), our world could easily accommodate double, even triple its current population and there would still be plenty of room for everyone and plenty of food to go around.
It’s been calculated that the world’s entire population, now almost 8 billion, could comfortably be accommodated within the US state of Texas.
How or why anyone believes these hysterical shills and their blatant lies is what I cannot and probably never will, understand.
In spite of ALL of their morbid predictions all being what should be embarrassing fails, people still listen to them; but worst of all: pay them huge sums of money to propagate their bizarre, in fact quite impossible tales of imminent doom.
“Tackling climate change is a priority for the UK“
As a citizen of the UK, I don’t remember being asked if I thought it was a priority. Yet when I WAS asked if I wanted to leave or remain in the EU my opinion has been ignored…
It is of course a blatant lie.
Click to access issues_index_tables_may_2019_public.pdf
Just 4% of the public place it as the top issue facing Britain, despite perhaps one of the most intensive single issue advertising campaigns in history – which has been enough to mean that 20% grant it some salience. It ranks behind Brexit, the NHS, Crime, and Education at that lower standard.
Since when have our idiot politicians taken any notice of the voters views. My concern is that if that virtue signalling two faced fool Gove becomes PM the climate change scam will just be continued and probably increased. Mind you it will totally kill the Tory party. I don’t know where Boris stands on the scam?
Probably why they didn’t ask us. They would get the ‘wrong’ answer again.
Daily Express is reporting Donald Trump has stopped any meeting with the outgoing PM, Queen first, Johnson then Farage.
“Theresa May HUMILIATED as private Donald Trump meeting left OFF President’s agenda
THERESA MAY has been left humiliated after formal one-to-one talks with Donald Trump were left off the agenda.
By SAM LISTER, DEPUTY POLITICAL EDITOR” Daily Express
Dave Brown in the Independent has a nice cartoon today, which works just fine for this.
Not sure if Her Maj’s milkshake is for him or the turkey.
Once again, the key issue is not a changing climate but what it is that “we” collectively can do about it. When the issue is down to removing CO2 quantitatively to reduce the atmospheric burden the amount required in ppms or in tons is much too large. Dry ice weighs a lot sublimated or not. One ppm of oxidized carbon is, by mass, 7.8 billion tonnes.Do the maths on 50-60 ppmv? And then ask where “we” will safely store it.
Limestone.
With a tiny little effort, we could use one of the many Bamboo species just add a little fertilizer and water in Brazil, indonesia or Africa, Capture should be in the region of 30 tonnes hectare per year. To capture all the atmospheric CO2 we would have to divide the total Co2 by 30 to find the hectares we would need in a year to do this which is (2.996*10^12)/30= 99,886,666,666.6r Australia is 769.2 million hectares in size, so we would need 100 Australias and bamboo is the worlds fastest growing plant. The land area of the world is only 13 billion hectares, I think it is fairly obvious that we can make normally very little difference and most CO2 does not find itself locked by plants but by Chemical weathering.
Good example, however we cannot remove all the CO2 or we will die faster than even climate change could cause.
Or, better still, they’d be expressing their strong support for Trump who, in his Rose Garden announcement, said this about the ineffectual Agreement:
Given that the Agreement exempts countries responsible for 65% of emissions from any obligation – legal, moral or political – to reduce those emissions, they should surely welcome that offer. But no – instead they abuse the person proposing it.
Off-topic but as all the governments pay at least lip service to the IPCC (especially India and China), the reason mainly being the alarming result of the climate models. Maybe government advisors and officials should read this —
It is nice to see the work from honest scientist occasionally gets through. This paper questions the use of climate models, and points up some of their many short comings.
…
From https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437118301766
Physica C. Essex, A.A. Tsonis, Model falsifiability and climate slow modes,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2018.02.090
So the climate models are not just a poor but an irrelevant way, to verify the climate actuality.
“…future data…”
Becomes available, gradually, but is generally ignored.
It is Groundhog Day every day, for the Climate Shamans
UAH ‘May Figure’ is down 0.12 C from April.
Sun is spotless.
The walnut trees in my garden grow thicker and faster each passing year and take quite a lot of managing. Is the result of the beneficial effects of a few ppm more of CO2 in the atmosphere? I can’t think of any other reason.
It seems as though May will now be confined to a few words with Trump as she shows him around the Churchill War Rooms. Being in a bunker somehow seems highly apt.
So where was the other letter? You know, the one from all us sceptics?
The one that says that CAGW is a hoax based on a fraud and will waste £billions and €billions and only the pragmatism of DT has slowed the waste of $billions. The letter that states that CO2 has a small and decreasing effect on global temperature, that its only responsible for 70-95% of greenhouse effect, that the world has been hotter than present for 90% of the holocene, that the earth was an ice globe at a time when CO2 levels were four or five times what they are now.
That most of the increase in CO2 is not down to mankind and that, anyway, it has “greened” the earth by at least 15% saving many from starvation. That whatever we do in the west (while committing economic suicide) will make a minute difference, if any, to future temperatures and is being totally overwhelmed by the actions of China, India et al. That all the noise is coming from those who have their snouts in the funding trough and their fingers picking the public purse.
You know?
THAT LETTER!
M. Theresa: ‘Hey Donald did you know about this?’
Key Greenland glacier growing again after shrinking for years, NASA study shows
“That was kind of a surprise.”
https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/key-greenland-glacier-growing-again-after-shrinking-years-nasa-study-ncna987116
How can the Club of Rome agenda not be a political agenda ?
Thanks Oldbrew.Read the ref.NASA are still delusional it seems with their comment that GHGs warm the oceans.
She must also be one of the “Climate Experts”.
Trump is a realist, I’ll give him that. Mother Theresa is not a realist, religious fantasy isn’t very down to earth, unless she’s in on the plot to get rid of the majority of us unbelievers.