Slashdot Mirror
China Tells Trump Climate Change Isn't a Hoax it Invented (bloomberg.com)
China couldn't have invented global warming as a hoax to harm U.S. competitiveness because it was Donald Trump's Republican predecessors who started climate negotiations in the 1980s, China's Vice Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin said, according to a Bloomberg report. From the article:U.S. Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush supported the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in initiating global warming talks even before China knew that negotiations to cut pollution were starting, Liu told reporters at United Nations talks on Wednesday in Marrakech, Morocco. Ministers and government officials from almost 200 countries gathered in Marrakech this week are awaiting a decision by President-elect Trump on whether he'll pull the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement to tackle climate change. The tycoon tweeted in 2012 that the concept of global warming "was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive." China's envoy rejected that view. "If you look at the history of climate change negotiations, actually it was initiated by the IPCC with the support of the Republicans during the Reagan and senior Bush administration during the late 1980s," Liu told reporters during an hour-long briefing.
Paranoid much? No part of their statement says what you claim it is. None.
Who did what now?
-1 Troll
But seriously, what the hell ? China, like the US never wanted to do any effort about climate, they never cared that much about pollution and global warming. You could say it was invented by Europe, or Japan, but ... China ???
Anyway, it was not invented, it is a reported fact. There is no intent to find here.
Facts are #totallaypassay. We're like in the post-truth era now.
Politician: Crime is up 47,000 percent!
Journalist: No, figures say it's down roughly 13 percent.
Politician: But people believe it's up 47,000 percent. That's what matters.
I forget who it was. Newt "Family values" Gingrich?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
THen WHY DID TRUMP SAY IT bartles. Comon, why did he say it, and dont be a trumpite and make me go find the video, he said it DURING THIS ELECTION CYCLE. We BOTH KNOW HE DID.
Comon Bartles. HE CLAIMED IT SO I GET TO MOCK HIM FOR IT.
Also you should read this detailing how China "China will lead the world for growth in renewable power".
Technically, the silent not-even-a-plurality. Clinton won the popular vote, and neither got a majority!
You'll feel that way until a series of drought condition summers lead to massive wild fires. Look at what happened up in Northern Alberta and Saskatchewan last summer. For chrissake, the fire is still burning!
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
But, if you want to discuss the electoral college and the popular vote we can. There's nothing wrong with people in cities having a lot of votes if there are people there. It is in only because those people don't vote the way you like that you have the opinion you do. Moreover, the actual cause for an electoral college was primarily two things: First, to prevent populist demagogues by having another layer between the population and the electorate. Hamilton discussed this in Federalist 68 http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed68.asp. In that context, having an electoral college that just votes the way the state popular vote directs it to is exactly counter to that goal. Second, the electoral college preserved the power of the slave states http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/12/13598316/donald-trump-electoral-college-slavery-akhil-reed-amar. It should be clear why the second reason is not acceptable.
And if you really want to look at the "popular vote" numbers, you have to take into account the number of votes the Dems should not have gotten due to fraud such as illegal immigrants voting. The D's cheated and STILL lost. Their policies are obviously so popular that they're now trying to implement them by force.
Thank you for giving an excellent further example of the complete disregard for facts that some on the right are demonstrating. There is essentially zero evidence of any substantial immigration voting. See for example here http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-noncitizen-voters-20161025-snap-story.html. Facts matter. And if you want to play that game then it is worth noting that massive numbers of legitimate votes in swing states were disenfranchised due to voter ID restrictions, and even federal judges agree that many of those restrictions were designed to deliberately target minorities. Look for example at North Carolina http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/07/north-carolina-voting-rights-law/493649/. Again, facts matter. There's a good argument for not using the popular vote in this *specific election* because we have a system right now, and we don't know if it would have ended up this way if Hillary and Trump had focused on turning out the maximum number of voters rather than voters in swing states, but that's a distinct issue that's completely removed from the basic facts.
Well if you're going to be pedantic, so am I. Only the WESTERN Roman empire fell in 473AD. The EASTERN Roman empire (which includes most of the territory you mentioned) survived for another thousand years as the Byzantine empire.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Consensus doesn't mean a literature review
Needless to say, scientists disagree with you. If the science clearly and unambiguously shows something to be true, then there is considered to be a consensus around that fact.
Please read the papers means you are stuck on the idea of only listening to the people who wrote them.
As opposed to making things up whole cloth? Well yes. That's the whole point of science.