Slashdot Mirror


Trump Admits 'Some Connectivity' Between Climate Change and Human Activity (cnn.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNN: President-elect Donald Trump conceded Tuesday there is "some connectivity" between human activity and climate change and wavered on whether he would pull the United States out of international accords aimed at combating the phenomenon, which scientists overwhelmingly agree is caused by human activity. The statements could mark a softening in Trump's position on U.S. involvement in efforts to fight climate change, although he did not commit to specific action in any direction. During the campaign, he vowed to "cancel" the U.S.'s participation in the Paris climate agreement, stop all U.S. payments to UN programs aimed at fighting climate change and continued to cast serious doubt on the role man-made carbon dioxide emissions played in the planet's warming and associated impacts. "I think there is some connectivity. Some, something. It depends on how much," Trump said Tuesday in a meeting with New York Times reporters, columnists and editors. He has previously called climate change a "hoax" invented by the Chinese. Asked if he would withdraw the U.S. from international climate change agreements, Trump said he is "looking at it very closely," according to Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Mike Grynbaum, who were live-tweeting the meeting. He added that he has "an open mind to it," despite explicitly promising to withdraw from at least one climate accord on the campaign trail. The President-elect on the campaign trail repeatedly vowed to slash environmental protection regulations burdening U.S. businesses and said that beyond the consequences to the planet, he is particularly mindful of the economic impact of combating climate change. He said he is considering "how much it will cost our companies" and the effect on American competitiveness in the global market, according to a tweet from Grynbaum.

43 of 559 comments (clear)

  1. Flip flop .... by Freischutz · · Score: 5, Funny

    He's getting very good at emulating a pancake.

    1. Re:Flip flop .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I thought he looked more like a waffle.

      But I'm not gonna complain if he flip-flops away from stupidity and toward sanity.

    2. Re:Flip flop .... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Funny

      But I'm not gonna complain if he flip-flops away from stupidity and toward sanity.

      He has already flip-flopped on Hillary, and now says he will not send her to prison after all. The alt-right is livid. Next, he will be telling the Mexicans that they will only have to pay for their side of the wall.

    3. Re:Flip flop .... by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 4, Funny

      Usually when conservatives flip from climate change denial, it's to too late to do anything about it so we shouldn't try.

    4. Re:Flip flop .... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Informative

      He's long said that he wants to address climate change without crippling the economy to do so.

      Really? Let's see what he said in his own words...

      https://twitter.com/realdonald...

      http://www.snopes.com/donald-t...

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:Flip flop .... by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At the rate of change we've seen out of him so far he's going to be left of Bernie in 4 years.

      Hell I wouldn't be surprised if TrumpCare(tm) was single payer through some loopholes and careful wording. Marketing is everything.

    6. Re:Flip flop .... by Sarnya · · Score: 3

      But I'm not gonna complain if he flip-flops away from stupidity and toward sanity.

      He has already flip-flopped on Hillary, and now says he will not send her to prison after all. The alt-right is livid. Next, he will be telling the Mexicans that they will only have to pay for their side of the wall.

      Who cares what he thinks. It's unlikely the woman will go to prison. All that nonsense is a Republican load of nonsense.

    7. Re:Flip flop .... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not so worried about him making crazy decisions.

      Am still worried about him filling cabinet posts with dyed in the wool crazy career politicians - that's where some real damage can be done.

    8. Re:Flip flop .... by Gussington · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You have to feel for Trump voters. He is pretty much flip flopping on every one of the reasons they voted for him. As Obama said "whatever assumptions you bring into the office, this office has a way of waking you up."
      Trump will follow in Hillary's, Obama's and Bush's footsteps because that what you have to do in politics to succeed. For some reason most people don't get this and actually think the change candidate can actually do anything different from anyone else.

    9. Re:Flip flop .... by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 5, Insightful

      For some reason most people don't get this and actually think the change candidate can actually do anything different from anyone else.

      Well, actually it IS possible to change SOME things.

      The problem with Trump, more than perhaps most candidates, is that many of his biggest campaign claims were completely unrealistic, but supporters chose to believe them anyway.

    10. Re:Flip flop .... by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      dyed in the wool crazy career politicians

      Its not the career politicians that worry me, its the "maverick" ones. Washington wonks are at least a known quantity. They are versed in bureacracy and doing things the washington way. We know those guys, we've had them for over a century.

      Its the non washington people, trump, the breibart and daily stormer whackjobs, and the like that keep me up at night. Because those folks have a plan, and I'm not sure we're going to enjoy that plan very much at all.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    11. Re:Flip flop .... by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Trump will follow in Hillary's, Obama's and Bush's footsteps because that what you have to do in politics to succeed.

      Funny, I don't remember any white supremacists in Obama's cabinet.

    12. Re:Flip flop .... by shilly · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm curious: when you look at a country like Germany or Sweden today, which has government running (i.e. regulating and to some extent providing) healthcare, employment, banking, housing, etc, do you genuinely think you're seeing a country that is essentially the same as Franco's Spain, Mussolini's Italy or Hitler's Germany? Or are you simply making some kind of rhetorical exaggeration for effect? Or do you think there is a meaningful distinction between what these modern European countries are doing and what US-style progressivism is trying to achieve? Or something else?

      I'm asking because I genuinely can't understand your viewpoint: I can't follow the logic. So I'd be grateful if you could lay it out.

    13. Re:Flip flop .... by Sri+Ramkrishna · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They'll blame the democrats, because the party of personal responsibility likes to make other people responsible.

    14. Re:Flip flop .... by BlueStrat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm curious: when you look at a country like Germany or Sweden today, which has government running (i.e. regulating and to some extent providing) healthcare, employment, banking, housing, etc, do you genuinely think you're seeing a country that is essentially the same as Franco's Spain, Mussolini's Italy or Hitler's Germany? Or are you simply making some kind of rhetorical exaggeration for effect? Or do you think there is a meaningful distinction between what these modern European countries are doing and what US-style progressivism is trying to achieve? Or something else?

      I'm asking because I genuinely can't understand your viewpoint: I can't follow the logic. So I'd be grateful if you could lay it out.

      Well, the countries you mention are centuries old. Capitalism and limited government such as the US used to have created the richest, most powerful, and most-free nation to ever exist in the space of less than 2 centuries, not to mention the most generous when it comes to helping nations in dire emergencies.

      Capitalism and free markets have lifted more people out of poverty and lifted the standards of living of more people than any other system yet tried, combined. It has also advanced science, medicine, and industrial systems and technologies faster than any other system yet tried. Government controlled/run economies and societies cannot match that or even come close.

      Another aspect is the size and diversity of the US and it's population compared to the countries you named. Until very recently those countries' populations and cultures were fairly homogenous as opposed to the US, therefor comparisons are apples-and-oranges.

      The US was founded on the idea that power resides in the people, and a portion only temporarily and conditionally is granted to government to do only those things that a national government can do, like negotiate treaties, declare war, guard borders, etc. This was designed in part to assure the maximum amount of individual freedom and liberty possible.

      It all depends on the goals, I suppose. If one values individual liberty, a free and open society, a high average standard of living, free and open political debate, and rapid advances in science and technology, a limited government, individual liberty, and capitalistic free markets are necessary to obtain the best results as US history has shown. History shows that the more-free a nation and it's people are, the more successful, peaceful, wealthy, and advanced that nation and society become.

      No system is perfect, and capitalism and free & open societies carry risks and have their own problems, but they still beat any of the alternatives tried so far.

      HTH

      HAND

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    15. Re:Flip flop .... by Lisandro · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yeah, he hired Bannon just to handle coffee around the office.

    16. Re:Flip flop .... by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      Trump's threats to cut off NATO and other states that the US has typically defended scares me a lot more. Because the result would be a rapid military buildup in said states. Including an increase in the number of states that have nuclear weapons, and the quantity of weapons therein. Some places that currently rely on the US as their source of Mutually Assured Destruction are particularly concerning to think about: if the US abandoned Saudi Arabia, leaving them exposed to Israel and Iran, how long do you think it would be before they had a nuclear weapon (esp. given that some sources suggest that they helped fund Pakistan's program in exchange for a right to acquire the nuclear technology if they ever needed it)? A nuclear-armed Israel, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, doesn't that sound like a dream? Japan would certainly give up their pacifism and go heavy on militarization; they've already been drifting that way. More military confrontation between Japan and China or North Korea, doesn't that sound like a safe world? South Korea would likewise have to scale up even further from how they currently are, and again, go nuclear. Eastern Europe would be terrified and likely form an anti-Russian alliance with a huge increase in military spending (if they couldn't establish a Europe-wide alliance); Poland would likely be at its core, but it'd likely welcome Ukraine and Georgia.

      The further you drill down, the more potential for upheaval you run into. It's really a terrifying concept, what could happen if Trump were to carry out his threats. Much of global stability hinges on countries feeling safe and secure. When countries don't feel safe and secure, they stockpile arms and sleep with one eye open.

      --
      Wingus, Dingus! Listen up!
    17. Re:Flip flop .... by larkost · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, in the case of Germany the U.S. is older as a country by something like a hundred years. The unification of something like what we now call Germany did not begin until the German Empire began in 1871. The Confederation of States was formed in 1781, and the Constitution (so U.S.) was seven years later in 1788. So depending on when you were talking about, either 100 years, or 93 years. Prior to that you don't really have anything that could be called Germany, rather you have separate German-speking states. It does not look like you understand history enough to be using it to make broad sweeping statements like you are doing.

      Another major problem in your argument is that the U.S. is much bigger, population wise, that most countries it is going to be compared to. So when you say things like "richest", that is true for aggregate wealth. But it is not true for per-capita income (U.S. is #11).

      And the statement "Capitalism and free markets have lifted more people out of poverty and lifted the standards of living of more people than any other system yet tried, combined" ignores that China has lifted billions of people out of poverty. You can make lots of truthful bad statements about China, and I certainly would not want to live there. But it does prove that statement wrong.

      But even more to the point: Germany has a much more social-based system than ours. Clearly in areas of heath-care, education, workers rights, and welfare systems. But they are doing better than the U.S. in terms of growth, average wage, and unemployment. How does your argument survive that?

  2. Lessons being learned by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Running for President and being President are two entirely different things.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Lessons being learned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'll just leave this here.

    2. Re:Lessons being learned by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Trump downplayed that Chinese hoax thing long ago and claimed he was joking.

      He repeated it several times. And I dare you to find the "joke" in this tweet from Donald:

      https://twitter.com/realdonald...

      In fact, he stated that he thought climate change was a "hoax" or "bullshit" no fewer than five times, and none of them seem to have any "joking" in them.

      http://www.snopes.com/donald-t...

      Or maybe you think that linking to quotes from Donald Trump is "fake news" and it's just the MSM trying to make him look stupid by linking to his actual words.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  3. Trump 2016 by backslashdot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Trump is the best thing to happen to the socialist agenda. He is going to run up a massive deficit. How soon before the conservatives try to disparage him? It will be comedic gold. This is the guy they said is unafraid to speak the truth and can't be bought. Cause no matter what you believe if you say exactly what u think you're good .. right? I mean, nobody despicable in history ever said what they really think?

  4. Step 1: Ignore the mouth by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's a fact about Trump that's growing ever more apparent: his mouth is nearly useless. Only his actions matter (and they've yet to unfold).

    Forrest Trump is like a box of chocolates: you don't know what you are getting until you bite into one ... or one bites into you.

    1. Re:Step 1: Ignore the mouth by shanen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Insight on today's Slashdot, eh? Not intended as a personal criticism, though I personally miss the "funny" posts more.

      No, the Donald's past actions are quite clear. Trump loves crushing his opponents. The "You're fired" bit on TV was just a way to personalize Trump's personal preferences and make them more marketable.

      If Trump avoids impeachment, then I predict that Trump will dump Pence in 2020. He will pick Ivanka as his VP, to replace him in the White House in 2024. How's that for America's first female president, AKA queen? Things will be perfectly clear by then, but we'll get a lot of clarity as soon as he names his Supreme Court justice in a few days. Even as I write, I'm sure he is interviewing his deplorable list of candidates in search of the one with the highest degree of personal loyalty to the Donald.

      Notwithstanding the Electoral College, the will of the voters was clearly expressed in 2012 for President Obama to pick that justice, and by the largest number of the voters in 2016 that Trump NOT pick that justice.

      --
      Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  5. Re:Ball-busting ... by Rei · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Obama and Guantanamo, for example.

    It was obvious that he really wanted to close that thing. Who knows exactly what he learned when he was office, but you could just see that combination of "frustration" and "defeat" in him when the topic came up afterwards.

    --
    Wingus, Dingus! Listen up!
  6. Re:I predicted 2017 would be the year of walking b by Tablizer · · Score: 3

    How do you walk back something you've given different answers for? He waffled heavily on the campaign trail also. He is consistently inconsistent. We shouldn't be surprised.

  7. Worse than a 'politician.' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Think of all the stereotypes you can think about with a politician.

    Lying, manipulative, weasil-tactics, duplicitous, and so on.

    Trump is pretty much all those things to a level we're unfamiliar with in the modern era. People tend to vastly overestimate how badly corrupted our system has become in the recent modern era, when seeing isolated incidents of outrageous things, such as lies before congress, violence, or right being ignored.

    The thing is, if you've ever read any newspapers from the 1800s, or from earlier eras from most places, politics have always been truly horrible, to a much greater degree than we're used to. History is replete with millions of deaths for the sake of the worst kinds of political stupidity, Even the mythical ideals, such as Camelot, are filled with absurdly horrible acts as commonplace, when you read the versions not cleaned up for modern standards.

    The return to commonplace racism, outright lying and fiercely punishing those who call you out on lies, and playing of all sides with open disdain is what we seem to be seeing here. A return to the 'good old days', well before the 1950s.

    So yeah, if Trump find he can use the specter of global warming to push some part of his agenda, a nugget to throw to get someone in line, he'll play that card.

  8. You Trump voters have been played by presidenteloco · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He just said whatever he thought would win him the election.

    What he said has pretty much no attachment to what he will do.

    He's a fast learner at becoming a typical lying establishment politician, after having been briefed on the actual facts of the nation and the world.

    Of course the role dictates what you have to do in it, anyway. It's all part of the machine.

    Enjoy the ride, suckers.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    1. Re:You Trump voters have been played by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      Disingenuous politically correct virtue signalling, as it so often man(oops sexism)ifests as kicking THE GREAT SATAN and its innocent sons, is bigoted in and of itself - not to mention narcissistic.

      Is there a native English speaker who can translate this for me?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:You Trump voters have been played by EmeraldBot · · Score: 5, Funny

      Disingenuous politically correct virtue signalling, as it so often man(oops sexism)ifests as kicking THE GREAT SATAN and its innocent sons, is bigoted in and of itself - not to mention narcissistic.

      Is there a native English speaker who can translate this for me?

      Depends on the dialect. You can interpret it as either, "somebody swapped out my decaf" or "these new recreational marijuana laws are fantastic!", depending on what the stress is when you say it out loud - but given THE GREAT SATAN , it's proooobably the latter.

      --
      "Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
  9. Re:Stop breathing! by LifesABeach · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm waiting for the Trump to state, "Climate Change is really huge, and you're going to love it."

  10. Feel so conflicted. . . by Idou · · Score: 3, Insightful

    On the one hand, it looks like Trump lied to a bunch of scared and vulnerable people to get elected (under the disguise of "not being another politician" and "not just being all talk"). . . On the other hand, a lot of his promises ranged from authoritarian to completely incoherent (Bring back jobs by attacking free trade when automation is the real job killer at this point? Bring back coal by attacking green technologies when natural gas is the true coal killer?).

    Either way, the guy is a real douche in my book. . .

    --
    Sdelat' Ameriku velikoy Snova!
  11. Re:Stop breathing! by Rei · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Many people are saying climate change is a serious issue, many people. Nobody is better at fighting climate change than me. We're going to have the best carbon controls in the world. Obama was a total failure at fighting climate change. Total failure. The rest of the world is laughing at us...."

    Maybe someone presented climate change to him as a jihadist terror plot. I can't wait to hear him repeat the phrase "radical Islamic climate change" ;)

    --
    Wingus, Dingus! Listen up!
  12. Scott Adams predicted this by taustin · · Score: 5, Informative

    Scott Adams predicted this in May.

    Predicted that Trumps real position on climate change was actually "I don't know because I haven't looked into it," and that once he did, if he decided it was a problem, he'd be the only person who could convince the Republican base that it was a problem and that something needed to be done. That no Democrat ever could, but Trump could carry the Republicans right along because they see him as one of them, and very credible.

    Mr. Adams is a very observant wingnut.

  13. Re:Ball-busting ... by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's why we have an outsider White man.

    "outsider"? Trump? You mean the scion of a wealthy family?

    He may have convinced millions of people that he is an outsider, but they are badly mistaken.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  14. Re:Stop breathing! by Sarnya · · Score: 4, Informative

    Can you explain how Obama is not a total failure at fighting climate change or cite links as to how he has had a meaningful impact on reducing global warming?

    The fact that progressive policies have been implemented on working towards goals, open, rational and above all educated dialouge. Most importantly not idiotic pro-business, anti-middle class policies that counteract any attempt to deal with the main issues that would need to be in place for this: the consumer public and the actual economy, not the millionaire+ economy.

  15. He's a politician by HalAtWork · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Did anyone expect any different?

  16. Re:Ball-busting ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Interesting take, but wrong.

    America is way long overdue for the needle to peg out to the right.

    That's obviated by the results of this last election.

    America needs Trump and everything he can possibly bring to the fight.

    America needs to actually experience the fantasy of suicide so it can get a sour taste in its mouth and deal with that which has remained in the shadows.

    The effort to convert America to Christianity needs to be exposed so we can get rid of the son of a bitches.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  17. Only "some connectivity" by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just because we might get out of the fire and back into the frying pan, that doesn't make it a good place to be.

    Also, let's be clear what Trump actually said here. "Some connectivity." It's not like he's suddenly become an environmentalist.

    I can just hear him tomorrow if he got too much push-back from conservatives: "Uh... yeah... I said 'some connectivity.' Not a lot. Like a phone -- when you got 'some connectivity' you might have one bar if you're out in the woods. Well, not on my phone, because my phone's awesome and I'm rich. But some people get one bar. That's 'some connectivity,' which is all there is with the climate change. Obama and ISIS, on the other hand -- there's FIVE bars of connectivity there."

  18. Re:Stop breathing! by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fact that progressive policies have been implemented on working towards goals, open, rational and above all educated dialouge. Most importantly not idiotic pro-business, anti-middle class policies that counteract any attempt to deal with the main issues that would need to be in place for this: the consumer public and the actual economy, not the millionaire+ economy.

    One of the things that kind of puzzles me about the idea that being "pro business" and "pro not-fucking-up-the environment" being mutually exclusive is that potentially fixing climate change could be great for industry, if it got past its short sighted myopia.

    Switching over to a low/no CO2 economy doesnt just mean shutting down coal plants. It means shutting down coal plants and building solar/wind/nuclear plants. Surely this counts as "economic activity". Those wind farms don't build themselves and those solar panels wont service themselves.

    European countries that have put effort into transitioning over have generated a tonne of jobs, money and economic activity in the process , so it seems strange that people seem to think the US doing so would mean the opposite of that.

    --
    Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
  19. Re:Stop breathing! by buss_error · · Score: 3, Informative

    Two words:

    Republican Congress.

    'Nuf said.

    --
    Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
  20. Re:Stop breathing! by silentcoder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem with closing Gitmo was what to do with the inmates. If you bring them onshore you have to give them trials. Some (perhaps many) will not make bail, many would be convicted - that means they have to be housed as prisoners afterward, the others you have to release.

    That creates a double problem. No congressman wanted to have a bunch of convicted ex-gitmo terrorists in the prisons in his state. Nobody wanted his prisons to be housing the awaiting-trial ones, and nobody wanted the released ones living in their state.
    Since the whole damn congress went NIMBY about it - Obama had nowhere to put the people in Gitmo - which made closing it basically impossible.

    Now if congress wasn't completely obstructionist this may have been possible to work around. For example one may have sent a tribunal of judges to the Island to hold public trials there - with JAG lawyers prosecuting using whatever evidence they were holding them on. The judges would have a grand-jury style trial and then you only release the ones who are found innocent and the rest are already in jail. It would mean exploiting the "not America" loophole of Bush one last time to get around the bail laws but at least you could have gotten the innocent ones out and been able to say nobody is held without trial. That wouldn't be a 'closure' of Gitmo but it would have been a huge improvement and probably an acceptable compromise - unfortunately, not one Obama could take without congressional approval.

    --
    Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
  21. Re:Stop breathing! by silentcoder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >It was like they were all super villains not a bunch of terrorists that have been waterboarded all over the place and probably can't even think straight anymore.

    Considering all these people are held without trial - NONE of them are terrorists. In the free world people are innocent until proven guilty and not a single Gitmo inmate has been proven guilty of anything, including terrorism.

    --
    Unicode killed the ASCII-art *