John Oliver gives a great summary of why Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement makes absolutely no sense
An agreement cannot be both nonbinding and draconian (Spoiler: Paris is the former)
Early on in the speech, Trump said: “Thus, as of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the nonbinding Paris accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country.”
This made me laugh out loud when I first heard it. I still get a kick out of it.
The Paris climate agreement… is voluntary. Participating countries determine their own targets and their own policies. They can, at any time, revise those targets and policies. They can fail to meet the targets, without penalty. When Trump says “nonbinding” … that’s what nonbinding means. There are no legal bonds…
So how, then, if there are no threatened penalties, and the US is free, within the agreement, to implement whatever policies it wants … can the agreement also “impose … draconian financial and economic burdens”?
The answer: It cannot. That sentence makes no f’ing sense, even internally. The chances that the logical dissonance troubled Trump for even a microsecond seems, however, remote.
It is not something to say I chose not to believe e-mc2; YOU DONT HAVE THAT OPTION!
When you have an established scientific emergent truth, it is true whether or not you belive in it and the sooner you understand that the faster we can get on with the political conversation about how to solve the problems that face us.
Every minute one is in denial you are delaying the political solution that should have been established years ago.
Chairman Lamar Smith dismissed commentary presented during testimony on climate change because it came from the journal Science — one of the oldest and most prestigious scientific publications in existence.
It rare to see such a wilful disregard of reality, it is absolutely devastating to see it from the Chair of the House Science Committee.
As was eloquently said by Richard Feynman, “Science is what we do to keep from lying to ourselves.”.
Lamar Smith clearly prefers comfortable but disastrous lies instead of reality.
The hope is that the radiation will stop the growth of my tumour. It wont’t, however, remove it. The success rate is roughly equivalent of the success rate of surgery (90%), and there is a greater chance of not loosing function on the left side of my face and keeping whats left of my hearing in my left ear.
They also wont have to drill out the bone behind my ear and remove the bones of my middle ear.
Instead they will make a mask of my face, take another MRI and CT scan, then I’ll go get radiated 5 times a week for 5 weeks. I likely wont even lose my hair, but they made me shave my beard.
That’s the good news (well except for the bit requiring me to shave).
The bad news is that the radiation has a 1% chance of causing cancer in the next 10-15 years; the type of cancer that doesn’t lend itself to a good outcome. And when a radiation oncologist says that you know it is serious.
But it’s only 1%, so it probably wont happen…
Ya that doesn’t bring me very much comfort either.
Hans Rosling, one of the most enlightening science communicators, passed away last week.
It was his first Ted talk that thrust renowned Swedish academic Hans Rosling into the international spotlight in 2006, billed as the man in whose hands data sings. Since then, the statistician more likely to illustrate an idea with a few multi-coloured lego bricks than a PowerPoint has been described as everything from a data guru to a Jedi master of data visualisation.
He died on Tuesday, aged 68, after a year-long illness, surrounded by his family in Uppsala, Sweden.
I think Hans’ best talk was his magic washing machine talk, it perfectly sums up the difficulty (but necessity) of balancing development and environmentalism.
It really is worthwhile to watch the rest of his TED talks.
At this rate Canada’s emission regulations should be ready by 2025.
Canada is once again delaying emissions regulations in the oil and gas sector, despite major pipeline projects that continue to put intense scrutiny on the energy industry’s environmental track record
The regulations were first promised seven years ago, and Alberta has recently criticized the federal government for delays in introducing them.
Real Climate gives the recent methane news some proper context. The bottom line is that since methane is a short lived GHG it would take a very sudden and very massive release of methane for it to have a large effect on the climate.
The climate crisis of the 21st century has been caused largely by just 90 companies, which between them produced nearly two-thirds of the greenhouse gas emissions generated since the dawning of the industrial age, new research suggests.