Kerry On ‘Climate Change’: No One Should Make Decisions For Billions On Ideology

After taking long fossil fueled trips to Antarctica and New Zealand, current Secretary of State and uber-Warmist/climahypocrite John Kerry has gone all announcey

(Huff Post) The United States on Wednesday announced an ambitious new goal to rapidly reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions by midcentury, despite the incoming presidency of Donald Trump, a man who has called the phenomenon a “hoax” invented by the Chinese. (snip)

Under the newly released strategy, which aims to rapidly “decarbonize” America, emissions would be slashed about 80 percent by 2050, compared with levels set in 2005. The U.S. has already promised a 26 percent to 28 percent cut in emissions by 2025 and would build on those pledges through a transition to renewable energy production, carbon removal technology and efforts to curb emissions from agriculture and other sources.

Good news: President Trump will axe these goals and projects. Here’s where it gets really fun

Kerry used his speech to urge those in power to “do your own due diligence before making irrevocable choices.”

“No one has a right to make decisions that affect billions of people based solely on ideology or without proper input,” he said. “Anyone who has these conversations, who takes the time to learn from these experts, who gets the full picture of what we’re facing ― I believe they can only come to one legitimate decision, and that is to act boldly on climate change and encourage others to do the same.”

Sounds like he’s making these decisions for billions based on a cultish ideology and with only the facts from that narrow viewpoint. He says to do your own due diligence, then trots out the Warmist viewpoint. This is what they do.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

20 Responses to “Kerry On ‘Climate Change’: No One Should Make Decisions For Billions On Ideology”

  1. Zachriel says:

    William Teach: Sounds like he’s making these decisions for billions based on a cultish ideology

    Actually, anthropogenic global warming is strongly supported by the scientific community.

    It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities. This warming has already led to changes in the Earth’s climate. — Science Academies of Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom, United States

  2. Dana says:

    Translation: no one has a right to make decisions that affect billions of people unless they take those decisions in the way I approve.

    Mr Kerry would be perfectly fine with the President taking decisions that affect billions of people if those decisions were taken differently. Indeed, in 2004, he wanted to be the person taking those decisions, and we can thank the Lord — and President Bush — that he didn’t get his way.

  3. drowningpuppies says:

    Yep, no one should be making decisions based on ideology except …


    President Obama has just set a new record for rules and regulations, his administration spitting out 527 pages worth in just one day, as he races to put his fingerprint on virtually every corner of American life and business.
    —–
    What’s more, there are still about 26 working days left in the year.

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/obama-sets-new-record-for-regulations-527-pages-in-just-one-day/article/2607677

  4. drowningpuppies says:

    Actually, anthropogenic global warming is strongly supported by the scientific community.

    Not really.

    http://www.climatedepot.com/2010/12/08/special-report-more-than-1000-international-scientists-dissent-over-manmade-global-warming-claims-challenge-un-ipcc-gore-2/

  5. Zachriel says:

    drowningpuppies: Not really.

    Heh. That’s funny.

    The very first ‘authority’ is Tom Tripp, a metallurgist, hardly a relevant specialty. Next is Leonard Weinstein, an aerospace engineer. Again, not a relevant specialty. Robert Laughlin is a particle physicist. Christopher J. Kobus is a mechanical engineer. Mary Mumper is a biochemist.

    Should we continue? Why yes, yes we should!

    Anatoly Levitin does study the ionosphere, so there’s that. But then he says, “The planet’s climate is doing its own thing, but we cannot pinpoint significant trends in changes to it because it dates back millions of years while the study of it began only recently.” But that’s silly. Just because we live in the present doesn’t mean we can’t study the past. It’s called science!

    Hans Jelbring apparently doesn’t have any peer-reviewed scientific papers, but he did write an article called “The ‘Greenhouse Effect’ as a Function of Atmospheric Mass”. It’s not just wrong, but fundamentally mistaken. If you compress a gas, it will warm, but then it will return to the ambient temperature. With a relatively tenuous and infrared-transparent atmosphere, that process will occur quickly.

    And so on. And these are the luminaries!

  6. Jeffery says:

    Fact: The Earth (atmosphere, land, oceans) is warming.

    Fact: Atmospheric CO2 is increasing, primarily from humans burning fossil fuels.

    Fact: CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs infrared radiation re-radiated from the Earth.

    Fact: The increase in CO2 over the past century is causing the current period of warming.

    The political (not scientific) debate is over what actions, if any, to take to slow or stop this unnatural (i.e., man-made) warming.

  7. Liam Thomas says:

    Well at least the crazed left still have the AGW agenda to kick around for the next 8 years. Perhaps we should give them some coloring books and hot chocolate and let them have their space so they dont have to start taking anti-depressants. I mean just look at Zach up their Saul Alinsky-izing the entire list of scientists who disagree with the science is settle meme…..it appears that science is what they say it is…rather then what the degrees inferred by colleges say it is.

    What can you say…..

    Fact: The Earth (atmosphere, land, oceans) is warming……….True

    Fact: Atmospheric CO2 is increasing, primarily from humans burning fossil fuels……Partially true.

    Fact: CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs infrared radiation re-radiated from the Earth……Yes it does….

    Fact: The increase in CO2 over the past century is causing the current period of warming…..In part true.

    The political (not scientific) debate is over what actions, if any, to take to slow or stop this unnatural (i.e., man-made) warming.

    The political debate makes the science suspect….does it not….anytime you have a political debate about FACTS then one has to take a closer look at the FACTS.

  8. Rev.Hoagie® says:

    What Jeffery and the rest of his radical leftist cabal fail to realize is they have politicized the science just like they politicize everything they talk about. Once a topic is political the truth becomes the first casualty thus, no one believes in glow-ball warming any more.

    If they really cared about AGW they would stop politicizing it immediately but because of the damage they’ve already done it would take a decade to get back on track.

    Oh, and having a bunch of scientists who get paid to support AGW actually support AGW is not considered “proof” by sane people.

  9. drowningpuppies says:

    <blockquote> Heh. That’s funny.

    “Ha, ha” funny?

    Or “hockey stick” funny?

  10. drowningpuppies says:

    And so on.

    Please go on…

  11. Jeffery says:

    Laim,

    Nearly every issue has a political component! Deniers argue that the potential downstream political actions invalidate the science of global warming. That is just not true.

    The science behind man-made global warming is sound and overwhelming, to the point that the motives of science deniers is suspect.

    We get it. The US ideological right sees any interference by way of regulation and/or taxation as anathema to their beliefs, so they attack the science and the scientists. Deniers have only very grudgingly began to admit the obvious – that the Earth is warming and that CO2 is a contributor. We get it. Conservatives don’t want to admit that the engine that build the modern world – fossil fuels – also has a downside – CO2 pollution. But those political beliefs do not invalidate the truth.

    Stephen Hawking recently estimated that humankind has about 1000 years left as a species.

  12. drowningpuppies says:

    That little guy who lied about serving in the Army discussing truths and motives…

  13. Jeffery says:

    The political debate makes the science suspect….does it not….anytime you have a political debate about FACTS then one has to take a closer look at the FACTS.

    Do you have evidence to support that any major step in the rationale for AGW is untrue? The Earth is warming, CO2 (from burning fossil fuels) is increasing, atmospheric CO2 causes heat retention etc. Has there been a feasible alternative explanation for the current warming? No. The counter argument is that the Earth warms and cools randomly and this is a random, natural warming by mechanisms yet discovered. That explanation MAY be correct, but it is very unlikely.

    By all means look at all the facts. By all means find the scientific flaw in the evidence that overwhelmingly supports the theory that human generated CO2 is causing the Earth to warm. That’s the way science works.

    The scientist that disproves the scientific Theory of AGW will become very famous indeed. Isn’t that motivation enough for scientists to act?

  14. Jeffery says:

    The little shit-eating pink poodle that lies about EVERYTHING discussing anything of substance… LOL

  15. drowningpuppies says:

    Oh, so you didn’t lie about serving in the Army?

    Yep, the truth does hurt.

  16. Rev.Hoagie® says:

    The scientist that disproves the scientific Theory of AGW will become very famous indeed. Isn’t that motivation enough for scientists to act?

    No. Generals, politicians and actors are motivated by fame, not scientists.* Perhaps once President Trump Makes America Great Again the truth about AGW will be able to be told. Until then we must live under the filthy lies of radical left anti American propagandists.

    * Failure to understand the motivations of other people is what caused you radical leftists to constantly call anybody who disagreed with you names like racists, bigots, islamophobes(?), homophobes and xenophobes. Even your douche leader called them “a basket of deplorables” and “irredeemable”. By now one would think any intelligent person would figure out calling your opposition names does not convince them to join you. Keep up the good work. Thirteen more states and we have ALL the legislatures.
    You know as much about human nature as you do global warming.

  17. Zachriel says:

    drowningpuppies: Please go on…

    How many are named Steve?

  18. Jeffery says:

    Rev. Sandwich,

    What does motivate scientists? And please explain your reasoning.

  19. drowningpuppies says:

    Little fake soldier guy,
    What motivates you to lie about serving in the Army or are you just being a drama queen?

Bad Behavior has blocked 10392 access attempts in the last 7 days.