Because Reagan Recognized Ozone Layer Issue Conservatives Should Acknowledge The Climate Crisis (scam) Or Something

These are the same people who constantly and consistently hate on Ronald Reagan, you know

Reagan recognized the threat to the ozone layer; conservatives today should respond the same way to climate change | Column

As folks across Florida don bikinis or swim trunks and head to the pool or the beach this holiday weekend, they probably don’t realize that they have President Ronald Reagan to thank for being able to do so safely.

As odd as that sounds, it’s true. In the 1980s the world was facing a big problem. Scientists had discovered that chemicals used in air conditioners, refrigeration equipment, and aerosols—such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs)—were rapidly depleting the earth’s stratospheric ozone layer. (snip)

Instead, [Reagan] became the world’s first head of state to personally approve a national negotiating policy on ozone protection. He then led the effort to push through the Montreal Protocol treaty to phase out the use of CFCs and HCFCs.

Reagan’s success with the Montreal Protocol was a point of pride for the Republican Party. Its 1988 party platform heaped effusive praise on the treaty and called for a similar approach in solving other complex global problems such as tropical forest destruction and climate change.

That would have been nice, but special interests —mainly fossil fuel companies—swooped in and swayed the party away from tackling those problems.

In reality, Republicans were able to get information from other sources, and started seeing that this was less about the climate and mostly about hardcore Modern Socialist policies.

Today, climate change is a much more visible and advanced threat than it was in 1988, and we could use Reagan’s brand of conservative leadership in tackling that problem.

Raise your hand if you think Reagan would be pushing for bigger and bigger government, for more governmental control of people’s lives, liberty, and choice. And controlling more and more of the economy. And taxing the hell out of citizens and private entities.

Two of Reagan’s top cabinet officials, James Baker and George Shultz, are pushing for a carbon fee and dividend approach to address climate change, which is a market-friendly solution long preferred by economists and business leaders.

Reagan would not support this: it is destructive, raises costs for companies and citizens, and then makes citizens more dependent on the government with the “dividend” payout.

When faced with a similar threat, President Reagan felt a moral duty to heed scientific warnings and do what is necessary to protect the public. Florida and the nation need our leaders to do the same today.

When faced with Commies being Commies, Reagan fought back and refused to give in. You know what’s missing from the opinion piece? Any shred of science proving the current warm period is mostly/solely caused by Mankind. And Reagan would dare the Warmists to practice what they preach if they believe.

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

30 Responses to “Because Reagan Recognized Ozone Layer Issue Conservatives Should Acknowledge The Climate Crisis (scam) Or Something”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Teach: These are the same people who constantly and consistently hate on Ronald Reagan, you know

    Much of what Mr. Reagan supported was harmful to America and Americans, but recognizing the reality of the hole in the ozone layer was correct.

    Teach claims that Mr. Reagan would not have recognized the reality of global warming and not have supported a carbon tax, but Teach has no way of knowing that. After all, Mr. Reagan not only supported restrictions on chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons but led the charge. Although Reaganism set America on the road to extreme inequality, it wasn’t until 2008 when the GOP went batshit crazy. Recall that the GOP recognized global warming until 2008.

    The Earth is warming rapidly from CO2 we humans are adding the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.

    • formwiz says:

      Much of what Mr. Reagan supported was harmful to America and Americans, but recognizing the reality of the hole in the ozone layer was correct.

      Riiiiight. That’s why he had the biggest electoral blowout in the country’s history.

      Teach claims that Mr. Reagan would not have recognized the reality of global warming and not have supported a carbon tax, but Teach has no way of knowing that. After all, Mr. Reagan not only supported restrictions on chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons but led the charge. Although Reaganism set America on the road to extreme inequality, it wasn’t until 2008 when the GOP went batshit crazy. Recall that the GOP recognized global warming until 2008.

      reagan hated the tax policies of the Demos.

      And Reagan led the charge against abortion and Communism, not global wahoo. The Whigs that infested the party may have, but Reagan didn’t.

      The Earth is warming rapidly from CO2 we humans are adding the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.

      I’ll bet if all the Lefties moved to the North Pole and burned whale oil, it would stop.

  2. alanstorm says:

    “Much of what Mr. Reagan supported was harmful to America and Americans…”

    Such as…? Citations, examples?

    I still have serious doubts about the ozone hole concept. To wit: Most of the world’s population was and is in the northern hemisphere (probably because the distribution of land mass was RACIST!!! But I digress. One could therefore infer that most of the CFCs would likewise be in the north.

    The air masses of the northern and southern hemispheres do not mix much, due to the way the atmosphere acts near the equator.

    How, then, did a CFC-caused hole in the ozone layer appear over the SOUTH pole?

  3. alanstorm says:

    “The Earth is warming rapidly from CO2 we humans are adding the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.”

    no, dear child, that is the argument you need to PROVE. Assuming the answer (i.e. begging the question) is a logical fallacy. Assuming that something measured in the PPM is having THAT much effect is hard to credit, except for the credulous.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Most atmospheric ozone is generated around the equator and is transported to the poles by stratospheric circulation. Halogenated organic gases follow the same path, destroying ozone along the way. There’s a constant flux of ozone.

      What more proof do you need that increases in atmospheric CO2 is causing global warming? Is CO2 increasing? Yes. Does CO2 absorb IR? Sure. Is the increased CO2 derived from fossil fuels? Of course. Is the Earth warming? Yep.

      What is your hypothesis to explain the current period rapid warming?

      • formwiz says:

        Summer.

      • Jl says:

        Too bad it’s not “warming rapidly”, J, but you already knew that.
        “Does CO2 absorb IR..” But yet there’s not one single lab experiment that’s been done to show that back radiation from CO2 has warmed anything, even a cup of coffee. Why would that be, J?

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          J,

          Of course it is warming rapidly, but you already knew that.

          Visible light is absorbed by Earth, water, objects and re-emitted as infrared (heat) radiation which is off into space. Heat is a form of energy transferred from one body to another. In the atmosphere, CO2 (and other gases, H2O, N2O, CH4) absorb infrared radiation, and technically heat. The gas molecules can emit the heat in any and all directions – some directed to deep space, some down. In effect, the absorption and re-emission of heat slows the loss of heat from Earth.

          This has been known for over a century.

          At one time, you denied that the Earth was warming, whether rapidly or not. How about now?

          • formwiz says:

            Of course it is warming rapidly, but you already knew that.

            Of course, it’s not.

            At one time, you denied that the Earth was warming, whether rapidly or not. How about now?</i.

            It’ll cool off around October.

      • alanstorm says:

        “Halogenated organic gases follow the same path” – which is what
        I said. How did the CFCs cross the equator?

        As for my hypothesis, I don’t actually need one to ridicule your simplistic schematic.

        “Is CO2 increasing? Yes.” It’s STILL a trace gas. The effects of water vapor swamp it into insignificance.

        “Does CO2 absorb IR? Sure.” What frequencies? Are those saturated or not?

        “Is the Earth warming? Yep.” Is it? It’s very hard to tell, since NASA and others keep “adjusting” the data, and some of the data was already suspect. And, every catastrophic prediction made so far for “climate change” has turned out to be incorrect. If it doesn’t predict, it’s not a valid hypothesis.

        • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

          Termites yearly emit more CO2 worldwide than all sources from mankind.

          Rimjob has tried to dispute that scientific fact without success.

          Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

          • Elwood P. Dowd says:

            The microbes in termite guts convert cellulose to CO2 and methane.

            But note, termites chew up wood, not coal, oil or gas. Note too, that fossil fuel burning releases CO2 trapped for 100s of millions of years. Wood traps CO2 for decades, a period less than the atmospheric half-life of CO2. Termites and their little gut buddies rapidly recycle carbon. Termites have been turning wood into CO2 for thousands of years, yet today the atmospheric CO2 is higher now than at any time in the past million years.

            The Earth continues to warm with no end in sight.

          • Liljeffyatemypuppy says:

            Nice try Rimjob.
            You still have not disputed the fact that termites emit more CO2 worldwide than ALL sources from humankind.

            Lolgfy https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

        • Elwood P. Dowd says:

          Actually global warming is a scientific theory.

          Rising atmospheric greenhouse gases (mostly CO2) will cause warming. Predictive so far.

          Are you suggesting that the absorbance of IR by CO2 is saturated?

          It IS true that overall water vapor is increasing, and it’s true that water vapor is a potent greenhouse gas. Water vapor in increasing as a result of CO2 induced warming. But you must realize that water vapor is highly variable. Why? Precipitation. Water vapor has a short atmospheric half-life, doesn’t it?

      • Jl says:

        “What is your hypothesis?” Not how it works, J, and we’ve been over this before. An analogy-a defense attorney doesn’t need to prove who committed the crime, he simply has to prove that it wasn’t his client. But since you asked, there are multiple theories. Did you actually believe there weren’t? https://twitter.com/kenneth72712993/status/1218058276492976131?s=21

      • Jl says:

        And no, it’s no warming “rapidly”, as you so desperately try to believe. https://twitter.com/dawntj90/status/1194386595929108480?s=21

  4. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Ronald Reagan’s economic policies nearly tripled the national debt. They also widened the gap between the rich and the poor, shredded the social safety net and yanked the rungs out of the economic ladder. Reagan’s Supply Side (i.e. “Trickle-down”) economic policies slashed taxes for the rich, allowing the upper classes to horde more and more money, leaving the rest of the nation with crumbs. The top 1% richest Americans’ share of the nation’s income has doubled since Reagan came into office.

    Ignored the AIDS epidemic.

    To fight Communism!! he armed Iran and Nicaraguan contra death squads.

    To fight Communism!! he armed and trained the Afghan Mujahideen, Taliban, al-Qaeda.

    Reset the racist nature of the GOP – welfare queens etc.

    But his worst damage was the explosive increase in income and wealth inequality, gutting the middle class.

    • formwiz says:

      Ronald Reagan’s economic policies nearly tripled the national debt. They also widened the gap between the rich and the poor, shredded the social safety net and yanked the rungs out of the economic ladder. Reagan’s Supply Side (i.e. “Trickle-down”) economic policies slashed taxes for the rich, allowing the upper classes to horde more and more money, leaving the rest of the nation with crumbs. The top 1% richest Americans’ share of the nation’s income has doubled since Reagan came into office.

      Bull. that has more to do with Willie and Zippy, the Wall Street boys.

      Ignored the AIDS epidemic.

      So?

      To fight Communism!! he armed Iran and Nicaraguan contra death squads.

      To fight Communism!! he armed and trained the Afghan Mujahideen, Taliban, al-Qaeda.

      To fight Hitler!! Roosevelt armed and trained Stalin.

      To fight The Nips!! Roosevelt armed Mao.

      Reset the racist nature of the GOP – welfare queens etc.

      You mean the racist party that abolished slavery and passed the Civil Rights Acts?

      But his worst damage was the explosive increase in income and wealth inequality, gutting the middle class.

      Zippy again.

    • Jl says:

      With no evidence, as usual

    • Jl says:

      J conveniently forgets that Reagan’s policies (and others) of cutting taxes actually ended up causing the top 1% of wage earners to pay a greater share of the total tax bill, even more than when the top rate was at 90%. The U.S. has one of the most progressive tax systems in the world, meaning a very small number of people pay most of the taxes. The moral is-if you want the rich to pay more taxes, lower the tax rates. This somehow is upsetting to J and his ilk, but liberals never could understand economics 101. And for another example of how one person could be wrong so many times, we have-“slashed taxes allowing the upper classes to hoard more money”. Wow-first of all, keeping more of what was yours to begin with isn’t “hoarding”, it’s simply…keeping your own money. But thanks for the drama Queen remark. “Leaving the rest with crumbs..“. That, of course, would be impossible because the money didn’t or doesn’t belong to the “rest of us”. Money isn’t a zero-summed game-because some have a lot of money doesn’t mean other have less money.

  5. formwiz says:

    The microbes in termite guts convert cellulose to CO2 and methane.

    But note, termites chew up wood, not coal, oil or gas. Note too, that fossil fuel burning releases CO2 trapped for 100s of millions of years. Wood traps CO2 for decades, a period less than the atmospheric half-life of CO2. Termites and their little gut buddies rapidly recycle carbon. Termites have been turning wood into CO2 for thousands of years, yet today the atmospheric CO2 is higher now than at any time in the past million years.

    The Earth continues to warm with no end in sight.

    I still say October. But all your rap about CO2 has an easy solution.

    Kill off a few billion people. Then nobody is putting the earth in danger, right?

    Funny how the Commies always end up in the same place.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      You think killing a few billion humans is a solution?

      Not surprised. Connies always accuse others of what they have planned.

      • formwiz says:

        You think killing a few billion humans is a solution?

        No, that’s your solution. Commies have already murdered about 125 million people for the sin of being in the way.

        Connies always accuse others of what they have planned.

        No, Uncle Saul gave the game away. That’s what you do.

        Little late to try reversing it. Your side has the track record.

Bad Behavior has blocked 10004 access attempts in the last 7 days.