Paris Accord’s unnecessary burden fell only on U.S.

0
137

Dear Editor,

Why is there so much dismay over the pullout from the Paris Accord?

This was not a treaty, but simply an agreement which obligated the U.S. to further reductions— and to pay $100 billion to various undeveloped countries— and let the rest of the countries make their own optional commitments for possible changes.

The only obligations fall on the U.S., India and China made no commitments until 2030.

Climate change is not the question. The climate has been changing since time began, however man-caused warming is still only a consensus of opinion, not a fact. More people die from cold than heat. Crops grow better when it is warm than cold.Does anyone remember when butter was bad and margarine was good, or when eggs were bad? These were also consensuses, but not facts.

There was a period of warming in the late 30’s which became cooling in the 40’s. Was there a problem with CO2 then?

Under the conditions of the accord, the temperature might increase by 0.2 degree in 2030 if the computer models can be believed, however the computer has trouble predicting next week’s weather many times.

There have been periods of warm weather in the past. During the Roman Empire, the world temperatures were higher. There was a reason they called Greenland “Greenland” in the 1400’s when the vikings were there. There was the little ice age from which we are still emerging.

—Don Thorson 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here