3153
Comments (179)
sorted by:
140
SBOJ_JOBS [S] 140 points ago +140 / -0

"20 Years to Stop CO2" is a convenient way to destroy all those pesky freedoms which impede the move to global governance

91
Formerlurker92 91 points ago +91 / -0

The solution to every problem, from environmental catastrophes to aliens will always be the same.

More government and your unquestioning obedience

35
ihaveotherthingstodo 35 points ago +35 / -0

The solution to every problem, from environmental catastrophes to aliens will always be the same. More government and your unquestioning obedience.

If Ronald Reagan were alive today, he would have said this exact same thing.

18
QuranIsToiletPaper 18 points ago +20 / -2

SAVE THE TREES, INCREASE CARBON EMISSIONS!

Carbon is good.

Photosynthesis is good.

If you disagree, you hate our planet.

https://i.ibb.co/P4bRNfP/800px-Photosynthesis-en-svg.png

5
AmericanPatriot6f0 5 points ago +5 / -0

I believe the increase in carbon dioxide is a large part of the something like 5% increase in forest cover over the last 50 or 100 years (I don’t remember the exact statistic.)

Interestingly enough, CO2 isn’t even the most impactful greenhouse gas: if I am remembering right it was carbon monoxide.

3
BeardedNinjaPede 3 points ago +4 / -1

Definitely not carbon monoxide. You may be thinking of methane or water which are green house gasses.

2
Klyuchak 2 points ago +2 / -0

Which when you consider the amount of work being done compared to emissions, cars actually look quite green compared to us farting and sweating by the boat load to do a tiny fraction of the work. Not to mention cows. Basically, if you want life on earth, methane and water are going to be a thing. But ohh that's right, they want to "Build Back Better"

1
ModernKnight 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's water.

2
Junionthepipeline 2 points ago +2 / -0

Then sign an amnesty and start wiping out 2a

23
MsAnthropic 23 points ago +23 / -0

Exactly right. The “solution” is ALWAYS more communism.

10
IllEagle 10 points ago +10 / -0

Some might even say the solution is...

Final.

12
ibfriend 12 points ago +12 / -0

Its one of the reasons they are against Elon Musk. Because although he does believe the same thing as them, his solutions are less centralization.

9
TD_Covfefe_Crusader 9 points ago +9 / -0

Their solution to everything is communism.

33
ChairForce1 33 points ago +33 / -0

Hahaha and it’s been 20+ years since this load of horse shit was conceived. Remember they said Miami would be under water by now??

28
BloodElfSupporter 28 points ago +28 / -0

The biggest thing for me is how they decided to shift from “global warming” to “climate change”.

22
Hambonemcgee 22 points ago +22 / -0

Now it’s “Climate Crisis!”

17
ChairForce1 17 points ago +17 / -0

Always w the fake deadlines and false urgency

14
bangbus 14 points ago +14 / -0

In 2020, “two weeks” became the replacement for “ten years.” The climate people always say 10 years.

5
kt524 5 points ago +5 / -0

Even horse mouth AOC said 12 years.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
11
ATK69 11 points ago +11 / -0

Don’t forget the Kenyan and Big Mike’s favorite mansion in Martha’s Vineyard.

8
Jimmy33 8 points ago +8 / -0

No life without carbon. No plants, no animals. Climate Change is a deadly death religion. They may as well be anti oxygen. I wonder if the Mayans became liberal greenies.

Pacific Islands are getting bigger, not smaller.

7
Kek_Johnson 7 points ago +7 / -0

CO2 makes up only 0,04% of the atmosphere. Over 97% is made by nature. SCIENCE!!!

14
NomadicKrow2 14 points ago +14 / -0

20 years to do it. Like two weeks to flatten the curve. "20 years" is just a two decade lead for China.

I used to hate when people said that Americans live in a bubble and don't know shit about the world. And now I realize it: They were right. Americans live in a bubble and don't realize we're cutting our own knees out from under ourselves and China is doing whatever the fuck they want.

14
Gelus 14 points ago +14 / -0

People think it's 20 years to destroy CO2, but what's really going on is we have 10 years to destroy all communists, and the longer we wait the harder it gets.

8
deleted 8 points ago +8 / -0
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
40
george1984 40 points ago +41 / -1

Delightful...... can anyone show me where CO2 impacts the climate? Last I heard it was needed for plants to grow. Now it’s a killer

34
Gelus 34 points ago +34 / -0

Anyone remember that NASA scientist from 15 years ago or so who was talking about terraforming Mars by using supergreenhouse gases to warm it up, and a reporter asked him about using CO2 to warm Mars and he just laughed and said, "You can't produce enough CO2 to warm Mars." Then got eviscerated by the green lobby?

Pepperidge Farm remembers.

15
Riolinda 15 points ago +15 / -0

iT hUrTs ThE oZoNe WeRe ALl GoInG tO dIe

16
FliesTheFlag 16 points ago +17 / -1

The Ozone hole from hair spray caused in the 90s at the north pole that no one can visit

15
IllEagle 15 points ago +15 / -0

The Hairspray Lie was perpetuated by Big Grunge & the record industries to stop the coke-fueled party metal of the 80's. Van Halen was just too powerful. It started with the subversive tactic of getting DLR out of VH, but that didn't go according to plan when Sammy joined.

So they had to kill the hairspray industry by promoting heavier & more angsty depressing music to the new generation before they could figure it out.

It started with Metallica's video for One. Metallica were perfect because they were heavy metal & paved the way for shit like Nirvana and.... Ugh.... Pearl Jam

4
FelixtheMan 4 points ago +4 / -0

You obviously hate grunge, which I did too, but it seems like that was the last time we saw any real bands formed and mainstreamed. I dont even know how the music industry is an industry now

4
IllEagle 4 points ago +4 / -0

Lol, I don't hate grunge music, I was just fuckin' around. AiC & Soundgarden are two of my all time favorites. In Utero was the first tape I 3vwr bought for myself & Bleach was the first CD I ever owned. Metallica is my #1 in terms of mainstream music.

4
FelixtheMan 4 points ago +4 / -0

I forgot to mention how much I enjoyed the hairspray story.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
6
Riolinda 6 points ago +6 / -0

Wtf is a carbon footprint anyway...

1
Junionthepipeline 1 point ago +1 / -0

Plant food

36
UndercoverSpez 36 points ago +36 / -0

I want a climate scientist bro tell me how many years did we gain with covid lockdowns.

19
FliesTheFlag 19 points ago +19 / -0

Don't ask NOAA, their "scientists" admit to fucking fudging numbers to fit the narrative.

11
TheReal45 11 points ago +11 / -0

It’s all for your safety.

8
bangbus 8 points ago +8 / -0

I want to see a model of exactly how much recorded temps have risen as a result of us dropping asphalt and concrete everywhere. That stuff has to have had a massive effect on every data gathering station anywhere near a populated area.

2
FliesTheFlag 2 points ago +2 / -0

Supposedly some out there about Phoenix temps being higher now and it called the concrete/asphalt city. Never looked into it just stuff a friend said that lives in AZ. Something about the concrete/asphalt holding heat better/longer than just dirt, could be total absolute bullshit though, I dont trust fake scientists.

3
Liberty4All 3 points ago +3 / -0

The urban “heat island” effect is quite real and well documented. It’s one of the few things that both sides of the global warming debate agree on.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
3
Junionthepipeline 3 points ago +3 / -0

They are fortifying numbers bigot

23
Poopyonurface 23 points ago +23 / -0

High levels of CO2 emissions and pollution is bad for air quality.

High levels of CO2 emissions does not cause global warming.

I’m fine with trying to improve air quality through new tech. I’m not fine with kneecapping our energy sector because people are afraid the worlds going to end in 10 years if we don’t stop CO2 emission, kill all cows, and depopulate the Earth.

14
MightyEighth 14 points ago +14 / -0

They honestly think that an earth that has survived millions of years will die in 10 when humanity has industrialized for 150. Shits ridiculous.

8
ATK69 8 points ago +8 / -0

Can we all agree the world would be a better place without masked covidians?

6
Yam_nation 6 points ago +6 / -0

CO2 isn't emissions or pollution. Soot? Yes. NOx and SOx, absolutely. Ground level ozone and CO are too. The enviromarxists have muddied up the definition of emissions to include normal respiration and clean combustion. Now they tax it to fund more communism.

0
Poopyonurface 0 points ago +1 / -1

Humans emit CO2, cars emit CO2, it’s an emission. You’re right that’s it’s not as dangerous as the other pollutants you mentioned, but it’s not healthy to inhale a large volume of CO2 either. It’s essentially acid in your blood.

Maryland taxes rainwater. They don’t need to classify something as an emission to tax it.

2
BillGall2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nobody is talking large volumes of CO2. CO2 is good for the environment at levels we are talking about. Climate change is phony science.There is no scientific proof that burning fossil fuels to produce carbon dioxide and water causes global warming. The CO2 increase we are experiencing is good for green plants and good for mankind.

6
NZ_Pede 6 points ago +6 / -0

Spot on!

18
TheOne1 18 points ago +18 / -0

What happens to the levels if we eliminate China?

27
deleted 27 points ago +27 / -0
18
JudicialDredd 18 points ago +18 / -0

Fish would make a massive comeback. The Chinese have an armada of fishing vessels that poach in every major ocean. Some are even equipped with weapons. You know, for fishing.

8
NomadicKrow2 8 points ago +8 / -0

See, if we had a president with balls, he'd say "Call my bluff, China, see what happens." And then the Navy would sink any armed civilian or commercial Chinese vessel in international waters.

3
Junionthepipeline 3 points ago +3 / -0

Less endangered species everywhere if we ended the cancer that is china

10
NZ_Pede 10 points ago +10 / -0

Someone needs to burst that 3 gorges dam to speed this shit up

4
Demonspawn 4 points ago +4 / -0

You could literally nuke China and it would be a net environmental positivize within 5 years.

17
Riolinda 17 points ago +17 / -0

Also fun fact: It’s ok to be CO2.

3
Brucesky420 3 points ago +3 / -0

Triple fun fact: If we reduce our CO2 and CO here in the states, the industries who were creating some of it here would move to countries where they can have higher emissions. So you'd actually be making things worse because when it comes to emissions, we're actually fairly strict compared to a lot of other countries in the world.

You see this exact same thing in Europe, they laid down crazy regulations, so they all moved to north africa and now north africa is one of the areas with large emission rates. We've also begun to see it in the states already, which is why a lot of cheap shit is made in China, they don't have high costs of reducing emissions so that's why a lot of manufacturers buy from there, it's cheaper because of costs - and slave labor of course

13
Italians_Invented_2A 13 points ago +15 / -2

And if you removed all of humanity, it would put only a very small dent.

CO2 produced by humans is very little, like 4%.

11
WeaponizedSmirk 11 points ago +11 / -0

Where did you get that number?

6
Rockonanon 6 points ago +6 / -0

I believe something like this is correct--humans produce a small percentage of CO2, and an even smaller percentage of overall greenhouse gases. (A quick search yielded a variety of different numbers but they were all small).

The theory proposed by the climate alarmists, as I understand it, is that this relatively small addition of man-made CO2 into this otherwise closed system is tipping a delicate balance: man-made CO2 causes the earth to warm, and the warming in turn releases more CO2, and this cycle eventually spins out of control leading to disaster.

I have never heard an even remotely convincing argument as to why this small addition of greenhouse gases should have such a compounding effect, or how such an effect could be observable against the backdrop of solar activity, which is likely the primary driver of global temperature anyway. I'm not a scientist but that's the way it stacks up for me.

1
Italians_Invented_2A 1 point ago +2 / -1

More CO2 will make it easier for trees to grow, and thus it would balance itself out.

But even if they can prove that the earth is warming a little bit, they don't explain why that is bad. They feel the need to prove why humanity should invest considerable resources to avoid it.

It's like calling someone racist. They don't explain why being racist is supposedly bad (but only if you're white), they just assume that is evil with no explanation.

5
Jimmy33 5 points ago +6 / -1

I read somewhere, 3% from humans. The bulk of CO2 is produced by the oceans and volcanic activity, Mother Nature herself. She feeds her beautiful plant life with CO2. Less CO2 = less trees, plants, fruit, veggies, crops, seaweed, plankton etc. That will bring greater animal extinctions and human depopulation through starvation and food competition. So these greenies have started a war against Mother Nature.

Death cult Greenies are manipulated useful idiots for the Energy billionaires, and The Devil.

1
Italians_Invented_2A 1 point ago +2 / -1

In fact the earth got much more trees in the last few decades because of increased CO2.

10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
4
hey_spike 4 points ago +4 / -0

I lost all respect for National Geographic when their article on global warming only mentioned possible bad effects such as a few out of work ski lift operators in Wisconsin, but no mention of the thousands of Wisconsin farmers that would enjoy longer growing seasons.

9
Shmioighan 9 points ago +9 / -0

Anyone remember the "hole in the ozone layer"?

What ever happened to that?

Oh wait, its still there and it looks like it was always there.

What about that "Ice Age"? "Peak Oil"? "Iceless artic"?

4
Godan 4 points ago +4 / -0

Future water shortages was another one.

2
Liberty4All 2 points ago +2 / -0

Water shortages are going to be an issue in many areas, but it doesn’t have anything to do with climate change. The simple fact is that people are pumping groundwater out of certain aquifers faster than the aquifers can refill.

For a while people can drill deeper wells, but eventually that will fail.

Desalination is an option for areas on or near the coasts. (It’s energy intensive, but the technology is well-developed.)

But some of the areas where the water levels in the aquifers are dropping fastest (such as parts of the Southwest and Midwest) are far away from oceans. So they will have to figure something else out when the wells run dry.

Just drilling deeper wells won’t work forever. Eventually you run out of permeable layers to drill into - you just find impermeable bedrock.

2
dontdrinksoy 2 points ago +2 / -0

Anyone remember the "hole in the ozone layer"?

What ever happened to that?

Oh wait, its still there and it looks like it was always there.

What about that "Ice Age"? "Peak Oil"? "Iceless artic"?

The ozone layer is not a good one to bring up, because the plan to close the hole was successful. Banning chemicals that damaged the ozone layer helped. But the plan was made when people weren't woke.

8
MsAnthropic 8 points ago +8 / -0

I’m in Australia and this really pisses me off - we’re going to sabotage our own economy, but we’re so small that IT WON’T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE AT ALL. China will pick up the slack in about 72 hours.

7
Imransgarage 7 points ago +7 / -0

Haha wow you guys are fucked.

6
MsAnthropic 6 points ago +6 / -0

Tell me about it. This is going down under a supposedly “conservative” government.

7
ColonelTravis 7 points ago +7 / -0

Carbon emissions do not cause temperature increases. Temperature increases always precede carbon increases. Warm water holds less carbon, than cold water, and outgasses it into the atmosphere. The warmest period of the past 1,000 years was the Medieval Warm Period, when there was still next to zero human carbon emissions. CO2 induced global warming is entirely a tool to convince the West to destroy itself.

2
Liberty4All 2 points ago +2 / -0

The climate crisis folks are also Medieval Warm Period deniers.

7
Neonlightdistrict 7 points ago +7 / -0

Blaming CO2 for global warming is scientific reductionism. There are a fuck ton of variables being ignored. And no scientists can ask "what if global warming isn't even real" without getting blacklisted and their funding cut.

Don't question it, peasant. The sky is falling and its your fault.

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
6
NeverKnewBetter 6 points ago +7 / -1

Can you link us to the evidence. Something with proof had more red pill potential

9
Poopyonurface 9 points ago +9 / -0

This is the issue with climate change. There’s no way to definitively prove or disprove what specifically causes different climate patterns.

But the greenhouse gas CO2 hypothesis is very flawed and is relatively simple to disprove. It’s based on the same concept as a greenhouse that heat gets trapped inside. Increasing temperature causes water to evaporate, the water has no place to escape, which then increases water vapor pressure. The increase in pressure then further exacerbates the heat as there is no room for volume expansion. Remember the good ole chem equation Temperature = Pressure * Volume...because the earth is not limited to a finite atmospheric volume, this effect wouldn’t occur.

The hypothesis is that CO2 essentially acts like a greenhouse cover or roof for the Earth, effectively walling in our atmosphere. So let’s go back to T = PV. If the temperature is rising and the CO2 is creating a roof, then the volume would not be expanding. This would then mean that the pressure must be increasing. Because the atmospheric pressure is not increasing, the idea that CO2 is trapping heat in our atmosphere is thus completely false.

1
Rockonanon 1 point ago +1 / -0

I never heard that argument about atmospheric pressure that's a good one.

3
Poopyonurface 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yea, it’s important to understand that this stupid theory is WHY the focus is on CO2 emissions. Most people really have no idea why CO2 is supposedly bad other than that it’s released in emissions. Many people also mistakenly think it’s CO2, not CO that is the deadly gas emitted by car exhaust.

1
Rockonanon 1 point ago +1 / -0

It continues to baffle me how people will accept the proclamations of their chosen authority without bothering to educate themselves on the issue AT ALL, especially when so much depends on getting it right.

0
TamilTrump 0 points ago +1 / -1

Increase in CO2 is reduction in O2. Gases occupy fixed volume per molecular weight. Thus there's no increase in pressure.

1
Poopyonurface 1 point ago +1 / -0

That has nothing to do with temperature increases. If temperature increases, there has to be some compensation by volume or pressure.

Also gases are compressible, they don’t occupy a fixed volume.

2
Riolinda 2 points ago +2 / -0

Always thought Climate Depot was good. https://www.climatedepot.com/m/ Can’t recall who Rush used to reference for weather stuff...

6
zippy2 6 points ago +6 / -0

Cool. Source?

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
4
ocdpepe 4 points ago +4 / -0

It has never been about co2 or world temperatures or acid rain or peak oil. It has always been about depopulation and the elites owning giant swaths of the planet free of useless eating plebs.

3
3percenterFan 3 points ago +3 / -0

White liberals should submit to euthanasia to minimize greenhouse gas emission through flatulence.

3
thegeeseisleese 3 points ago +3 / -0

But white people bad

3
Siteless_Vagrant 3 points ago +3 / -0

Fun fact, CO2 makes up about .04% of Earth's atmosphere, that's ALL CO2, natural and man made, and if someone thinks a gas that makes up less than 1% of Earth's atmosphere controls Earth's atmosphere, someone might be dumber than a CNN reporter.

3
MySidesGoUp 3 points ago +3 / -0

Because we have an abundance of mouth-breathing grifters??

3
AgnesDomini 3 points ago +3 / -0

Sauce???

-3
QLARP -3 points ago +1 / -4

The map shows no US

2
notCIA 2 points ago +2 / -0

And their oceanic plastics would blip at best. There has never been anything more than a local arguement for environmental regulation in the US, and anyone pushing global climate change should immediately be voted out of office. It does not belong in North American political discussion even if it is as bad as they say.

2
Bernier4Canada 2 points ago +2 / -0

That is neither fun, nor a fact?

United states, Canada, and Mexico together make a significant "dent"

but the point you tried to make, that China and India are the main contributors, stands

1
SBOJ_JOBS [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sorry, been away awhile. Cold fact, not made up, fren.

US produces about 5,000 million tonnes of CO2 from fossil fuels each year, slightly decreasing yearly since about 2005.

From 2000-2018 the INCREASE in CO2 output from China and India fossil fuel use was about 12,000 million tonnes. They are still increasing at about the same rate. The rest of the world outside the EU also increased about 4-5,000 million tonnes during that period. Continue those trends (likely China may do better, but India and other developing nations could well do worse), and even if the US went to zero, the mere 5 billion tonnes of savings would be swallowed in 5-7 years at most.

A synopsis of these numbers, and Kerry admitting to the same can be found here, but the same numbers are all over the scientific community.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/04/25/john-kerry-bidens-climate-czar-admits-u-s-co2-emission-cuts-are-pointless/

1
WestCoastG 1 point ago +1 / -0

Great source!

2
barryb0nds 2 points ago +2 / -0

I hate this map!

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
2
July_1776 2 points ago +2 / -0

virtue signalling retards are running this shit show.

the worlds oceans produce the majority of CO2 just from the sun hitting them, or something like that.

2
Erosluv 2 points ago +2 / -0

This would be a more compelling argument with stats. I like it and believe it but I'd love to be able to drop percentages for validity.

3
SBOJ_JOBS [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

Sorry, been away awhile. Cold fact, not made up, fren.

US produces about 5,000 million tonnes of CO2 from fossil fuels each year, slightly decreasing yearly since about 2005.

From 2000-2018 the INCREASE in CO2 output from China and India fossil fuel use was about 12,000 million tonnes. They are still increasing at about the same rate. The rest of the world outside the EU also increased about 4-5,000 million tonnes during that period. Continue those trends (likely China may do better, but India and other developing nations could well do worse), and even if the US went to zero, the mere 5 billion tonnes of savings would be swallowed in 5-7 years at most.

A synopsis of these numbers, and Kerry admitting to the same can be found here, but the same numbers are all over the scientific community.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/04/25/john-kerry-bidens-climate-czar-admits-u-s-co2-emission-cuts-are-pointless/

2
TrumpWinz 2 points ago +2 / -0

you mean it won't drop the current C02 levels any lower than 0.04% of the atmosphere?

2
Merica4EVER 2 points ago +2 / -0

I bet if you got rid of china it would

2
HoldTheLineTOTO 2 points ago +2 / -0

SAUCE

2
rob0Pede 2 points ago +3 / -1

Most carbon is being produced by cruise ships and tankers. But you don’t see these hippy globalists talking about shutting down their trade routes or kid smuggling.

2
Yam_nation 2 points ago +2 / -0

*volcanoes

2
_Sully_ 2 points ago +2 / -0

Just like that one vegetarian who says they don't eat meat to reduce animal suffering. It's purely emotional and doesn't reduce shit. It only makes you feel less responsible for something that is totally out of your control. Plus suffering will rise as people who think like this enact their derangement.

1
4cdarth 1 point ago +1 / -0

Now do the same check, but instead of NA do China.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
pinchitony 1 point ago +1 / -0

Mexico is also North America, btw.

1
ironhorse 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
DZP1 1 point ago +1 / -0

Also, we have to kill all cows and stop eating meat, because ... methane cow farts. Chickens too. Hell. give up all meat and eat soy and kale and dandelions and cricket intestines. By the way, we now have a new measurement unit for feces. Gretas per flush.

1
Jimmy33 1 point ago +1 / -0

Eat soy, become trans.

1
South_Florida_Guy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Except without the US most of the rest of humanity would die out from famine and wars and runaway communism or worse so there would be no one left anywhere to create CO2 and world would revert to the stone age.

1
Erosluv 1 point ago +1 / -0

This would be a more compelling argument with stats. I like it and believe it but I'd love to be able to drop percentages for validity.

1
Hambonemcgee 1 point ago +1 / -0

Who thinks this has anything to do with co2 levels?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
DrHubs 1 point ago +1 / -0

I would love to see where these numbers are from.

Great tool in the argument kit but I have to understand it before I quote a picture

1
Gengar 1 point ago +1 / -0

Uhh, this isn't true though? Per capita the USA emits more CO2 than most other countries - and more than double what China does. You can't just make up something like this without a source.

Compare this with other countries. https://datacommons.org/tools/timeline#&place=country/USA&statsVar=Amount_Emissions_CarbonDioxide_PerCapita

1
SBOJ_JOBS [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sorry, been away awhile. Cold fact, not made up, fren.

US produces about 5,000 million tonnes of CO2 from fossil fuels each year, slightly decreasing yearly since about 2005.

From 2000-2018 the INCREASE in CO2 output from China and India fossil fuel use was about 12,000 million tonnes. They are still increasing at about the same rate. The rest of the world outside the EU also increased about 4-5,000 million tonnes during that period. Continue those trends (likely China may do better, but India and other developing nations could well do worse), and even if the US went to zero, the mere 5 billion tonnes of savings would be swallowed in 5-7 years at most.

A synopsis of these numbers, and Kerry admitting to the same can be found here, but the same numbers are all over the scientific community.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/04/25/john-kerry-bidens-climate-czar-admits-u-s-co2-emission-cuts-are-pointless/

1
anotherviewpoint 1 point ago +1 / -0

Believe it or not, Mexico is part of North America...My Mexican friends like to remind me of this...

1
SBOJ_JOBS [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, this is why I blanked out most of Mex

1
Canlog96 1 point ago +1 / -0

“But by outsourcing industry to China the US is still responsible for all their emissions”

A) Not true

B) Great then let’s bring industry back. American industrial tech is cleaner anyways. Hate climate change? Then you should hate exporting jobs to third world countries where they use dirty industrial methods powered by 100 year old coal plants.

1
based_trekkie 1 point ago +1 / -0

A minor increase in a trace gas that allows plants to be more efficient with water is a bad thing????

1
xkgb 1 point ago +1 / -0

REEEEE!!!

1
MAGAzine1 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sauce

1
1775Concord 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's not about CO2 it is about fleecing the USA .

1
Wcvarn 1 point ago +1 / -0

Liberals create CO2, Conservatives create freedom.