Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

The Internet’s Best Overheated Reactions to U.S. Withdrawal from Paris Climate Agreement

The Internet’s Best Overheated Reactions to U.S. Withdrawal from Paris Climate Agreement

“A Rose Garden celebration of a step that denies science and hurts children.”

Thursday afternoon, the White House formally announced the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement orchestrated by President Obama.

Climate alarmists internet-wide defaulted to doomsday predictions and declared America “lost”.

I can’t help but chuckle when reading the micro freakouts. My favorite parts are the sincere beliefs that 1) people control the weather and 2) a treaty will stop global climates from climating.

But, without further ado, some of the best Paris Agreement flip-outs:

BUT WHAT DOES DENMARK THINK?

Obama ain’t happy:

RACISM:

Yeah, good luck with that:

Conveniently timed:

The Washingtonian should ask the polar bears that were supposed to be extinct how this theory is working:

MOAR WATER:

Well, bye:

Well, nice knowing ya:

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

practicalconservative | June 1, 2017 at 4:06 pm

Now its time for overheated hyperbole from the Mother Goose Brigade. The people yelling are for the most part members of the resistance. Why should Trump care about pleasing them one bit, if he believes pulling out is the right thing to do for the Untied States.

Personally, I will be drunk on this by the end of the evening…but not before posting my own analysis as an environmental health and safety professional (I promise):

liberal-tears-small

    Tom Servo in reply to Leslie Eastman. | June 1, 2017 at 5:21 pm

    Some people say Trump is the Second Coming of Reagan, but I think Reagan was just the first coming of Trump!

    JOHN B in reply to Leslie Eastman. | June 2, 2017 at 8:19 am

    When you see the list of all the powerful leaders, groups and media attacking the President, it is obvious that he deserves a “profiles in Courage” award more than anyone who ever received one.

    But they will probably give it to someone like Elon Musk for having the “courage” to complain that this may cost him billions of lost government welfare $ (while claiming to care about children…)

casualobserver | June 1, 2017 at 4:12 pm

At least no one is using terms like Hitler or Nazi or treason or…..

Oh. Wait, Tom Steyer is saying “traitorous act of war…” Now, that may take the cake!

Ever wonder why the reactions are so visceral and over the top emotional???

    He** hath no fury like a Democrat scorned. When you cannot in by reasoned argument you shout.

    Okay globalists, lie on the floor and kick you feet. Just like a three year old.

    sequester in reply to casualobserver. | June 1, 2017 at 4:22 pm

    These Globalists. (Merckel included) are like children who have never had an adult tell them no before. So they throw temper tantrums as any child would.

      Children with armies and assassination squads.
      We need to keep an eye on them as much as we do North Korea.

      Tom Servo in reply to sequester. | June 1, 2017 at 5:48 pm

      And here comes Elon Musk, this countries greatest corporate welfare queen, right on cue, to gnash his teeth and wail about “THE CHILDREN! OMIGOD THE CHILDREN!!!” He needs an oil tax to make his insanely overpriced toys for rich white people a bit more competitive, and that’s the only dog he’s got in this race.

      JOHN B in reply to sequester. | June 2, 2017 at 8:20 am

      When international criminals are prevented from stealing a few trillion dollars, they get upset.

Oh noes! We formally “withdrew” from a loose set of non-binding agreements on some vaguely worded principles!

This is literally just like Hitler!!!

    rdmdawg in reply to clintack. | June 1, 2017 at 4:51 pm

    They were very much binding and they would have destroyed whatever is left of our economy.

      Bruce Hayden in reply to rdmdawg. | June 1, 2017 at 6:32 pm

      How could they be binding? Please find the place in our Constitution that allows one President to bind a successor merely by personally signing an agreement, and never bothering to run it through Congress as either a treaty or a bill.

buckeyeminuteman | June 1, 2017 at 4:19 pm

With liberals, power and money grabs are always “for the kids”. Except when it comes to abortion…

How do you withdraw from a treaty that was never ratified by the Senate?

Trump should do a tour explaining basic civics.

(Sorry world, the previous POTUS failed to read the US Constitution).

    herm2416 in reply to Andy. | June 1, 2017 at 5:48 pm

    It isn’t a treaty, it’s an accord…that is how Obamalamadingdong was able to go around the Senate.

Would someone explain how this a racist? Does bad air or excessive temperature affect POC more than white people?

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | June 1, 2017 at 4:40 pm

Obama entered into a fake treaty. The fake treaty was never ratified by the Senate nor binding.

World CO2 emissions have been flat for three years. Emissions in the U.S. peaked 11 years ago in 2006. Excluding CO2, emissions of six other major pollutants have declined an amazing 71% since 1970. Chances are pretty high that if you are an American, you are breathing the cleanest air you’ve ever breathed in your life.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-02/1970-2015_baby_graphic.png

The Paris deal was good for everybody not part of “the West”. It is bad for the West and terrible for America.

Good on Trump.

    It was absolutely binding, and it would’ve been devastating.

    https://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2017/05/31/dont-stop-with-paris/

    Don’t believe the media as they try to downplay how big of a deal this is.

    It was not a fake treaty – the president can enter into such treaties and they will have the effect of law in the U.S.

    Don’t believe the lies of the democrat media.

    I would agree with you, except that CO2 is necessary for our survival, and can not be considered a pollutant. 97% of the climate change priests think it is a heater, but it has exactly the same permittivity as N and O. It is only by magic that it somehow heats the air when N and O do not. They call it a “greenhouse gas”, but greenhouses allows radiation while impeding convection. Anything that impedes convection is by definition not a gas, so “greenhouse gas” is an oxymoron with emphasis on the last two syllables. If that is not enough, even the climate change priests measure the temperature of years ago by the amount of CO2 at that time. 97% of CO2 is from plants, and more plants grow when it is warmer. The key factor is that the CO2 has to fall out of the air back to earth within a few years, or CO2 won’t be a thermometer if it can only go up. So the CO2 that we have with us today won’t be around 15 years from now. It will be in the dirt, where the CO2 religion needs to be.

Where’s Rags to rip on Trump doing this?

    Tom Servo in reply to jabster. | June 1, 2017 at 5:30 pm

    He was pissing and moaning in the other thread. Never-Trumpers gotta never-Trump.

    Can anyone imagine Jeb Bush doing this? or John Kasich? Or McCain? Mitt Romney has already come out and said this was a terrible thing to do, so we know where he stands Yeah, I don’t need any of you. After today, Trump could BBQ up a litter of puppy’s and eat them all on live TV and I’m still behind him.

      “Can anyone imagine Jeb Bush doing this? or John Kasich? Or McCain? Mitt Romney…”

      No. That’s why we blew out those rino sleazeballs out of the nomination process. The GOPe is a third party with zero base, but a lot of rotting leftovers still in office.

      Time to clean the GOPe swamp.

Looks like Trump just hit a home run, judging by the reaction of liberals. Would any other GOP candidate have done this if elected? I’m not sure any would’ve.

I call it the ‘3 Pillars of the Democrats’ designed to destroy America as founded, 1. AGW Hoax, 2. Open Borders and 3. Socialized Medicine. Trump just put an end to one avenue of subversion.

OMG. Look at bar graph. We’re doomed! Wait, what? 1.69 degrees? BFD.

    Don’t forget, that’s *after* the numbers have been ‘adjusted’ and ‘corrected’ and the original readings conveniently lost. I suspect the date range was specifically picked just to make it look good, and that the margin of error in the actual data still does not exceed the rise guestimated. But you know, we really need to burn a few trillion dollars on this anyway because… carbon. Yeah.

Photosynthesis – Plants/Plankton turning Sunlight/CO2/H2O into Food & O2; neither animal nor blade of grass would exist, absent CO2. It extends growing seasons & lets plants move higher in altitude & Latitudes; just as it shrinks deserts, plants using H2O more efficiently. Rising temperatures extend growing seasons, help babies, increase net rainfall & save lives. As CO2 levels rise, photosynthesis flourishes & plants take in more CO2, sparking more plant growth, photosynthesis & CO2 uptake; a win for Gaia. Mankind’s CO2 production may be extending the length of this Glacial Interstitial, because ‘Winter Is Coming’ (the next Ice Age).
This Cradle of Life is greener, more fertile & life sustaining than it was 30 years ago.

I’d prefer President Trump just submit the treaty to the Senate for ratification.

    “I’d prefer President Trump just submit the treaty to the Senate for ratification.”

    Why? Why do obama the media organ-grinder monkey’s work he should have done.

    Obama’s handlers had him scam the nation – Trump just unscammed it. Obama may be dancing around in protest like the media’s trained monkey, but the crowd no longer finds the monkey amusing, nor the organ worth listening to.

    Thinker in reply to Icepilot. | June 1, 2017 at 6:00 pm

    Have you lost your flipping mind? There are far too many libtards and RINO’s in the Senate to leave this decision to. President Trump did exactly what he should have done, what we pay him to do, and what he promised to do! Make America Great Again!

    murkyv in reply to Icepilot. | June 1, 2017 at 11:21 pm

    NO!!!

    Kyoto was rejected some 15 years ago, but I can almost guaran-dam-tee-ya that every Democrat Senator would now jump at the chance to ratify. One only needs to look at their platform.

    Add to that, there were 30 Republican Senators who DID NOT sign the letter to Trump to withdraw, and we could be getting dangerously close to that two-thirds they need

      Wait. Kyoto was NOT a bad treaty, aside from the Carbon emissions trading thing. The problem with it was that everybody got hung up on the “reducing emissions” language without reading any farther into the treaty.

      It was entirely possible to meet the atmospheric targets without making a single change to any technology if an aggressive forestation and agriculture program was implemented. Basically you needed to plant a fast-growing plant which absorbs a lot of CO2, and was going to act as a carbon sink when converted into a final product (hemp and bamboo are great choices).

inspectorudy | June 1, 2017 at 5:36 pm

Except for the fiscal punitive parts of the accord aimed at the US, it was basically just a liberal manifesto of their wishes that will never happen. There was no deadlines or mandates mentioned specifically about any nation, such as India or China. It was all smoke and mirrors except towards the US. We are the leader in the world against pollution of all kinds and it is done through the individual company, following guidelines set out by the EPA. Look at what happened to Germany. They doomed their nuclear power and went with solar and wind and COAL! Now they produce more pollution than before the accord and their industries are dying because of the cost of electricity. The accord would have brought us down to their level. Thank you DJT!

He probably heard Rush give out the warning, yesterday. When you lose Rush, forget about ever being in the good gracious of the American voter, the deplorables anyway.

The so-called carbon emissions in the photos are nothing but steam. When did steam ever hurt anyone? Oh yeah, when the wacko bird is a member of the Rainbow family.

Back in 2009, NRO columnist Kevin Williamson broke down the global warming claims as follows:

“The planet is getting warmer, human activity is a main factor, the consequences will be catastrophic, and some U.N.-style climate policeman is going to be able to manage a mitigating response — in an economically efficient manner that also is consistent with our political liberties and national sovereignties.”

He said that we need to divide the issues (and that paragraph) up into what we agree with:
1. The planet is getting warmer
2. Human Activity is the main factor
3. The consequences will be catastrophic
4. UN climate cops are going to be able to manage the mitigating responses
5. That will be done in an economically and efficient manner
6. That will be done without violating our political liberties and national sovereignty.

The Paris Agreement forces us to swallow that entire paragraph whole.

Does anyone actually believe that Paris will accomplish steps 4-6? And at what cost to us?

It’s like they’re having a contest.. who can make a bigger ass of themselves.

Icepilot,

That’s only part of the story. EVERYTHING living, breathing, moving or just existing owes it’s existence to Co2.

Co2 is food for plankton which is what everything else in the sea relies on. Also plankton removes Co2 from the oceans and when plankton dies they eventually fall to the sea floor and over Malenia as the tectonic plates moves all that plankton which has died is eventually recycled and returned to the atmosphere via volcanoes etc.

I always thought it would be an interesting research topic to see if plankton (which feeds on co2) numbers have grown as co2 in the atmosphere increases. Surely anytime you increase a food source then you will see a corresponding increase in things that depend on that food source?

So it goes if there is an increase in Co2 there must also be a corresponding increase in plankton?? Surely an easily falsifiable premise?

Google the co2 lifecycle.

Quote from Obama: Simply put, the private sector already chose a low-carbon future.

Whew! Thank you, President Obama. Here I was worried that dropping out of the Paris agreement was going to *change* something, but since the private sector already was happily going along with the carbon restrictions without any government threats or coercion, they will obviously keep doing it.

And I was worried. It’s so nice to have that stress taken off my back.

buckeyeminuteman | June 2, 2017 at 7:59 am

“Roll up your pants, everybody is about to get wet. The world will now flood thanks to Trump deciding not to give underdeveloped nations $100B per year of our hard earned money!”

The picture above with the smoke stack is early morning/late evening steam.. Just water! Dims think that is poison gas or something.

If it was such a great thing, why wasn’t it a TREATY, ratified by a 2/3 vote in the US Senate? That was a rhetorical question. Ah the bullshit the left does to circumvent our Constitution. Bravo, President Trump.

Those whiney libs surely are an entertaining bunch and they are like the energizer bunny. Life is good.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend