They are doing far more than the U.S., and we are willingly ceding the next frontier of energy research/investment/entrepreneurship to other nations because of a backwards-facing loyalty to coal. This has already been pointed out multiple times in this thread.
Probably because there's nothing to talk about.
I'll sum the 51 pages up for you.
Some people are so dug in on denial that they can't grasp that citing extreme swings in temperatures and weather for specific regions reinforces the scientific argument behind climate change rather than to refute it.
i think part of it is 20+ years of being spoon-fed outrage on a daily basis
You're twisting words. Trump said he got us out of the Paris Accords which would have cost us trillions in carbon credits. He did not say he was ending US research onto new technologies. Again, your disdain for him (and some of it is well founded) has blinded you when he saves the US from incurring even more debt. Research will continue in the US. Look at New Delhi and many Chinese cities. Their air quality is so bad people can't even go outside. We are continuing to move forward with solar and wind projects because it is cleaner and it's demanded by the consumers.
Displaced, you seem to think Trump is coherent on topics with an overall gameplan. I think you are way overestimating him.
I think Trump is a nut burger and needs to put down his phone in most cases. As for the reality "climate change" I do understand it and it starts with reducing population by about 3-4 billion people and ending the pollution that is associated with new industrial countries such as india and china who are the current leading polluters. This is not a US issue in the sense of pollution contol. China and India are now the leading contributers to greenhouse gases.
He cannot unilaterally destroy green energy funding, but he has gutted the Department of Energy's research funding, which supplied an enormous amount of federal investment in that sector. From your other posts, we simply disagree on the urgency of this issue and the need for U.S. federal funding in green research funding.
If the cost is equally distributed then let's talk. We have enough financial issues that we don't need to bail the world.
