- This topic has 0 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 7 years, 8 months ago by .
-
Remarks of President Barack Obama as Delivered
Weekly Address
The White House August 13, 2016Hi, everybody. One of the most urgent challenges of our time is climate change. We know that 2015 surpassed 2014 as the warmest year on record – and 2016 is on pace to be even hotter.
At this point readers will notice that evidently the president is basing his statement on the surface temperature record, the most highly ” adjusted ” record set of the 4 or 5 global sets commonly referred to, by the liberal media and politicians. He does not mention the error margin in his claim, nor does he mentioned by HOW MUCH these claims are increasing over previous values.
Last year, that leadership helped us bring nearly 200 nations together in Paris around the most ambitious agreement in history to save the one planet we’ve got. That’s not something to tear up – it’s something to build upon.
Meanwhile, over at his State Department;
There are many countries – the most vocal outside of us probably India – but the reality is there would be many developing countries who would balk at having to do legally binding targets for themselves. They might be perfectly happy to ask for legally binding targets from developed countries, but we were not going to go back into a Kyoto structure of binding target commitments for developed countries but not for developing. We’re past that. That’s the backwards-looking world. It didn’t work. That’s not where we were going. So the notion of the targets not being binding was really a fundamental part of our approach from early on, and obviously something quite useful for us as well …..
In terms of congressional approval, this agreement does not require submission to the Senate because of the way it is structured. The targets are not binding; the elements that are binding are consistent with already approved previous agreements. So it would not be – I mean, I don’t want to speak in a definitive way, but it’s certainly not – I would just say that it’s not required. What actions are taken or not taken is a separate question, but it’s not required ….
…. there was no way you were going to be able to negotiate targets and timetables, as was done in Kyoto; and you were going to need to have a totally different kind of structure, a bottom-up structure which allowed countries to come in understanding that and feeling comfortable with the fact that they weren’t going to have to compromise their fundamental imperatives of development and growth and poverty eradication and so forth.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.