'Which Nation Has Reduced CO2 Emissions By The Greatest Number Of Total Tons In The Last 15 Years?'
Вставка
- Опубліковано 27 лип 2022
- At a Senate Commerce Committee hearing earlier this month, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) grilled a Biden Administration nominee about CO2 emissions.
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: / forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: / forbes
More From Forbes: forbes.com
Science has moved from intellectual pursuit to bracing stupidity
The only person making any political comments and stating things with a heavy political agenda is TED CRUZ!
Oh it did that long ago. Dr. Oppenheimer and the entirety of the Manhattan Project scientists gave IKE a warning about science becoming dogmatic, political and revered as holy writ by the dumbed down masses back in 1947. See Dr. Lapp's book on the matter.
The witness only acknowledged the "complexities" of gender affirming care for very young child, refusing to state the obvious that of of course it is not settled science. Even she was in favor of it, she could have said that and still acknowledged that the science is far from settled. This indicates the extreme lockstep grip the LGBTQ community has over Democrat Party politics.
On climate issue, when asked what country has reduced their greenhouse gas and Co2 emissions the most, the witness said, "that the US had been very good at reducing alot after a long time of being the greatest emitter." This historical blame argument is a strawman tactic that uses a false equivalency of hindsight to equate the modern, however limited, understanding of climate science to the myriad of scientifically accepted ideas of climate science throughout the past century or more. This is nonsense and illogical and literally parrots the propaganda out of CommunistChina.
Last question, what is the reason for reduction. She is lying and she knows it. Ted Cruz is correct. Atleast 95%, but probably more, of the reductions are a direct result of LNG replacing coal primarily . The pie graph of energy production sources. From 15 years ago until now, The LNG pie slice got bigger by same amount that the Coal slice got smaller.
Her answer was 3 reasons and they are all not correct.
First that the reductions are primarily due to renewables [Solar and Wind increases] is empirically false. Those have increased from 2% to 5% of total energy production.
Her second reason was that reductions come from energy efficiencies found in the grid. The various energy efficiencies found through high-powered transmission lines or grid upgrades account.0 05% of total reduced emissions at best. This is a rounding error in the scheme of total carbon and greenhouse gas emissions. And she saved her most retarded reason for last. That the emissions reductions are due to manufacturing shifts..?? Economic shifts?? Huh???? The economy and GDP and thus total energy use is almost 30% higher from 20 years ago which of course should mean that emissions should be shifting upward as well but they weren't; emissions have been reduced by almost 20% . The academic is buzzword nonsense word salad that this lady spews from her mouth shows that she is not only not an unbiased rational scientist, but also an affirmative action dolt.
¹1¹11 you yup 56u k l
Politicians and Activists have corrupted Science and the Scientists who face their wrath.
For some reason, when the person being questioned begins their response with “thank you for that question…” they’re about to completely dodge it. Anyone else notice that?
Notice it? Every bureaucrat and politician and potential candidate for anything has taken the course in the fine art of dodging questions.
First woman to ever get a Dodge Ball scholarship ...
I noticed that she is apparently too smart for you to keep up with even when she is attempting to speak down to a group of people not at her intelligence. She answered the question. She said No, science is always looking for new things but it seems sometimes we have reached the conclusion. What you do reach though is concensus where most people educated on the subject agree. Like global warming. You will find the odd ball guy who says it doens't exist but consensus is and has been we are in trouble, just a question of speed and how much.
@@robertstutesman7764 well, thank you for your blunt assessment of my mental capabilities. For starters, I was being facetious but possibly my dry wit is too fast for you.
Cruz asked her a yes or no question, ‘Does she believe in settled science?’ I don’t claim to be a genius or smarter than most, but I do know enough to distill her answer down to a vague “no”. Can’t she simply just say “no”? But now I digress.
All thanks and endless praise to this highly intellectual female who has graced us with her kindness to speak down to us lowly simpletons with her vast knowledge and lauded studies…in case your unsure, that’s another joke.
ABSOLUTELY
When you hear a politician use the words:
"I don't recall"
"I don't remember"
"I never read"
They are using plausible deniability to deflect away legitimate criticisms and questions.
You forgot my favorite "its a complex issue" even though it isnt.
Nailed it
and avoid lawsuits
e.g. Biden's press secretary!
It's like when Trump took the "5th" after saying anyone that takes the 5th is guilty?
“Senator, you’re talking about some issues that require a lot more thought”
yeah they require thought and QUESTIONS. Without questions, our thoughts would amount to piss all
They lie saying “thank you for that question”. Really means “how the hell do I answer that question?”
They want the printed record to show that they were polite, but didn't answer a single question while doing so.
They do the Washington D.C two step by dancing around the question,but never answering questions that were asked by the Senators
Everyone knows that taking the time to thank someone is "taking the time"...
The political consultant who advised these DEM candidates to mouth the phrase, "Thank you for that question ...." should be immediately terminated, because the audience knows they are not thankful, making the first words from the candidate's mouth an obvious lie.
So true.
She stuck to the script and avoided his question and that's all that became of it
Seems to be all that ever comes of it!
Seems like a contempt of congress. Send the FBI to her/his/their/it's/* house.
You wonder why they don't just send the script they were given. Wouldn't that save time?
"The essence of science is to question. And history is replete with all sorts of instances of 'scientific consensus' being categorically wrong. And the Mantra of settled science is often a mask for a political agenda to prevent scientists from asking questions that are inconsistent with the political agenda." ~Sen. Ted Cruz
And yet, Teddy believes in the absolute nonsense in the Bible. Explain that load of rubbish.
@@steelcom5976 At least he's open about his faith and open to dialogue and understand how science impacts people in an objective way. The modern Democrat party are no better than those who participated in the Salem Witch Trials, the Inquisition, or any other purge of non-believers. The only difference is they lie about their faith. I'd prefer someone who will tell you their bias.
@@steelcom5976 non sequitur
@@GenXCoder psittacus
@@steelcom5976 hebetudinous
"Thank you for your question. It is a complex issue."
I smell blood.
It's people like her who refuse to give the obvious answer why people hate our government
Exactly. The same reason Trump took the 5th after saying anyone that takes the 5th is guilty
in time of desperation telling truth is considered as an extremism.
1984
@@brianbarefoot6574 there's nothing we can do about that then and there's nothing we can do about this now! But you keep living in the past while the rest of us live in the present.
@@youtubecommercialsareascam8495 Yes, and you can keep screaming lock her up.
She is a freak!!
Where did they come up with that freak show
I think they were like the herpes virus. They were laying dormant until Trump stressed the liberals out then they popped up all in our face. This is literally a circus. I don't see how these people are so educated.
My question is "Can't you be liberal and still look normal?"
ikr they (mostly) all have this wide eyed dreamy crazy look
Excellent questions and commentary from Cruz.
She knows how to talk around the questions. A true politician!
Liberal....won't answer a direct question with a direct answer.
"That's an area that's very complex. It's one I would like to learn more about"
Jeepers creepers.
SHE'S A SCIENCE ADVISER? 😠
More like a 👹.
She didn't know anything.
What are we paying her for?🤦🤷
She didn't know sh@!
They always have those crazy eyes
Goal is to not give cancun cruz ammo…
@@philmckay9973 the goal is to lie.
Subterfuge is punishable by death.
Thanks Ted....don't ever give up laying the truth out to tbem!
The only person making any political comments and stating things with a heavy political agenda is TED CRUZ!
You know that when you're questioning a woman with bright blue "statement" glasses that scream "I'm not answering a damn question" you know you're in trouble. This government, 2022.
It makes me physically ill when I hear yet another conversation about giving children drugs that will alter them not only sexually but emotionally. Why are we continuing to let this happen to children? We are all responsible!
Agreed, Donna. We have become an evil, banana republic. We got away from God, and did it all "our way" - and this happens. You clearly have a brain - great post.
@Donna Parrish -- We are NOT all responsible. For example, I am not responsible.
A group of "experts" have taken it upon themselves to do what they want to do.
They apparently hope to make children sterile to reduce the population.
They apparently hope to make the U.S. so inept that they can take over
and run the country as they wish, while benefiting from their new power.
They seem to actually believe that, by tearing the country down,
they'll be able to re-build it as they think it should be.
And, somehow, they think that their re-build will be a utopian civilization.
That woman should be fired! 🙌👼
Out of a cannon.
Actually executed
She got nominated because the Dumocrats have the majority.
They obviously know what they are doing is wrong when they refuse to answer questions that they know their answer looks bad.
The only person making any political comments and stating things with a heavy political agenda is TED CRUZ!
It is because the answer is a pretext the real goal is power
Exactly! Wishy washy woman
@@ImprovmanZero The real goal is to kill us off so there are more resources left for them.
You are overlooking the fact that you can go to any major university and get a degree in political science. You are therefore overlooking the fact that to a democrat, politics IS SCIENCE and it is also their religion and government is their church.
Good job teddy. 🧸
You get her.
I am proud to have you in a position to where you demand truth and answers.
And when you aren't being given it, you demand it, and if you are not provided it, you call them on it then and there. 👏
"Reduced CO2 Emissions By The Greatest Number Of Total Tons" is a strange statistic to use... this could only be a statistic for high population countries like India, USA, China etc...
Smaller countries may be far greener per-capita (or total percent decrease?) - I think per capita is the better measure (per person). So dived the total emissions by the number of people and then look at the reductions... then we can get a per-person CO2 usage in different coutries and see how each is doing and who is doing the best at reducing
You are totally right
And you can easily find on internet that usa is the fourth more polluting country.
And as a sentence directly from the source that senator is using, you Can search for it to get the full study and confirm usa is one of the most, if not the most shitty country in term of pollution :
"The United States accounts for only about five percent of global population, but is responsible for 30 percent of global energy use and 28 percent of carbon emissions"
It is fascinating for me how usa people are thinking they are always the best in everything... While SETTLED facts tell them they are the worse.
Yep, what he said does not mean anything in context. You only have to look at Norway for context.
"when science can not be questioned, then it has become propaganda" Aaron Rodgers
This woman (dare I say that?) is
well practiced in double speak. She also has O interest in truth.
@@dalegehrking2862 she should ask "Q". Q knows everything
"All our science is just a cookery book, with an orthodox theory of cooking that nobody's allowed to question, and a list of recipes that mustn't be added to except by special permission from the head cook." - Aldous Huxley
"Troy Aikman was way better than I was" Aaron Rodgers
@@secondchance6603 Actually Huxley was supporting science with that quote, not denigrating it.
Consensus is not science.
But a consensus of scientists is still something worth listening to.
@@5353Jumper Consensus is not science! Listen to that!
@chucksmalley3987 yes, but a consensus of scientists is a lot better advice than anyone else on the planet. A lot closer to truth than anyone else on the planet.
And definitely more likely to be accurate than the "feelings" of any politician. And for sure more accurate than the financially motivated rhetoric of any politician or corporation.
Government has NO RIGHT here. PERIOD.
Thank you Senator Cruz for exposing this nominee!
I keep hearing about questions put to Biden's nominees that result in not answering, ridiculous answering, or just plain out lie in answer to them. Yet most of these nominees still are approved because the democrats have the majority and want ultra-liberal nominees who meet their agenda standards. This is very bad for out country in the long run.
• 💯% •
Same sh*t in Canada Biden and Turdeau are on the same page which badly needs redacting.
It's been very bad in the short run!!
You should have seen the judges that were seated right after FJB was "elected". What a joke that was.
Stupidity is the new religion
Thanks again SENATOR Ted Cruz.
My God. This Guy is AWESOME. He puts his point across perfect and won't pushed around to say the "politically correct" thing instead to go for straight facts. Just like Jordan Peterson.
Love from Wales.
It is insane that a child has to be 18-21 to purchase a gun but at age 16 can have their testicles or breasts removed.
The only benefit I see is that these are the children of, and future LIBERAL DEMOCRATS.
Or 8
Indeed, Leonard - and the DemoNcrats are now pushing for this [gender change] at age 3. Evil as Satan!
People that support this are depraved, evil, satanic
Actually you can't get a tattoo until you're 18 or buy a pack of cigarettes into your 21 but you can literally have your balls removed at age 12 without your parents consent in some cases
The parents are sick in the head to even consider giving a child those changes
Right on! If a child wants these types of life long altering changes they can wait until they are adults. Kids/children are still mentally developing. My kids change their minds of what they want regularly throughout growing up. And for the senior science indicating it's not okay to ask questions is just plain nuts.
You'd be surprised how many parents are that sick in the head. Where do you think the child got the idea in the first place?...
It’s child abuse and a failure as a parent if you allow this crap to go on.
A lot of the parents are STILL children that never grew up themselves in this dumb down generation. No joke. I see it every day. Of course that extensive damage as well, was also in the evil plans of the same hacks in power for YEARS!! Wipe out a generation and their off spring too and there is NO MORE COUNTRY!!! Exactly where the country is now!!
The pubert blockers they use are also outlawed by the US and only used before this to chemically castrate felons…
"ideology is the science of idiots" John Adams
Thank you for the question. It’s a complex one and I’m too dumb to answer
Like him, don't like him, Senator Cruz always drives his questioning to the crux of the issues.
@@Lofi.z34 Action is the hard part anyway. He's get one vote. He gets to vote on committees. That's about it. Cruz has done action in the past to force issues and hold up votes to encourage debate on bills in the past and he got totally shredded by the media.
Clever.
WE have got to get out of our gov. the rich, "educated experts" at pocket lining and extortionist blm
They do not deal or have to deal in reality...!
@@tommas2674 If a small con job can prevent a big civil war by deescalating the emotions of unreasonable people, then I think even enraged conservatives have adequate patience and fortitude to take a little bullshit with their breakfast.
Yeah we need more people like him in our government.Help drain the swamp.
Love ya Ted...stay on their butts and shine a light on their BS answers.
💕🇺🇸💕. Thank you Senator Cruz for setting the record straight! 💕🇺🇸💕
Thank you for that question, Senator. I am nominated for this position because I meet the quota to show change at this point in time. I will dodge any question of substance until I can achieve a book deal, and then I will blame others for any negative environmental changes that occur during my tenure.
Imo, another reason our co2 emissions are lower is due to the fact that we have sent most of our production to other countries. Mainly China. Which I find interesting that China is a major producer of pollution and is not expected to be forced to "go green". Check it out. The countries that are so stringent on reducing their carbon footprint are the ones who use other countries (such as China) for the manufacture of many products. And isn't it interesting that folks such as Al Gore and John Kerry both push the "go green" initiative while traveling the world in their private jets? Like they can't possibly teleconference, as their families wouldn't have the perks of vacations that can be written off as a tax credit.
100% true . Why does no-one ever ask why the level of carbon continues to rise exponentially when half the world has cut their emissions if you believe those reports of reductions.
Because there are NO reductions globally. Whatever the west reduces emissions by are simply emitted by developing nations who have taken over production of goods the west used to make before they started reducing emissions.
China opens each week double the number of coal fired power stations than the west closes and as they ramp up electric car production emissions will explode compared to now. It is a false economy and emissions are guaranteed to rise 600% between now and 2050 yet countries in the west claim they will be net zero carbon emitting by then.
ROFALMAO how stupid the west is nowadays.
The witness only acknowledged the "complexities" of gender affirming care for very young child, refusing to state the obvious that of of course it is not settled science. Even she was in favor of it, she could have said that and still acknowledged that the science is far from settled. This indicates the extreme lockstep grip the LGBTQ community has over Democrat Party politics.
On climate issue, when asked what country has reduced their greenhouse gas and Co2 emissions the most, the witness said, "that the US had been very good at reducing alot after a long time of being the greatest emitter." This historical blame argument is a strawman tactic that uses a false equivalency of hindsight to equate the modern, however limited, understanding of climate science to the myriad of scientifically accepted ideas of climate science throughout the past century or more. This is nonsense and illogical and literally parrots the propaganda out of CommunistChina.
Last question, what is the reason for reduction. She is lying and she knows it. Ted Cruz is correct. Atleast 95%, but probably more, of the reductions are a direct result of LNG replacing coal primarily . The pie graph of energy production sources. From 15 years ago until now, The LNG pie slice got bigger by same amount that the Coal slice got smaller.
Her answer was 3 reasons and they are all not correct.
First that the reductions are primarily due to renewables [Solar and Wind increases] is empirically false. Those have increased from 2% to 5% of total energy production.
Her second reason was that reductions come from energy efficiencies found in the grid. The various energy efficiencies found through high-powered transmission lines or grid upgrades account.0 05% of total reduced emissions at best. This is a rounding error in the scheme of total carbon and greenhouse gas emissions. And she saved her most retarded reason for last. That the emissions reductions are due to manufacturing shifts..?? Economic shifts?? Huh???? The economy and GDP and thus total energy use is almost 30% higher from 20 years ago which of course should mean that emissions should be shifting upward as well but they weren't; emissions have been reduced by almost 20% . The academic is buzzword nonsense word salad that this lady spews from her mouth shows that she is not only not an unbiased rational scientist, but also an affirmative action dolt.
@@owenspears8662 100% correct Owen.
If anyone seriously studies renewable energies they have resulted in almost zero emissions reduction for the largest capital expenditure ever spent on energy production.
No-one promoting renewables ever discusses the carbon emissions manufacturing solar panels, wind towers, EV batteries etc etc etc.
All they ever mention is the fact that they release few if any emissions whilst operating. Yet nearly all forms of renewable energy in place needs to operate at full capacity for around 10 years before it negates the emissions released manufacturing them or gathering the resources to produce them.
In almost every case by that stage the efficiency of solar panels, wind farms and EV batteries has depreciated to the extent they are no longer fit for purpose and need to be replaced, repaired or modified/improved.
Has no-one ever wondered why China/India etc were exempted from having to reduce their emissions before 2035? Because they are producing all those things we had to stop producing because we were required to reduce our emissions NOW that's why. There is NO reduction of emissions worldwide and all these Kyoto protocols and Paris agreements are a smokescreen.
If people think I am wrong why have emissions continued to rise over the last 40 years these agreements have been in place? Their sole purpose was allegedly to reduce global emissions yet whilst Western Countries(approx 35-40%) have reduced their emissions at varying degrees of success the remainder of the world(60-65%) have steadily been increasing their emissions. Do the math people, If more of the world is increasing their emissions exponentially how do you reduce global emissions when less than half the world is reducing their emissions slowly? Paris Agreement actually enshrines a massive increase in emissions to the tune of approximately 600% by 2035 yet was sold to the Western world as a tool to reduce global remissions.
Never have so many been fooled by so few.
That happened before 2000, he was referenceing the last 15 years.
@@macicoinc9363 Still happening today Maci.
Get 'em, Ted! Sic 'em!
Keep it going!
We may not keep them from being confirmed, but you can sure expose their ignorance, ineptitude, and their unwillingness to give a straight answer.
I'm calling his office tomorrow and letting him know how proud we are of him.
We all should.
These people make you sick. They sit there and won't answer questions, mostly because they know SFA about anything.
We must have deep respect for everyone involved, except for those who question what we're doing or disagree with us.
We can’t save the earth so we need to make as much money as we can before she shakes us off like fleas on a dog. Vote red.
@Chief Scalpalot man made or not the earth will become inhospitable to human life. This is why increasing corporate profits are a number one priority for the human race. Vote red.
indeed!!! the climate changer telling us we shall burn up unless we give them money is like the old church demanding fees to keep one from burning in hell. meow!
@Chief Scalpalot keep being focused on the important issues like loyalty to political parties and corporate profits. We owe it to our grandchildren…trust me…they will look back fondly on our inaction during the early stages of societal collapse. Vote red.
@Chief Scalpalot they go nuts when you tell them that Hitler was a socialist. And they will bring up the Constitution for defense when it suits them, otherwise, they just call it a piece of garbage written by white men. The so called trained Marxists have never really understood Marx, who starved his kids and hung out in cafes. It's low IQ stuff for a low IQ party. Sadly, these oppressed people are not too oppressed to have loads of sex an' babies.
The Left Wing Climate Change Agenda is a Money and Power grab! If the Left is serious about Climate Change, how come they're flying all over the World every year to a new Country to discuss how to lower Co2 emissions?😅
How come the Elites still own Multiple Mansions, Yachts, Private Jets, Helicopters, SUVs, getting the picture??? If Climate is so important, how come they NEVER address the Garbage polluting our Oceans and Waterways, this is actually a real threat to Humans and All Marine Life!
The Elites of the World will never give up their lavish lifestyles, they expect us too surrender ours so they can maintian theirs!! Climate Change is real, Naturally! Proof that we are at the end stage of an Ice Age, agrees Science!
Hurricanes, Tsunamis, Tornadoes, Earth Quakes, Heat Waves, Floods, Mudslides, Landslides, Blizzards, Volcanic Eruptions, Droughts, Lightening Strikes, Forest Fires, Ice Caps Expanding, Ice Caps Receeding, Meteors, Asteroids, Solar Flares, Ice Ages and every other "Natural Occuring Event" has been going on long before Man and will continue long after Man is Gone!
I wanted to add that the reason the US emissions are lower can be summed up in one word: fracking.
This woman shouldn't be allowed to be in a position of influence.
Should never be unacceptable to ask questions 🤔
I'm in love with senator crusz mind! He just nailed it!!!!
Amazes me that so many hate Cruz when in fact his knowledge of issues and presentation of same puts most to shame
Your statement explains the hate. The Left’s agenda only makes sense in a world that exists in fantasy, not reality. Senator Cruz will never, ever acknowledge the existence of that fantasyland therefore he must be hated.
Go get em Teddy!
I would rather have questions I cannot answer, than answers I cannot question.
The fact she cannot proudly state that it is the US which has reduced emissions far more than all the other countries shows what this woman is all about. Hook, please. Can the next candidate be direct, honest , and knowledgeable. Please?
Libs openly hate the US--they assume the US is always the cause of the problems in the world.
When we move all manufacturing to China ans Mexico, our pollution goes too. That's not reducing it, it's shifting blame
@@yourlogicalnightmare1014 it’s still reducing. Dance more. It matters nothing what the US does when China produces so much more. It’s doing all these actions for appearance with no evidence that it works. Similar to many of the COVID policies. Nothing the US can do will have any meaningful impact on “global warming”
@@morehamsandwich troll account says what?
Guys, HERE is The Savior
YaH The Heavenly FATHER HIMSELF was Who they Crucified for our sins, NOT jesus, and “HERE IS THE PROOF”
From the Ancient Semitic Scroll:
"Yad He Vav He" is what Moses wrote, when Moses asked YaH His Name (Exodus 3)
Ancient Semitic Direct Translation
Yad - "Behold The Hand"
He - "Behold the Breath"
Vav - "Behold The NAIL"
Whenever these people being asked questions start out explaining their history of this that and the other, you KNOW they're going to give their political party's approved answer, and seldom if EVER is it going to be the appropriate or correct answer. Skirting the issues and deflecting is their modus operandi.
She is the result of Affirmative Action, vs hiring the most qualified human.
Don't you think "ah sh*t, here we go again" when they say "thank you for your question"?
Yep, another professional liar -- disguised as a "scientist" -- sad state of affairs.
All these nominees have no idea of what the answers are.
They do but just won't tell the truth!! They are all Anti-American it's a prerequisite to being nominated by Obiden OH!! and they must all lie and not answer any questions honestly. She nailed it as usual, just run out everyone's time .
Absolutely disgusting how does this even happen
Hey its the roommate with the little dog from the movie Something About Mary ....lmao !
I wonder if she ever took ANY science courses at any time during her school years ? If the answer to that is NO, then it makes perfect sense why she has been nominated by the Biden administration for the cabinet position of "SCIENCE ADVISOR".
but pretty sure they said even back in the mid 2010s over half the science teachers didnt have any science based degrees w their teaching degree. makes sense. i could always tell who was and wasnt knowledgeable about science when teaching it to us back in my day. plus if u got that degree work where money is. my sister graduated and got offered 85k starting from pfizer
Even if she did, it's most likely in what are often called the "soft sciences" also known as social science which is notoriously unscientific and is in fact mostly just excuses to socialize.
You made a speculation and then drew an opinion on YOUR speculation. Discussions around your eating table must be stupifyingly onerous even at the best of times.
Science? Who cares about THAT?
Job performance?
She's NOT a white male, that's the only criteria that is important to this administration.
Senator Cruz is so intelligent and knows all the facts on scientific evidence to the so called climate problems ! Use natural gas to provide the US with energy!
The only person making any political comments and stating things with a heavy political agenda is TED CRUZ!
Gotta drill for oil to make it feasible.
Cruz is a bum who ran out on his constituents
Yep, natural gas gives off a horrible byproduct called water vapor when it’s burned. The horror…
There are no facts based on scientific evidence to the so-called climate problems. All problems are based on assumptions and models which to date have never been shown to be correct as nothing predicted via the modelling used has occurred in the timeframe the modelling said would occur.
Am over 70 and we were told the year 2000 was the tipping point to reduce carbon to prevent catastrophic consequences. In 2010 it was 2017. In 2020 it became 2030 and should I survive long enough I guarantee in 2030 they will say 2040 etc.
The goalposts always change yet we get told the science is in, is irrefutable and 97% of scientists agree. NONE of those statements have anything to do with science.
Science is always changing regards weather etc as we have 150 years of history out of 4+billion years. What we know is less than 0.01% yet scientists try to tell us they have enough info to be certain of x. ROFALMAO anyone intelligent buys this rubbish.
Newt Gingrich was brilliant and Cruz has taken up his brilliance
Let's see how do I answer these questions without telling the American people the truth.
It amazes me that people who think this way are in administrative positions within our government. Not too long ago they would find themselves locked within the confines of a padded room. Have we run out of padding?!?!
With this fjb scaministration yes we have run out
How can people vote for politicians who then appoint these pathetic people. It's lunacy. The system has become a circus and we are 'represented' by clowns🤡. Thank you Senator Cruz for being with the people, fighting this madness. ❤from 🇦🇺
Nope!
biden's diapers are fluffy, padding - filled and soft.
Her glasses alone shed a lot of light on who she is.
I bet that mic needs wiping out when she,s finished talking.....
What is the purpose of Britney Lewis? I don't need her Pre comments. Please pay your grandkids to do something else.
She's a real gem
They skipped the theory and experiment phase of anthropological climate change.
Mann PhD just went full video game mode.
BINGO! These ppl need to take an Oceanography Class I guess these num-nuts need to go back to college!”Oh wait we aren’t paying their tution🤣😂🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🙏
For the "woman" question. They've completely convoluted language so much that they now demand we call a woman by some other term (birthing person), because they've decided to redefine woman as something else.
I wonder if we could start to fix that by publically calling a woke person a fsckwitted human person at every opportunity?
When we talk about renewable energy, natural gas, coal and oil were all stored away many, many, centuries ago by the expiration of organisms that were previously life on this planet. For organisms to grow on this planet, the process of photosynthesis needs CO2 and levels of 400 parts per million as they are now, are quite low.
My point is that the discussion is really about the timeline that we are releasing these fossil fuels, and over that time of storage, the planet has done quite well without human intervention. Volcanoes are sending more gases into the atmosphere than arrogant humans, we are irrelevant, and to think humans can control this planet is political and insanity.
Love this guy
"The subject is too complex for me to answer your questions". She can't answer because if she says ONE wrong word......she'll be on the OUTS with the Dems.
Luckily, CO2 poses no problem for earth. None whatsoever.
Oh, a critical thinker! Thank God
Without it, we’d die.
@@xltek1 very true and scr needs to be eliminated it emits ammonia oxide.
She doesn't appear to know anything! Why is she here?
Oh it was hammer time for Teddy! He brought the BANG! 😁
Ted, you couldn't be more accurate.
Why are we trying to reduce co2? Our crops, trees and all foliage would grow larger and faster if we increase the co2 ppm. The science is settled on that.
EXACTLY! Faster growing, healthier food, less fertilizer would be needed as well. The Socialist Greenies not only want less CO2 in the air but less fertilizer being used on crops.. meaning way less crops grown... why because they consider humans to be parasites on the planet and want the population to die of starvation until we get down to a population of about 1 billion.
It’s all about control and money.
I'm against the ideological BS but I also call out logic failures when I see them. Climate and ecologies are complicated you cannot reduce an entire world's weather and nature systems down to "plants like CO2 therefore more CO2 good".
@@faithful451 could not agree more.👍
@@faithful451 that’s true. But I’m not going to write a book as a comment to explain how increased levels of CO2 are beneficial to our climate.
This woman is everything that's wrong with the world today.
Of course she avoids answering the question!
I guess she has intentionally made the choice to present herself as a clownish person by wearing those glasses, an odd choice.
Not complex- MALE AND FEMALE
even my pets know that!
I always ask them, if there are more than 2, how many can you chose from when you opt for gender change surgery? 2!
She avoids questions like the press secretary...but without the outright lies.
They will never answer a question if it dosent suit them .
“The primary reason for the reduction of CO2 emissions has been the substitution of natural gas with coal and the production of electricity”..
The most effective way to fight the climate change maniacs has just been laid out in one sentence..
It’s the other way around “the substitution of natural gas for coal in the production of electricity”.
The climate is changing. Humans are the reason. Neither of those points are debatable. Whether or not the change is going to be bad is debatable.
@@CaptainMisery86 Interesting how the same pathetic globalist shills that claimed the COVID vaccines combined with masks would prevent infection are pushing the climate change hoax and are completely oblivious of the enormous financial gains being made by the elitists pushing Cap and Trade led by Al Gore.
.
@@CaptainMisery86 "Humans are the reason" To what degree?
@@CaptainMisery86 Life itself constantly changes its environment. Humans have had a greater input than most lifeforms. If all life stopped breathing, that issue would be resolved.
The best question is “is it settled science that Co2 causes the earth to warm up, and is it not the sun?”
The founder of Greenpeace has called the greenies flat out wrong. The guy who was the head weather reporter for the Weather Channel has done the same and he has shown proof numerous times but he just gets banned from youtube for not drinking the greenie koolaid.
The Sun is THE major cause of climate change in the world and the greenies refuse to listen to the real science. After that the planet produces something like 95% of all the CO2 in the world.. I guess the greenies will have to cut down the amazon rainforest to limit the CO2
That survey that was sent out what 20 years ago that said that 97% of scientist agree about human caused global warming was bad.. that survey was faked.. Most did not reply at all and the majority of responders had no experience in weather patterns or anything weather related.
The hockey stick graph itself they proudly use was faked because it was seeded with so much false info
NASA and NOIA have changed the measured temps of the past to make it seem like it was colder 60, 70, 80 years ago.
The hottest decade ever recorded in modern times was the 1930s.. hell one day in the 30s over most the nation the temps were over 100 degrees. We have never had a day that hot before or since! Weather reports now make false claims that the planet is warming up.. its not.. it's been cooling off since 2000 or so. (which is why they now call it climate change and not global warming)
I live in central Ohio.. we have not had a 100 degree day in over the last 20 years.. The last time I can remember a day over 100 was in 1988 or 89. I can remember it quite easily since I worked in a fiberglass factory and it was 102 outside and 152 where I worked. (I would drink about 2 or 3 gallons of water over a 10 hour shift and would still be dehydrated)
Growing up in the 60s and 70s we had much hotter summers and also colder winters. I remember in the early/mid 70's we had temps over 100 for something like 30 days straight.. we haven't had that since. (And unfortunately I never lived with AC until I was in my 20s.) Good lord it was hot! But at least I guess I can say now I prefer it hot and humid to cold and dry so it wasn't all bad! lol
Totally wrong. The UN and the IPCC has now declared Water Vapour is, it’s 70% by volume in the atmosphere, CO2 is 4%. You want proof, why have their been floods all over the world? Look up those clouds you see is Water Vapour, aka rain. So if the UN and the IPCC have change their views the Science is not settled, or can only the UN change its views?
Why do we bother having hearings?
Right On
I know little about the science so can I be enlightened please, how do you weigh gas that was not produced, how do we get a figure of all C02 in the atmosphere.
Also why are we removing an essential gas the plants need to produce oxygen that we need.
Do you know what would happen if they eliminated CO2?
The world would starve to death - without CO2 every plant on the planet would die, they need CO2 to live, plus plants create Oxygen, so we would eventually die from lack of oxygen as well.
Excellent questions to be asked Sen Cruz. You make Texas proud and this why you’ll continue to get my vote….
Being respectful sounds an awful lot like feelings
Many politicians have no guts to give the straight answer. Few politicians give the blunt questions.
Someone should tell John (dork) Kerry. Does anyone really believe that China, India or other developing nations care. China starts construction of several new coal power plants each week. How many gas power automobiles do developing Nations add each year increasing emissions.
The Paris agreement allows China and India to increase their emissions 1500% and they currently produce just over 40% of all emissions. Now just assuming(and it is not correct) the West produces the remaining 60% just do some basic maths and you will see Paris actually allows for a massive RISE in carbon emissions whilst telling the world current emissions are far too high to prevent a global disaster regards climate etc.
If that is true(and all thinking people know it is not) how can they in clear conscience applaud an agreement that will increase emissions by approximately 600%? Did they not tell us we must REDUCE emissions to have any chance of reversing the effects of Climate Change(a naturally occurring process)/Global Warming? Call me a conspiracy theorist if you will(because you cannot discredit statistics that scientists etc themselves produce) but seems the people we thought were attempting to reduce emissions are the very people INCREASING emissions with their treaties.
Look at Kyoto 1/2 and every agreement up to and including Paris agreement. ALL have resulted in emissions rising at a faster rate than before them yet the Western world has been reducing its emissions for 40 years.
Seems those criticising the Western world have an agenda against the Western world whilst not caring the rest of the world has more than doubled their emissions in the same time period. And they continue to demonise the Western World whilst allowing others to do the opposite.
Even a fool by now can see we have been conned by these people. But of course no-one likes to admit they were fooled do they?
@@saintsone7877 Trump was correct to leave that corrupt and useless whatever it also along with the worthless World Health Organization that should have seen the pandemic coming and what China did.
OMG the level of crazy look in her face is off the charts
The "HEY LOOK AT ME" glasses and her wooden teeth are the sprinkles on top! 😏
HOW DOES A WOMAN MORPH INTO THIS? WOWSER!!!
"Natural gas replacing coal." Why did I know that and the nominee to be the president's science advisor didn't?
Science is history now. Ted exposed that so eloquently.
Oh my God, these Democrats look sooooo weird. Are they aliens?
just super degenerate devil worshippers
They seem to be a bunch of freaks!!
Yes
Her eyeglass frames alone tell me she's nuts.
So funny to see these people on the hot seat smile and so courteously address their interrogator Cruz. I can imagine all their cursing and middle finger salutes to Cruz when they get back to the privacy of their homes.
Here is a question: At what concentration level of CO2 will plant life begin to die? It is important to know the tipping point.
Yes thats a good one. We are still a bit low at 400 PPM. Actually before the Industrial Revolution and ted to pump CO2 in that atmosphere we were b
below 200PPM and that is almost too low for plant life
I believe plants start dying below 150 ppm and we were down to about 180 ppm before the industrial revolution kicked in. Thank God for coal - the saviour of life on earth!
Cruz.....master at his craft.
The " Witless" ah " Witness" has mastered the Dear in the Headlights look perfectly! Hopefully no one put her in charge of anything.
She sure as hell wouldn't get my vote!
The simple fact of the situation is that without politics science doesn't have shelter or food to eat. THAT is where we need to target change for improvement.