Obama will bypass Senate, ratify Paris climate accord himself during trip to China


President Obama is prepared to enter into the Paris climate accord as early as this week even though Republicans have insisted that the pact must be ratified by the Senate, according to a report out of China.

The South China Morning Post reported that Mr. Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping are “set to jointly announce their ratification” of the ambitious international climate-change pact on Friday, two days before the start of the 11th G-20 Summit in Hangzhou, Zhejiang.

“There are still some uncertainties from the U.S. side due to the complicated U.S. system in ratifying such a treaty, but the announcement is still quite likely to be ready by Sept. 2,” an unnamed source told the English-language newspaper.

In addition, “[s]enior climate officials from both countries worked late into the night in Beijing on Tuesday to finalise [sic] details,” said the article, citing “sources familiar with the issue.”

The Thursday report touched off alarm among foes of the Paris Agreement, which calls for nations to reduce their greenhouse-gas emissions with the aim of holding global temperatures to an increase of “well below” 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial levels.



“Under President Obama, the U.S. has embraced the Paris agreement and is already implementing a robust Climate Action Plan at home. Critics claim the president can’t commit our country to Paris, or take these domestic actions, without getting the current Congress’s approval. They are wrong on both counts.”



Hmmm. According to some earlier reports, we should mostly be underwater or breathing our last breath by now. This is obviously designed to be implemented according to the needs of businesses to be profitable and remain profitable. Advances in battery technology, energy storage and electricity generated by the sun means any adjustments cannot hurt economies anywhere. Along with other renewables.

Finally, those responsible for putting billions of tons of pollutants into our air will begin to move.



One remembers long ago when, during Nixon’s administration, people complained about an “imperial presidency”. If Obama can truly commit this country to treaties all by himself such that they are the law of the land (which I do not believe) we’re truly in an “imperial presidency”. If congress has no power, then there is no need to even have one.

But one needs to be extremely concerned if Hillary Clinton is elected. She will select supreme court justices who will ratify every decree she issues, whether with Congressional approval or without.

We really are on the cusp of being ruled by despotism. Our elected representatives, I am afraid, will be powerless if the supreme court becomes the tool of the executive.


I really am questioning the legitimacy of Obamas commitment to america. He has implemented a healthcare program that is jacking up premiums as high as 20%, legalized same sex marriage, causing racial divide, and has been actively funding/arming ISIS. The weapons going to syrian rebel forces tend to go missing far to often and it seems pretty suspicious that he wired (illegally) 1.3 billion dollars to Iran, a radicalized regime seeking nuclear weaponry to destroy Israel and other apostate nations, 2 days after the 400 million for “ransom”. I hope his successor is tougher on some of these issues because right now Obama is essentially destroying america.


This is why when people complain they think Trump would be too dictatorial, I am convinced they are either lying or simply think that all it takes to be a dictator is to yell brashly.

After 8 years of this sort of attitude from President Obama, after running under the guises he did, I don’t take anyone who fears Trump but supports BO seriously anymore.




Giving up energy use is, to me, bizarre. Energy is what allowed man to heat copper to make a crude sickle to cut grain in order to live better than he would as a hunter-gatherer.

It’s what put large four-footed beasts at man’s service to carry his cargo and his person and to plow deeper in the earth than he would have with the energy in his own arms, and to produce much more than he did before.

It’s what allowed us to retire four-footed beasts as our energy source and have great huffing machines carry food, equipment and other things, every single one of them created by the expenditure of energy.

It’s what allowed us to manufacture and operate huge tractors that plow the earth and create more food than anyone would have dreamed of when man was dependent on the energy in his own arm, or in the legs of beasts or in the huffing and puffing of train engines.

It’s what allowed us to transport absolutely stupefying quantities of cargo across seas and back, and to quickly get them to people who need the products.

The energy we get from the earth is what makes a man’s arm that of a superman.

And yet, because of computer models that predict that which nobody actually experiences (global warming) some now want to weaken that arm. And the consequences will be predictable enough.

In older times, people went around smashing looms that made cloth more efficiently than ever before. And some want to revisit that.


I’m pretty sure no one is suggesting (at any rate not President Obama, or anyone that anyone could even plausibly take seriously) we stop using all forms of energy.

And given that this year so far as been the hottest year on record…since last year…to suggest that no one is experiencing any aspect of a warming climate is kind of ridiculous. This isn’t about luddites.


Good for him…when you gave a do nothing congress someone has to do b things.


What do you guys make of this article forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2014/02/11/remember-the-acid-rain-scare-global-warming-hysteria-is-pouring-down/#5d8e4a0b44c4?


Oh, I don’t think Obama wants to stop all energy use, only those that are cheapest and most reliable. It has been estimated that Obama’s war on coal alone will cost each household in my state an increase of $1500/year. I can afford that, but a lot of people are going to have a hard time doing it.

I’m aware of studies that say temperatures have been going up constantly since 1888, including the one that says the increase since 1888 has been 1.54 degrees, less than Obama is pledging the United States to somehow accomplish worldwide.

And it will be the United States that bears the brunt because other nations won’t honor it, including the two biggest CO2 producers; China and India.

And I have also seen the studies that say temps have not increased for nearly 20 years.

My real point, though, is that nobody actually experiences MMGW. Summers can be hotter than usual (as in the early 1950s here or cooler than usual (like this summer and last summer). The “experts” predict runaway global warming and some people believe it…until they get 3 feet of snow dumped on them. Long ago, they predicted enormous increases in the number of hurricanes due to MMGW, but they didn’t happen. On and on. No palm trees in Kansas yet. Nor in Oklahoma. Nor in North Texas.

Yes, the next is anecdotal, but it’s demonstrative, at least to me. When I was a kid, lo these many decades ago, you couldn’t successfully grow hay crops of Bermuda much north of Springfield, Missouri. Still can’t, because it’s too cool too long. But you could south of Springfield, and still can. The climatic zone for it hasn’t moved an inch northward. When I was a kid, there were no climate sensitive roadrunners north of Springfield, but there were south of it. There are still no roadrunners north of Springfield, but there are south of it.

I’m still waiting to see the snowy cattle egrets from just a few miles south in Oklahoma move north into here, but they never do despite all the cattle in this part of the country.

Oh yes, and instead of agreeing with China to cause Americans to freeze in the dark, why not provide funding to maximally improve American grasslands? A study by scientists at Texas A&M demonstrated that if the grasslands in the U.S. were properly managed, the grass would eat more CO2 than is produced in the U.S. And then there are also the forests.

But we won’t do that. We’ll try to make up for China’s pollution while it desertifies millions of square miles in China because China wants agricultural autarky despite the fact that China isn’t suited for it. And why? Because China wants to take in more money than it spends outside the country.


The Constitution says the Senate must approve treaties by 2/3s.


He’s now trying to make climate change his big legacy project.

I feel sorry for him (and our country), he seems to have the “Sidam Touch” (opposite of Midas).
Every task he’s turned his admin on has backfired.


Frankly Hydroelectric Dams, solar and wind farms are efficient enough when Nuclear power plants cannot be placed due to fault line locations or extreme weather zones. This is why Nuclear energy, mainly the ones being designed by transatomicpower.com/ , would be ideal for the East coast of America while the West should rely on Solar/Wind/Hydro power.


What scientific sources said we’d be underwater by now?

Never let facts get in the way of polemics

Coal is dying because natural gas is massively undercutting it in terms of prices.

Actually, it looks like China might meet its goal early.

Rolling ten year averages (climate change is temperatures trending upwards, not every single year is hotter than the last) keeps going up indeed the past couple years are at top and this year is also expected to be quite hot.

Runaway growth is only if we fail to do enough.

In case you didn’t know, Oklahoma has palm trees. The Midwest is seeing increasing numbers of farmers switch to things like Sorghum and Okra because other crops just keep failing due to it being too hot.

Americans aren’t going to freeze, natural gas is cheaper than ever.


Great article.

Page 3 is excellent.


Actually, this year has NOT been the hottest year on record.

There were at least two, in the 1920s and 1930s that were hotter.


Nukes were working quite well on the West Coast until political action caused a couple in California to be shut down.

The agitators have been wanting to shut down ALL fossil fuels, including natural gas.

Nuclear is the ideal power generation source. Save the natural gas to make chemicals.

The issue is that nuclear energy requires some actual knowledge. AND it requires some math.

NOTHING triggers fear and panic and loathing among the average agitator than math.

Read “Underexposed: What If Radiation Is Actually GOOD for You” by Ed Hisereodt.

He does an outstanding job of explaining the workings of nuclear stuff.

When you get Hiserodt’s book, feel free to jump around. Inside the book.

It has 13 tables and 34 charts.

He went out of his way to make the subject interesting.

Not necessary to attempt to plough through it in a boring way.

The book is available in both ebook and hard copy:


Scroll down to book review: page 32 >>>




Yes, there are a few varieties of palm trees that could always grow in Oklahoma and north Texas. I remember seeing them decades ago. They’re tricky to keep alive, though, because of the Continental influence. There are a lot of them in Dallas, for example, but always have been. A few years ago, though, they got nailed in Dallas unless owners took precautions to shelter them.

However, in northeast Ok, which is next to me, there is only one that will survive with care, and it will survive with care here too. But that has always been true. I was not talking about novelties.

I absolutely do not believe it has been too hot in the Midwest to grow traditional crops. Corn is heat-sensitive even when there is plenty of rain, and its production has expanded here greatly over the last few years, not diminished, and I’m actually south of what most consider the “Midwest”.

Wheat is not affected by warm summer temps because it’s harvested before it gets really hot. Soybeans are, and always have been, a warm-season crop. With them, the issue is rain, not temperature.

Nobody who actually pays attention to what goes on in rural areas believes global warming is a reality. And perhaps more importantly, the university extension here does pay lip service now and then to “climate change”, but they do not change their crop recommendations or anything else based on climate. They don’t recommend Bermuda in northern Missouri and they don’t recommend Brome in southern Missouri. Never have.

And if one imposes burdens on an industry like the coal industry that are expensive and require extensive retrofitting, of course it becomes uncompetitive for many things. That’s what Obama promised, and that’s what we got.

But Obama/Clinton will get their way and America will become even more noncompetitive. China “meeting its goals” is a joke, just as European nations “meeting their goals” under the Tokyo accords was a joke.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.