Professors Comment on Implications of Trump’s Paris Accord Withdrawal

In 2015, shortly after 195 nations had signed the historic Paris climate accord to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and attempt to curb climate change, we asked several Bowdoin faculty to weigh in on the significance of the agreement.

Now that President Donald Trump has announced his decision to pull the United States out of the deal, we checked in with a few of them again, asking what they think might happen next. Read their observations.

Comments

  1. George Griggs says:

    I have no attribution for this quote, but it sums up my feelings:

    “I have no problem with valid research that follows the scientific process. I do have a problem with spending trillions of dollars on an alleged problem based on an anomaly that no one has actually proven even exists. I have a problem with tax hungry politicians who have zero acumen in any science getting involved with the research. I have a problem with totalitarians using fictitious world-ending scenarios to scare the masses into compliance with their agenda. I have a problem with people pretending that an alleged “consensus” has any place in the scientific method. I have a problem when research shows the base premise of the theory under study shows the theory itself to be completely flawed; and yet, the researchers continue on their merry way and soak up tax dollars anyway.
    Research is leaning in the direction that perceived climate anomalies tend to be cyclic and heliocentric rather than in any way anthropogenic via (relative) miniscule anthropogenic contributions of C02 to perceived greenhouse anomalies. Particle cluster nucleation due to anomalous solar radiation, Milankovitch rotational anomalies (axial tilt & precession – orbital forcing), as well as Svensmark’s efforts around Cosmoclimatology are 100% valid research efforts which show the fallacy inherent to the AGW myth. It amazes me that with the mountains of contradictory evidence available, the IPCC and Gore are still able to perpetrate the prodigious myth that the minuscule amount of anthropogenic CO2 is somehow catastrophic to our environment. AGW is in fact the hoax of the century; or of a couple of centuries.”

  2. I believe that Trump’s decision was premature. Although many factors influence the environment and climate change, one is the human factor and that we can and should have control. The less we worry about it, the more problems we’ll have in the long run.

    If each one does his part, we will have a much better world for the new generation.

Leave a Comment

*