Danger, I don't know why I have to explain this. I know you understand. That "donation" is actually an investment. You think China is doing out of the goodness of their hearts? I never said anything about tipping point. If I did, please quote me. But you won't because I never brought it up. You kept bringing up the tipping point. All I ever said was that is is clear human caused CO2 emissions are contributing to global warming and that something should be done and the paris agreement was a step in the right direction.
I already explained this a few times in the thread. I don't understand why you are still asking me that, to be honest.
That's not true. These developing nations and other nations across the globe do not operate on a purely free market basis. Because China is pumping money into their infrastructure, these countries will want to use Chinese technology. China already has a huge population and is expected to surpass the US economy within the next two decades. The Chinese companies already have a huge base to sell to in their homeland. This combined with all the technology they will sell abroad if they take the lead on the international stage will make it difficult for US companies to compete. The Chinese companies will simply be making a lot more money and because of that will have more resources to create better and cheaper technology than American companies.
Men frequently err by talking too much. They often monopolize conversations, droning on and on about topics that bore women to tears. They think they're impressing the women when, in reality, they're depressing the women.
Quote taken from The SoSuave Guide to Women and Dating, which you can read for FREE.
To get an idea of what counties China is investing in, check this: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/china/belt-road-initiative-china-plans-1-trillion-new-silk-road-n757756
That's simply not true, Danger. The money is not massive. I've explained this. I've answered your same questions. Too many times.
Danger, come on...seriously
I never said this. If that is your take away from everything I wrote, wow.
No didn't say that. Your interpretation of what I wrote is incorrect.
There is little to no risk. There is way more risk by not taking the lead on this, from every angle: social, national security, and economic.
Question is, did you even look in at the links I posted? Because if you didn't, I'm not taking you seriously.
Danger, I already explained all this. Read my posts again. If you don't understand or don't agree, I don't care to repeat myself again.
Yes, I looked at the PDF you linked. Did you click the links I posted?
No, because you didn't even bother to pull the facts from those sources and compare them with your rebuttal. If you really wanted to support your case and actually be taken seriously, you would have taken the time to counter argue my points from the sources.
I looked at your link. You asked for a source. So I linked you a source. You did not check it out. I didn't know you were looking for a debate. Didn't seem like it. You just asked me for a source, which you did not check out.
Danger, again, you are misinterpreting and misrepresenting what I posted and you simply don't understand what I have posted.
Danger, again, you just don't get it.
Perhaps if you weren't so dense, I wouldn't need coloring crayons, fun pictures, and charts to get you to understand something that I explained over the course of 3 pages. You don't understand international relations, business, economics, or basic political history. Your worldview is shaped by conspiratard blogs, so you won't understand.
Again, all this was explained. You don't get it. I've explained this to multiple people in my every day life who were misinformed and they understood after I explained. You won't get it. The NWO/globalist take over of America narrative put forth by conspiratard blogs is what you consider a logical, coherent idea. Global warming is a conspiracy to people like you, too. Considering this, the only two conclusions I can reach are:
