Nope. The document asserts, without evidence, that global emissions must be reduced to net zero emissions by 2050
"(4) global temperatures must be kept ...
(B) net-zero global emissions by 2050"
#104 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN
Apparently your reading skills could use a little work. Here is the beginning of that statement...
"Whereas the October 2018 report entitled "Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 ºC" by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the November 2018 Fourth National Climate Assessment report found that -- "
So, no. The document DOES NOT assert that. It is quoting an assessment by the IPCC.
I see NOTHING in the Green New Deal resolution that I am opposed to. It is just a resolution so it has very few concrete statements, and it covers itself multiple times with "as much as is technologically feasible". I think carbon neutral in 10 years is probably unrealistic, but this is politics. Trump also said he would build a "big, beautiful concrete wall" along the whole border and we all know how realistic that is.
So, please... list your albatrosses. I don't see any. I am happy that McConnell is going to bring it up for a vote. It will put Republicans on record as being against preventing climate change.
More and more Americans (last I saw it was at 60%) believe that climate change is happening and that humans are responsible. And we are getting more and more evidence over time. Republicans might be able to squeeze it into their favor now (they will get more by firing up their base than they lose on people who believe in science) but momentum is in the wrong direction. Will it still be in their favor in 2 years? Keep in mind, the last 5 years have been the hottest years on record. Is that an anomaly, or a trend?
And, if it is a trend that continues over the next two years (2018 was the cool year, the past three years were hotter), what will people think of the party who unanimously rejected doing anything to tackle climate change.