I have advocated independent review of climate science by the Trump Administration over the last few years, most recently here. The best way to do this is a formal reevaluation and rejection of the Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding (EF) issued by the Obama US Environmental Protection Agency in 2009. This might lead to real action–rejection of the EF. The Trump Administration has scaled back EPA’s climate-related regulations, but been careful not to formally reevaluate EF or attack climate alarmist “science.” Until the EF is formally reevaluated and rejected, EPA is in legal jeopardy of being forced to implement various attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions despite its dubious benefits. There have been various attempts to carry out reviews that might question climate alarmism, but no serious review has been undertaken to date by the Trump Administration.
This week a new effort has been rumored to be undertaken on a portion of climate alarmismt science, namely the impact of alleged climate change on national security. This would be in the form of a review by a Presidential panel or committee. Only one definite member of the panel has been mentioned, Dr. William Happer, who was rumored to be the chairman. The CIC immediately howled bloody murder against Dr. Happer, despite his long and distinguished service in the academic and governmental worlds.
This attack was presumably in hopes of derailing the effort even though there is no information as to who the other panel members might be. The Climate-Industrial Complex (CIC) prepared their usual attacks using logical fallacies, particularly their trademark ad hominem attacks, this time against Dr. Happer. They claimed that climate alarmism was “established science.” They claimed that Dr. Happer had compromised his objectivity by various statements that indicated that he was a “denialist” since he does not subscribe to many of the beliefs advocated by the UN IPCC reports. They claimed that Dr. Happer is unqualified since he had not completed course work in climate science (which probably did not exist at the time he completed his PhD). Imagine, he even believes that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but rather a vital constituent of the atmosphere that makes life on Earth possible. Horrors!
Whether the rumored proposed panel will survive such a major attack by the CIC remains to be seen. To date, the Trump Administration has retreated or ignored all such climate science review proposals. Will the Trump Administration retreat as usual in face of this attack from the CICs “captive” main street media? Or will they make a serious effort to undertake a review and new policy statement at least in this part of the climate policy science space? If so, the CICs usual operating approach of using logical fallacies through their “captive” media can notch another “victory” and encourage similar CIC bad behavior in the future.
The Trump Administration has less than two years left to launch a serious, public, scientific review of the climate scam. There is barely enough time to finish such a review before they may leave office in 2021. If they should win a second term in 2020, would they undertake such a review in their possible second term? Until the EF is scrapped, the US is in danger of wasting still more trillions of scarce dollars on the world’s biggest scientific scam.
The high profile and insanity of the Green New Deal are tempting targets.
Trump will want to go after climate change so as to shine a spotlight on the daffiness of the Green New Deal.
The Green New Deal is fantastic for Trump and Republicans. It’s so crazy that many Democrats cannot support it. This makes it a great campaign issue for demoralizing democrats.
Climate change helped Republicans in 2016 and could do so again in 2020.
A problem for democrats is lack of credibility. They depend on Fake News or false narratives. Global warming has been one of these for 30 years.
Another example is The Russian collusion narrative to slowdown Trump with disinformation, phony prosecution, or coup d’etat.
Another kind of problem democrats suffer is disregarding practical needs. Does the USA need to replace planes with trains, as proposed by the socialist politician from New York? Should the country have open borders? Should we let cheap imports displace all manufacturing in the US or protect US jobs with import taxes?
Angry democrats reflexively oppose plausiblle ideas, but promise the bribes of free health care, free college, and reparation payments. The result is a massive credibility problem and large opportunities for Trump to appear like a giant surrounded by Democrat midgets.
I agree with Alan Carlin. It’s the US that gave Climate Alarmism traction. If Trump can de-legitimise the scam via a respected review of its phony science the house of cards may fall apart. It’s a requirement for for the US economy to thrive and Trump knows that.
Happer represents science at its independent finest. It’s his independence as a thinker that is important. That his background is not in the heavily prostituted field of Climate Science is a positive, not a negative. In fact, it should be a requirement that the man appointed to do the job should not be a practitioner. He’s sharp and of an independent mind. That’s what’s needed.
Trump is a politician of rare courage. He is not driven by the media. There is yet hope.
2020 will be decided by the middle of the political divide. Those are voters
who are still reasoning humans. They are less prone to accepting
the ever louder and more absurd claims of hysteria promoted by the media.
Nevertheless, if Trump and the GOP continue to avoid the issue,
the middle of the divide will be lost – through the relentless bombardment
by media and opportunists in the Democratic party, which has already
adopted the CIC as its wagon to power. Without balance from Trump and the GOP,
the middle of the divide will inevitably succumb to the orchestrated and
relentless hysteria. Defectors are already forming within the GOP’s own ranks.
The advance will be halted only if the mythical science propelling the CIC
has been publically exposed. That embarrassment will also discredit
the Endangerment Finding. It certainly won’t come from the Democrats.
Unless the Trump administration acts, the next election will be a painful lesson
for the GOP. But it will be vastly more painful for the American public,
who will be saddled with its consequences far into the future: diversion of
American prosperity to ideology and its ultimate beneficiary –
government corruption and bureaucracy: Venezuela.
As Churchill recognized,
“An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last.”
If Trump doesn’t confront its mythical grounds, for this issue, 2020 may be the last feeding.
I am not sure asking when the trump administration will confront the CIC is a fair question. Trump confronted the CIC in appointing Scott Pruitt and Andrew Wheeler. The president exited the UN Paris program in a White House event. The president was very clear before the 2016 election when he called climate change BS.
The President gives higher priority to nuclear war threats from North Korea and to border security. These seem higher priorities with which I cannot disagree.
Now there are rumors he will unleash happer to liberate the US military from climate change policies. This sounds like a great place to begin debunking alarmism. We want our generals focused on real threats, not eco-fantasies.
National security may be a smart place to start repealing climate alarmism. if all goes well, EPAs endangerment finding can be repealed thereafter.
The Linked Times article is in keeping witb the surreality of climate alarmism. It states that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant.
CO2 is a gaseous molecule. It enables photosynthesis, plants and oxygen, and food chains, in short life on earth. A pretentious Socialist newspaper alleges a vital molecule is instead dangerous to life. And claims this is a scientific consensus. anybody who believes this is scientifically illiterate or has been led astray by the hoaxers.
The administration could eviscerate climate alarmism via the nationaL security review. This review could hear the scientific case against alarmism.
Thereafter as a separate matter the administration could potentially invalidate the Endangerment Finding on procedural grounds. The USEPA did not follow proper legal procedure when developing the EF.
It’s not clear trump would need to hold another scientific review for the EF. To do so would be redundant.
The President will not want to enter the 2020 election without first administering another scrushing humiliating defeat to the climate hoaxers. Rumors indicate Professor Happer is now on the move! This is very very encouraging.
Trump has to go beyond simply calling climate change BS.
He has to take on the CIC and reveal why it is wrong. This will punish foes and reward supporters.
It will also attack a great weakness of the socialists, convenient lies created by the administrative state and its union membership to better themselves at the expense of other US citizens.
Rejecting climate change goes to the core of the trump presidency. it would Help the us economy. Empower states versus federal executive meddling in their domestic sphere. Fit appointments to the Supreme Court. Expose the depravity indifference of socialist media like the New York Times to good science. Expose the lack of support for good science within universities. Expose Federal funding for cargo cult science.
There are many reasons why Trump can help his historical reputation and help the Inited States by revealing the hoax. He does not shy from big challenges.
What i cannot fathom is that climate ‘deniers’ are still actively protesting the [clear + proven] –BASIC, ELEMENTARY– science of the Greenhouse Effect on healthy ecosystems — instead of joining the fight for SUSTAINABLE OPS IN ALL SECTORS, againsT the evil polluters still honing destruction of our life-sustaining rainforests & poisoning our air/crops/waters for their own greedy unsustainable ‘economic growth at all costs’ — even if it means denying our kids & future generations a livable world free from imminent threats of climate imbalance & extinction of healthy biodiversity (our beloved wildlife populations, whose existence is a measure of ouR own global populations) –if the animals are dying from habitat degradation etc., our own extinction is sure to follow (since we all depend on the same clean water, healthy ecosystems/ plants & breathable oxygen to live..) Why do you want to waste time denying what is happening right before your very EYES??? Your denial is irrelevant — the science is transpiring exactly as we learned it — & [most of us] knew all along:: THAT is common sense, get on board going sustainable & lessening suffering for others.. Or die a miserable death as one of the evil ‘deniers’ who refused to join in & help..