scott pruitt epa

Scott Pruitt EPA Nominee: More Leftist Slavery Ended

Leftists’ hysteria and vitriol in response to Trump winning the presidency is escalating. Enraged, they vow to stop Trump at all cost. It occurred to me that what has really driven the Left insane, enraged and quaking in fear is Americans free to live their lives. Over the past 8 years, Obama transformed government agencies such as the EPA into his personal hit squads. Using these agencies, Obama incrementally repealed our Constitutional and God-given freedoms, while criminalizing and silencing dissenting voices. Leftists arrogantly assumed Hillary would win to take Obama’s slavery of Americans to unprecedented irreversible levels.

Trump is America’s Abe Lincoln, our emancipator. His election equaled him unlocking and pushing open the 2 feet thick, 100ft high iron gates of the Left’s government plantation. Overwhelmed with the anticipation of freedom, millions of traumatized Americans ran for their lives, flooding out of the compound, joyously running free in all directions. As they ran, visions of starting businesses free from Obama’s 4000 new EPA regulations and restored freedoms like raising their kids according to their conscience danced in their heads.

Frustrated enraged Leftist overlords (Rosie O’Donnell and other evil wackos) watched helplessly as the tsunami of Trump’s emancipated runaway slaves exited the government plantation. Leftist mercenaries have already begun capturing, beating, torturing and dragging back freed Americans in chains

I want low-info voters like my professional electrician nephew Mike to understand that Leftists are a different species, Arrogantous-Superiorist. Though sighted throughout America, Leftists’ natural habitat is Hollywood, New York, LA and Washington DC. Leftists believe their superior compassion authorizes them to use their superior intellect to dictate how we inferior commoners must live our lives.

So now the battle is on folks. Freaked out Leftists are pulling out all the stops to stop Trump. Trump seeks to further our liberation. Ending Leftist government bullying will spark a new era of American prosperity; investors risking capitol, creativity, jobs and growth beneficial to all Americans.

There is no greater Leftist government plantation overlord than the EPA. Therefore, Leftists’ attempts to demonize Scott Pruitt, Trump’s pick to head the EPA, will be insanely vicious, filled with lies. Leftists hope to brand Pruitt evil incarnate. They will claim Pruitt wants dirty air and water for personal gain. Leftists will throw old standbys into the mix, racism, sexism and homophobia. They will claim Pruitt’s destruction of the environment will harm minorities, women and homosexuals most. Leftists foolishly continue to use their old school tricks to stop our new president.

Here are a few of many of our Leftist slave master’s unbelievable power grabs via the EPA.

While claiming to champion the little guy, Obama’s draconian EPA carbon regulations harm the poor and most vulnerable Americans

Ponder this folks. A record 94,708,000 Americans are not in the labor force. http://bit.ly/2aGWPJ4

And yet, stupid EPA manufacturing regulations hurt jobs and competitiveness. American manufacturers scolded the EPA. Paraphrasing,

“Look you arrogant clueless idiots. We create jobs that support our economy and build technologies which make cleaner energy possible. Poorly crafted regulations like your New Source Performance Standards for new power plants threatens both.” 

Using the EPA as his enforcers, Obama’s illegal war on coal is projected to cost 125,800 jobs.

Unbelievably, Obama’s EPA is illegally confiscating privately owned land and dictating water usage across America

For daring to challenge the EPA in court, an EPA official threatened to throw executives of HVI Cat Canyon Inc in jail to be raped by a black male prisoner named Leroy. Yes, this is the extraordinary arrogance and abusiveness of the untouchable government agency

But folks, the most egregious dictatorial command of the EPA is that we embrace their religion of Climate Change. The EPA conspired with Obama’s DOJ to jail anyone expressing unbelief in their god (Climate Change). Yes, you heard me correctly. The EPA intends to criminalize disagreeing with them regarding Climate Change, throwing “Climate Change Deniers” in jail.

Meanwhile, Climate Change is a hoax.

Scott Pruitt will liberate Americans from the shackles of the Climate Change religious zealots running the EPA. Leftists have begun launching lie-infested fake news stories trying to destroy Pruitt. They will fail folks. Trump’s election marks a new day in America.

With Scott Pruitt heading the EPA, Americans can breathe a sigh of relief and say, “Free at last! Free at last! Thank God almighty we’re free at last!”

environmntal news

Let’s Stop with the Carbon Con Already

The side that defines the vocabulary of a debate, wins the debate. So we could ask: as we fight the global-warming scam, why are we using the language of the scammers? It’s harder to combat “carbon” taxes, “carbon” credits and callow “carbon” appeals if we accept that at issue is “carbon.”

Calling CO2 “carbon” is like calling H2O “hydrogen.” Carbon is about as useful to a plant aspiring to photosynthesize as a tank of hydrogen is to a dehydrated man in a desert. Carbon dioxide and carbon are not the same thing any more than a fox and foxglove are the same thing.

If chemical formulas are meaningless and one element or atom between friends can be ignored, try inhaling copious amounts of CO. It’s also “carbon,” being in fact more “carboney” ratio-wise than CO2. But carbon monoxide is poisonous to fauna and flora while carbon dioxide is plant food, which is why botanists pump it into greenhouses.

Likewise, would you like some chlorine with your food, sir? Sodium is poisonous; chlorine is poisonous. Combine the two — NaCl — and you have table salt. Chemistry is our friend.

It would be nice to think that the carbon crew is just being friendly and familiar. But not only would calling CO2 Mr. Dioxide be just as inaccurate, there’s clearly an agenda here. Carbon, the primary element in coal, conjures up images of spewing sky-blackening soot into the air. It’s a dark brand of marketing.

In fact, I challenge those crafting “carbon tax” bills to call CO2 “carbon” in their legislation’s text. They won’t because I suspect it wouldn’t stand up in court, as factories don’t actually emit carbon. The alarmists will either specify carbon dioxide or define, tendentiously, what “carbon” means for the “purposes of the bill.”

Of course, carbon isn’t really a villain, either. It’s the fourth-most abundant element in the universe, and man is known as a “carbon-based life form.” Given the latter, if extra atoms and elements and how they react with each other can be ignored when formulating labels and definitions, we could say that Al Gore’s birth was a carbon emission.

Honest people should reclaim the language and reboot the debate by rejecting “carbon” talk. As for those knowingly using the term for propaganda purposes, they should have a huge carbon footprint placed firmly on their carbon-based posteriors.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

earthquake (1)

A Repeat of Natural Catastrophes May Be President Trump’s Biggest Challenge

This is an invitation for you to go to several web sites for important new information regarding the serious threat that now exists for historic and deadly earthquakes here in the United States. The first of these quakes may strike during the administration of President Donald Trump.

Hundreds of billions of dollars in property damage are likely and tens of thousands of Americans may perish in this major earthquake threat period that begins this year – 2017!

upheavalThis warning comes in the recently published book, “Upheaval – Why Catastrophic Earthquakes Will Soon Strike the United States.”

Based on ten years of research from a team of international scientists and a full year in the writing, the book exposes the clear and present danger the USA is under from devastating earthquakes that come around on cycles of roughly 100 and 200 years. The most damaging cycle, the 200 year cycle has just begun. These earthquake cycles are, according to the book, intimately linked to climate variation.

“Upheaval!” explains in understandable, non-technical, language why there is an over 80% chance of calamitous earthquakes once again striking the United States, affecting not just Alaska and California, but also the central and northeastern US and other states.

This rare and profoundly dangerous new geophysical era the US and the world has entered, will provide significant new challenges to every citizen of the US as well as to the new administration of President Donald Trump.

Please examine the following references:

1.The Veritence Corporation web site at http://www.veritence.net has a new ‘Commentary’ titled:

“A Repeat of Natural Catastrophes May Be President Trump’s Biggest Challenge.”

This Commentary focuses on past Presidents and the unanticipated geophysical and climate related disasters that occurred during their terms in office. The Commentary explains how these events were linked to changes in the climate and references the research from“Upheaval!” The Commentary goes on to support the opinion that President Trump may face some of the most damaging earthquakes in our country’s history that may cause significant human and economic losses – more than any other President has seen in our country’s history!

2.The eBook and the paperback version of “Upheaval!” are now available from Trafford Publishing and Amazon.com.

Please go to the Trafford web site for “Upheaval!” at www.upheaval2017.com for your copy of “Upheaval!” in paperback or the new eBook versions (ePub, mobi, and PDF formats), or

Go to the Amazon.com web site at www.amazon.com and enter the book title in the search block to be taken to the Amazon order page for both the paperback and ‘Kindle’ eBook  version of the book.

or

3.To get an autographed copy of “Upheaval!” please go to the web site of Veritence Publishing, Inc., at:  www.veritencepublishing.com

Go to the “Non-fiction Reading” page at the site for instructions to obtain a paperback copy via mail at the existing retail price with no S&H.

Here are some quotes from this important book:

“…a book that every American and every citizen of planet Earth should read and heed.” Dr. Rich Swier

From a USGS study: “More than 143 million Americans living in the 48 contiguous states are exposed to potentially damaging ground shaking from earthquakes.”

From the chapter on ‘The West Coast – Widespread Damage.’ We have:

“There is at least an 80% chance of more than one catastrophic earthquake of at least M 6.7+ hitting the state (of California) during the period 2017 to 2031 and an 80% chance of a catastrophic M 7.9 or greater quake striking the state during the same period.”

From the chapter on the “The New Madrid Seismic Zone (NMSZ)”:

“Few cases reach the strength of evidence for a major earthquake anywhere in the USA more than the New Madrid Seismic Zone (NMSZ). Like clockwork, the NMSZ has produced a region wide devastating earthquake or series of earthquakes with every 206 year solar hibernation or significant decline in the Sun’s energy output since the year 1450!…“The fact that another solar hibernation has begun should put every state in the area and the federal government on high alert.”

“Most Americans are unaware that should the NMSZ have a series of quakes similar to the 1811-1812 temblors during the last solar hibernation, the majority of the gas and oil that is delivered to the northeastern states will be shut off, possibly for many months.…resulting in a substantial and immediate power and heating oil crisis….”

For a repeat of the 1811-1812 NMSZ quakes, “FEMA estimates… 86,000 injuries and fatalities,…7.2 million people displaced,….Direct economic losses…nearly $300 billion, while indirect losses may be at least twice this amount.”

Regardless of your decision of whether to obtain the paperback or the eBook version of this important work, you are requested to notify any friends and family or business associates, media and government officials  you may have in the states listed below.

According to the book authors, they should begin at once to prepare for the worst geophysical period in our country’s history with the real possibility that some of the first destructive earthquakes could strike as early as this year:

Any Central and Northeastern state dependent on oil, natural gas and fuel from the gulf state refineries, including as a minimum, Ohio,Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts.

Alaska, California, Oregon, Washington, South Carolina and Puerto Rico.

Anyone in the central Mississippi valley states including: Arkansas, Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, and Louisiana.

global-warming-crisis-cancelled

VIDEO: Princeton Professor debunks climate change propaganda

John Casey, author and former NASA rocket scientist, has taught me three facts about the climate:

  1. The climate changes.
  2. The changes are cyclical.
  3. There is nothing mankind can do to change these natural cycles.

As John notes the only thing that mankind can do is prepare for these changes using good science and the best climate prediction tools to warn us of the coming changes.

The New American (TNA) interviewed Princeton University Professor William Happer on the notion that CO2 is a pollutant and is the cause of climate change, formally known as global warming. TNA reports:

Physics Professor William Happer discredits the negative effects of CO2 on the planet and whether or not climate change is man-made. He also goes into detail of why the United Nation’s models are incorrect despite their overwhelming confidence that significant warming is taking place due to human activity.

Erick Erickson in a column titled The Real Reason Leftwing Groups Are Freaked Out by Trump’s EPA Pick reports:

Leftwing groups are freaking out about Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma’s Attorney General and Donald Trump’s nominee for the EPA. It is safe to say that the collective meltdown over Pruitt is greater than over any other Trump pick. You probably have no idea why and it has nothing to do with climate change.

Superficially, progressives are saying that Pruitt is a climate change denier and has no business managing the agency he sued so often. But that’s just cover.

The real reason has everything to do with money.

With the blessing of the Department of Justice, the EPA has been going after major corporations and telling those corporations that they can pay a massive fine to the federal government or pay a lesser amount to various environmentalist groups.

Read more…

Its always about the money. Radical environmentalists are being funded by the EPA. The EPA is using its power to regulate and partnering with the DOJ to harm every business in America.

Well there’s a new sheriff in town and this government theft is going to stop.

RELATED ARTICLE: Washington Post Admits Science isn’t Settled on Climate Change of Warm Arctic, Cold Continents

upheaval-book-cover-2

New Book Warns of Catastrophic Earthquakes for USA

upheavalVeritence Publishing, Inc. announces today the publication of the book, “Upheaval!” which contains specific warnings of climate related catastrophic earthquakes the authors believe are about to strike the United States.

“Upheaval” is the culmination of years of research by an international team of climate and seismology experts and eleven months in the writing and editing stages.

The text’s primary writer John L. Casey, is both CEO of the International Earthquake and Volcano Prediction Center (IEVPC) as well as President of Veritence Publishing, Inc. His previous book, “Dark Winter,” was the number one best-selling book on climate change at Amazon.com during July and August 2015 and was the first climate book of its kind to discuss the strong correlation between the climate and earthquakes.

The book “Upheaval!” is co-authored by prominent geologists, Dr. Dong Choi, who is the Director of Research at the IEVPC in Canberra, Australia, Dr. Fumio Tsunoda, who is Emeritus Professor of Geology at the National Saitama University in Japan, and Dr. Ole Humlum, Professor of Physical Geology at the University of Oslo, Norway.

The text paints a stark view of the future of the United States based on repeating cycles of catastrophic earthquakes, all tied to cycles of climate change. Written for the average man-on-the-street, “Upheaval!” uses historical earthquake records, climate trends, and energy flows within the Earth’s crust to predict this coming period of geophysical devastation.

“The long cycles of nature are once again turning against the planet and the USA in particular,” says Casey. “Our analysis has shown without a doubt, that the cold climate cycles of the Sun are when we have our worst earthquakes. A new solar minimum or ‘solar hibernation’ has begun and has been verified by the US solar physics community. It is expected to bring record cold weather and along with it, as history shows, the most damaging earthquakes. This wave of destructive earthquakes is expected to produce destruction and loss of life on an historic scale. This period of highest earthquake risk is expected to begin as early as next year and last through the 2030’s. We have very little time left for the cities and states in well known earthquake zones to prepare for this calamitous natural assault.”

Dr. Choi, says,

“The time and latitude based patterns of energy flow that drive release of great energy within the Earth’s crust, are solid indicators of what areas of the planet are most likely to see the greatest earthquake occurrence. In our book, we analyze the level of threat for the Cascadia Subduction Zone states, California, the New Madrid Seismic Zone (NMSZ) states, South Carolina, Puerto Rico and Hawaii. For each of these high risk areas we examine the history of their past earthquakes in relation to climate change cycles and crustal energy transfer patterns to come up with our prediction for when they are going to see their most damaging earthquakes. Our findings are doubtless going to cause great concern in most of these earthquake threat zones since we have found the most likely window for these new catastrophic earthquakes opens in 2017. The cycle of numerous dangerous quakes for the USA, causing substantial loss of life, will not end until the 2030’s.”

I wrote in the Foreword to “Upheaval!”:

“If the geophysical predictions of John and his associates come to pass with the accuracy of John’s past climate predictions, then everyone should begin at once to prepare for the coming catastrophic earthquakes.”

“Upheaval!” will be available in eBook form in a few weeks but is now available in paperback at Trafford.com and can be directly accessed at by CLICKING HERE.

epa logo

More than the EPA

Conservatives and rule of law advocates are rightfully rejoicing at President-elect Trump’s pick of Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to head the EPA. Members of the environmental community on the other hand, are crying in their lattés as they lament the end of their power over the people via one of most abusive unconstitutional reigns of a government agency in modern American politics.

However, this gallant new knight at the round table of honest government will need help. Curing the ills of nearly thirty years of United Nations inspired man-made global warming propaganda, and related global, socialistic, sustainability programs tied to a re-distribution of wealth, will take much more than just one inspired leader at the EPA. The cancer of environmental extremism and government dominance over US citizens under the guise of ‘saving the planet’ has now had three decades to metastasize within the body of America and infect all of our fundamental institutions that make up this country.

The roots of the current affliction of man-made global warming (a.k.a. climate change) are spread across the globe but can be identified by several key events in the past. They include the late British PM Margaret Thatcher’s desires to permanently end the UK coal miner’s strikes by going to nuclear power. To achieve this goal, though perhaps not understanding the monster she was creating, she was the first global leader who pumped serious money into resurrecting the long dead greenhouse gas theory in the mid-1980’s. Later, the formation of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN-IPCC) in 1988, created a global forum for publication of often misleading and sometimes fraudulent science reports using the re-minted greenhouse theory. The UN-IPCC’s stated aims were to examine only mankind’s CO2 role in climate change, thus ignoring the role of more important causes like the Sun. Yet, as erroneous as these reports and their associated and failed global climate models have been, they have nonetheless been used by governments around the world to justify the spread the politics of environmental extremism.

This political sickness began its most invasive phase in the USA when a much younger Rep. Nancy Pelosi introduced the United Nations “Agenda 21” on the floor of the House of Representatives during the Bill Clinton administration. Clinton later ushered in a more palatable version of “Agenda 21” as the “Sustainable America” program. This required all elements of the federal government to get on board with a US version of the UN program. The infection then became an integral part of American governance. President Barack Obama took these earlier initiatives to a whole new level with his Clean Power Plan, Climate Action Plan, out-of-control job killing EPA regulations, and his international diplomatic efforts where he was fulfilling a legacy desire to be crowned the world’s climate change king.

As a result of these and numerous other federally controlled climate and renewable energy programs, we now have two generations of Americans who have been brainwashed into believing that mankind controls the Earth’s climate, that the Sun is insignificant in doing so, that polar bears are endangered, and that only by controlling man’s industrial CO2 can we save the planet from catastrophic overheating by the year 2100. None of these assertions has been proven and there is, in fact, substantial evidence against these dubious claims. Many like me, believe they are emblematic of “…the greatest international scientific fraud in human history.”

Yes, the future Trump administration may finally give the American people a chance to truly return scientific integrity to the White House, and cast out the disease of politically driven science and nefarious United Nation programs that run counter to the U.S. Constitution. But it won’t come from just one Lancelot at the EPA.

More to the point, failure to implement a comprehensive treatment for this malady may allow this illness to resurface in another form or agency in the future.

Only a comprehensive nation-wide campaign every bit as rigorous and thorough as the one that created this disease of environmental socialism, will be sufficient to end it, once and for all.

EDITORS NOTE: John L. Casey is the author of the best selling climate book, “Dark Winter.”

scott-pruitt

Trump ignores Gore’s advice, instead picks skeptic to head EPA and dismantle climate agenda

‘Trump listened to what Gore had to say at their New York City meeting and then he exercised his good judgement and did the exact opposite.’

Flashback: Trump’s pick for EPA chief declared EPA climate regs were like ‘gun to the head’

Greens freak out over Trump’s EPA pick: Call him ‘Dangerous’ – ‘Existential threat to the planet’

“President-Elect Trump’s appointment of Scott Pruitt is a breath of fresh air. No longer do we have to suffer under President Obama’s ridiculous EPA ‘climate’ regulations. It is also refreshing that a Republican President is not throwing the EPA over to the green activists and the media by appointing a weak administrator. Christine Todd Whitman he is not! See: Bravo! Trump appoints ‘a fierce critic of the EPA’ — to head EPA! & Cheers! Trump picks leading EPA critic to head agency

Trump’s pick of Pruitt finally means that a Republican President is standing up the green establishment! Historically, EPA chiefs have been among the most pro regulatory members of past Republican presidents from Nixon through Ford, Reagan and both Bushes. Trump has broken the cycle!

Climate sanity has been restored to the U.S. EPA. No longer do we have to hear otherwise intelligent people in charge in DC blather on about how EPA regulations are necessary to control the Earth’s temperature or storminess. See: Huh?! Obama advisor John Podesta claims EPA CO2 regs (which don’t impact global CO2 levels) are needed to combat extreme weather: ‘The risk on the downside you’re seeing every day in the weather’

No longer do we have to endure GOP presidents avoiding battle over the green agenda by picking EPA chiefs that were timid at best. We know how bad GOP EPA picks have been in the past because many former GOP EPA chiefs all endorsed President Obama’s EPA climate regulations. See: EPA chiefs who served under Republicans press for climate action

If climate skeptics were worried about Trump’s meeting with Former VP Al Gore earlier this week, the pick of Pruitt is reassuring. Basically Trump listened to what Gore had to say at their New York City meeting and then he exercised his good judgement and did the exact opposite.

Kudos to Trump for standing up the well funding climate establishment by picking Pruitt.

The UN Paris climate change agreement and the EPA climate regulations claim to be able to essentially save the planet from ‘global warming’. But even if you accept the UN’s and Al Gore’s version of climate change claims, the UN Paris agreement or the EPA’s alleged climate regulations would not ‘save’ the planet.

University of Pennsylvania Geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack has noted, “None of the strategies that have been offered by the U.S. government or by the EPA or by anybody else has the remotest chance of altering climate if in fact climate is controlled by carbon dioxide.”
In layman’s terms: All of the so-called ‘solutions’ to global warming are purely symbolic when it comes to climate. So, even if we actually faced a climate catastrophe and we had to rely on a UN climate agreement, we would all be doomed!

Even the proponents admit these EPA regulations are purely symbolic.

EPA Chief Admits Obama Regs Have No Measurable Climate Impact: ‘One one-hundredth of a degree?’ EPA Chief McCarthy defends regs as ‘enormously beneficial’ – Symbolic impact

Former Obama Energy Chief slams EPA climate regs: ‘Falsely sold as impactful’ – ‘All U.S. annual emissions will be offset by 3 weeks of Chinese emissions’ Former Obama Department of Energy Assistant Secretary Charles McConnell: ‘The Clean Power Plan has been falsely sold as impactful environmental regulation when it is really an attempt by our primary federal environmental regulator to take over state and federal regulation of energy.’ – ‘What is also clear, scientifically and technically, is that EPA’s plan will not significantly impact global emissions.’ – ‘All of the U.S. annual emissions in 2025 will be offset by three weeks of Chinese emissions. Three weeks.’

And after all the green stimulus bills, subsidies and regulations, overall energy use has not really changed all that much in over 100 years.

Reality check: In 1908, fossil fuels accounted for 85% of U.S. energy consumption. In 2015, more or less the same

http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=28592 …

Related Links: 

Trump’s Pick to Lead the EPA Calls Himself a ‘Leading Advocate Against the EPA’s Activist Agenda’ -Warmist Slate Mag laments: ‘Pruitt’s selection should extinguish any remaining hope that President Trump, who will be the only world leader who openly and outright rejects fighting climate change, will somehow be convinced by his daughter (or Al Gore) to act in response to the scientific consensus.’

Fmr. Harvard Physicist praises Trump’s EPA pick: ‘There is nothing unclean about CO2 & the environment doesn’t need to be ‘protected’ against it’
Climate skeptic group praises Trump EPA pick: Pruitt will confront EPA’s ‘enormous federal regulatory overreach’

TRUMP PICKS PROMINENT CLIMATE SKEPTIC AS EPA CHIEF
Celebrate! Trump to pick ‘ardent opponent’ of Obama climate agenda to run EPA – In an interview with Reuters in September, Pruitt said he sees the Clean Power Plan as a form of federal “coercion and commandeering” of energy policy and that his state should have “sovereignty to make decisions for its own markets.”

Trump’s Pick for EPA Has a History of Fighting the Agency

man-on-the-moon-painting

End of the Dark Age: Trump to restart space exploration rather than fund climate hoax

What wonderful news — investing in actual science and divesting from leftwing lunacy. Some of man’s greatest achievements and scientific discoveries came from space exploration.

Obama changed NASA’s mission from space exploration to Muslim outreach. NASA’s Administrator explained that Obama had asked him to “find ways to reach out to dominantly Muslim countries.” (More here: Obama ‘s stone age)

TRUMP TO SEND MEN BACK TO THE MOON AND ‘EXPLORE ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEM’ RATHER THAN FIGHT CLIMATE CHANGE

The president elect could put men on the moon once again – and use money from the climate change budget to do it

By Jeff Parsons, The Mirror, November 23, 2016 (thanks to Van):

Sending Americans back to the moon could also hinge on the appointment of Newt Gingrich, a high-profile Republican, to a top job at NASA.

Gingrich has been a vocal supporter of returning to the moon and has even spoken in the past about creating a permanent base there. He says that such a settlement could sustain around 13,000 people and possibly even become a new American state .

However, investing in a moon mission is likely to divert funds from NASA’s Earth Sciences division which researches climate change.

Moon Base

Moon Base (Photo: European Space Agency)

The division has received a 50% funding increase since president Obama took over. This year it received $1.92 billion at the same time as Obama proposed cutting funding for deep space exploration.

The Donald’s views on climate change are no secret. He has referred to it in the past as a Chinese hoax and claimed it was invented to limit American manufacturing and growth.

Therefore, it’s not much of a stretch to see NASA’s budgets and priorities overhauled during the Trump administration with a focus to putting astronauts back on the moon.

Speaking to The Telegraph , a former congressman who has advised Trump on space policy called NASA a “logistics agency concentrating on space station resupply and politically correct environmental monitoring.”

Bob Walker said that the incoming administration would “start by having a stretch goal of exploring the entire solar system by the end of the century.”

“You stretch your technology experts and create technologies that wouldn’t otherwise be needed. I think aspirational goals are a good thing. Fifty years ago it was the ability to go to the moon.”

EDITORS NOTE: This column first appeared on PamelaGeller.com.  The featured image is the painting The Last Man on the Moon
by Alan Bean

trump-pope

Pope warns Trump: Do not back away from UN climate pact

Pope Francis has issued a climate change challenge directly to President Elect Trump. The Pope, in thinly veiled speech, urged Trump not to withdraw the U.S. from the United Nations Paris agreement reached in 2015. The UN treaty has been said by critics to be “history’s most expensive treaty’,” with a “cost of between $1 trillion and $2 trillion annually.”

Pope Francis warned of the “crisis of climate change.”  “The ‘distraction’ or delay in implementing global agreements on the environment shows that politics has become submissive to a technology and economy which seek profit above all else,” Francis said, in what Reuters described as “a message that looked to be squarely aimed at” Trump.

Trump pledged to pull the U.S. out of the UN Paris climate agreement and defund and withdraw from the UN climate process. See: Trump wins U.S. Presidency! Climate Skeptics Rejoice! Set to dismantle & Defund UN/EPA climate agenda!

Speaking to a group of scientists, including physicist Stephen Hawking, the pope said in his speech that scientists should “work free of political, economic or ideological interests, to develop a cultural model which can face the crisis of climatic change and its social consequences”. The Pope has previously urged Catholics to pray for a UN climate agreement. See: Pope urges prayers for passage of UN climate treaty! Tells faithful ‘to ask God for a positive outcome’ for Paris UN agreement 

(Pope Francis greets Stephen Hawking (R), theoretical physicist and cosmologist, during a meeting with the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in Vatican, November 28, 2016. Osservatore Romano/Handout via Reuters)

Pope Francis also called for “an ecological conversion capable of supporting and promoting sustainable development.” In 2015, the Pope issued an encyclical on climate and the environment titled “Laudato Si: On Care for Our Common Home.”

In a 2015 Climate Depot Special Report revealed the Pope’s inner climate circle were. See: ‘Unholy Alliance’ – Exposing The Radicals Advising Pope Francis on Climate

The report noted: “The Vatican relied on advisers who are the most extreme elements in the global warming debate.  These climate advisers are so far out of the mainstream they even make some of their fellow climate activists cringe…The Vatican advisers can only be described as a brew of anti-capitalist, pro-population control advocates who allow no dissent and are way out of the mainstream of even the global warming establishment.”

Climate Depot also released the 2015 report: The Climate Skeptic’s Guide To Pope Francis’: Talking Points About The Pope & Global Warming – & See: Pope is a ‘climate lobbyist’ – Listen: Morano: ‘Pope is serving as chief religious lobbyist for man-made global warming & UN’

Climate experts who have looked at the UN climate agreement think Trump is correct to dismantle it. Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg wrote “Trump’s climate plan might not be so bad after all.”

Lomborg added that Trump withdrawing from the UN treaty “will will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end” because even if you accept the climate claims of the UN, the agreement “will matter very little to temperature rise.”

University of Pennsylvania Geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack  has also noted: “None of the strategies that have been offered by the U.S. government or by the EPA or by anybody else has the remotest chance of altering climate if in fact climate is controlled by carbon dioxide.”

Climate Depot Note: “In layman’s terms: All of the so-called ‘solutions’ to global warming are purely symbolic when it comes to climate. So, even if we actually faced a climate catastrophe and we had to rely on a UN climate agreement, we would all be doomed!”

Francis has faced considerable criticism for his climate activism from both inside the Vatican and out.

See: No Consensus inside the Vatican: Skeptical Vatican Cardinal takes a swing at Pope’s climate encyclical: The Catholic Church has ‘no particular expertise in science’ – The Vatican’s financial chief, Cardinal George Pell,

Flashback: Fox’s Andrew Napolitano: Pope Francis is ‘somewhere between a communist with a lowercase ‘c’ and a Marxist with an uppercase ‘M’

Climate Statistician Dr. Matt Briggs was blunt in his criticism of the Pope’s climate claims. “The Pope Is Wrong About Global Warming,” Briggs declared.

“The Pope declared it would by ‘sad, and I dare say even catastrophic,’ were particular interests to prevail over the common good at the upcoming climate conference in Paris.” It would be sadder if we signed over to politicians even more control than they already have to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. That would really hurt The Poor™. So why does the Pope believe all these demonstrably false things? Bad advice, in part,” Briggs wrote in 2015.

Related Links: 

Special Report: ‘Unholy Alliance’ – Exposing The Radicals Advising Pope Francis on Climate

Flashback: The Climate Skeptic’s Guide To Pope Francis’: Talking Points About The Pope & Global Warming

Pope is a ‘climate lobbyist’ – Listen Now: Morano: ‘Pope is serving as chief religious lobbyist for man-made global warming & UN’

Listen Now – Full 10 minute interview: Morano on the Pope on SRN News radio (9-23-15): ‘This is all about ideology and central planning and the Pope is now serving as the chief religious lobbyist for man-made global warming and the UN. And this is a very ill-conceived role for any pope to play. It’s hard to say the pope is being used, because he is willingly allowing himself to be used by the media and by the UN as a climate lobbyist.’

Pope turns lobbyist?! Urges prayers for passage of UN climate treaty! Tells faithful ‘to ask God for a positive outcome’ for Paris UN agreement – Pope Francis: ‘We believers cannot fail to ask God for a positive outcome to the present discussions, so that future generations will not have to suffer the effects of our ill-advised delays.’

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano comment: “No matter how nuanced and faithful to Catholic teachings this encyclical attempts to be, this passage where the Pope urges Catholics to ‘ask God for a positive outcome’ to the current UN global warming treaty process, will overpower every other message. The Pope is clearly endorsing a specific UN political climate treaty and essentially declaring he is on a mission from God to support a UN climate treaty. He even conjures up the comical concept of climate ‘tipping points’.” See: Flashback: Earth ‘Serially Doomed’: Climate Depot Factsheet on Inconvenient History of Global Warming ‘Tipping Points’ — Hours, Days, Months, Years, Millennium

Bloomberg Pope poll shows climate lowest of all issues: Only 33% of Americans agree with Pope’s warmism –

Bloomberg Poll: America Loves Pope Francis, But Not His Stance on Climate Change – Bloomberg Poll reveals 56% of U.S. Catholics believe the Pope’s ‘climate change’ push is a ‘bad direction’ for the church. Only 33% think it amounts to a ‘good direction.’

Study: Papal letter, Laudato Si’ fails to inspire Catholics on ‘climate change’ – “While Pope Francis’ environmental call may have increased some individuals’ concerns about climate change, it backfired with conservative Catholics and non-Catholics, who not only resisted the message but defended their pre-existing beliefs by devaluing the pope’s credibility on climate change,” says Nan Li, lead author of the study.

pope-francis-laudato-si

Podesta Emails: ‘Pope Is the Real Deal’ on Climate
THE POPE’S BOSS?! Wikileaks reveals Pope and Soros Forged An Unholy Alliance On ‘Global  – ‘In 2015, the Soros operatives, embedded in the Vatican, directed Pope Francis’ Environmental Agenda, by delivering for Soros and the UN, an Apostolic Exhortation on Climate Change, and a prized papal endorsement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the Pope’s apostolic blessing on the Paris Climate Treaty. Soros won the environmental trifecta sealed and delivered by Pope Francis.’

SOROS

Pope Maker: The Soros Syndicate Partners With Vatican to Promote UN Climate Agenda

Pope Maker: The Soros Syndicate Partners With Vatican to Promote UN Climate Agenda – On March 13, 2013, Soros and his UN operatives understood that the climate instantly warmed and opportunities abounded with the new leftist Argentine pontiff. George Soros could not have imagined a more perfect partner on the world stage, one he has been searching for his entire career: a major religious leader pontificating as the moral authority for the environmental, borderless countries, mass migration, and pro-Islamic movements.

Climate Statistician Dr. Matt Briggs: ‘The Pope Is Wrong About Global Warming’ – The Pope declared it would by “‘sad, and I dare say even catastrophic,’ were particular interests to prevail over the common good at the upcoming climate conference in Paris.” It would be sadder if we signed over to politicians even more control than they already have to solve a problem that doesn’t exist. That would really hurt The Poor™. So why does the Pope believe all these demonstrably false things? Bad advice, in part.

Leonardo DiCaprio Meets With Pope Francis On ‘Need for Immediate Action on Climate Change’

Bjorn Lomborg: On climate change, Pope Francis isn’t listening to the world’s poor – Lomborg: ‘Those who claim to speak for the poor and say that climate change is the world’s top priority are simply wrong. The world has clearly said it is the least important of the 16 priorities the UN focuses on. And when those campaigners suggest the poor don’t know what’s best for them because carbon cuts will stop global warming from making all other problems worse, they’re wrong again. The poor are typically much better helped directly rather than via climate aid.’

No Consensus inside the Vatican: Skeptical Vatican Cardinal takes a swing at Pope’s climate encyclical: The Catholic Church has ‘no particular expertise in science’ – The Vatican’s financial chief, Cardinal George Pell, has taken the unusual step of criticizing Pope Francis’ groundbreaking environmental encyclical, arguing the Catholic Church has “no particular expertise in science.” Nearly 18 months after Pell was brought to the Vatican by Pope Francis and given a mandate to reform the city-state’s banking affairs, the Australian cardinal gave an interview to the Financial Times, whacking his boss’ landmark document.  “It’s got many, many interesting elements. There are parts of it which are beautiful,” he said. “But the church has no particular expertise in science … the church has got no mandate from the Lord to pronounce on scientific matters. We believe in the autonomy of science,” Pell told the Financial Times.

Cardinal George Pell on global warming: If it’s science, where’s the evidence?

Kudos! A religious leader who gets it! Flashback 2006: Catholic Cardinal George Pell: ‘In the past, pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in Co2 emissions’

Claim: Pope Francis Part of Amicus Brief Filed in Support of Teen’s Landmark Climate Change Lawsuit

Watch: Video of climate activists at Papal rally in DC reveals they don’t believe in God – ‘I’m more involved with the nature religions’ – ‘The best part, most of those in attendance didn’t even believe in God! And they certainly were not convinced by the Pope’s position on climate to think more critically about other matters faith and Catholic teaching, such as issues like abortion. If the Pope and the Vatican think that by taking a step closer to the left on climate change they would make people more open to serious matters of faith and morality, they are flat out wrong.’

UK Sun newspaper: Pope Francis committing ‘Holy Wrong’ – ‘He has no business banging on about climate change’ – ‘Stick to religion, Your Holiness’

Alabama’s climatologist Dr. John Christy: I would give the Pope some homework on global warming – Regs ‘will actually do nothing to change what the climate is going to do’

‘We have never lived in better times’: Aussie Geologist Dr. Ian Plimer: Heaven and Hell, the Pope condemns the poor to eternal poverty – This book criticises the Encyclical and shows that we have never lived in better times, that cheap fossil fuel energy has and is continuing to bring hundreds of millions of people from peasant poverty to the middle class and that the alleged dangerous global warming is a myth.

‘Only when Third World children can do homework at night using cheap coal-fired electricity can they escape from poverty.’

Pope Francis, Vatican Officials and Climate Skeptics Have a Common Enemy in United Nations Global Warming Agenda

Robert Redford: The Pope is right about climate change – Redford: ‘Flooding, drought, wildfires, and hurricanes – all you have to do is open your eyes to see the damage being done, and it’s going to get worse. We can no longer claim ignorance as an excuse for inaction. The jury is no longer out – climate change is real. It is not just a threat for the future, but happening here and now. And as Pope Francis so eloquently points out, climate change is a moral imperative that transcends politics.’

UN Armed Security Shuts Down Skeptics After Trump Event – SHREDDED UN Climate Treaty at Summit – Full Video of UN Climate Cops Shutting Down Skeptics

Climate Report to UN: Trump right, UN wrong – Skeptics Deliver Consensus Busting ‘State of the Climate Report’ to UN Summit

Trump wins U.S. Presidency! Climate Skeptics Rejoice! Set to dismantle & Defund UN/EPA climate agenda!

Bjorn Lomborg: Trump’s climate plan might not be so bad after all – Clexit ‘will will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end’ – ‘So Trump’s promise to dump Paris will matter very little to temperature rises, and it will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end’

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump speaks during a roundtable meeting with African American business, civic and religious leaders in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S., September 2, 2016.   REUTERS/Carlo Allegri

Media falsely spins Trump’s NYT climate comments

The media spin on President Elect Donald J. Trump’s sit down with the New York Times on November 22, can only be described as dishonest. Trump appears to soften stance on climate change & Donald Trump backflips on climate change  & Trump on climate change in major U-turn

The ‘fake news’ that Trump had somehow moderated or changed his “global warming” views was not supported by the full transcript of the meeting.

Heartland Institute President Joe Bast had this to say about the full transcript of Trump’s meeting: “This is reassuring. The Left wants to drive wedges between Trump and his base by spinning anything he says as “retreating from campaign promises.” But expressing nuance and avoiding confrontation with determined foes who buy ink by the barrel is not retreating.” The Heartland Institute released their skeptical 2015 climate report featuring 4,000 peer-reviewed articles debunking the UN IPCC claims.

Trump’s climate science view that there is “some connectivity” between humans and climate is squarely a skeptical climate view. Trump explained, “There is some, something. It depends on how much.”

Trump’s views are shared by prominent skeptical scientists. University of London professor emeritus Philip Stott has said: “The fundamental point has always been this. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically selected factor (CO2) is as misguided as it gets.” “It’s scientific nonsense,” Stott added. Stott is featured in new skeptical climate change documentary Climate Hustle.

Scientists at the UN climate summit in Marrakech commended Trump’s climate views. See: Skeptical scientists crash UN climate summit, praise Trump for ‘bringing science back again’

Trump also told resident NYT warmist Tom Friedman: ‘A lot of smart people disagree with you’ on climate change. (Note: Friedman has some wacky views: Flashback 2009: NYT’s Tom Friedman lauds China’s eco-policies: ‘One party can just impose politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward’)

Once again, Trump was 100% accurate as very prominent scientists are bailing out of the so-called climate “consensus.”

Renowned Princeton Physicist Freeman Dyson: ‘I’m 100% Democrat and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on climate issue, and the Republicans took the right side’

Nobel Prize-Winning Scientist Dr. Ivar Giaever, Who Endorsed Obama Now Says Prez. is ‘Ridiculous’ & ‘Dead Wrong’ on ‘Global Warming’

Green Guru James Lovelock reverses belief in ‘global warming’: Now says ‘I’m not sure the whole thing isn’t crazy’ – Condemns green movement: ‘It’s a religion really, It’s totally unscientific’

Politically Left Scientist Dissents – Calls President Obama ‘delusional’ on global warming

Trump correctly cited the  Climategate scandal: “They say they have science on one side but then they also have those horrible emails that were sent between scientists…Terrible. Where they got caught, you know, so you see that and you say, what’s this all about.” See: Watch & Read: 7th anniversary of Climategate – The UN Top Scientists Exposed

Trump cited his uncle, a skeptical MIT scientist: “My uncle was for 35 years a professor at M.I.T. He was a great engineer, scientist. He was a great guy. And he was … a long time ago, he had feelings — this was a long time ago — he had feelings on this subject.” (Yes, other MIT scientists are very skeptical as well. See: MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen Mocks 97% Consensus: ‘It is propaganda’

It is also worth noting that Trump’s often cited 2012 tweet about climate change stating “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive,” was clearly a joke and he has said it was a joke. It is further worth noting that climate skeptics do not believe the conecpt of “climate change” was “created” by China.

The media have created a cartoon-version view of Trump’s climate views.  If he says anything short of global warming is a hoax created by the Chinese, then the media claims Trump flip-flopped.

Trump countered: ‘We’ve had storms always, Arthur.’

Trump is accurately citing the latest climate science by noting that extreme weather is not getting worse. See: 2016 ‘State of the Climate Report’

  • The U.S. has had no Category 3 or larger hurricane make landfall since 2005 – the longest spell since the Civil War.
  • Strong F3 or larger tornadoes have been in decline since the 1970s.
  • Sea level rise rates have been steady for over a century, with recent deceleration.
  • Droughts and floods are neither historically unusual nor caused by mankind, and there is no evidence we are currently having any unusual weather.

Trump’s claim to have an “open mind” on U.S. climate policy and his comment that “I’m going to take a look at” withdrawing from the UN Paris agreement are more nuanced than his previous blunt statements that the U.S. will cancel the UN agreement. But those comments in the context of the interview are hardly a flip-flop or major signal of changing views on the issue.

(Climate Depot Note: UN Paris climate deal ‘is likely to be history’s most expensive treaty’ – ‘Cost of between $1 trillion and $2 trillion annually’

http://www.thegwpf.com/donald-trump-on-climategate-the-paris-agrement/

Donald Trump’s New York Times Interview

President-elect Donald J. Trump during a meeting at The New York Times’s offices in Manhattan on Tuesday.

[….] THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN, opinion columnist: Mr. President-elect, can I ask a question? One of the issues that you actually were very careful not to speak about during the campaign, and haven’t spoken about yet, is one very near and dear to my heart, the whole issue of climate change, the Paris agreement, how you’ll approach it. You own some of the most beautiful links golf courses in the world …

[laughter, cross talk]

TRUMP: [laughing] I read your article. Some will be even better because actually like Doral is a little bit off … so it’ll be perfect. [inaudible] He doesn’t say that. He just says that the ones that are near the water will be gone, but Doral will be in great shape. (Note: Trump’s Seawall Is About His Business, Not Global Warming – ‘Only shows Trump uses climate alarmism to benefit his business’)

[laughter]

FRIEDMAN: But it’s really important to me, and I think to a lot of our readers, to know where you’re going to go with this. I don’t think anyone objects to, you know, doing all forms of energy. But are you going to take America out of the world’s lead of confronting climate change?

TRUMP: I’m looking at it very closely, Tom. I’ll tell you what. I have an open mind to it. We’re going to look very carefully. It’s one issue that’s interesting because there are few things where there’s more division than climate change. You don’t tend to hear this, but there are people on the other side of that issue who are, think, don’t even …

SULZBERGER: We do hear it.

FRIEDMAN: I was on ‘Squawk Box’ with Joe Kernen this morning, so I got an earful of it.

[laughter]

TRUMP: Joe is one of them. But a lot of smart people disagree with you. I have a very open mind. And I’m going to study a lot of the things that happened on it and we’re going to look at it very carefully. But I have an open mind.

SULZBERGER: Well, since we’re living on an island, sir, I want to thank you for having an open mind. We saw what these storms are now doing, right? We’ve seen it personally. Straight up.

FRIEDMAN: But you have an open mind on this?

TRUMP: I do have an open mind. And we’ve had storms always, Arthur.

SULZBERGER: Not like this (sic!).

TRUMP: You know the hottest day ever was in 1890-something, 98. You know, you can make lots of cases for different views. I have a totally open mind. (Note: EPA Says That The Worst Heat Waves Occurred in The 1930s)

My uncle was for 35 years a professor at M.I.T. He was a great engineer, scientist. He was a great guy. And he was … a long time ago, he had feelings — this was a long time ago — he had feelings on this subject. It’s a very complex subject. I’m not sure anybody is ever going to really know. I know we have, they say they have science on one side but then they also have those horrible emails that were sent between the scientists. Where was that, in Geneva or wherever five years ago? Terrible. Where they got caught, you know, so you see that and you say, what’s this all about. I absolutely have an open mind. I will tell you this: Clean air is vitally important. Clean water, crystal clean water is vitally important. Safety is vitally important.

And you know, you mentioned a lot of the courses. I have some great, great, very successful golf courses. I’ve received so many environmental awards for the way I’ve done, you know. I’ve done a tremendous amount of work where I’ve received tremendous numbers. Sometimes I’ll say I’m actually an environmentalist and people will smile in some cases and other people that know me understand that’s true. Open mind.

JAMES BENNET, editorial page editor: When you say an open mind, you mean you’re just not sure whether human activity causes climate change? Do you think human activity is or isn’t connected?

TRUMP: I think right now … well, I think there is some connectivity. There is some, something. It depends on how much. It also depends on how much it’s going to cost our companies. You have to understand, our companies are noncompetitive right now.

They’re really largely noncompetitive. About four weeks ago, I started adding a certain little sentence into a lot of my speeches, that we’ve lost 70,000 factories since W. Bush. 70,000. When I first looked at the number, I said: ‘That must be a typo. It can’t be 70, you can’t have 70,000, you wouldn’t think you have 70,000 factories here.’ And it wasn’t a typo, it’s right. We’ve lost 70,000 factories.

We’re not a competitive nation with other nations anymore. We have to make ourselves competitive. We’re not competitive for a lot of reasons.

That’s becoming more and more of the reason. Because a lot of these countries that we do business with, they make deals with our president, or whoever, and then they don’t adhere to the deals, you know that. And it’s much less expensive for their companies to produce products. So I’m going to be studying that very hard, and I think I have a very big voice in it. And I think my voice is listened to, especially by people that don’t believe in it. And we’ll let you know.

FRIEDMAN: I’d hate to see Royal Aberdeen underwater.

TRUMP: The North Sea, that could be, that’s a good one, right?

[…]

MICHAEL D. SHEAR, White House correspondent: Mr. Trump, Mike Shear. I cover the White House, covering your administration …

TRUMP: See ya there.

[laughter]

SHEAR: Just one quick clarification on the climate change, do you intend to, as you said, pull out of the Paris Climate

TRUMP: I’m going to take a look at it.

Full interview

Related Links: 

UN Armed Security Shuts Down Skeptics After Trump Event – SHREDDED UN Climate Treaty at Summit – Full Video of UN Climate Cops Shutting Down Skeptics

Climate Report to UN: Trump right, UN wrong – Skeptics Deliver Consensus Busting ‘State of the Climate Report’ to UN Summit

Trump wins U.S. Presidency! Climate Skeptics Rejoice! Set to dismantle & Defund UN/EPA climate agenda!

Bjorn Lomborg: Trump’s climate plan might not be so bad after all – Clexit ‘will will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end’ – ‘So Trump’s promise to dump Paris will matter very little to temperature rises, and it will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end’

 ‘The Trump Taboo’ at UN climate summit: He is ‘omnipresent…even though nobody is saying his name’ – ‘There is a taboo word at this year’s 22nd UN climate change summit: Trump. The president-elect is omnipresent in Marrakesh. You can feel him lurking behind talks on low-carbon economies and in the cracks between climate-induced loss and damage. He’s never directly addressed, but he’s always in the room. You can tell from the anxiety in people’s voices and their disapproving headshakes, heavy with concern for what the future for action on climate change holds.’

Trump casts HUGE shadow over UN climate summit

RELATED VIDEO: Energy Summit 2016

trump-change

Trump Transition Recommendations on Energy, the Environment and Education

My apologies, as I try to avoid bothering people over the weekend — however this is extremely important.

FYI I have some connections to the Trump transition team, and (as you can tell from news stories), things are moving along quite quickly.

I’ve made up a list of some major issues that need addressing, in the 3-E areas where I’m primarily focusing my efforts: Energy, Environment and Education.

Some of What Needs to Be Fixed in Three E’s

Energy

  1. Change national energy slogan to: “All of the Sensible”
  2. Terminate special renewable subsidies (e.g. PTC and ITC)
  3. Change grid rules that give wind and solar favorable treatment
  4. Cancel the “Clean Power Plan”
  5. Eliminate (or fundamentally change) NREL
  6. Constrain FERC’s unscientific bias towards renewables
  7. Fix the NDAA so that military has better protections from turbines
  8. Allow US nuclear plants to use reprocessed fuel
  9. Fast-track Thorium (LFTR) reactors as an energy source
  10. Fast-track Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) as an energy source
  11. Approve Yucca Mt as an acceptable repository for used nuclear fuel
  12. End all ethanol subsidies and favoritism
  13. Seriously investigate Deep-Drilled Geothermal as an energy source

Environment

  1. Appoint a balanced Science Committee to hash out the AGW issue
  2. Challenge and reverse Supreme Court Massachusetts vs EPA case
  3. Make EPA’s basis for Endangerment Findings genuinely scientific
  4. Send the Paris Agreement to the Senate for ratification
  5. Eliminate the Sea Level Rise (SLR) provision in Biggert-Waters-12

Education

  1. Substantially revise Common Core (with focus on real Science)
  2. Pass a reasonable School Choice measure
  3. Do a much better job with Vocational Education
  4. Reduce federal funding to any college that politicizes Science

Across the Board on the 3 E’s

  1. All three of these federal agencies should be redefined and reduced
  2. Review all recent Executive Orders/Memoranda. Change as needed.
  3. Require that all technical policies be genuinely Science based
  4. Weaken the influence of lobbyists on legislators
  5. Reduce the reliance on computer models

Please review my draft version of this list and let me know:

  • Any suggested improvements/additions to the list, and
  • Any recommended people you have to head the DOE, EPA, or Dept of Ed.

I’ll update the list as new key items are forwarded, so periodically check it.

PS: As one of my teachers was fond of saying “I’m just a little clog in a big wheel” so what will result from all this is anyone’s guess. However, from what I’ve heard so far, I’m cautiously optimistic. I also believe that when faced with a problem, doing something is better than doing nothing.

PPS: As always, please pass this on to open-minded citizens, and on your social media sites. If there are others who you think would benefit from being on our energy & environmental email list, please let me know. If at any time you’d like to be taken off the list, simply send me an email saying that.

climate-depot-report

Trump right, UN wrong – Skeptics Deliver Consensus Busting ‘State of the Climate Report’

Climate Depot’s 43 Page Report Presented To UN Climate Summit in Marraketch, Morocco – Trump is correct to be skeptical of ‘climate change’ claims

‘All of the so-called ‘solutions’ to global warming are purely symbolic when it comes to climate. So, even if we actually faced a climate catastrophe and we had to rely on a UN climate agreement, we would all be doomed!’

University of London professor emeritus Philip Stott: “The fundamental point has always been this. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically selected factor (CO2) is as misguided as it gets.” “It’s scientific nonsense,” Stott added.Very prominent scientists are bailing out of the so-called “consensus.”

Renowned Princeton Physicist Freeman Dyson: ‘I’m 100% Democrat and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on climate issue, and the Republicans took the right side’

Nobel Prize-Winning Scientist Dr. Ivar Giaever, Who Endorsed Obama Now Says Prez. is ‘Ridiculous’ & ‘Dead Wrong’ on ‘Global Warming’

Green Guru James Lovelock reverses belief in ‘global warming’: Now says ‘I’m not sure the whole thing isn’t crazy’ – Condemns green movement: ‘It’s a religion really, It’s totally unscientific’

Meanwhile, climate skeptics descend on UN climate summit in Morocco: Skeptics in Morocco on Trump: ‘Expect both international & domestic climate agenda to be reversed. It’s about time!’

By:  – Climate Depot – November 15, 2016 9:56 AM

Full 43 Page PDF Report: https://www.cfact.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/2016-State-of-the-Climate-Report.pdf

Presented to the UN Climate Summit in Marraketch, Morocco – November 2016
Key climate data highlights:

  • Global temperatures have been virtually flat for about 18 years, according to satellite data, and peer-reviewed literature is now scaling back predictions of future warming
  • The U.S. has had no Category 3 or larger hurricane make landfall since 2005 – the longest spell since the Civil War.
  • Strong F3 or larger tornadoes have been in decline since the 1970s.
  • Despite claims of snow being ‘a thing of the past,’ cold season snowfall has been rising.
  • Sea level rise rates have been steady for over a century, with recent deceleration.
  • Droughts and floods are neither historically unusual nor caused by mankind, and there is no evidence we are currently having any unusual weather.
  • So-called hottest year claims are based on year-to-year temperature data that differs by only a few HUNDREDTHS of a degree to tenths of a degree Fahrenheit – differences that are within the margin of error in the data. In other words, global temperatures have essentially held very steady with no sign of acceleration.
  • A 2015 NASA study found Antarctica was NOT losing ice mass and ‘not currently contributing to sea level rise.’
  • In 2016, Arctic sea ice was 22% greater than at the recent low point of 2012. The Arctic sea ice is now in a 10-year ‘pause’ with ‘no significant change in the past decade.
  • Polar bears are doing fine, with their numbers way up since the 1960s.

Introduction:

CO2 is not the tail that wags the dog. CO2 is a trace essential gas, but without it life on earth would be impossible. Carbon dioxide fertilizes algae, trees, and crops to provide food for humans and animals. We inhale oxygen and exhale CO2. Slightly higher atmospheric CO2 levels cannot possibly supplant the numerous complex and inter-connected forces that have always determined Earth’s climate. As University of London professor emeritus Philip Stott has noted: “The fundamental point has always been this. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically selected factor (CO2), is as misguided as it gets.” “It’s scientific nonsense,” Stott added. Even the global warming activists at RealClimate.org acknowledged this in a September 20, 2008 article, stating, “The actual temperature rise is an emergent property resulting from interactions among hundreds of factors.”

The UN Paris climate change agreement claims to able to essentially save the planet from ‘global warming’. But even if you accept the UN’s and Al Gore’s version of climate change claims, the UN Paris agreement would not ‘save’ the planet.

University of Pennsylvania Geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack noted in 2014, “None of the strategies that have been offered by the U.S. government or by the EPA or by anybody else has the remotest chance of altering climate if in fact climate is controlled by carbon dioxide.”

In layman’s terms: All of the so-called ‘solutions’ to global warming are purely symbolic when it comes to climate. So, even if we actually faced a climate catastrophe and we had to rely on a UN climate agreement, we would all be doomed!

The United Nations has publicly stated its goal is not to ‘solve’ climate change, but to seek to redistribute wealth and expand its authority through more central planning. UN official Ottmar Edenhofer, co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III, admitted what’s behind the climate issue: “One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy … One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.”

EU climate commissioner Connie Hedegaard revealed: Global Warming Policy Is Right Even If Science Is Wrong. Hedegaard said in 2013, “Let’s say that science, some decades from now, said ‘we were wrong, it was not about climate,’ would it not in any case have been good to do many of things you have to do in order to combat climate change?”

The UN is seeking central planning. UN climate chief Christiana Figueres declared in 2012 that she is seeking a “centralized transformation” that is “going to make the life of everyone on the planet very different.” She added: “This is a centralized transformation that is taking place because governments have decided that they need to listen to science.”

The UN and EPA regulations are pure climate symbolism in exchange for a more centrally planned energy economy. The UN and EPA regulations are simply a vehicle to put politicians and bureaucrats in charge of our energy economy and ‘save’ us from bad weather and ‘climate change.’

Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer in 2016: “Global warming and climate change, even if it is 100% caused by humans, is so slow that it cannot be observed by anyone in their lifetime. Hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, droughts and other natural disasters have yet to show any obvious long-term change. This means that in order for politicians to advance policy goals (such as forcing expensive solar energy on the masses or creating a carbon tax), they have to turn normal weather disasters into “evidence” of climate change.”

While the climate fails to behave like the UN and climate activists predict, very prominent scientists are bailing out of the so-called “consensus.”

Renowned Princeton Physicist Freeman Dyson: ‘I’m 100% Democrat and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on climate issue, and the Republicans took the right side’ – An Obama supporter who describes himself as “100 per cent Democrat,” Dyson is disappointed that the President “chose the wrong side.” Increasing CO2 in the atmosphere does more good than harm, he argues, and humanity doesn’t face an existential crisis. ‘What has happened in the past 10 years is that the discrepancies between what’s observed and what’s predicted have become much stronger.’

Image result for ivar giaever

Nobel Prize-Winning Scientist Dr. Ivar Giaever, Who Endorsed Obama Now Says Prez. is ‘Ridiculous’ & ‘Dead Wrong’ on ‘Global Warming’ – Nobel Prize Winning Physicist Dr. Ivar Giaever: ‘Global warming is a non-problem’ – ‘I say this to Obama: Excuse me, Mr. President, but you’re wrong. Dead wrong.’

‘Global warming really has become a new religion.’ – “I am worried very much about the [UN] conference in Paris in 2015…I think that the people who are alarmist are in a very strong position.’

Lovelock in 1991 with the book that made his name

Green Guru James Lovelock reverses belief in ‘global warming’: Now says ‘I’m not sure the whole thing isn’t crazy’ – Condemns green movement: ‘It’s a religion really, It’s totally unscientific’ – Lovelock rips scientists attempting to predict temperatures as ‘idiots’: “Anyone who tries to predict more than five to 10 years is a bit of an idiot, because so many things can change unexpectedly.” – Lovelock Featured in Climate Hustle – Watch Lovelock transform from climate fear promoter to climate doubter!

While these scientists take another look at the climate data, efforts to transform economies away from fossil fuels underway but even proponents admit they are purely symbolic.

EPA Chief Admits Obama Regs Have No Measurable Climate Impact: ‘One one-hundredth of a degree?’ EPA Chief McCarthy defends regs as ‘enormously beneficial’ – Symbolic impact

Former Obama Energy Chief slams EPA climate regs: ‘Falsely sold as impactful’ – ‘All U.S. annual emissions will be offset by 3 weeks of Chinese emissions’ Former Obama Department of Energy Assistant Secretary Charles McConnell: ‘The Clean Power Plan has been falsely sold as impactful environmental regulation when it is really an attempt by our primary federal environmental regulator to take over state and federal regulation of energy.’ – ‘What is also clear, scientifically and technically, is that EPA’s plan will not significantly impact global emissions.’ – ‘All of the U.S. annual emissions in 2025 will be offset by three weeks of Chinese emissions. Three weeks.’

And energy use has not really changed all that much in over 100 years.

Reality check: In 1908, fossil fuels accounted for 85% of U.S. energy consumption. In 2015, more or less the same

Click here for Full Report ‘2016 State of the Climate Report’

clipular-1

Table of Contents:

Introduction:
Global Temperature:
Sea Level:
Polar Bears:
Arctic:
Antarctica:
Greenland:
Agriculture:
Extreme Weather:
Floods:
Heavy Rains;
Tornadoes:
Droughts:
Hurricanes:
Climate Predictions:
Global warming causes war?
Predict Both Outcomes & They Can Be Always Correct!
Tipping Points/Last Chance
What Exxon Knew
97% Consensus?

Click here for Full Report ‘2016 State of the Climate Report’

champaign-glasses

Trump wins U.S. Presidency! Climate Skeptics Rejoice!

Climate Depot’s statement on President Elect Donald J. Trump: 

“Climate sanity has been restored to the U.S. No longer do we have to hear otherwise intelligent people in charge in DC blather on about how UN treaties or EPA regulations will control the Earth’s temperature or storminess.

The election of Trump tonight was one of pure enjoyment for those concerned about silly, sovereignty threatening and purely symbolic climate policies that have been imposed on the U.S. without a single vote. Skeptics also enjoyed watching the grieving faces of the mainstream media on CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, as the Trump election night shock sunk in.

“What they (the Democrats & warmists) are so afraid of is this: Trump is the first Republican Presidential nominee that has ever staked out a strongly science supported skeptical position not only on climate science claims, but also on the so-called ‘solutions’. (See: CLIMATE TRUTH FILE: 2016: Skeptical Talking Points from A-Z on Global Warming – Point-By-Point)

Trump is right on climate science and Trump rightly scares the hell out of the warmists.

Climate skeptics are ready to get down to the serious business of working with a Trump Administration to begin overhauling the U.S. climate and energy policy and battling the climate activists and their ill-gotten agenda achieved through bypassing democracy.

The time for a Clexit has arrived, a U.S. exit from the UN Paris climate agreement.

Trump can now move forward with his scientifically sound and coherent climate and energy policy that he laid out during the campaign.

Skeptics look forward to the following Trump climate agenda:

Donald Trump said on May 26, 2016

1) Trump pledges to rip up Paris climate agreement in energy speech

2) Trump railed against “draconian climate rules”

3) Trump said he would “cancel” the Paris climate agreement –

4) and withdraw any funding for United Nations programs related to global warming.

End Morano statement

Background Info on Trump’s plans:

Breitbart’s James Delingpole analysis:

“To get an idea of the horrors to come for the greenies, look at how they reacted to the prospect of his new Environmental Protection Agency Dismantler-in-Chief Myron Ebell. Ebell is an old friend of mine who works on climate and energy issues at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The fact that he’s an old friend of mine probably tells you all you need to know about where he stands on global warming.

Here’s how Newsweek views him:

Ebell is sometimes described as climate denier-in-chief, and he revels in it, crowing in his biography that he’s been called one of the leading “misleaders” on climate change and “villain of the month” by one environmental group. David Goldston, a policy analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund, says Ebell “doesn’t believe in climate change and wants to reverse the advances we’ve had in environmental protection and decimate—if not utterly destroy—the Environmental Protection Agency.” The Competitive Enterprise Institute, Ebell’s employer, “has done everything it can politically and through litigation to block any forward movement on climate and to try to harass anybody who is trying to get forward movement,” Goldston says.
Ebell is also the chairman of the Cooler Heads Coalition, more than two dozen nonprofit groups “that question global warming alarmism and oppose energy rationing policies,” according to the coalition’s website. Those positions line up nicely with Trump’s goals, which include “saving” the coal industry, reviving the Keystone XL oil pipeline and expanding offshore oil drilling.
Ebell has attacked nearly every aspect of Obama’s environmental policies and accomplishments. He has said that the president’s decision in September to sign the Paris climate accord—which commits nations to sharp reductions in the greenhouse gas emissions responsible for climate change—was “clearly an unconstitutional usurpation of the Senate’s authority” because treaties need approval by two-thirds of the Senate. (The White House argued that it was an agreement, not a treaty.) In a speech in August at the Detroit Economic Club, Trump said he would cancel the agreement and stop all payments of U.S. tax dollars to U.N. climate change programs.

Yup, greenies. That climate change gravy train you’ve been riding these last four decades looks like it’s headed for a major, Atlas-Shrugged-style tunnel incident…

Wash Times features Morano: The ‘time has come for a U.S. led ‘Clexit’ from UN the climate treaty’ – Marc Morano, who runs the skeptics’ website Climate Depot, said Tuesday that the cold feet on global warming shows that some countries are realizing the international climate agreement is “not in their best interests.” “More and more nations are realizing that the U.N. climate treaty is nothing more than an effort to empower the U.N. and attack national sovereignty while doing absolutely nothing for the climate,” said Mr. Morano, who debuted his film “Climate Hustle” during the negotiations in Paris. He said that the “time has come for a U.S. led ‘Clexit’ from UN the climate treaty.”

Climate Skeptics Rejoice! Trump echoes Climate Depot’s call to dismantle & Defund UN/EPA climate agenda!

Flashback January 2016 – Marc Morano wrote: “The GOP nominee for president in 2016 must present a basic plan to roll back Obama’s climate regulations. Here is a simple breakdown of what is needed:

Morano wrote in Jan. 2016: 1) Repeal all EPA climate regulations; 2) Withdraw the U.S. from any Paris agreement (nonbinding) ‘commitments’; 3) Withdraw the U.S. from the UN climate treaty process entirely; 4) The U.S. should defund the UN IPCC climate panel;

Donald Trump said on May 26, 2016: 1) Trump pledges to rip up Paris climate agreement in energy speech – 2) Trump railed against “draconian climate rules” – 3) and said he would “cancel” the Paris climate agreement -4) and withdraw any funding for United Nations programs related to global warming.

Via MSNBC – May 26, 2016:

Trump railed against the “totalitarian tactics” of the Environmental Protection Agency. He pledged to dismantle the EPA entirely in an April town hall, although he referred to it at the time as the “Department of Environmental” and “DEP.” He assailed Hillary Clinton for saying in March that fracking projects would be unlikely to pass muster under her environmental regime.

“Hillary’s agenda is job destruction. My agenda is job creation,” Trump said.

He railed against “draconian climate rules” and said he would “cancel” the Paris climate agreement and withdraw any funding for United Nations programs related to global warming. Trump has repeatedly called climate change a “hoax” in the past…”

Flashback January 14, 2016 – Climate Depot’s Marc Morano on dismantling UN/EPA climate agenda:

Morano: “President Obama laid out his final vision in the State of the Union address. Republicans need to get their act together quickly in order to prevent Obama’s climate legacy from being cemented.

Morano: “The GOP nominee for president in 2016 must present a basic plan to roll back Obama’s climate regulations. Here is a simple breakdown of what is needed:

1) Repeal all EPA climate regulations;

2) Withdraw the U.S. from any Paris agreement (nonbinding) ‘commitments’;

3) Withdraw the U.S. from the UN climate treaty process entirely;

4) The U.S. should defund the UN IPCC climate panel;

‘Yes! We Should Defund The UN IPCC': ‘It seems along with 17 years of flat global temps there is some evidence that we are witnessing some cooling on global warming hype & hysteria in DC as well’

5) Start praising carbon based energy as one of the greatest liberators of mankind and the best hope for the developing world’s poor.

Anything short of this clear and comprehensive approach will lead to failure and guarantee Obama’s climate policies will become permanent in the U.S. The Republicans need to get a coherent plan and articulate their course of action.

End Morano excerpt. 

Cheers! WaPo Editorial Board: ‘A President Trump could wreck progress on global warming’

wikimedia_commons_animusriver_spill_1600px

Will EPA Hold Itself to a ‘Higher Standard’ Over Gold King Mine Spill?

KEY TAKEAWAYS:

After causing three million gallons of toxic waste to spill into a Colorado river, we’re still waiting for EPA to hold itself to a “higher standard.”

In August 2015, EPA workers caused mine waste to burst from Colorado’s Gold King Mine into the Animus River, turning it a sickly yellow and polluting water supplies in three states.

After EPA’s Office of Inspector General sent the Justice Department what it thought was evidence of criminal wrongdoing, federal prosecutors chose not to prosecute, leaving any possible punishments against government employees to EPA, the Denver Post reports:

The U.S. Attorney in Denver will not prosecute an Environmental Protection Agency employee involved in the Gold King Mine disaster, leaving it to the agency to determine administrative action against the employee.

A decision made Oct. 6 was based on information submitted by the EPA’s Office of Inspector General to federal prosecutors after a year-long internal probe.

Instead of a criminal prosecution, the EPA’s internal investigators “will submit a report of an investigation to the agency that details the findings of our investigation,” OIG spokesman Jeff Lagda said in response to queries.

“The agency, not the OIG, will then determine what administrative action they may take against the employee based on that report,” Lagda said. “The EPA will have to report to the OIG what administrative action the EPA will undertake.”

Soon after the spill last year, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy vowed, “We are holding ourselves to a higher standard than we would hold other responsible parties.” But earlier this year, McCarthy talked down the damage done by her agency. State officials were not pleased.

There have been plenty of investigations. None made EPA look good.

An EPA internal investigation found that the spill was “likely inevitable” because workers onsite didn’t take water pressure readings from inside the abandoned mine.

Why? Because EPA felt it “would have been quite costly and require much more planning and multiple field seasons to accomplish.”

Internal EPA investigators also noted that the agency didn’t plan for the possibility of a spill that could threaten a river popular with tourists and a necessity for farmers and local residents.

The Interior Department’s investigation was just as tough. It chastised EPA for having “little appreciation for the engineering complexity” and for having “a general absence of knowledge of the risks associated with these [abandoned mining] facilities.”

Then there was the OIG investigation that referred its findings to federal prosecutors. The Hill reports, “OIG found that the unnamed employee may have broken federal water pollution law and may have made false statements to law enforcement officials regarding the Gold King Mine spill.”

What if a private party and not EPA were responsible? EPA would throw the book at them, as they do all the time:

  • Earlier this year, America’s oldest brewery, Yuengling, agreed to a $2.8 million settlement and $7 million in improvement costs over Clean Water Act violations.
  • To protect his land from being washed away from future flooding, an Oregon farmer faces $100 million in fines for building a retaining wall near a river without an EPA permit after consulting with the Army Corps of Engineers.

And anyone lying to the agency would be in serious trouble.

It should be noted that EPA has paid out more than $5 million to state and local governments to reimburse them for emergency response expenses. But is that the “higher standard” Administrator McCarthy promised?

Anyone public or private should be held accountable for violating federal rules and environmental damage they cause.

EPA “will not hesitate” to vigorously hold private parties accountable for breaking environmental laws, but will it do the same to itself? It’s been over a year since the spill, and we’re still waiting.

This is something to think about if EPA’s Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) rule survives its court challenge (hopefully not), and the agency is allowed to enlarge its authority over land use by claiming jurisdiction over waters, including ditches, canals, ponds, and wetlands, as far as 4,000 feet from a navigable water.

MORE ARTICLES ON: ENVIRONMENT, REGULATORY REFORM

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of the Animas River. Photo credit: Riverhugger. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

KIDS

Make Babies, and Don’t Let the Greens Guilt Trip You about It by Steven Horowitz

Several years back, the economist Bryan Caplan wrote a wonderful book called Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids. Caplan argued that most parents underestimated the benefits of larger families and were engaging in costly parenting strategies that yielded few real benefits. Thus, he said, if you love kids, you should have lots of them.

From NPR this week comes a story that might well be called “anti-Caplan” in every dimension. It is a profile of bioethicist Travis Rieder and others like him who argue that it is immoral to have many children, if any at all, because of the burden that additional children place on the Earth’s ecosystem. Given that we are already, Rieder claims, on the road to climate disaster, adding more children will both make matters worse and condemn those children to a horrible life on a worsening planet. His argument might well be called “Altruistic Reasons to Have Fewer Kids.”

More specifically, he argues that children are what economists call negative externalities: “We as parents, we as family members, we get the good. And the world, the community, pays the cost.” As it turns out, that claim is almost entirely wrong. It is parents who pay most of the costs of having children and the rest of us who reap the benefits.

I am not going to contest some of the claims about climate change Rieder and others in the article invoke. He does tend to take the most extreme predictions of climate models as gospel truth when the recent data have suggested that reality is closer to the much more modest predictions. However, even if the worst case scenarios are true, Rieder misses a number of important points about population growth that need to be considered.

Human Beings are Producers

He, like so many environmentalists, sees human beings only as consumers of resources. So one core statistic he trots out is that the amount of CO2 saved by not having a child is roughly 20 times what we can save through traditional things like driving hybrids and recycling. Therefore, he and the other people discussed in the story conclude, if we really want to “save the planet,” we should have fewer, if any, children.

But this is single-entry economic and moral bookkeeping. This view ignores the idea that humans are also producers. As Julian Simon reminded us so often, more people not only means more hands to work and more minds to create, it means more different people with different ideas. Increases in population not only deepen the division of labor and productivity by their sheer numbers, they also take advantage of the fact that each of us is unique which leads to new ideas and innovation.

Human progress depends upon the increasing productivity that comes from a finer division of labor and new ways of doing things. And those are the result of more people.

It’s not, as a student in the article suggests, that one of those kids that isn’t born might have come up with a “solution for climate change,” but that each and every one of those kids that isn’t born would have contributed to greater economic growth, which is nothing more than the more effective and efficient use of the resources we have.

Such growth is what has made it possible for the Earth to sustain 7 billion lives of increasing length, comfort, and quality. Reducing the population might mean we use up more resources by losing the efficiencies that come from a larger population’s greater ability to innovate and productively specialize.

The benefits of having more kids are not primarily to the parents involved, though as Caplan points out there are many. More people means we are better able to beat back omnipresent scarcity and carve out a more inhabitable planet for more people who live longer, better lives.

This is the most fundamental error of so many environmentalists, especially those arguing for reductions in the population: they see humans only as consumers of resources and not the source of the very innovations that enable us to use resources more effectively and the riches that enable us to have a cleaner, healthier planet.

Demographic Transition

The other crucial point Rieder and people like him miss is that the Earth’s population is already in the process of stabilizing. One of the most agreed upon empirical facts of history is the so-called “demographic transition.” As societies become wealthier and more industrialized, the incentives facing parents change and family size falls. Once mom and dad, or perhaps only one of them, can earn enough income to support a family, and there’s no farm or cottage industry that requires the whole family pitching in, the need for many children is much less and parents seek to control their fertility.

The Western world began to go through this transition over a century ago, and the rest of the world has followed in turn. Most of the Western world is dealing with fertility rates that are below replacement, and rates of population growth in all but a handful of countries worldwide have fallen in the last few decades.

Thankfully Rieder does not want to use Chinese-style coercion to limit family size, but he’s not afraid to tax larger families more heavily. Even that isn’t necessary given the reality of the demographic transition:  in a free society, human beings naturally limit their fertility as they get wealthier. Again, the best way to save the planet is not to have fewer kids, but to have as many as you can afford and let their productivity enable us to use resources with more efficiency and create more progress.

Anti-Life, Anti-Human

The radical wing of environmentalism is, as Ayn Rand said decades ago, “anti-life” and “anti-human” in its belief that humans are the scourge of the planet and not the source of its progress. After all, if the important thing is saving the planet by reducing our carbon footprint, why stop by persuading people to not have kids?

Why not persuade currently living people, especially young ones, to reduce their lifetime carbon footprint by killing themselves? The logic is no different.

That they don’t make that argument suggests that “saving the planet” really isn’t the overriding issue here. Like so much else in the Green movement, this seems to be about protecting their own comfortable lives against what they think will happen when everyone else is able to live lives like they have. They got their progress and health and children, but everyone else needs to sacrifice for the sake of the planet. That Rieder does have a child is some evidence of this point.

Not only is Rieder’s argument deeply immoral and reactionary in how wrong it is, it turns out to be far less altruistic than it first seems. Nothing could capture the total failure of radical environmentalist anti-natalism better than calling it “selfish reasons everyone else should have fewer kids.” Let’s hope, for the sake of both actual humans and the planet we live on that these environmentalist arguments are as infertile as their proponents wish humans were.

Steven Horwitz

Steven Horwitz

Steven Horwitz is the Charles A. Dana Professor of Economics at St. Lawrence University and the author of Hayek’s Modern Family: Classical Liberalism and the Evolution of Social Institutions.

He is a member of the FEE Faculty Network.