Reaction To Trump’s Team Proves Climate Alarmists Are The Real Deniers

Reaction To Trump’s Team Proves Climate Alarmists Are The Real Deniers

After the election, there were reports of EPA employees breaking down in tears and Energy Department staffers needing counseling. It’s not because they care about the environment.
Julie Kelly
By

Today is the Day Against Denial, where climate change activists around the country are protesting President-elect Donald Trump’s cabinet picks. Activists will supposedly converge on U.S. Senate offices and demand that their senators “reject Donald Trump’s reckless climate-denying cabinet nominees” particularly secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson, Environmental Protection Agency administrator Scott Pruitt, and Energy secretary pick Rick Perry (if you’re not sure what a denier is, I just wrote about it here for The Hill).

Day Against Denial is being organized by 350.org, an environmental group founded by climate change lunatic Bill McKibben. He thinks we should actually declare war on climate change and fight it the same way we fought the Nazis in World War II: “It’s not that global warming is like a war. It is a war. And we are losing.” McKibben says Trump’s presidency demands fierce resistance and foresees “an onslaught of daily emergencies during the Trump years.”

Cue the Global Meltdown

Climate change alarmists are not just upset about Trump’s victory, they have completely lost their sh–. After the election, there were reports of EPA employees breaking down in tears and Energy Department staffers needing counseling.

Last month at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco, climate celebrity Michael Mann urged about 26,000 scientists to “step forward and make our voices heard, not just for the sake of scientific research but for the sake of the entire planet.” The Union of Concerned Scientists penned a letter to Trump, signed by thousands of scientists, demanding more resources for scientific agencies, without which “the consequences are real….we will be less prepared to limit the impacts of increasing extreme weather and rising seas.” Those are just a few of about two zillion examples.

But the topper came last Friday from meteorologist and climate researcher Eric Holthaus, who unleashed a pathetic 15-tweet rant that sadly represents the current mindset of the climate change cult. Holthaus admitted to seeing a counselor due to his post-election “climate despair” and said he knew many people who felt the same way.

It’s hard to choose which tweet is the most petulant, but this one sticks out: “We don’t deserve this planet. There are (many) days when I think it would be better off without us.” He must’ve felt better after his tirade because he later bragged how many people saw his tweets and told trolls to “eat a bag of d–ks.”

This Is about Loss of Power, Not the Planet

Climate alarmists may actually be less fearful about the fate of the planet and more afraid that climate science will finally get a hard look at the federal level that is way overdue. For eight years, activist-led agencies in the Obama administration have had their way, passing harsh rules and regulations all in the name of climate change.

Agencies like the EPA and NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) have rejected and ignored congressional oversight, particularly inquiries from the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, led by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas). Smith has accused the EPA of being driven by a political agenda rather than sound science; the agency has often refused to cooperate with Congress. That kind of stonewalling will end next week, and it’ll be interesting to see what Trump officials find at these agencies (assuming all data, emails, and research are left intact).

There appear to be some cracks now emerging from the fierce grip the scientific-political class has on climate change. A few brave scientists are finally speaking out about the cult-like environment of climate science where anyone who challenges current dogma will be attacked, vilified, and even have their careers destroyed. Last week, Judith Curry posted a jaw-dropping article about why she’s retiring as a professor of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology (this is a must-read).

The Private Sector Is Safer for Scientists

Curry—who hosts the blog Climate Etc. and has written books, articles, and testified before Congress on climate change—cites her “growing disenchantment with universities, the academic field of climate science and scientists.” She says scientists must go along with the prevailing political groupthink at universities on climate change that is a “battle of scientific integrity versus career suicide.”

The aforementioned jerk Michael Mann applauded Curry’s retirement, saying she played a “pernicious role in the climate change denial campaign, laundering standard denier talking points…and boilerplate climate change denial drivel.” Curry says the private sector is a better place for scientists to work rather than the “politicized field” at universities and in government. This may encourage other scientists to speak out as well.

To climate change activists, the science is settled and there is nothing to discuss. Not only is this not how science is done, it is a political statement rather than a scientific one. And it actually might be the climate changers who are in denial, that there is a real possibility they’ve been dead, flat wrong. This, not Trump, is what scares them the most.

Julie Kelly is a National Review Online contributor and food policy writer from Orland Park, Illinois. She's also been published in the Wall Street Journal, Chicago Tribune, Forbes, and The Hill.

Copyright © 2017 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.

comments powered by Disqus