On the eve of the Climate March, the New York Times ran Stephens’s first column for them, and it sent the climate mob on a virtual stampede with torches ablaze.
Bret Stephens penned a tepid piece that makes the rational suggestion that both sides of the climate-change debate should hear hear each other out. The Left’s reaction? ‘Burn the witch!’
The organizers of the ‘March for Science’ follow the legacy of substituting a political narrative for the distinctive language and methods of science.
Arguments in favor of Tesla’s subsidies would make a whole lot less sense if the tech media had the slightest familiarity with pro-free-market economics.
Even if regulations like those in the Paris Climate Treaty could somehow significantly reduce global warming, they could hurt people and the planet.
The Paris Climate Treaty is a heat-seeking missile aimed solely at American jobs that will do nothing to reduce global warming. Why would we deploy it?
The Los Angeles Times tries to rewrite history by claiming that the Valdez struck Bligh Reef because the Columbia Glacier had been shedding icebergs.
All taxpayers have an investment in climate change. We have the right to give an opinion on the subject—even if we don’t adhere to the prevailing orthodoxy.
It all just goes to show how government regulation can be silent, but deadly.
Texas Rep. Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, has accused the EPA of cooking the scientific books to justify oppressive and costly regulations.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt is absolutely correct about carbon dioxide, and it’s the media who don’t understand the scientific issues.
The whole point of Donald Trump was supposed to be: BUT HE FIGHTS. But we shouldn’t be surprised to see the Trump administration’s bluster melting away.
Bill Nye the Science Guy joined Tucker Carlson on Fox News to talk about global warming, but didn’t answer any basic questions about it.
For the last 30-plus years the Left has claimed the mantle of moral superiority and portrayed conservatives as motivated by bad intentions for the environment. No more.
The scientific community and media outlets that claimed Trump will silence scientists are now attacking one of their own for speaking up.
When I challenged him about the ‘hottest year on record,’ a New York Times reporter explained that his readers are too dumb to understand numbers.
When you read a science report claiming that 2016 was the hottest year on record, you might expect that you will get numbers. And you would be wrong.
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.
While temperatures in the Arctic are relatively high, high temperatures, while not the norm, are also not unusual.
Correctly acknowledging the climate change debate is enough to get EPA nominee Scott Pruitt branded a ‘denialist.’ Why would anyone take such a clownish ideology seriously?
- Here’s What’s Weird About Robert Mueller’s Latest Michael Flynn FilingRobert Mueller’s reply brief revealed several new tidcontinue reading >
- A Federal Judge Finally Exposes The Lies At The Heart Of ObamacareObamacare was sold to the American people under false pcontinue reading >
- Incoming Democrat Chairman Makes Definitive Case Against Impeaching TrumpTwenty years ago, Jerrold Nadler argued in Congress thacontinue reading >