Trump administration report: ‘no convincing alternative explanation’ for climate change

Did you have to read that title twice? I did.

Title of the article edited to fit into the thread.

The Trump administration released a dire scientific report Friday calling human activity the dominant driver of global warming, a conclusion at odds with White House decisions to withdraw from a key international climate accord, champion fossil fuels and reverse Obama-era climate policies.

To the surprise of some scientists, the White House did not seek to prevent the release of the government’s National Climate Assessment, which is mandated by law. The report affirms that climate change is driven almost entirely by human action, warns of potential sea-level rise as high as eight feet by the year 2100, and details climate-related damage across the United States that is already unfolding as a result of 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit of global warming since 1900.

www.washingtonpost.com...

The story has been updated but the core premise, above, remains the same.

It's a surprise the administration would release this given the stance. Who knows, he could just be common decency, and an attempt to be transparent (and that the report would inevitably leak out anyway). I'm more leaning towards the possibility that this has something to do with the Paris Accord. Given the United States is obligated to honor the agreement until 2020, there has yet to be any official withdrawal. This may be the administration's attempt to cover themselves potentially if that happens?

There's also the fact the Trump Administration would be at odds with the vast majority of scientists, groups, organizations, governments and their own findings if they came out with a report stating human action has a minimal to no impact. Their report would be torn to shreds which would end up being an embarrassment.

97% consensus on global warming
www.skepticalscience.com...

Whatever the reason, they are contradicting their own stance now on this matter.

Good strategy to release it.

Now people can rip it apart easier.

To the surprise of some scientists, the White House did not seek to prevent the release of the government’s National Climate Assessment, which is mandated by law.

I'm confused- why would anyone be surprised that the government followed its own laws?


Honestly, this is the first time in a long time I've seen the "administration" do anything that wasn't contradictory to common sense. I feel like it's been decades since anything wasn't decided by party lines. If anything, it's a shocker that they're doing their job instead of promoting an agenda.

I've still not done my own research on climate change, so I don't have an opinion either way on the truth- but I know damn well we've got too many humans wasting too many resources for us to survive. Not sure why we have to bicker and argue over science.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Good strategy to release it.

Now people can rip it apart easier.

Yes indeed.

It's probably riddle with traps right? That report.

The Deep State will go down over this for sure.

a reply to: Southern Guardian


I heard that story on the news earlier. The next step is for the scientists to support AL GORE's $15 Trillion Dollar project to SAVE HUMANITY.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

a reply to: xuenchen

Steve McIntyre over at Climate Audit will be rubbing his hands to get at it . He has a few good posts on the DNC hacks that are interesting but the bigger gang over there love to crunch data especially relating to climate .

a reply to: lordcomac

Honestly, this is the first time in a long time I've seen the "administration" do anything that wasn't contradictory to common sense. I feel like it's been decades since anything wasn't decided by party lines. If anything, it's a shocker that they're doing their job instead of promoting an agenda.

They've release this report but that doesn't mean their stance on climate change has changed. The administration hasn't changed their intention to withdraw from the Accords. Until they officially come out stating so, they're still following the same party agenda.

Who knows though, this report may be the start to the administration changing direction over this issue. They will anger a lot of their suppporters though.

I've still not done my own research on climate change, so I don't have an opinion either way on the truth- but I know damn well we've got too many humans wasting too many resources for us to survive. Not sure why we have to bicker and argue over science.

Like or not, Science gave you all those electronic gadgets, products you depend on today. It's not something you can just sweep under the rug. Ultimately the issue of resource waste or resource inequality will have to be resolved through science again.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

I think it has less to do with their position on the science of climate change and more on the language of these accords and treaties.

Generally they are globalist bills aimed at controlling the US economy internationally and destroy our national sovereignty. They have little to do with actual methods to deal with climate change.

B.S. if anyone is responsible for weather change it is those who are using/manipulating it for their personal gain and agendas/military/globalists and Al Gore the Climate Whore.. a reply to: Southern Guardian

a reply to: carewemust

I heard that story on the news earlier. The next step is for the scientists to support AL GORE's $15 Trillion Dollar project to SAVE HUMANITY.

That $15 trillion dollar claim comes from rightwing sources with a known political bias. I've done alternative searches, info-wars, Daily Caller. Come on now. Honestly. You yap on about fake media but your sources themselves are known to post fake news.

That figure doesn't even have a source to it on the Examiner.

Seriously.

a reply to: projectvxn

Generally they are globalist bills aimed at controlling the US economy internationally and destroy our national sovereignty. They have little to do with actual methods to deal with climate change.

The OP isn't about what agendas these climate change groups may have financially or politically. This is another topic, for another thread. The OP is about this administration stance on the matter of climate change and whether or not man is the cause of it, or the predominant cause. This report says yes, contradicting the administration's postion. Where do you stand?

Didn't he pull out of the Paris accord because it was not fair , that the US would be spending more money than other countries?
If that is the reason , why should we spend more than others ?
We already give money to far to many countries as it is and should probably stop that too.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Typically I stand with peer reviewed science. Climate change isn't a controversy to me.

I know what the OP is about.

I was actually addressing a point you made in a different post in this thread.

they are globalist bills aimed at controlling the US economy internationally and destroy our national sovereignty

Any proof for that at all, or it just sounds like a good talking point?

It's 86 degrees right now in San Antonio in November, yes the climate has changed.

15 trillion to potentially curve the health of Earth and stop numerous disasters and habitats from being destroyed?
Don't forget that we had more wildfires in towns than ever before. Just a slight temperature rise will make 4x as much forests catch fire. Just a slight temperature change will cause people's houses burried in snow
And a slight temperature change can kill millions of fish.
And it can kill thousands of penguins and polar bears as it is already accomplishing in recent headlines 30 000 penguins died last year alone and it's never been this high.

Billions of cars are on the road... smog from these vehicles reportedly in urban zones is killing more people than anything else in the world, besides dying naturally from old age. Billions of cars release smog each second, of each day, of each weak, of each year, for 40 years. That's why electric and solar and wind are being praised that in Europe they are now replacing coal and getting further than that. Even if Africa hundreds of villages thanks to Akon the rap artist.

I don't know if there is proof of human climate change as I havn't read the findings but I remember reading the article saying that scientists observed CO2 (carbon dioxide) on ice and the ice that had the CO2 on it melted much faster.

----------
You won't find many people praising your OP because the winning candidate gets the happiest most flourishing supporters who all support Trumps 'no climate change' while the sane ones in the forum were pushed out as the news if full of lush servings that the one side hates and the other feasts on so they left out of weakness.

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: carewemust

I heard that story on the news earlier. The next step is for the scientists to support AL GORE's $15 Trillion Dollar project to SAVE HUMANITY.

That $15 trillion dollar claim comes from rightwing sources with a known political bias. I've done alternative searches, info-wars, Daily Caller. Come on now. Honestly. You yap on about fake media but your sources themselves are known to post fake news.

That figure doesn't even have a source to it on the Examiner.

Seriously.

Huh? The figure wasn't a figment of "rightwing" sources in any way. It came straight from Algore's report...
energy-transitions.org...

Enabler 1 – Investment shift
The transition to a low-carbon global economy* will
require significant additional energy system investments
– around $300-$600 billion per annum

It's a 25 year report, 25x$600 Bil = $15 Trillion Dollars.

I doubt the Trump administration feels any need to align themselves with the scientific community's consensus on climate change.

Trump's support base, whether they feel climate-change is linked to man-made causes or not, wants what is better NOW. Not what is better for future generations. Save money NOW. Win NOW.

No need to develop new technologies or move forward. Burn coal, burn oil, make money now... Let the future worry about the future.

Unfortunate but true.

a reply to: Admitted

That's one of the main reasons he is against the notion of climate change. Cause if he wasn't he'd be a hypocrite to push coal and such that he's obsessed with pushing.

He's so traditional to focus on coal but if somehow it was in business to get cheap solar panels and distribute them along with electricity (cars) he'd be saying "Yeah these pollution man made IS bad" and "you gotta get on the electric"

And yet the US is lowering emissions faster than Canada

v"It's a bit of a paradox, here," Gurria told The Canadian Press. "In Canada, you have a situation where you have a very strong political will to reduce, but effectively it has not gone on the planned road.

"In the United States, you have a government that has pulled out of the (Paris) agreement, but in the United States you are having a reduction in emissions."

www.cbc.ca...


Good job!

originally posted by: CB328

they are globalist bills aimed at controlling the US economy internationally and destroy our national sovereignty

Any proof for that at all, or it just sounds like a good talking point?

It's 86 degrees right now in San Antonio in November, yes the climate has changed.

we had a cool week a few weeks ago. Does that mean that AGW is over, or is climate still different than weather?