Emails: Trump official pressed NASA on climate science

ELLEN KNICKMEYER and SETH BORENSTEIN
  • S
    Shoey
    Even if climate change isn’t real... why shouldn’t we do a better job of controlling the waste and chemicals we produce?
  • M
    Mark
    If we are relying on any government to save us from global warming then we deserve to fail. We all need to do our part to protect our natural resources, whether that means limiting our use of plastics, recycling, keeping our waterways clean, etc. The private sector is more than capable of developing clean energy alternatives that are feasible!
  • J
    Jovanavichs
    A Trump administration national security official has sought help from advisers to a think tank that disavows climate change to challenge widely accepted scientific findings on global warming, according to his emails.

    At one time it was widely accepted that the sun revolved around the earth too. The real truth came out.
  • g
    gary
    Yes Politicians are going to be able to effectively manage the "climate" since they are doing such a great job of taking care of our other problems. You know Health care, illegal immigration, ETC. Yet people actually believe politicians are going to save them rom the dreaded "climate change". Hilarious.
  • l
    la vache
    "Once a skeptic about climate change, Jim Bridenstine came around to the prevailing view of scientists before he took over as NASA administrator."

    He really wanted that job.
  • M
    MICHAEL
    Set reasonable emissions standards and let capitalism take over. Which ever energy source can meet those standards at the cheapest cost can win. No tax payers' money needed to subsidize any industry.
  • N
    ND
    Life goes in cycles as does the climate. Everything nowadays gets blamed on climate change (formerly global warming). Climate change has occurred for literally millions of years, ice ages have come and gone as have periods of warming/cooling. People tend to think of climate in terms of just the last hundred years or so because that amount of time seems relevant to them; that is their world.

    The National Park Service recently removed visitor center signs that claimed all the glaciers at Glacier National Park would disappear by 2020 due to global warming. As it turns out, higher-than-average snowfall in recent years upended computer model projections from the early 2000s. The NPS based its claim that glaciers “will all be gone by the year 2020” on those projections, according to federal officials.

    Unfortunately some "scientist" have been under pressure to support various computer climate models or lose their research grants. The last couple of generations have been brainwashed into believing man is the primary cause of climate change to the point it has become a religion for many. If there was an actual climate crisis, it would be obvious. Alarmists wouldn’t have to hide and tamper with data. Never mind that the industrial revolution did not start until the 1800's, some people, including some scientist, look the other way. There were no cars or power plants when the last ice age ended, no cars were around when the dinosaurs died off, what made the Hugh glacier that covered the great plains disappear; certainly burning fossil fuels played no part in any of it.

    Every so often we get predictions that the end of the world occur within 10 years or so if we do not radically alter every aspect of our lives. How accurate were the predictions made around the time of the first Earth Day in 1970?. Well, the prophets of doom were spectacularly wrong. There are 19 examples of predictions since the first earth day by people who should know better, but there are too many to list in this note
  • A
    Andrew
    It's funny how literally NONE of these "news" articles ever talk about the ACTUAL numbers and statistics involved in this theorizing about climate change. It is a sheer fact that no scientific group has ever proven that the percentage change in CO2 levels as measured over the last few decades can cause the actual average temperature rise that has been detected (which is also quite small, which is why it is never quoted). All of the alarm is based on theoretical models of extrapolated changed that are possible, but dependent on many factors that cannot be accurately predicted, necessarily.
    For instance, certainNASA scientists recently warned of probable drastic cooling of the Eatth due to decreased sunspot activity, but this is also obviously subject to a continuing trend, which is in all reality largely unpredictable.
    One absolute and undeniable fact is that climate scientists have been predicting end of the world level temperature changes for over a hundred years. They are forced to keep massaging data and waiting for a several year spike in temperatures to release another wave of fire predictions. The problem with climate is that it changes in longer cycles, and has obviously been doing this since long before any influence by human industries. No one can conclusively prove these climate projections, and ALL of them from the past have been wrong.....ALL OF THEM!!!!
    I say all of this not to try to prove that man-made climate change is an impossibility. It might bear some level of truth, and perhaps even as serious as some predict. The real problem here is that boys have been crying wolf MANY times, and many chicken littles have ran around saying the sky is falling, and virtually all of them had PHD after their name. In the eyes of most common sense people, climate scientists just don't have much credibility anymore.
  • w
    will
    Trump officials consulted climate scientists NOT being funded by the Federal Government. There, fixed it for you.
  • j
    jamesh
    97% of scientists agree that science is not conducted by consensus.