Guest post by David Middleton
A supervisor at the Energy Department’s international climate office told staff this week not to use the phrases “climate change,” “emissions reduction” or “Paris Agreement” in written memos, briefings or other written communication, sources have told POLITICO.
Employees of DOE’s Office of International Climate and Clean Energy learned of the ban at a meeting Tuesday, the same day President Donald Trump signed an executive order at EPA headquarters to reverse most of former President Barack Obama’s climate regulatory initiatives. Officials at the State Department and in other DOE offices said they had not been given a banned words list, but they had started avoiding climate-related terms in their memos and briefings given the new administration’s direction on climate change.
[…]
News of the DOE office’s word ban drew criticism from one green group.
“What exactly is this office supposed to call itself now? The international C****** office? Ignoring the climate crisis will not make it go away, will not create jobs in the booming clean energy economy, and will not make our country great,” Liz Perera, climate policy director at Sierra Club, said in a statement.
Darius Dixon and Ben Lefebvre contributed to this report.
Setting aside the fact that it is truly idiotic for the Department of *Energy* to even have an office, department or bureau with the word “climate” in its name… The irony here is priceless.
The greatest governor in U.S. history is now the Secretary of the Department of… Ooops.
And the Department of Ooops now has an Office of International Climate and Clean Energy.
Getting back to truly idiotic government things… Why does the *United States* Department of Energy have an *International* office of anything? Is the swamp really this deep?
“Climate change” is a redundant tautology and thus a meaningless phrase. Climate by its fundamental nature is and has to be always changeing. How could a dissipative open heat engine with a complex mixture of excitability (positive feedbacks) and friction (negative feedbacks) ever do anything but change continually, fractally on every spatiotemporal scale. “Climate change” is like saying “wet rain” or “radiative light”.
bingo … and when the climate … changes from one climate condition to another over centuries (not decades) it possibly could be beneficial or harmful to humankind … just because the climate may be changing does not mean it is harmful …
Edward Lorenz back in 1961 made a computer simulation of climate, showing clearly – and unexpectedly – that with no change to steady state inputs, temperatures spontaneously jumped from time to time between different thresholds and never tended toward any kind of stasis or mean. This confirmed the work of Cartwright, Feigenbaum and others in showing chaotic nonlinearity in climate. To this day this is the best and most meaningful, in fact the only important, climate computer simulation. On a 1961 computer.
Separation of Church and State.
“What exactly is this office supposed to call itself now?”
The Erstwhile Office of International Climate and Clean Energy?
Mission Creep is an infectious parasite.
So is the progressive movement.
Good day.
This is why you shouldn’t listen to government bureaucrat fools:
“Peak oil is now.” German Energy Watch Group –2008
“By 2012, surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear..…” U.S. Department of Defense –2008 & 2010.
“A global peak is inevitable. The timing is uncertain, but the window is rapidly narrowing.” UK Energy Research Centre -2009
“The next five years will see us face … the oil crunch.” UK Industry Taskforce on Peak Oil and Energy Security –2009
Wonder what they will call it thousands of years from now when the climate is REALLY changing, as in getting colder?
Hi Pamela. In the early 1970’s it was global cooling (Ice Age predicted) caused by – you guessed it- increasing CO2 from use of fossil fuels. Go to my Dr. Vincent Gray link @ur momisugly 6-27pm. Climate change can mean anything one wants it to by anyone wishing to obliquely ‘attribute’ any weather event to it.
I am thoroughly enjoying watching the climate of the Washington swamp change as President Trump steadily gains control!
The actual phrase “climate change” means nothing. 2 nouns without a qualifiying pronoun is meaningless. Climate changes.So what. Is it man-made? Is it natural? Is it dangerous? To humans? To the ecosystem? Can massive changes in human activity actually make the slightest bit of difference?
It beggars belief how people have fallen for this 2 word slogan that actually means nothing. The nations of the world, supposedly led by intelligent people fighting on behalf of the People have fallen for this scam and are throwing trillions of (taxpayers) dollars to the very groups that promulgate the lies climate myths.
The People will not be very happy when they find out how blatant a scam it was from day one. They will not be happy with mainstream media who deliberately fed the People with falsehoods. They will not be happy that the education system plugged such lies without permission. The People will not be happy how their supposed “leaders” have betrayed them on a range of other serious issues.
Climate change only comes into “existence” after the weather has “changed” and people have looked at the history and decided to call what they see “climate.”
Andrew
This is priceless. The snowflakes are melting.
HotScot March 30, 2017 at 2:38 pm said:
“it’s almost as bad as a British newspaper adopting the title ‘News of the World’, eventually vilified as the UK gutter press, before succumbing to it’s own notoriety. Sadly, I believe it was at one time, in it’s dim and distant past, the newspaper to be relied upon for quality investigative journalism.”
Yes, the quality investigative journalism was notable for the punch line “Penetration then occured, so I gave my excuses and left.” Not for nothing was it known as the “News and Screws of the World”.
https://twitter.com/GrrrGraphics/status/846040055353245697
pretty sure you dont need a twitter account to view this
fabulous swamp cleaning piece of artwork
…Awesome !!
Over here it’s the Department of Hot Air.
Sorry Tony. Didn’t see this while typing the same.
Good question there Liz Perera, climate policy director at Sierra Club. What should the Department of Energy’s ‘Office of International Climate and Clean Energy’ be called?
How about Office of Hot Air, effective as of 1/4/2018?
MSM watching the white house. Ivanka got an office.
What with https://www.google.at/search?q=obama+wife&oq=obama+wife&aqs=chrome.
Retreat battles are the most vicious.
David Middleton:
This post is slightly off-topic because it pertains to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and not the US Department Of Energy (DOE) but – like your above report – this post relates to ‘draining the swamp’.
Breitbart is reporting that President Trump’s appointee as head of the EPA, Scott Pruitt, seems to have ‘gone native’ and is “Failing to drain the swamp at the EPA”.
James Delingpole provides a trenchant explanation of the matter that explains
emphasis added: RSC
Richard
A supervisor at the Energy Department’s international climate office told staff this week not to use the phrases “climate change,” “emissions reduction” or “Paris Agreement” in written memos, briefings or other written communication
Is it possible that the instruction is designed to avoid FOIA searches for communications which the DoE would like to conceal?
Just a thought. If the words climate change, emissions reductions, and Paris Agreement are not used in memos, briefings, and other written communication [e-mails], it is then much more difficult to search out those documents since those words would be some of the main search terms. Thus much harder to find out what is actually going on in the Energy Department with respect to associated files by outside parties (or new administrations).
Love that pictures. It shows the ignorance of the guy in the polar bear suit.
How about a tally of all the funds invested in the great fusion reactor promise year by year and in total.
The measure is wrong.
The more DoE employees talk about climate, the easier it is to figure out whom to fire.
A proper name for what we originally called global warming in the 20th century and climate change in the 21st should all now be referred to as Climate Study based upon rigorous and high standards of collecting raw weather data. It will all make more sense in the future as we collect and analyze more raw weather data over time.
“What exactly is this office supposed to call itself now?”
Defunct
New Zealand’s Dr. Vincent Gray nailed the UNIPCC “climate change” duplicity in 2009.
https://anhonestclimatedebate.wordpress.com/2009/06/28/the-triumph-of-doublespeak-how-unipcc-fools-most-of-the-people-all-of-the-time/
Because the DOE is a relatively new department, it is overloaded with bureaucracy. Over 8 pages, single-spaced in the Plum book (list of presidential appointments required). You have never seen so many permutations of the words “Assistant” “Associate” “Deputy” “Special” “Director” “Under-Secretary” etc. You too could sign on to be the “Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Oil and Natural Gas” under the Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy for example, or the “Special Assistant and Scheduler to the Deputy Secretary of the Office of Management”. No joke. DRAIN THE SWAMP.