Intelligence aide, blocked from submitting written testimony on climate change, resigns from State Dept.

From The Washington Post Via MSN News

Juliet Eilperin

A State Department intelligence official who was blocked by the White House from submitting written congressional testimony on climate change last month is resigning from his post.

Rod Schoonover — who worked in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research’s Office of the Geographer and Global Issues — spoke before the House Intelligence Committee on June 5 about the security risks the United States faces because of climate change. But White House officials would not let him submit the bureau’s written statement that climate impacts could be “possibly catastrophic,” after the State Department refused to cut references to federal scientific findings on climate change.

Individuals familiar with the matter, who asked for anonymity to speak frankly, said Schoonover is leaving voluntarily. But the incident that led to his departure underscores the extent to which climate science has become contested terrain under the current administration.

Andrew Rosenberg, who directs the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a phone interview Wednesday that federal experts should be free to provide their expertise with policymakers, even if it is at odds with the views of whoever occupies the Oval Office.

“This isn’t carrying forward your political opinions,” Rosenberg said. “This is bringing the work you’re hired to do in a policy setting.”

President Trump has repeatedly questioned the scientific consensus that human activity is driving recent climate change and that the planet’s warming poses a major security risk to the United States.

Asked about the matter Wednesday, a State Department official confirmed that Schoonover would step down Friday.

Schoonover, who has served in the federal government for roughly a decade, could not be reached for comment. Before working at the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, he had served as director of environment and natural resources at the National Intelligence Council and as a full professor of chemistry and biochemistry at California Polytechnic State University at San Luis Obispo.

Three divisions of the White House, the Office of Legislative Affairs, the Office of Management and Budget and the National Security Council, all raised objections to parts of the State Department intelligence bureau’s testimony, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post. Ultimately, the Office of Legislative Affairs made the decision not to submit the document to the House Intelligence Committee.

One of the statements White House officials objected to was this observation: “Absent extensive mitigating factors or events, we see few plausible future scenarios where significant — possibly catastrophic — harm does not arise from the compounded effects of climate change.”

Read the full article here.

Advertisements

131 thoughts on “Intelligence aide, blocked from submitting written testimony on climate change, resigns from State Dept.

      • kenji July 11, 2019 at 5:37 pm
        My sincere comment: see ya! go peddle that fantasy at the EU
        ——————————–
        What a good idea. Just bury your head in the sand and everything will be alright.

        What you want to hear may not be true. Time will tell

        • What security risks do you see in warming of the poles?
          g half runt, you worry about the future while ignoring the present observations and the state of the oceans, which hold 99.9% of earths heat. That bedwetter doesn’t have anything new to offer and Trump has already heard Obama’s “security risk” propaganda. Trump should be listening to previously unheard voices of independent scientists well versed in the climate debacle but denied any legitimate and necessary discussion, all the while being defamed and ridiculed by the Malthusian-minded climate orthodoxy.
          Can’t you see the political agenda behind the screen of “climate change security risks”?
          What then, if climate changes for the colder and the middle latitudes can’t produce enough food (a much more historically based scenario) to feed the rest of the world?
          Who has their head buried in the sand here? Certainly not the President.

          • you seem to be saying “I’m alright jack” and letting the rest of the world suffer. the security risk is that many will have to migrate towards the poles. does the USA not perceive a security risk from the Mexico border? Amplify this by significant amount and you have millions migrating/or dying!

            the seas are indeed a large temperature sink. but don’t you see that a warmer ocean will have deleterious effects on its flora and fauna. some critters will become extinct others thrive. do you not see that warmer means more available energy and therefore the potential for worse storms etc. do yo not see warmer means more evaporation and hence more precipitation and therefore flooding.

            One should only mess with the status quo with absolute knowledge of the final outcome. This may not affect you or you children but at some point if we make a wrong decision now many will suffer.

          • Better them, than us…

            The warming allegedly caused by CO2 is all that separates us from “The Ice Age Cometh?”

          • Ghalfrunt some see the light at the end of the tunnel an on coming train. While others see the light as just the end of the tunnel.

            The problem with your argument is that it comes across as a hand wringing unfounded fear of oncoming trains. As if an alarmists has planted it in your brain with so many horror stories of deaths in tunnels by oncoming trains.

            p.s. in evolution there is no status quo. Everything is always changing and man is an apex species always striving for a better life. One unattainable without fossil fuel. The species most deserving of extinction is the fear mongering climate Alarmist.

          • Ghalfrut, your fears are unfounded. The planet is warming much less then the alarmists predicted. The tropics and subtropics are barely warming at all, and most of that small warming is at night.
            The T differential that fuels storms is, if anything, reduced by expected warming patterns. ( evidence – zero increase in global ACE and a likely reduction in tornadoes.)

            Also crop zones have not really moved at all, quite possibly they have expanded due to additional CO2; via increased drought tolerance and heat and cold tolerance and fewer freeze nights.

            Cheer up, its all good, the benefits of CO2 continue to grow, the theoretical harms continue to fail to manifest.

        • “ghalfrunt July 11, 2019 at 6:22 pm

          “kenji July 11, 2019 at 5:37 pm
          My sincere comment: see ya! go peddle that fantasy at the EU”

          ——————————–
          What a good idea. Just bury your head in the sand and everything will be alright.
          What you want to hear may not be true. Time will tell”

          Why not? Thirty years of failed alarmist claims have already put failed to their claims.
          Add in thirty years of alarmist flip flopping every time their predicted alarms have failed:
          • No snow -> lots of snow.
          • No rain -> lots of rain.
          • Drought -> Floods.
          • Arctic ice disappears -> Arctic ice doesn’t disappear.
          • Sea level rise flooding -> sea level maybe/perhaps/possibly some day in the future sea level rise.
          • Warming climate -> zero change in growing zones.

          Flip flopping destroys the alarmist claims. Now their predictions cover all possible just in case outcomes are no longer forecasts; they are fantasies.

          • Repeated efforts of alarmists to try and find a more encompassing and frightening term for their alleged claims -> “anthropogenic global warming“, “catastrophic anthropogenic global warming“, “global warming“, “climate disruption“, “climate emergency“, “climate change“, etc. etc. All of which prove that the cause of alleged “global warming” is propaganda to promote fear, destroy economies and force socialism upon Western Civilization.

        • ghalfrunt, Do you even know if increasing levels of CO2 are bad? Maybe they are good! Maybe plant life will thrive to help the world feed its growing population. And if we implement severe restrictions on fossil fuels, might that hurt the poor, and even increase the number of poor? Do you know that many temperature sensors are now located next to heat-radiating parking lots, airports, cities, and air conditioner exhaust, and that if you only look at data from pristine temperature sensors that have been in open fields for decades they show there is no global warming? Do you even know that a Greenland glacier has grown in height by 90 feet/year the past three years? Do you know that none of the climate models have even come close to predicting the actual average global temperature? When a model fails, the “scientists” have either changed the actual historical measured temperatures using bogus reasoning and/or changed the mathematical formula for the period of time where it was inaccurate so the output of the model appears accurate? ghalfrunt, Don’t bury YOUR head in the sand and help lead humanity into poverty and global governmental control of our lives. Instead, continue to read the counter-information which doesn’t make it through the mainstream news filter in places like this web site.

    • No, no, no!

      If you drain the swamp, dragonflies will have nothing to eat!!! Mosquitoes live in swamps! Don’t be so heartless!!!

      #dragonfliesmatter!!!

      • Here in Finland we have lots of water, some 10 000 lakes. A man “invented” mosquito trap. He took floorfan and put pantyhose on it. After few minutes there was mosquitos in. And a newspaper made story about a new easy homemade mosquito trap.

        Greens didn´t take that very well. They were furiously shouting that it´s not allowed to kill mosquitos, like we don´t have enough those annoying bloodsuckers. Greens reaction was priceless and very good indicator about their sense of humor.

        Ps. We have very big and fat dragonflies here, so they are safe.

  1. Having worked for the State Department “about ten years” would mean he was an Obama hire, and that administration was meticulous at ideologically vetting employees. And any comment about “this isn’t carrying forward your political opinions” is risible concerning climate change, which is political all the way down.
    All I would say is”Buh-buy”!

      • Only the first. T*rds still float to the top and need a lot of flushing (especially with the new ,Govn’mt mandated low-flush toilets). Gonna take a lot of flushes to drain out the swamp.

        • Naah, all that wet bathroom tissue on top will sink that mess with a single flush!!! 😉

    • Another leftist had this to say today:

      Saikat Chakrabarti, chief of staff to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has this to say on the Green New Deal: “Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti continued. “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you- change-the-entire- economy thing.” https://twitter.com/JJHunt10/status/1149331587252797440

      Yeah. Duh. What we been saying!!

    • Just what I was thinking… time to get rid of another Obama watermelon in the State Department.

      • As the UN fessed up a few years back, CGW had nothing whatsoever to do with saving the planet,that was simply a device, a ploy, a deception (or lie as I call it), it was everything to do with creating the circumstances for the (il)legitimate formation of a Globul World Guvment claiming ownership of ALL world resources, that they will meter out as only they see fit, when & only when the good ‘ol USA has been dismantled & broken up into nice simple managable parcels of land, a’la Agenda 21, please read it despite its depressing totalitarian “it’s for your own good” underlying (the inclusion of the segment lying was intentional!) doctrine! 😉 I’m guessing the good ‘ol US of A is well on its way to achieving EU status, ruled & dictated to by un-elected, un-democratic, un-accountable, & un-sackable bunch of bureaucrats in charge of everything yet responsible for absolutely nothing! Sorry to depress on a Friday! 🙁

        • Alan, you are so right. EU is hell on earth. Some dictators somewhere are inventing totally idiotic rules to everybody.

          If you have good depress, share it. We, all EU citizens have this good depress, and the load is growing day by day.

  2. “Absent extensive mitigating factors or events, we see few plausible future scenarios where significant — possibly catastrophic — harm does not arise from the compounded effects of climate change.”

    If they see no future without significant to catastrophic harm then they are obviously either wearing blinders or suffer from severe tunnel vision.

    • What flavor was the Kool-Aid?
      The green blob has been predicting doom right soon now for the past 50 years, and it hasn’t happened yet.

    • Bryan,

      I have to agree.

      If the current trends continue the drop into a mini ice ages is going to screw over a LOT of people. The tunnel vision in refusing to even discuss the temp drop is in fact worrying.

      (not personally what makes me sleepless in fear at night to be honest, but still worrying.)

    • Willis
      I am surprised at your comment.

      Do you have proof that the person was a wastrel?
      Is it right that climatologists are prevented from informing the world of their research.? how do you criticise research if none is published?

      • Mr. Runt, I’m surprised that you show no indignation of the decades of climate sceptic research based on empirical scientific data (rather than GIGO climate models) that has been blocked and its proponents ousted and/or ridiculed for what the alarmists see as “climate heresy”.

      • ghalfrunt,

        Not a climatologist. Was not presenting or publishing his non-existent research.

      • Oh Griff (aka ghalfrunt)!

        Your constant trolling is so droll
        Incessant name changing not so much
        Top of the paid troll honor roll
        With half-wit comments in the clutch
        Do you make enough for a living wage
        Zapping inanities to I’net space
        Baiting commenters to a rage
        As with psuedonyms you hide your face
        Or must you have another job
        Like flipping meat at MCD
        What is the rate for the bon mots you lob
        Is it worth the loss of integrity

  3. Don’t let the door hit your behind on the way out…

    Wish we could get rid of the rest of the activists from government jobs. Climate Change has as much chance of being a national security issue as Santa Claus becoming radicalized.

  4. Where on earth is this supposed climate change? I have travel to all but two States of the Union for the past 25 years and I have observed winter being winter and summer being summer. I have not witnessed the climate change either locally or continental.

    Furthermore, I personally would like another 2C. Remember 2C globally would be 1% of the absolute total range temperatures we see on planet Earth. There’s far more daily variation.

    I like how they also caveat it as “possibly” or “might”.

  5. You are repeating something that includes advice from the UNION OF CONCERNED FRAUDSTERS? I’d be careful on this and point out that the USC has members, such as Kinsey, Anthony’s dog.

    • Aw, come on Max, it’s Kenji. Though I wouldn’t be surprised if Kinsey is in there somewhere, too.

    • Didn’t this group of FOOLS forward their DOOMSDAY clock to about 11:59:59 after Trump’s election? They have as much credibility as that Prize-winning Economist who predicted economic collapse and depressed stock market after Trump’s election. No self-respecting journalist would publish ANYTHING these TDS’ers have to say

  6. “possibly catastrophic,” … what a joke! The climate is about as benign as it can be and they call it “catastrophic”. Is this the same agency that failed to spot 911 coming because they were obsessed by the impacts of what is in reality a totally benign climate?

    They must all be on drugs – and so no wonder they’re useless.

  7. Why is this even news? Employees are told all the time by their bosses what they can and can’t do. Sometimes they do quit when told no, but it never hits the news. Ah, but he’s “woke” and this is “climate disaster” (or whatever they are calling it today), so that’s different. What a crock.

  8. Historical, bureaucratic, and rhetorical environmentalists, they still run much of the EPA in the next administration.

    There is something so “Leave It In The Ground” and anti-intellectual about the previous EPA. Frankly, I would rather “Leave it to Beaver”, June, Ward, Wally, Lumpy, and Eddie Haskell.

  9. Why did this have to take two years into the new administration? We need more such good news more quickly.

  10. If you can’t fire them… Make them want to quit. His CV consists of being a professor and working for the Obama maladministration, who he apparently still thinks he works for… Never had a real job. Maybe he can find time to get a haircut now…

    • David Middleton July 11, 2019 at 3:24 pm
      Maybe he can find time to get a haircut now…
      ————————————
      Just what has hair length to do with intelligence?

      What an idiotic comment

      • Where did I link his hair length to intelligence? Learn how to read and then quote me in context instead of being a moron.

      • Ghalfrut, your fears are unfounded. The planet is warming much less then the alarmists predicted. The tropics and subtropics are barely warming at all, and most of that small warming is at night.
        The T differential that fuels storms is, if anything, reduced by expected warming patterns. ( evidence – zero increase in global ACE and a likely reduction in tornadoes.)

        Also crop zones have not really moved at all, quite possibly they have expanded due to additional CO2; via increased drought tolerance and heat and cold tolerance and fewer freeze nights.

        Cheer up, its all good, the benefits of CO2 continue to grow, the theoretical harms continue to fail to manifest.

    • Did you have to post that photo? I just had supper a little while ago. Now you’ve spoiled my ice cream dessert for me.

      And here I thought my months-long stomach flu was the problem. It wasn’t. It was the mordant peabrained nitwits who are really just aging hippies (and not aging well, either) who keep beating this gong and no one is listening to them for any reason other than to point and giggle.

    • David, it doesn’t matter how much you don’t like someone, we cannot resort to bullying and insulting people like this. You have made plenty of interesting contributions to this website. Please stick to raising the bar and discuss the issues maturely.

      • The time for ‘discussion’ is long over… the radical socialists aren’t listening, and never did. They’re hell-bent on implementing global totalitarian socialism, and CAGW is their vehicle of choice… several have outright admitted it, as we see from the article this comment thread is in.

        What you’re suggesting is akin to “David, it doesn’t matter how much that enemy army is bombing you and killing your troops, we cannot resort to shooting back like this. Please stick to politely and maturely discussing the issues.”

        I say, “To hell with that”. It’s time to get out the steel-toed boots and get to kicking socialist arse.

        Spare them nothing, give them no quarter, show them no mercy. Destroy them as they seek to destroy us.

        There’s a very large group of us just itching for these idiotic snowflakes to start a hot war. We’re ready for them, and there won’t be many of them left by the time we’re done. It’s been a long time coming, and they’ll get exactly what they deserve.

  11. Repetition is the only way to bring reality to the fore. Climate changes, constantly. Humans are not causing climate to change and can not stop it from changing. Those are the f**king facts.

  12. After he resigned he got in his SUV and drove home and used fossil fuels every day of course, I might bet. What a hypocrite, climate lefties are always FLAMING hypocrites.

  13. This Obama artifact needs to return to his spawning ground, California. He will find many agreeable, nodding heads there and feel much safer.

  14. “Rosenberg said that even though Schoonover may have left on his own, the controversy surrounding his testimony could intimidate other experts within the federal government’s ranks.”
    We can only hope so. The abusers of truth and science deserve to be afraid, and should be.

    • Perhaps this IS the only credible thing he can do — Quit in a huff!
      If he had any real evidence ie something other than hypothetical projections based on unverified models provided unrealistic ‘facts’; he should present that evidence for examination and discussion.

  15. Once again I have to ask: How is that this person is somehow considered a “climate expert”, since he’s a professor of chemistry and biochemistry? His formal education shows that he’s qualified to teach that, but shows nothing even remotely related to climate.

    Rod Schoonover – Physics, Chemistry, Art, Chemical Physics, Theoretical and Mathematical Physics

    • It doesn’t take a climate scientist to evaluate the validity of straight-forward evidential claims about the climate.

      • Well, “climate science” (as opposed to most other fields of science) seems to be absolutely filled with folks who apparently have few if any bona fide credentials in that particular field of study. But if you want to run with this, then I guess I (also not a climate scientist) can rightfully say that I have the ability to “evaluate the validity of straight-forward evidential claims about the climate.” And I’ve found them seriously wanting! Fair enough?

  16. Climate alarmist quits government job….. Hmmm. Excellent!
    How can we replicate this result, many more times? Shifting the activist swamp leftovers of the Obama regime from insular government jobs to the private sector should be our determined ‘down sizing’ goal!

  17. Another one down and about 10,000 more DC sewer slugs to go.

    Back when I was going through the first phase of SF training the cadre at night would blare Weird Al Yankovic’s

    ‘Another One Rides the Bus’ on the compounds PA system one time for each wannabe that had quit or failed and was taken back to the main post at Ft. Bragg and thus became a wouldneverbe. Just one of the several psychological games the played while at the same time preventing much needed sleep for some. Of course by the end of the first week of the phase the numbers of times they would play that song started to decline considerably.

  18. Pll research based on the *presumption* of apocalyptic climate change should not only be audited by someone with a high school diploma but should also be considered criminal in nature.

    One does not *presume* that the laws of physics do not apply to one’s causation premise.

  19. I wonder if Rod read this baloney from 1989:

    U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked
    PETER JAMES SPIELMANN
    June 29, 1989

    Excerpt:

    A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.

    Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees,′ ′ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.

    He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.

    As the warming melts polar icecaps, ocean levels will rise by up to three feet, enough to cover the Maldives and other flat island nations, Brown told The Associated Press in an interview on Wednesday.

    Coastal regions will be inundated; one-sixth of Bangladesh could be flooded, displacing a fourth of its 90 million people. A fifth of Egypt’s arable land in the Nile Delta would be flooded, cutting off its food supply, according to a joint UNEP and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study.

    ″Ecological refugees will become a major concern, and what’s worse is you may find that people can move to drier ground, but the soils and the natural resources may not support life. Africa doesn’t have to worry about land, but would you want to live in the Sahara?″ he said.

    https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0

  20. Looking through Schoonover’s written testimony, he claims early on that, “Fundamental characteristics of the global climate are moving outside the bounds experienced in human history…” which is flat wrong, and shows that Dr. Schoonover did no research in preparing his testimony.

    He goes on to show a plot of global air temperature without any uncertainty bounds, making the usual consensus naive-freshman error of presuming that the historical thermometers are perfectly accurate and have infinite precision.

    One would think that Dr. Schoonover never took a lab course during his training. But he did, of course, which would make his freshman error puzzling in the extreme, but for the fact that his blindness to measurement error is common among consensus climate scientists, even those who have degrees in physics. The lobotomizing effect of group-think?

    Dr. Schoonover then shows the CO2 record going back 800,000 years, but does not show that changes in atmospheric CO2 lagged air temperature changes through every single ice-age swing.

    Finally, the story does not mention that Dr. Schoonover’s testimony was critically evaluated and shown seriously wanting. The downloadable pdf has the marginal notes.

    If anything, perhaps Dr. Schoonover resigned out of chagrin for having been so foolish, after his critical mistakes were pointed out to him.

    The critical refutations in the marginal notes would have been available to the UCS people, too, making a mockery of their grave pronouncements of alarm.

    • I am going from memory only, but Schoonover’s (selected) summary of IPCC’s probabilities (High, Med etc) of climate events caused by Global Warming seem higher than what I recall from the original report. Anyone else notice this?

      Even if that was what was originally published, the definitions of high, med, low etc in terms of percent probability were badly skewed to the scary side. And of course they readily admitted there was no data behind those probabilities, only subjective opinions of members of a subcommitte.

      • the IPCC confidences are in the consensus, not the event itself. A subtle but important difference.

  21. Probably already has a better paying job lined up. He’s got his good government credentials, now it’s time to cash in on the NGO circuit.

    • “Probably already has a better paying job lined up. He’s got his good government credentials, now it’s time to cash in on the NGO circuit.”

      In France.

  22. May be Trump should ensure all Federal employees watch this, that might get rid of a few more …

    Clouds utterly destroy climate models …

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THg6vGGRpvA

    Best laughs… hand held calculators match super-computer models… 12:28, climate model uncertainty (error bars)… 24:25

    “Cloud error is 114 times larger than the variable they are trying to detect”

    • Also to note is a recent paper called
      ‘No experimental evidence for the significant anthropogenic climate change’
      Jyrki Kauppinen, Pekka Malmi
      (Submitted on 29 Jun 2019)
      Abstract

      In this paper we will prove that GCM-models used in IPCC report AR5 fail to calculate the influences of the low cloud cover changes on the global temperature. That is why those models give a very small natural temperature change leaving a very large change for the contribution of the green house gases in the observed temperature. This is the reason why IPCC has to use a very large sensitivity to compensate a too small natural component. Further they have to leave out the strong negative feedback due to the clouds in order to magnify the sensitivity. In addition, this paper proves that the changes in the low cloud cover fraction practically control the global temperature.

      A pdf (1.7MB) for download is available at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165

  23. “…One of the statements White House officials objected to was this observation: ‘Absent extensive mitigating factors or events, we see few plausible future scenarios where significant — possibly catastrophic — harm does not arise from the compounded effects of climate change’…”

    The lying spin in the media is that the simple mention of “possibly catastrophic” is what made it objectionable.

  24. Hey, is now warming in the realm of intelligence services ?

    Sober-up, how hot is that, last week in the climb over Lower Saxony we had to hit the anti-icing !

    Shields-up climbing over Germany in July ? Beats me how that qualifies for hot sizzling warming.

    So where’s the trick? Cooling is now the new warming of sorts ? Yep, precisely a thing for the secret services to sort out.

    Or is it that they overcooked the “Energiewende” and now we’re about to freeze because of all efforts invested in fighting the terrible global warming ?

  25. “Possibly catastrophic”

    As H.L. Mencken said: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed and hence clamorous to be led to safety by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary”.

  26. When government reports and testimony are absurd, they should not be looked upon as legitimate.

    Preventing lies from being sprea would seem to be part of the President’s job.

  27. Maybe his calculation included the likelihood of a Trump re-election. If he thought Trump would be impeached or lose the election to a Democrat, surely he would have the patience to stick it out for a while longer.

    Do the Democrats know something the rest of us don’t?

  28. Buh-bye, @ssh0le. Don’t let the door hit you in the @ss on the way out; you don’t need any more brain damage.

    Regards,

    Normal People

  29. For much that I can be content with this kind of news, my rational part does not agree with this procedure. The bad science (or any science) is to be refuted and discussed and not blocked. Otherwise we are precisely having the position that we criticize, as skeptics, promoted by the alarmists, to block publications unfriendly to global warming of anthropogenic orighem. If we want to have some reason we can not support positions and procedures that we criticize so much on the most alarmist side. This is the most elementary position of a true scientist.

    • Discussion is one thing; presenting biased, opinionated propaganda to Congress as factual is something entirely different. There were discussions, with differing views presented in the comments section of his paper by others in the Administration. He was basically told that his paper was not presentable, as is. Was there any attempt by him to address the criticisms or discuss the science? If not, then he was the one unwilling to discuss it. If his attitude was, do this my way or forget it, then forgetting it was the proper action.

  30. JN of July 2. is right. He should have been extensively questioned as to how he came to this opinion. We are fighting a war, and the enemy the Obama administration has placed a lot of “Land Mines”” in key positions, such as the EPA.

    There is a very true saying in a war situation, “”Know thy enemy””

    His statement should have been challenged and he should have been told to prove all of his points that Climate Change was as dangerous as he said it was If of course he continued to chum out all of the usual rubbish, he should have been told that his opinions made no sense and that he best seek employment elsewhere, but in the process we might clearly know how he e nemy really thinks. Such as he is apparently enjoying a carbon rich lifestyle.

    The question which needs to be asked is “What was a chemistry
    Proffer doing in a intelligence sector, “poison gas perhaps.

    MJE VK5ELL

    • Exactly!! Block the guy is just make him another CAGW martyr…The stupidity is to be asked and refuted.

    • Yea, everyone knows CO2 is a poison gas!
      Fades compared to Novichok. Ask anyone at Porton Down!

  31. Did anybody else catch this side-note in the link to the actual testimony?– “A consensus of peer-reviewed literature has nothing to do with truth.”

    Now isn’t that the truth in the modern world!

  32. POP QUIZ
    1.) Why is there a “Center for Science and Democracy”?
    2.) How are democracy and science coherent?
    3.) Can one trust a “Union Concerned Scientist” to work unsupervised, or will he spend work time on union business?
    4.) Why did they let Moonbeam join their union? Is he a scientist, or just concerned? Maybe he has experience as a union clockwatcher.

    • Oh, I bet Jerry Brown was a Political Science major. That makes him ideal as a science union guy. 😉

      • Jerry went into a Jesuit seminary, but dropped out. He then went to Yale U for law. His name and connections served him well.

  33. So the faithful acolytes of climate alarmism object to the White House challenging a statement that is clearly an opinion without any foundation in observed reality:

    “Absent extensive mitigating factors or events, we see few plausible future scenarios where significant — possibly catastrophic — harm does not arise from the compounded effects of climate change.”

    We “skeptics” can identify numerous benefits to more CO2 and/or the moderate warming we have seen so far. The alarmists are so wed to their religion that they can only see their manufactured reality. It’s bizarre, but it’s real to them, just like the alien invasion was real to many listeners of the famous 1938 radio broadcast of “The War of the Worlds” by Orson Welles.

  34. Like Joey Ramone sang:

    Glad to see you go, go, go, go – goodbye.

  35. The Prof. will probably soon turn up at the UN where Ms May is heading, but with a complete new hairdo, maybe even a ‘stache!

  36. “Andrew Rosenberg, who directs the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a phone interview Wednesday that federal experts should be free to provide their expertise with policymakers, even if it is at odds with the views of whoever occupies the Oval Office.

    “This isn’t carrying forward your political opinions,” Rosenberg said. “This is bringing the work you’re hired to do in a policy setting.”

    President Trump has repeatedly questioned the scientific consensus that human activity is driving recent climate change and that the planet’s warming poses a major security risk to the United States.”

    Really!?
    Neither John Holdren nor Obama would have ever allowed contrary opinions. Both were very vindictive when dealing with employees and people who stated positions opposite to their “official” dogma.

    Bernie, Harris, Warren and other democrat presidential candidates have demonstrated vicious retribution towards employees whose actions or statements conflict with the candidate. Even for actions as trivial as disagreeing with a graphic pushed by the candidate.

  37. It’s politics. Just because the previous administration was willing to pay good taxpayer dollars to someone to stand at the corner and yell “the end is nigh” doesn’t meant the next administration must do the same.

  38. Isn’t the grand assumption that there is human-caused climate change and that it is presumably going to cause significant destruction to the world and to our species the most questionable and least reliable part of this guy’s claim?

    No wonder they shut him down – he lives in an alternate reality, predicting science fiction catastrophic events.

  39. People to take notice of: Piers Corbyn, Henrik Svensmark. It’s the Sun stupid! All the rest is pretty much rubbish.

  40. It is comforting to read those edit column comments in the Schnoonover PDF. It gives relief to know that the Trump White House NSC really does have people on board who understand how the science has been perverted and miscommunicated by the Alarmists.

    Big Hat Tip to “BJME” commenter. He/She gets it correct in all those comments.
    Brian Jack<?? Michael Ellis???

    We see now why the Democrats and their GreenSlime billionaires are so desperate to replace Trump with someone who will do their bidding and destroy affordable, reliable electricity and energy for the middle class in the US.
    Can anyone imagine a Hillary White House or an Pocahantas White House being so honest and admit uncertainty in climate change.?

  41. Being defended by the Union of Concerned Idiot’s now THAT’s an ENDORSEMENT. Indicating that this fellow is a “fellow idiot” and completely worthless IDEO-log. The UCS, however, does have some qualified members..as in the case of Anthony Watt’s dog, Kinsey. Asked about this, and what she thinks about what happened, she said, “ROUGH!!”

Comments are closed.