In a decisive move that underscores the Trump administration’s commitment to prioritizing economic growth over environmental alarmism, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has directed its officials to expunge references to climate change from public websites. This action aligns seamlessly with President Trump’s broader strategy to dismantle what he perceives as overreaching climate policies that hinder American prosperity.
A Bold Directive from the USDA
According to internal communications obtained by ABC News, USDA Director of Digital Communications Peter Rhee instructed staff to “identify and archive or unpublish any landing pages focused on climate change” by a specified deadline. This directive categorizes content into tiers based on the prominence of climate change discussions, ensuring a thorough and systematic review.
This initiative is reminiscent of previous efforts during Trump’s first term, where federal agencies were prompted to reassess and often remove climate-related content. Such actions reflect a consistent approach to eliminating what the administration views as unsubstantiated claims that could impede economic development.
Reaffirming Commitment to Energy Independence
In a series of executive orders, President Trump has taken significant steps to bolster America’s energy sector. By declaring a national energy emergency, the administration has paved the way for expedited approvals of energy projects, particularly in oil, gas, uranium, and geothermal industries. This move is designed to cut through bureaucratic red tape, facilitating the construction of natural gas pipelines and nuclear power plants.
Furthermore, the administration has lifted restrictions on oil and gas exploration and withdrawn the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement, signaling a clear departure from international commitments that the President believes are detrimental to national interests.
A Pragmatic Approach to Environmental Policy
Critics argue that these actions will exacerbate environmental degradation and accelerate climate change. However, the administration maintains that a balance can be struck between environmental stewardship and economic growth. By focusing on deregulation and promoting energy independence, the administration aims to reduce consumer costs and enhance national security.
The appointment of Doug Burgum as Interior Secretary further underscores this commitment. Tasked with boosting fossil fuel production, Burgum emphasizes the potential benefits of energy development, including promoting peace and reducing consumer costs. This perspective challenges the prevailing narrative that prioritizes renewable energy sources, advocating instead for a diversified energy strategy that includes reliable sources like coal and nuclear power.
Conclusion
The Trump administration’s recent actions reflect a steadfast dedication to reevaluating and often reversing policies that it perceives as hindrances to economic prosperity. By removing climate change references from USDA websites, expediting energy projects, and withdrawing from international climate agreements, the administration is charting a course that prioritizes national interests and economic growth. While these moves are contentious, they underscore a broader commitment to challenging established narratives and promoting a pragmatic approach to environmental policy.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
More important is to reassign anyone who previously dealt with climate change, and was a fanboy for it. Nome, Alaska?
Attu Village in the Aleutians. 4800 mi from Washington. Closer to Hokkaido than to the continental US.
If Trump were to be available for the position of UK Prime Minister I suspect he would get the job.
We’re told that the whole world despises him. Funny that.
We’d like to hire him as the PM of Canada too 🙂 (and I’m sure the Aussies are also interested)
This is great news!
Yes even The Guardian is pleased to announce the climate crisis is over-
Trump orders USDA to take down websites referencing climate crisis | Trump administration | The Guardian
Presumably Michael Mann will be taking a package?
and web hosting storage costs will decrease without all that boring climate boilerplate that infests government sites
No more personal pronouns on sites will help stop the oceans from boiling too.
Approximately 71% of the USDA’s $213 billion budget goes towards nutrition assistance programs . . . The U.S. Forest Service is part of the USDA.
As of 2019, FY 2020 Forest Service total budget authority is $5.14 billion, a decrease of $815 million from 2019. The budget includes $2.4 billion for Wildland Fire Management, a decrease of $530 million from the 2019 … [Wikipedia]
Nutrition assistance and fire management! Uff da!
I hope along with looking to expunge references to climate change the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) can slice and dice this monstrosity of a multi-purpose agency.
There is nothing wrong with recognizing there are serious weather events that can be addressed. There is a long history.
Yes a hot spell coming for my neck of the woods in Oz and I’ve been busy with the adapting cleaning the aircon filter as you do.
Draining the swamp is temporary. Fighting the MSM is where the real battle lies. It seems logic is making headway though as the MSM is losing credibility, as it should.
“Fighting the MSM is where the real battle lies.”
I agree.
The MSM is a leftwing propaganda organ that is detrimental to the freedoms of Americans. Americans cannot govern themselves properly if they don’t have the truth, and the MSM makes sure they don’t have the truth. Don’t listen to these professional liars.
Time for conservative billionaires to buy up much of the MSM.
De-emphasizing the lackey media and including the rising alternative media sources in press briefings, and removing resident media offices at the Pentagon and presumably elsewhere are significant steps in eliminating the stranglehold on information availability that the MSM has enjoyed.
It helps that the propaganda outlets are seemingly oblivious to just how out of touch they truly are with most Americans. Clinging to their pet narratives like a dog with a Frisbee will hopefully be the coup de gras for much of the tripe that passes for journalism in these dying organizations. Like all trends, these seem to be going out of fashion.
Members of the “media” have been coming forward lately, to complain about how their editors would routinely order them to drop any story that might “help Trump”, going back to before the 2020 election.
When USDA has to pull down all their ‘climate science’ stuff, you know Biden went way too far. For agricultural purposes, ‘climate’ has been for decades governed by observational Koppens climate zones. NOT by IPCC models.
And those zones are created by the global large scale convective overturning cells, not greenhouse gases.
True, but a very much simplified statement.
Köppen’s original idea was mapping vegetation to see where various things grow or don’t grow. Say Palm trees: Here – Not here. Vegetation integrates climate. One has to consider mountain ranges, continental versus marine locations, latitude, elevation, and such. Vegetation does all this for you.
There is another important part of the swamp that has to be drained. This is the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). The program was established by Congress 1990 to assess both natural and human caused climate change. Instead, it has been taken over by the climate modelers and functions as a US deep state version of the IPCC.
The climate fraud is contained in Figures 1.5, 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 of NCA5, the Fifth National Climate Assessment Report. I discussed this in the recent Tom Nelson podcast # 271. At present there are 15 different government agencies that are required to be part of USGCRP. The global warming and extreme weather nonsense contained in NCA5 has been taken from the Sixth IPCC Climate Assessment Report. Each agency has to be told to review and revise its contribution to NCA5.
A realistic climate assessment report can be summarized in a few lines:
At present the average annual increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration is near 2.5 parts per million (ppm) per year. This produces an increase in the emission downward longwave IR (LWIR) radiation from the lower troposphere to the surface of approximately 40 milliwatts per square meter per year (40 mW m-2 yr-1). It is impossible for this small increase LWIR energy to produce a measurable increase in surface temperature. Nor can it cause any change in the frequency or intensity of ‘extreme weather events’.
Good points. “It is impossible for this small increase LWIR energy to produce a measurable increase in surface temperature.” It may take a few more years for this to become more obvious, but the misconception that the tiny static radiative effect of incremental CO2 should be treated as a climate “forcing” is at the core of the circular modeling exercise. It is the “forcing” + “feedback” framing of the investigation of rising CO2, CH4, N2O, etc. that must be exposed as an unsound assumption. NO ONE KNOWS at the outset that the energy involved in the effect must end up stored on land and in the oceans as sensible heat gain as a result when the dynamic operation of the atmosphere is properly considered.
” This produces an increase in the emission downward longwave IR (LWIR) radiation from the lower troposphere to the surface of approximately 40 milliwatts per square meter”
No it doesn’t. How are you, or anyone else, measuring that? Bear in mind that the surface is warmer than the lower troposphere, so energy (therefore power) only flows the other way.
I notice that you have no intention of defending your fake physics, Roy, just like the last time you posted this claim. What are you, some kind of drive-by nonsense emitter?
Note in particular that “40 milliwatts per square meter” is not the same as “LWIR energy“, despite your apparent confusion to the contrary. This energy would of course (in standard physics) be measured in Joules, not Watts, just like every other kind of energy.
Prioritising national interests and economic growth are contentious moves??!!
The radical Left prioritizes gaining political power and keeping political power. Everything else is secondary.
You left out filling their money bins, aka Scrooge McDuck.
From an Aussies point of view I’d love to see our current opposition have the spine to do the same!
While it’s welcome that Trump has forced government departments to take down the climate doom propaganda, it’ll be a temporary measure until the next Biden-type bot is in power.
IMHO, if Trump were to investigate the science behind the doomsday scenarios by appointing a red and a blue team, he would have the chance to quash the whole nonsense once and for all effectively.
I think a Red/Blue Team is a distinct possibility.
Alex Epstein should be involved with it. Just watched a video where he said, “Fossil fuels didn’t take a safe climate and make it dangerous- they took a dangerous climate and made it safe.”
The Greatest Climate Myths and Misperceptions Explained | The Way I Heard It with Mike Rowe
Excellent news. I only wish we were doing the same in the UK and Europe. Not one single alarming climate forecast has ever come true. Time and again real scientists confirm the nonsense of man made climate change and the utterly idiotic idea that cultivating or eating meat releases inordinate mounts of methane to affect the climate was destroyed a couple of years back by the discovery of a world wide layer of bacterial Bio Mass all over the earth https://youtu.be/j2M99LhYv2Q. Worse, supposedly ‘accurate satellite ‘readings of earth/s temperature have been shown to be both falsified – even by NOAA and NASA – and on top of that shown to be measuring things not totally associated with surface temperature too. The UK’s Royal Societies have stopped repeating the earlier climate mantra because they know it is wring. It goes on and on – clearly Trump is doing the right thing at the moment – at least in this. Where is Starmer for the UK?
“I only wish we were doing the same in the UK and Europe.”
They will when they see the American economy boom, thanks to Trump.
Putting you head in the sand and ignoring what is happening to temperature does not affect the physics unfortunately.
Oh, so “Climate Change” is now “Global Warming” again…Got it…
it is an easy metric to show that climate is changing – or do you think that the ocean heat content is being affected by urban heat island?
Nope. But it is being affected by the amount of energy from sunlight reaching the ocean.
Please show us a time when it did not change. And, would you prefer that it had gotten colder since the Industrial Revolution? Would that be better for humanity?
Is the ocean heat content being affected, or is that just what you are paid to believe.
The claim that we can measure the temperature of the ocean to within 0.003C is so ludicrous that only someone trained to believe impossible things, could possibly believe it.
ghalfrunt,
When you have finished answering Jeff Alberts, search up the wrongheaded cliché “putting you (sic) head in the sand” and never use it again.
Contesting the poorly supported claims of the climate cabal and removing the overrepresented propaganda they have provided may allow some real investigation into what is happening with temperature and can only enhance the attempt to understand the complex physics involved.
The absurd oversimplification of the climate system that underpins the alarmist position has been nothing less than the grinding of our faces into the sand under heavily hobnailed boots.
There is nothing going on with temperature that hasn’t been going on for over 200 years, and none of it is being caused by CO2.
Next,all textual material used at all levels of education needs to be edited
Great news. Perhaps the cattle burping methane studies will cease.
Bravo!!!
Now drain the Sierra Club and CARB.
usaid.org is gone…..poof!
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/usaid-website-goes-dark-trump-reportedly-plans-shift-agency-under-state-department