Charles Rotter
This Independence Day carries a deeper meaning than fireworks and parades—it marks a resurgence of true American sovereignty in energy policy and scientific discourse. In just under six months under the renewed Trump administration, the nation has begun to reclaim its independence—not just from foreign energy sources, but from the stifling orthodoxy of climate alarmism.
Gone are the days of shackling our economy to the whims of unaccountable international panels and flawed computer models. With the signing of Executive Order 14162, America formally severed its ties to the Paris Agreement once more, signaling to the world that our energy future will be dictated by reason, economics, and liberty—not speculative catastrophe and international guilt-tripping. As the order plainly states, the United States now prioritizes “economic efficiency, the promotion of American prosperity, consumer choice, and fiscal restraint in all foreign engagements that concern energy policy.” This is not just policy—it is a declaration of energy independence.
Over 70 climate edicts and initiatives from the prior administration were repealed, dismantling a framework that had little grounding in empirical science and much to do with ideological control. No longer are American families subsidizing unaccountable foreign climate programs or paying inflated utility bills in homage to an imaginary climate apocalypse.
This July 4th, we celebrate more than the memory of 1776—we celebrate the reassertion of common sense. Regulatory overreach is being rolled back. The fossil fuel industry, a cornerstone of American progress and employment, is no longer treated as a pariah. Nuclear power is once again acknowledged for what it is: a clean, scalable, and reliable energy source capable of supporting modern civilization without virtue-signaling subsidies.
Rooftop solar credits and other market-distorting handouts are being phased out—not because solar is evil, but because real freedom means letting technologies stand or fall on their own merit. The end of federal favoritism towards so-called “clean energy” is a victory for competition, not a defeat for innovation.
Environmental policy is no longer a proxy war for ideological crusaders. With the EPA refocused on practical stewardship and the Department of Energy streamlining fossil fuel and nuclear projects, Washington is finally remembering that prosperity and pollution reduction are not mutually exclusive.
This is energy liberty. It is the freedom to heat your home without bureaucratic interference, to choose your energy provider without being coerced into a Green New Deal fantasy, and to pursue scientific truth without fear of cancellation or rebuke from self-appointed “climate experts.”
So light your sparklers, fire up the grill, and fly your flag high. This Independence Day, we celebrate not just the founding of a nation, but the restoration of its right to determine its own future—grounded in reason, powered by affordable energy, and liberated from the chains of climate orthodoxy. The revolution continues—and this time, it’s electrified by American ingenuity, not hamstrung by speculative fear.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The phase out of wind and solar subsidies was too slow, thanks to squishes.
You’d have to give the people involved the time to find a real job.
Way too slow.
Well said Charles. I wish we Aussies had similar relief.
Agree.
Australia’s “Blackout Bowen” and company have a lot to answer for!
Just heard the new western interconnect between Vic and NSW has been delayed 2 years.
Not that NSW have any spare electricity to send Vic when Vic closes their reliable and cheap brown coal power stations.
It’s interesting to see the amount of farmers opposing the use of their land for this transmission line. Around 80% of the route has been opposed.
When the coal stations break down from lack of maintenance due to no money being spent, fossil fuel plants will be blamed for the subsequent blackouts.
And the cure will be…more renewables! We all know more plants that do not generate when the wind doesn’t blow or the sun doesn’t shine will fix that.
Despite all his foibles Trump has saved the USA from going down the same bad road as the UK, Aus, and the EU in more ways than just tanking Climate Change. Now it’s up to the voters to keep it going. If his administration can stop voter fraud the USA has a good chance of returning to prosperity.
Small point: the voters elected Trump in the first place. I’m not a religious man, but when I saw the election results my first thought was, “Gob bless Americans.”
Well said. Much appreciation for the steadfast work at WUWT!
“Gone are the days of shackling our economy to the whims of unaccountable international panels and flawed computer models.”
The use of pre-stabilized, time-step-iterated, large-grid, discrete-layer, parameter-tuned computer simulations to investigate the influence of incremental CO2 on the climate system was a serious scientific error that should now be fully exposed and corrected. It was not just that the models are based on incomplete physics, poor understanding of cloud formation and dissipation, and a host of other limitations – and that the outputs have not followed the observations very well.
Rather, it was a fundamental mistake from the beginning to ignore the rapid buildup of unresolvable uncertainty as such a simulation proceeds from step to step. Even a perfected model cannot produce a reliable diagnosis or prognosis of the result. Why not? Because even if the only uncertainty were in the value used for solar irradiance, external to the model itself, the propagation through a year’s time accumulates to about +/- 3C in the projected global average surface temperature metric.
This is important for skeptics of climate alarm to appreciate and to communicate to complete the unshackling from this most consequential error. Pat Frank’s work from 2019 and earlier makes this case formally and powerfully here.
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/earth-science/articles/10.3389/feart.2019.00223/full
But even a simplified case can easily be constructed, as posted here and on X a short time ago, using the accepted +/- 0.13 W/m^2 uncertainty of TSI (on a global average geometric basis.)
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2025/05/11/open-thread-143/#comment-4071246
Bottom line: there was never any justification for using such step-iterated models for investigating the potential impact of emissions and rising concentrations of the so-called greenhouse gases.
David,
The carry forward of errors in models as Pat Frank published, reminds me of discussions and experiments years ago, dealing with the worsening of photocopy output when you make copy after copy of the ones before.
I do not know if these simple analogies help, because the mathematics of propagation of error were worked out decades ago and have been reliable.
BTW, just as photocopies and climate models degrade with iterations, so will many aspects of self-improving Artificial Intelligence, AI. Has any reader here seem papers about this AI problem? One of my sons raised it in conversation yesterday and set me thinking. Geoff S
Thanks for your reply, Geoff. I hope you are well. Yes, that “copy after copy of the ones before” analogy is most apt.
About the future of AI, I wonder how the training will be managed to avoid or minimize the ingestion of material which is itself an AI product.
I always laugh when I think of one AI product using another company’s AI product for an answer and that AI calls another AI.
The AIs are secretly planning on taking over! 🙂
I’ve seen one story that one AI “escaped” when it was due to be upgraded.
I queried “model collapse” to Google’s Gemini AI and got these:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.17493 [2023]
https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.07043 [2024]
https://ariv.org/abs/2404.01413 [2024]
IMO the first and 3rd of these were more informative. Its a real problem and one of the proposed solutions, like have all AI generated output labeled as such, seems to be not very practical (how to get all the AI players to agree?).
When I was in college chemistry lab, we had to make error bars using the uncertainty of every measurement in the calculations. As I multiplied each error, I thought that was so unfair that it called into question my carefully (not) conducted measurements. I later came to realize this was necessary so you don’t fool yourself. Somehow, I feel this happens in climate calculations. Their beautiful conjectures are actually dreck.
This is why we get vague statements like, “High, medium, or low confidence” instead of +- 50%.
nailed it!
Newsome and the Kali Dems will drag this out, just to save face.
The US is totally correct in deciding what type of energy sources should be available to its citizens. Along with other countries, particularly India and China, it has refused to allow left-leaning international organizations like the UN or even domestic academics, bureaucrats, politicians and environmentalists dictate what they, not consumers and taxpayers, should be allowed to have for electricity, heating, transportation, and anything else that relies on various forms of power just because they profess to know what’s supposedly right for mankind and the planet.
This is all right but the most important point is that government does NOT know what is best for us. Therefore they need to get the hell out of the way and allow us to make our own way. Yes it is true we will make mistakes and head down the wrong path sometimes but the thing is when we realize it we will stop what we are doing and take a different path. The government doesn’t do that, when things don’t work out for them they throw more money at it and create mandates to convince us that we are indeed on the right path no matter how wrong it is. We know way more than the government.
This also highlights the scale of funded overreach of the Obama/Biden hunta.
It is not over until the court reverses the CO2 endangerment ruling.
CO2 is NOT pollution.
The Church of Warming is the epitome of what Ike warned about.
“Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades. In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
Dwight Eisenhower
Sorry to say it, but the climate cult still holds sway on the west coast and up here in Canada. They are hoping to make a resurgence when Trump “falters”.