Trump Contradicts “Settled Science” On Climate Change Or Something

The media members of the Cult of Climastrology are Outraged!

Contradicting settled science, Donald Trump says “nobody really knows” on climate change

Donald Trump said again on Sunday that he is “open-minded” about climate change — but also that “nobody really knows” the truth about the issue, which contradicts the fact that there is near-universal scientific agreement on the issue.

In an interview with “Fox News Sunday,” moderator Chris Wallace pointed out to Mr. Trump that in the space of a week he both met with former Vice President Al Gore and appointed Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, a climate change denier who has opposed many environmental regulations, to head the Environmental Protection Agency. Where, Wallace asked, does Mr. Trump stands on climate change?

“I’m very open-minded. I’m still open-minded,” he said. “Nobody really knows.”

However, there is a near-universal scientific consensus that climate change is a real phenomenon — despite continued opposition to the notion among primarily Republican politicians. NASA’s website on climate change, for example, notes that approximately 97 percent of publishing climate scientists agree that human activities are very likely responsible for rising temperatures.

I’ll mention again, the NASA webpage relies on the utterly discredited and debunked Cook at al paper, which relies on cherry picking a small number of Believer papers, with the vast majority, like in the upper 90% range, either taking no stance or not deeming that the current warm period is mostly/solely caused by human activity.

Is it settled science if 95% of the models are wrong? Is it settled science when they make a prognostication that fails to materialize? It was settled science that the world was flat, that the sun revolved around the Earth, that vaccines caused autism, that there would be a “population bomb,” Einstein’s static universe, Martian canals, the expanding Earth, and so much more. We’re told that some things are settled, then bamm!, people do more science and things change.

This whole thing just exposes how much the “science” of anthropogenic climate change revolves around everything but science. It’s a cult. It’s politics.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

10 Responses to “Trump Contradicts “Settled Science” On Climate Change Or Something”

  1. Jeffery says:

    If Mr. Trump truly has an open mind on climate change and actually intends to “study” the issue, then that is encouraging news, right? If he listens to scientists he’ll reach the correct conclusion.

    On the other hand, it’s difficult to believe anything Trump says.

    Do the Deniers here see Trump’s language as “code” to soften his own “Denialism” for public consumption?

    Like for so many scientific issues, a scientific consensus has emerged on global warming, just as it did on the ozone layer, lung cancer and smoking, the solar system etc.

    The opposition to the theory of AGW is political, not scientific.

  2. Rev.Hoagie® says:

    You can repeat it all you want but scientific consensus is not scientific evidence. If climate scientists perform 51 “experiments” with 51 models they end up with 51 different outcomes that’s not anything more than scientific confusion.

    Opposition to the “theory” of AGW is precisely what science is supposed to be about. You’ve made up your mind and are demanding that everyone else close theirs. AGW is a theory, not a law. You have the right to believe whatever theory you want but you have no more right to force the rest of us to accept and finance it than a fundamentalist has in forcing you to abolish abortion and pay for a church education. They have their theories, you have yours. You should each pay for your own.

  3. drowningpuppies says:

    The opposition to the theory of AGW is political, not scientific.

    Apparently, the support for AGW theory is political, not scientific.

    Re: –The Attorneys General of a bunch of states holding up their lists of known “denier” organizations and tacitly urging the public to go after them.

    — Government officials of a variety of stripes ranting about how “deniers” should be brought to trial or otherwise penalized.

    –Roger Pielke being hounded out of his job by the climate mob…

  4. jl says:

    Sorry J, but the opposition to the theory of gw is definitely science. The opposition to the skeptical side is political, because that’s where all the money is

  5. jl says:

    “A scientific consensus has emerged on gw…” Too bad that consensus has nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics. But, you mean like the consensus on the cause of ulcers, low fat diets and global cooling to name just a few? See-it means nothing

  6. Jeffery says:

    Again, there is no doubt that the Earth is warming except in the most remote corners of the deni-o-sphere. A few more deniers still deny that greenhouse gases are the cause of this warming.

    So where is this robust scientific debate around global warming?

    The debate is over how to respond to man-made warming, and that is a political debate, and one worth having.

  7. gitarcarver says:

    Forbes reported the other day that the “consensus” is falling apart and more and more scientists in related climate fields are starting to say AGW is not scientific.

    Of course, liberals who are more concerned with taking over people and companies won’t care about the actual science.

  8. Rev.Hoagie® says:

    Once again you substitute climate change with AGW. A common deceit. I don’t know anyone who says there is no warming. Do you? Name him. However, manmade global warming is, for the millionth time, A THEORY, not a reliable fact upon which we can hang our money nor our economies.

    The debate is over how to respond to man-made warming, and that is a political debate, and one worth having.

    You say the debate is over but what you’re telling us is your mind has snapped closed. We don’t need any more close minded leftists in charge of us or hasn’t the last election sunk in yet?

  9. The Exile says:

    Why is the National Aeronautics and Space Administration involved in “climate change”? Do you see anything in that title that says that they should be focusing on the earth?

  10. Rev.Hoagie® says:

    For the same reason they’re supposed to make moslems feel wanted or something like that. It’s a raging-radical leftist thing. We’ll be done with that crap shortly. Hopefully once Trump starts cutting bureaucrat jobs they will take the hint and move to Cuba.
    Trumps gonna take these blood sucking leftists for a ride, New York style. Ask Jimmy Hoffa.

Pirate's Cove