When Al Gore emerged from his surprise meeting at Trump Tower earlier this week to suggest the president-elect was a good listener and maybe was keeping an open mind on climate change, there was hardly universal relief on the left. But there was a lot of suspicion that Gore had been played.
The editor of the progressive news outlet ThinkProgress, Judd Legum, posted an analysis of Google searches showing that the Gore meeting had gotten substantially more Internet attention than the choice of an official who is a favorite of the oil industry to run the new administration’s environmental policies.
“These meetings are entertainment to distract you while [Trump] guts Obama’s climate policy,” Legum tweeted.
Prominent Democrats and their allies are navigating uncharted waters as they look for openings to persuade Trump not to dismantle every policy they won under President Obama.
Not since Ronald Reagan assumed office 36 years ago have they had to deal with a president-elect who is both so reviled by their core voters and masterful at using the television cameras to co-opt them — even in those cases where they arrive at his doorstep to school him on why he is wrong.…
Lynne Featherstone, the Lib Dem environment spokesperson, said: “It’s appalling that the number of people working on climate change in the Foreign Office has been substantially reduced, especially now that the Decc has been disbanded.
“It sends all the wrong signals about this government’s commitment to tackling our biggest global threat, and undermines the work being done to encourage other nations to take action.”…
While many Coloradans were likely enjoying the warmth provided by fossil fuels after a night that saw temps drop “as low as minus-11 degrees,” a small group of “Keep It In The Ground” (KIITG)protestors stood in the extreme cold this morning to once-again protest energy development on public lands.
Photos courtesy of Western Energy Alliance
Carrying signs demanding a ban on fracking and an end to fossil fuel development on public lands, the protestors attempted to capture the attention of the media and commuters on a morning when many Coloradans were likely thankful for heat made possible by fracking.
In a sign that even some of the most extreme anti-fracking protestors could have been more interested in staying indoors, the small group of about ten protestors paled in comparison to previous protests held at the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) office in Lakewood, CO, that has been a frequent target of the KIITG activists.
The protest, organized by national KIITG activist groups, 350.org and Food & Water Watch, comes on the heels of a series of sweeping defeats for the groups in the state. Earlier this year, Coloradans resoundingly rejected their efforts to place a pair of ban-fracking initiatives before the state’s voters, an effort that was marked by a series of embarrassing missteps, including delivering half-empty boxes that they portrayed as full of petitions in support of their initiatives, and even staging a fake accident where a protestor pretended to be hit by an SUV.
Pruitt is a “climate skeptic.” The media has been labeling Pruitt as such because he co-wrote a National Review piece with Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange where they declared that the “debate is far from settled” on climate change.
“Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind,” Pruitt and Strange wrote. “That debate should be encouraged — in classrooms, public forums, and the halls of Congress.”
Pruitt’s statement on climate change was only a portion of a piece that focused mostly on a coalition that aimed “to criminally investigate oil and gas companies that have disputed the science behind man-made global warming.” The piece is dedicated almost entirely to defending free speech and condemning criminalizing dissent, but that line about scientists disagreeing about the impact of climate change is what the media wants to focus on.
Pruitt’s statement about the scientists is also accurate.
Pruitt has fought against the EPA numerous times. Pruitt has filed several lawsuits against onerous EPA regulations that overstep the agency’s authority, including:
- Leading a challenge to the EPA’s so-called “Waters of the United State Rule,” an attempt by the Obama Administration to seize federal control over virtually all bodies of water in the United States.
- Securing a historic stay from SCOTUS of the so-called Clean Power Plan and was singled out for developing the constitutional arguments in opposition to the Clean Power Plan.
- Leading challenges to EPA rules relating to regional haze, ozone, greenhouse gases and carbon dioxide regulations.
Pruitt also challenged the EPA’s ethanol mandate, but the Supreme Court wouldn’t hear the case.
Naturally, Pruitt is rather well-versed in environmental law, making him a qualified fit for the position. Should he get confirmed, Pruitt would likely have the know-how to slice through the bureaucratic quagmire to pull back on the EPA’s massive amounts of regulations.
3. Pruitt started the first-ever Federalism Unit in the Oklahoma attorney general’s office. The unit focuses on restoring state sovereignty from the encroachment of the federal government – suggesting that Pruitt is committed to the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.
4. Pruitt has fought the Obama administration in court outside of just EPA matters. Pruitt was the first one to challenge the Obama administration’s efforts to provide federal Obamacare subsidies to states that didn’t establish exchanges. He was also one of the …
NYT Alters Headline on EPA Pick from Fossil Fuel ‘Ally’ to Climate ‘Dissenter’ to ‘Denialist’ in 24 Hours
In the span of a few hours, the New York Times changed its characterization of President-elect Donald Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency pick from a fossil fuel “ally,” to a “climate change dissenter,” and then a “climate change denialist.”
An archive of New York Times reporter Coral Davenport’s original story on Scott Pruitt, dated Dec. 7 and timestamped 20:47:29 UTC, describes Pruitt in the headline as an “Ally of Fossil Fuel Industry”:
The headline of the article as it appeared at 00:46:58 UTC on Dec. 8, however, calls Pruitt a “Climate Change Dissenter”:
According to the timestamps from archives, the article’s title went through three revisions in the span of five hours. The edits came as Eric Lipton was added to the byline.
It’s not just the headlines of the articles that changed. The description of Pruitt and his ideology became more sensationalist and editorialized between the first version of the article and its subsequent revisions.…
Many Trump fans were worried when they heard that the president elect was meeting with “global warming” guru Al Gore. However, on last night’s show, ClimateDepot.com’s Marc Morano says he doesn’t think it’s anything to worry about.
As is frequently the case, the climate models can’t forecast even a month ahead. Similar models are run 100 years into the future. We are supposed to believe they are accurate. I could name a dozen reasons why they w 814temp ill not be. They tell us they will go to faster computers and higher resolution but that simply produces higher resolution noise.
CPC forecasters did see some potential at the end of November for some cold in the northwest.
But WeatherBell’s statistical Pioneer model in November saw a much colder December.
CPC came around to that cold mid month (they had it cold the next week) in their 8-14 day Tuesday.
The models show brutal cold the next 15 days – these are anomalies of near surface temperatures in degree celsius (they show anomalies of -40F or more in the core of the cold!)
These next three maps are 5 day increments:
Here is what we call a Meteogram for Chicago O’Hare from the US GFS model. It shows three sub zero day with lows near -10F. The usually more accurate European model takes them to -15F!
The many days of extreme cold crossing the warm Great Lakes will bring historic lake effect snows. Expect broadcasters and newspapers spouting the liberal lines and the AMS/GMU doctrine standing on the snowbanks and blaming it on global warming.
Here is a link to slides showing how the statistical models we use that includes factors the dynamical models ignore beat the dynamical models and official forecasts in recent years.
If you are in a weather sensitive industry, you should take a look at Weatherbell.com and follow our model, our (Joe Bastardi and I) daily blog posts and videos through this incredible stretch and winter.
Word of Trump’s latest pick sent liberal environmental groups into a panic along with networks CBS and NBC. “The president-elect filled more administration posts today, putting a global warming sceptic in charge of protecting the environment,” announced anchor Scott Pelley on CBS Evening News.
CBS’s Nancy Cordes bemoaned Trump’s climate change switcheroo from earlier in the week. “Al Gore’s meeting with Mr. Trump the other day gave environmentalists hope, but that hope evaporated today when Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt was tapped to head the environmental protection agency,” she whined.
She seemed to try to discredit Pruitt, reporting, “Pruitt claims the debate over climate change is far from settled and has repeatedly sued the EPA over fossil fuel regulations.” She then smeared him by quoting a liberal organization press release arguing he was “unfit to serve,” “The Sierra Club said today, ‘Having Scott Pruitt in charge of the EPA is like putting an arsonist in charge of fighting fires.’”
She interviewed Hawaii Democratic Senator Brian Schatz who warned, “This person who wants to lead the EPA has actually made a career out of undermining the EPA. So this is really the worst-case scenario, and we’re going to have a fight.”
NBC Nightly News kept their fretting brief as they covered all of Trump’s new appointees. But NBC’s Hallie Jackson noted that Pruitt’s nomination come with, “push-back already from those who fear he’ll keep fighting to dismantle President Obama’s climate change initiatives.” Eight years ago, none of the networks seemed to have a problem with Obama dismantling programs started under George W. Bush.
Both mentioned that Pruitt has sued the EPA a number of times, NBC only noted that it was over “power plant emissions regulations,” while CBS kept it vague with “fossil fuel regulations.” None mentioned that his lawsuits are against federal government overreach through President Barack Obama’s, so-called, Clean Power Plan. The plan puts burdensome regulations on coal fire power plants, which has forced many of them to shut down, coal mines to close, and energy bills to skyrocket.
And according to Fox News, Pruitt stands in opposition to the EPA’s abuse of the Clean Water Act, which has been a known method for the agency to disregard property rights of US citizens. On the issue, Fox News quotes Pruitt as saying: