Contact FreedomWorks

400 North Capitol Street, NW
Suite 765
Washington, DC 20001

  • Toll Free 1.888.564.6273
  • Local 202.783.3870

Blog Hit

White House Climate Study is About Changing the Debate Not the Environment

Originally Published in on 5/6/14.

Desperation reigns at the White House.

Facing dropping poll numbers and the increasing possibility of losing Democrat control of the Senate, the White House issued a National Climate Assessment that details the administration’s estimate of the effects of climate change on the U.S.

The White House fact sheet on the report’s findings includes a list of the expected climate change impacts across geographic regions in the U.S. The report reads like a science fiction disaster novel with claims of extreme weather and events.

It’s clear the goal of the report is to frighten the public in a desperate attempt to change the debate from Obama’s horrible record.


wvprez's picture
James Hinebaugh

Stentor4 you need to visit this site
Over 31,000 real scientist disagree with you.....

wvprez's picture
James Hinebaugh

Stentor4 you need to visit this site
Over 31,000 real scientist disagree with you.....

Stentor4's picture

The fact that Global Climate change may be being used as a political tool, is no excuse to ignore the fact that it is real, based on genuine science, and is seen as a real threat by a virtually unanimous scientific community. Improvements in the data and models have brought virtually all the competent dissenters around to agreement that the threat exists. We have to work together on this, not let politics and the influence of giant corporations postpone our cooperation on solutions.

Morlocke's picture

Your "virtually unanimous scientific community" consensus argument is not only incorrect (there are thousands of skeptical scientists), it is irrelevant to the Scientific Method. Galileo fought against the incorrect "consensus" that the Earth was flat. Voting does not make something true, regardless of the credentials of the voters.

Scientific theories are evaluated based on their ability to reliably predict future results based on current data. To date, 100% of the computer models employed by proponents of Anthropogenic Global Warming have failed to accurately predict climate behavior and have predicted more warming than actually occurred. According to all available empirical data, there has been no warming trend for over 15 years despite rising levels of CO2. While this does not entirely disprove the theory, the most optimistic appraisal would be that there are still many unknown climate variables and that the current theory needs to be revised to fit actual data.

BTW - the phrase "improvements in the data" is a dead giveaway. You don't change data to match theories, you change theories to match data.

It always amuses me that leftists can "follow the money" to "giant corporations", but when the money leads to government agencies they assume there is no possibility of corruption. Government agencies fund "climate research" specifically to support policies that increase their own power. It is a manufactured crisis intended to instill fear among the population and increase government control or our resources. It is well known in the skeptical scientific community that your grant money dries up as soon as you report results that disagree with their agenda.