JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Trump appoints even more skeptics

It doesn’t get much better than this. Mazin Sidahmed at The Guardian has posted a handy list of Trumps Cabinet Picks. The times have changed so much that it’s not a case of “spot the skeptic” but a hunt to find any believers in the climate doctrine. Make no mistake, things  are very, very bad for the fans of human-caused-weather.  Almost every name on this list would be the “top target” of green protests if they had been the one appointee among the standard Obama-Clinton picks. But almost all of them are drawing fire. People who have taken the toxic, unforgivable position of personally investing in oil and gas projects seem neutral now, compared to people who have run lawsuits against the government department they’ve been told to manage. If only The Guardian could find someone who was not in the bottom 10% of the Conservation scorecard!

Climate change denial in the Trump cabinet: where do his nominees stand?

Scott Pruitt: Environmental Protection Agency

Pruitt is the anti-christ for the EPA. He has led lawsuits against their unconstitutional grab for power. What’s not to like?

Ryan Zinke: Department of the Interior

He is  a congressman, former Navy Seal and Iraq war vet. He votes for oil and gas drilling projects. He scored 3% on the League of Conservation Voters scorecard.

Rick Perry: Department of Energy

A skeptic for sure who has called climate change “an unproven scientific theory”.

Rex Tillerson: Department of State

 Tillerson is a mixed bag. He’s said some pro-Paris-agreement things, yet run the company that was threatened with a RICO investigation for funding non-government approved views on climate. He didn’t turn Exxon in to a BP or a Shell version of a carbon trading lobby group. He’s probably a skeptic, but perhaps it’s not a high priority?

 James N Mattis: Department of Defense

The Guardian haven’t got much. There is an ambiguous hint that Mattis may be more concerned about the military having energy. But there’s also the suggestion from a very worried fan of the Man-made-crisis-meme” that  General James “Mad Dog” Mattis would be a better pick than most other Generals on the shortlist.

Ben Carson: Department of Housing and Urban Development

When Carson talks about climate change he’s the perfect skeptic: “I know there are a lot of people who say ‘overwhelming science’, but then when you ask them to show the overwhelming science they never can show it”

Mike Pompeo: CIA

Sounds like a good man: “Pompeo is among the most the outspoken critics of climate change legislation. ” “He derided Barack Obama last year for describing climate change as a national security threat. Pompeo referred to the Paris agreement as a “radical climate change deal”.”

Michael Flynn: National security adviser

Flynn also told off Obama for talking about climate change after the Orlando terrorist attack. At least Flynn has his priorities straight.

Jeff Sessions: Attorney general

Sessions is very much a skeptic. Smile. He voted in the Senate against climate action. The League of Conservation Voters giving him a scorecard of 7%. (High praise indeed!) He knows that there are “legitimate disputes” about global warming, and that CO2 feeds plants and is not harmful. “Sessions reportedly said last year that the fight against climate change hurts poor people.” In 2015, he conceded CO2 might cause temperature increases, but still said it wasn’t a pollutant and was plant food.

John F Kelly: Department of Homeland Security

There is not much to go on. Kelly has at least given a neutral statement on climate change  “… whether one agrees or disagrees with the cause-and-effect claims – all are at least fully aware of the issue. Even those who reject the science have reduced their energy consumption and know it is good for the environment.”

 Tom Price: Department of Health and Human Services

Price supported a bill to stop the EPA and spoke of  “recent revelations of errors and obfuscation in the allegedly ‘settled science’ of global warming.” He has consistently voted against incentivizing renewable energy sources… He signed a pledge to oppose climate legislation.”

Wilbur Ross: Department of Commerce

Ross will be managing NOAA. His views on climate change are not clear, but he has invested in oil and gas.

Steven Mnuchin: Department of the Treasury

He’s a Goldman Sachs guy. No public statements on climate. Hmm.

Betsy DeVos: Department of Education

She is chairman of the Windquest Group which started in 1989 and invests in “clean energy technology”. That was a long time ago. We sure hope that doesn’t get in the way of repairing the education system. The Guardian doesn’t mention that she is active in promoting a bigger role for parents in education through school vouchers. E’Gad! Imagine public schools having to compete with private schools, and being judged by actual taxpayers. So even if public schools still push the one sided propaganda on climate, at least parents will get more choice to avoid it:

For nearly 30 years, as a philanthropist, activist and Republican fund-raiser, she has pushed to give families taxpayer money in the form of vouchers to attend private and parochial schools, pressed to expand publicly funded but privately run charter schools, and tried to strip teacher unions of their influence.

But Ms. DeVos’s efforts to expand educational opportunity in her home state of Michigan and across the country have focused little on existing public schools, and almost entirely on establishing newer, more entrepreneurial models to compete with traditional schools for students and money. Her donations and advocacy go almost entirely toward groups seeking to move students and money away from what Mr. Trump calls “failing government schools.”

Elaine Chao: Department of Transportation

She’s been a fellow at the Heritage Foundation, which would be unforgivable in the Obama-world. In 2009 she “derided a proposed cap-and-trade system” as a way to deal with carbon emissions.

Read the full descriptions at The Guardian.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.8/10 (83 votes cast)
Trump appoints even more skeptics, 9.8 out of 10 based on 83 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/hqxufql

137 comments to Trump appoints even more skeptics

  • #
    David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

    WOW!
    This is more than I expected, even hoped for.
    May it all go well.
    Cheers,
    Dave B

    221

    • #
      Environment Skeptic

      I hope he appoints some decent ‘environment skeptics’ who can help to provide a balance of environmentalism and perhaps tax all environmentally damaging practices. Think of all the money if other damaging molecules in out environment could be taxed instead of myopically focusing on the molecule CO2???

      The climate environmentalism question is displacing all other traditional environmental concerns like logging, deforestation, water quality and so on, and is clearly and beyond any reasonable doubt, becoming environmentally lopsided and malignant.

      I remain skeptical about environmentalism as it is practiced today by our contemporaries in the question of the environment.

      70

    • #

      I think I can hear watermelons popping. :)

      251

      • #
        RAH

        That’s the heads of leftists you hear popping! They are completely off their rockers and have gone over the edge. The plethora of pure Bull Shine coming from the WH and their ever compliant media and the Federal bureaucrats and even the leftists of Hollywood is nothing more than them flailing to try and find some way to land some kind of blow on Trump. All their efforts are failing to delegitimize the man and his movement and his designees for appointments to his administration so, like to good disciples of Alinsky that they are, they are continuing to make ever more outrageous and outlandish claims and even demands for unconstitutional actions. Nobody but the densest of snowflakes and the most prejudice of the electorate are buying any of it. Many fear that the left will try to go beyond just words and move into direct subversion of the Constitution. I still believe it is highly doubful that is going to happen.

        That being said many of us, including me, are ready in the event that it requires direct punitive action to protect the Republic. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/12/16/americans-bought-17850-tons-of-ammo-in-last-12-months/
        Now that’s nearly 18 tons of ammo that was imported and does not include domestic production or home reloaders. Obama and the left has been the best civil arms and ammo salespeople in American history and the lefts current actions will make those numbers grow even more. Manufacture of all types of small arms have skyrocketed in the US despite the best efforts of the left. There will be firearms and ammo under many an Americans Christmas tree this year. Just ammo under mine though.

        Peace on earth and good will to men. But when the forces of darkness threaten it is only prudent to be ready for come what may.

        220

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          Hi RAH,

          I thank my lucky stars that I live in Australia where basically guns are not necessary in urban life.

          We have functional policing in cities.

          Maybe in country areas there is a need for self protection and pest control but otherwise my opinion is that they do more harm than good.

          America, unfortunately, has a different history to us and I appreciate people may feel safer with a gun handy.

          That said, I feel very happy with our arrangement here.

          Merry Christmas.
          KK

          25

          • #
            Angry

            The way things are going regarding M u S L I M s and crime in general in Australia it’s looking like gun ownership may become a necessity unfortunately…………..

            41

            • #
              KinkyKeith

              Yes.

              I hear there are parts of Sydney that are dominated by crime and gangs and many others that have a bad atmosphere with constant break ins.

              In the context of what I wrote above it is important to state that our community has been let down by law enforcement.

              There is only one place to sheet home the blame and that is parliament.

              Gun crime In Australia is inexcusable and those responsible should be held to account by voters.

              Vote them out. We shouldn’t have to take this sort of neglect from politicians.

              KK

              21

          • #
            John Michelmore

            Unfortunately people believe there is a direct relationship between firearm ownership and firearm homicide. In fact using multi country data no such correlation exits. Firearm homicide is more likely to be related to general law and order and the production and trafficking of drugs, not the number of firearms the population owns. Generally drug busts also find weapons, including illegal firearms. Those of us that would be labelled skeptics and legal firearms owners are confronted with the same kind of “consensus” problem, however the facts are quite different.

            30

            • #
              KinkyKeith

              I heard once that ownership of a firearm was compulsory in Switzerland.

              Given the apparent low crime rate there and their Canton system it seems to work.

              As a contrast, we have the USA with high firearm ownership and a tragic death rate from guns.

              This may suggest that the political system in place is the most important factor and the ensuing self discipline that comes with each style of”democracy”.

              Virginia Tech and other well known massacres suggest that there are people in the US community who have guns when they shouldn’t.

              It needs fixing but that’s up to the voters in the US.

              The people of Connecticut has probably not forgotten the horror brought by guns just a few years ago.

              It’s an important topic but my main concern is that people against climate catastrophism, such as use this site, aren’t automatically seen as supporting the gun lobby.

              KK

              23

          • #
            RAH

            KinkyKeith

            It would not matter where I lived, I would want a firearm for protection. The right to protect ones life and that of their family is the most fundamental of all rights. Police are great in they are generally only a reactive force and not a proactive force. Having a firearm or firearms for personal protection is no different then having a fire extinguisher in your home except for the fact that a firearm can be far more deadly when used or misused. Both require some knowledge to use them properly. Both require proper storage and periodic maintenance. And both can be used to eliminate/mitigate an immediate threat to ones life or welfare when emergency responders are minutes away.

            In addition, the 2nd amendment of the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution is the one right which provides the citizen with some ability to fight to ensure all other rights when the forces of darkness take actions to oppress them and all other measures and protections have failed.

            The founders of the United States who wrote the Constitution understood that Government is a necessary evil that will constantly strive to expand it’s dominance over the governed. Most people don’t seem to realize that for the base document of that Constitution to be ratified a deal was struck between the Federalists and the Antifederalists, that the Bill of Rights would be added by the first Congress for it’s ratification by the people. Every one of the 10 amendments in the Bill of Rights is intended to either limit the power of the Federal government or plainly state fundamental rights which the Federal government was not to infringe upon.

            60

            • #
              KinkyKeith

              Hi RAH,

              I appreciate what you are saying about America but you don’t seem to have anything to say except that you must have a gun.

              Maybe you could comment on why extensive gun ownership works in Switzerland but is a disaster in the US.

              Could you please also comment on the opportunity cost of having a gun handy when you feel suicidal?

              This blog is primarily about “global warming” and the politics that enables it to be an issue.
              I am exercising my right of free speech to say that I prefer to live in a society where guns aren’t necessary even though this seems to put me at odds with the twenty or so people who have approved your earlier comment.

              I like and have great respect for America and Americans but feel overwhelming sadness at the constant stream of summary executions of innocent people and children in your country.

              Also I don’t like the assumption that because I reject the concept of man made global warming I am automatically seen as supporting the pro gun lobby. That’s not the case.

              KK

              23

              • #
                Richard Ilfeld

                The US is a big place. In half of our geography, gun ownership is very useful, mostly to protect livestock & pets from pests ranging from coyotes to alligators. In another third, there is less need but little problem. Hunters, target enthusiasts, collectors, & those who like to feel safer are not generally represented in negative stats.
                WE have some difficult populations, and some substandard policing. The majority of gun crimes are committed byt those for whom possession is illegal.

                Seems we can’t substitute laws for culture.
                The casual use of public violence to resolve disputes with little legal intervention is worsened if the subculture who so act have firearms.
                But, that threat existing, the need for defence is as real as the fear of alligators. & they live at the golf course across the street.

                30

              • #
                RAH

                “I appreciate what you are saying about America but you don’t seem to have anything to say except that you must have a gun.”

                KinkyKeith your statement I quoted above makes it abundantly clear that there is absolutely nothing I could write that would convince you that owning a fire arm is prudent. I stated two reasons as clearly as I could and you rejected them out of hand.

                The fundamental boxes of liberty are:
                The Soap box
                The Ballot box
                The Cartridge box.

                The final box to be used when the other two are usurped.

                Here is a 13 minute video of true story of something that took place in Athens, TN in 1946.

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5ut6yPrObw

                The problem of firearms violence is a cultural one and not a legal one. The city of Chicago has an atrocious murder rate. During most of the time large numbers of US forces were in Iraq more people were dying from firearms in that city than US soldiers were being killed by firearms in the field. Chicago has some of the most stringent gun control laws in the country.

                And BTW the “pro gun lobby” is also the pro Constitutional law lobby.

                41

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Re Richard I,

                Thanks Richard that’s summed it up very well.

                10

              • #
                Rod Stuart

                Maybe you could comment on why extensive gun ownership works in Switzerland but is a disaster in the US.

                Firearms are like anything else. Ownership makes it necessary to learn about their use, care and storage.
                I grew up with firearms, and my parents were prudent to encourage my enrollment in a junior rifle club which was paramilitary in its discipline, knowledge, and conservation outlook.
                I understand that the Swiss have had conscription for decades. Nearly everyone still alive has had two years’ military training, which of course includes learning in the correct use, care, and storage of firearms.
                I rather suspect that has much to do with the Swiss experience.
                I thought that firearm ownership was mandatory in each household, but someone here hauled me up on that months ago. Nevertheless, unless I am very misinformed, it is very typical in Switzerland for each household to have at least one firearm. That is definitely be a disincentive to would-be intruders. Just like back on the farm, attempted theft or Tom Foolery was at the risk of getting a load of rock salt from a ten gauge up your ass.

                40

              • #
                Pat Frank

                Those intereted in US gun ownership should read John Lott’s “More Guns, Less Crime.” Lott is an economist, who examined gun and crime statistics down to the county level in the US.

                He found a consistent inverse relation between gun ownership and incidence of violent crime and of rape. Open carry laws are particularly effective against crime. More (legal) guns, less crime, in other words. He makes the point that criminals are not stupid. They avoid places where people are likely to be armed, and go elsewhere.

                Lott also found that gun owners are generally very law-abiding. They do not indulge in murder, nor do does legal gun ownership produce an excess of gun deaths.

                His work has been hotly attacked, but not disproven. Dispoofs have been claimed, and the disproofs themselves disproven. The debate can be a little comical.

                For example, from the abstract of Plassman & Witley’s Confirming, “More Guns, Less Crime,” [1], “[In their disproof] Ayres and Donohue have simply misread their own results. Their own most general specification that breaks down the impact of the law on a year-by-year basis shows large crime-reducing benefits. Virtually none of their claims that their county-level hybrid model implies initial significant increases in crime are correct.

                In the US, there is a huge disparity of gun-related killings with ethnicity, and with group-urban culture. Where drugs are commerced, gun murders are very high. Elsewhere in the US, the murder rate is at about the same level as in Europe.

                So, understanding the relatively high rate of gun-related murders in the US as if it revealed the quality of civility uniformly everywhere is to be misled.

                Likewise, US crime statistics show that gun-related murders are not an indictment of legal gun ownership.

                Here is an interview with Lott.

                [1] Florenz Plassmann and John Whitley (2003) Confirming “More Guns, Less Crime” Stanford Law Review 55(4) (April), 1313-1369

                40

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Thanks for the comment Rod.
                You have outlined the Swiss situation as I understand it. My take on it is that the Swiss have a very disciplined approach to gun ownership. I’m not sure how their experience can be used to help understand the system in the US but my distaste for guns in the wrong hands is probably coming through in my comments.

                Some comments here seem to suggest that the answer is to have the students at Virginia Tech and Connecticut schools carry weapons to school for self protection.

                I don’t think I need to make any further comment on that idea.

                I grew up watching Saturday afternoon movies of America’s wild West but thankfully never needed to own a gun nor do I want one.

                I have enough hobbies and interests to keep me busy without that.

                KK

                10

              • #
                Rod Stuart

                the answer is to have the students at Virginia Tech and Connecticut schools carry weapons

                Actually the State of Texas recently legislated that conceal and carry is permitted on State University campuses.
                In the recent case in which a Jihadi charged a group of pedestrians with a vehicle and then attacked them with a knife, it is rather unfortunate that at least one in the group didn’t have a weapon.
                I’m not making a case for the it one way of the other. Just trying to answer your questions.
                However, if your perception of “America’s wild west” comes from John Wayne movies, I’m sorry to say you’ve been badly misinformed.

                20

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Hi Rod,

                We could go on forever, but the Jihadi episode you describe points to the failure of politicians to do the right thing and take Jihadis and other known crazies off the streets.

                Citizens, especially school children, shouldn’t need to “carry and conceal”.

                Virginia Tech, Connecticut and so many others including the young child who killed one of its parents; it’s sad that the gun lobby can’t even begin to acknowledge the problem.

                KK

                11

              • #
                Mark D.

                “ACKNOWLEDGE the problem”? THE PROBLEM?????

                I don’t know how much clearer it could be. The “gun lobby” IS US!

                DO NOT MAKE THE MISTAKE OF BLAMING THE LAW ABIDING FOR THE ILLEGAL ACTIONS OF CRIMINALS!!!!!!

                There. Is is crystal clear for you?

                I don’t care that you think you have no need for guns. I KNOW that when you NEED one you are already F—-d.

                If someday we truly NEED guns then you are absolutely useless. I couldn’t give you one at that point you’d likely do more harm than good.

                10

              • #
                Rod Stuart

                Keith, I wasn’t arguing with you. Although I have a healthy respect for firearms, and have a few trophies earned many years ago to show for my love of the rifle range and the traps, I haven’t owned a firearm since I moved to Australia.
                I would like to point out a speech made by Bob Katter in Parliament, I think about a year ago. It was excellent. For the benefit of Mark D, Katter is a rather quirky politician that hails from the outback of Queensland. Bob enumerated the number of times that his family members had required police assistance, and were fortunate to have a few firearms handy to ward off intruders. In one instance it was TWO WEEKS from the time of the emergency call until the police arrived. Now, that is understandable in the circumstances and geography, but the fact is there is no police force good enough to be there the very instant you need them.
                I am sorry I can’t recall the day so that we could find it in Hansard. Suffice it to say, Bob made a compelling argument for gun ownership in the hands of mature, knowledgeable, honest folks.

                20

              • #
                Rod Stuart

                Kinky Keith
                Mark D
                I found the Bob Katter speech if you are interested.

                00

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Hi Rod

                No offense taken from you. I also made the point that those living outside cities would most likely need personal weapons. No argument there but Mark seems to have ignored that.

                It seems strange that so many of the commenters here are deliberately avoiding finding a remedy for incidents like Virginia Tech and Connecticut.

                The body count of those innocents must be a worry for any sensible citizen but carrying arms is more important than those deaths?

                Isn’t something wrong there?

                KK

                00

          • #
            clive

            “A man with a firearm is a citizen, without one he is a Subject”

            32

          • #
            Ernest Bush

            Since 1996 gun deaths have decreased by 40 something percent in your country. In the U.S., as gun ownership has increased, the amount of gun deaths has decreased by 53 percent. Seventy five percent of gun deaths in the U.S. involve gang shootings in Democrat enclaves (can you say Chicago, New York, and L.A. to mention a few). Strange that the shootings you refer to took place in gun-free zones. You write as if this is all happening in a vacuum occupied only by the United States and that Australia does not have these problems. I think others here have already demonstrated that is not the case. You live in fantasy land.

            Thousands of personal assaults, rapes, home entries, and murders are prevented from happening daily (300 plus million people, remember) because the victim-to-be or somebody nearby was armed. Most rapes and personal assaults on an armed citizen end with the presentation of a gun. The usual result is a quick retreat by the would-be criminal.

            Our Second Amendment guarantees us the right to own any firearm we care to own. There are millions of AR-15s in homes across America and billions of rounds. As documented by the writings of our founding fathers, we are practically required to rise up and take down any government that gets too odious to bear. Progressive policies have failed miserably in the U.S. as in everywhere else around the world. If Trump doesn’t keep his word it may be that the second amendment right may be the only remedy to restore individual liberties in the U.S.

            01

            • #
              KinkyKeith

              Reading that comment I feel very sorry for America.

              What a sad place, obsessed with gun culture.

              Go back and read all of my comments and if you have already read and ignored them, then that makes me feel even sadder.

              KK

              00

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                So much for truth.

                The rate of gun deaths per 100,000 in the well protected USA is 10 to 12 times the equivalent rate in the land I live in: Australia.

                Gun control seems to work?

                As I said earlier Virginia and Connecticut should not be forgotten.

                I like trump

                KK

                00

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Accidental discharge.

                I like Trump by not his approach to gun control.

                00

              • #
                Ernest Bush

                You are fortunate enough to live in a country that has a sane immigration policy. I live in a country where for decades progressives have done their best to keep the borders completely open. Thirty percent of the population in state prisons consists of illegal aliens. Most of them are there for supplying large quantities of illegal drugs to our city populations. Distribution is by minority gangs who fight over their territories for the most part. They supposedly live in gun free cities, but don’t seem to have much trouble getting an illegal weapon. Their weekend sport seems to be killing each other and some non-members in the inner cities.

                Whites account for 12 percent of gun deaths, which translate to the low hundreds per year. If the gangs were eliminated, we would have one of the lowest gun death rates per population in the world. It’s the guns in the hands of us white guys outside of Democrat cities that politicians have tried to go after. They are a little afraid of us and they should be if they continue to ignore our constitutional rights.

                As for Virginia and Connecticut, there is no solution. No guns allowed. Australia does not allow you to protect yourself. Your country has been subject to terrorism and hostage situations just as we have. What do you propose to do about that? At that point we are both dependent on local authorities to handle the situation. The same is doubly true for the EU.

                00

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                O.K. Ernest,
                We are now having a quiet measured exchange and much that you have written is relevant and to the point.

                In my comments above I have accepted and acknowledged the need for many Americans to own guns in the same way that I believe isolated farmers and the like should also have self protection available.

                The USA is different from Australia and Britain in historical approach to law and order and our greatest saving may be that we are an island.

                Your last paragraph has a few things that don’t seem right; Australians are able to own guns and if my memory serves me correctly the shooter in the Connecticut massacre took guns owned by a parent to use.

                And lastly, the only thing linking the CAGW debate and the gun debate is Bad Government.

                I, as an opponent of the cagw lie don’t want to be automatically linked to the pro gun lobby, that’s my main point.

                KK

                00

              • #
                AndyG55

                “I, as an opponent of the cagw lie don’t want to be automatically linked to the pro gun lobby, that’s my main point.”

                When you have a functional mind.. do you really need a gun ????

                And you, KK, definitely have a functional mind.

                11

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Thanks Andy,

                It’s been a bit lonely on this thread but the topic seemed to be crying out for some clarification.

                Guns may be a necessary evil in some circumstances but should not be allowed to add to the pain through misuse.

                Merry Christmas.

                KK

                10

              • #
                AndyG55

                I certainly can’t see a need for them in our part of the world.

                Maybe if I lived in certain parts of western Sydney or some parts of Melbourne, I might have a different opinion. Self protection only.

                Out bush, several of my friends regularly went pig and feral hunting.

                I went once, but it didn’t catch my interest that much either.

                10

              • #
        • #
          clive

          “We sleep well in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.”Orwell

          31

  • #
  • #
    Dennis

    Going, Going ……………………….

    80

  • #
    AndyG55

    The utter desperation from the alarmista will be hilarious to watch. :-) :-)

    I particularly like this wording from above. So I’m going to block-quote them

    “The times have changed so much that it’s not a case of “spot the skeptic” but a hunt to find any believers in the climate doctrine.

    Make no mistake, things are very, very bad for the fans of human-caused-weather.

    283

    • #
      Leigh

      I’m hearing you AG.
      The Trump administration must be ready for the ramping up of inevitable alarmists announcements of the coming armagedon. The moment the cash tap is turned off it’ll start. The kick back will come from the “97% of the settled science community”.
      The likes of Mann and co. will not go quietly and need to be hit head on with the actual science.
      Not the secretive data and the equally secret methodology used to collect it. We in Australia have seen first hand how our BOM flatly refuses to share their secretive methodologys of data manipulation . By stating “you wouldn’t understand the process of adjustments unless you were involved”. Bloody hell. I might not but I’m sure Jo & co. would with crystal clarity! “All according to worlds best practice” of course.
      The Trump administration being merely dismissive of these rent seekers won’t satisfy anyone.Including my fellow skeptics.
      Put it all on the table to be evaluated by ALL interested scientists and the branches of the science they represent.
      Affectively, put it up or shut up!

      222

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Mann and co. will not go quietly and need to be hit head on with the actual science.

        I agree.

        But it you are going to hit people on the head with actual science, make sure you hit them with the pointy end, and in a place where it really hurts.

        Wallets present a good target zone.

        120

    • #
      PeterS

      Yes it will be hilarious to watch except for one thing. They are not laughing. The leftists can be a very dangerous group of people. They will not give up so easily. Some even will rather see America burn than to let someone like Trump ruin their scam. Let’s hope that Trump somehow puts these leftists maniacs in their place before they do too much damage. We already are seeing some of the Hollywood actors trying to convince the Electors not to vote for Trump in the final College vote. Of course they are wasting their time so one wonders why they even bother.

      90

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        We already are seeing some of the Hollywood actors trying to convince the Electors …

        That may work, with the reality-challenged members of the populace. But why are Hollywood actors important? They have very limited skills:

        Hollywood actors can remember and repeat twenty word speeches, and simulate fake emotions, sufficently well enough to cause the average person to suspend their own reality for a short while.

        They may have other skills, in addition, but those are the two skills that define them as actors. Why do they get paid more than, say a blacksmith, who has to be proficient in a dozen skills, or more.

        81

        • #
          jorgekafkazar

          “All actors are cattle.” –Alfred Hitchcock

          “Moooo!” –George Clooney
          “Moooo!” –Johnny Depp
          “Moooo!” –Richard Gere
          “Moooo!” –Rosie O’Donnell
          “Moooo!” –Olivia Wilde
          “Moooo!” –Samuel L. Jackson
          “I’ll be bock!” –Arnold Schwarzenegger

          40

    • #
      Environment Skeptic

      In my case, after simply being your average Mike, it was at leas subconsciously clear from the beginning that all this, posturing about the weather, had nothing to do with looking after the environment in any case. If it was, really basic stupidly easy things like logging native forests would have ceased long, long ago.
      I continue to remain skeptical about environmentalism as it is practiced today by our naive contemporaries

      40

  • #
    Dennis

    The US Federal Government is expected to raise official interest rate at least three times during 2017.

    40

    • #
      Environment Skeptic

      I doubt they will be able to increase the rate of interest in talking about the weather when the present rates of interest with respect to talking about the weather are already at pathological high levels.

      Because talking about the weather was hardwired into our genome at very high rates of interest by our ancestors, any further interest rate increases might permanently damage the human genome

      20

      • #
        Environment Skeptic

        If the Government could tax the current rate of interest with respect to talking about the weather/climate, for example by taxing all new climate models and the latest climate theories, all those fiscal concerns about balancing the budget would be solved by this new tax alone.

        The side effect would be that talking about the weather would return to normal levels of interest and rarely get heated.

        20

  • #
    Mark D.

    He’s a Goldman Sachs guy. No public statements on climate. Hmm.

    Some folks would not like my opinion but I think it is smart to put someone in this position that actually knows money. Bankers are probably better with money than say; politicians.

    81

    • #

      With Mnuchin, I hope it is a case of “using a cheat to catch a cheat”?

      Being a big casino guy once, perhaps Trump knows the golden rule of Vegas that it takes one to know one?

      One thing I find very weird is the very strong relationship between Sir Evelyn and Lynn de Rothschild to the Clinton’s and people such as David Brock, but the paradox that Wilbur Ross was for over 20 years manager of Rothschild Inc investments, also being the exact same guy that saved Trump’s bacon when he had to ‘cut a deal’ not to go bankrupt in the 90′s. Without this Rothschild assistance restructuring Trump’s many corporate and private debts, he would have been ruined both professionally and personally (personal bankruptcy and not just a few LTD’s going bust, because he had his own money tied up in the Atlantic casino gigs).

      We should all remember that it was David Meyer de Rothschild, the son of Evelyn de Rothschild, who wrote the literal manual for the LIVE Earth concerts that Al Gore was promoting. The manual was called “77 ways to stop global warming …”, and he was also the Rothschild of Plastiki fame that did the stunt with the boat made of recycled plastic and the Pacific Ocean plastic whirlpool.

      Ross and Mnuchin are the two positions that have me highly perplexed and worried. The rest of them seem to be good compromises between neo-con’s and Tea Party types. Ben Carson is a legend and what is not to love about the guy; he has never wavered from his personal and moral convictions, which is an unheard of achievement in the D.C.Swamp – though he hasn’t been in politics for too long to be sure.

      I’m just praying for a quick incineration of the Paris deal, though it looks from Janet Yellin’s recent rate rise – just on time for the Republican – that the Fed is now going to tank the bubble that it has created giving the Democrats a stimulus cover for over 8 years now. Increasing rates now after such a long suspension will completely tank the economy that Obama has totally skewed heavily towards corporate welfare and government largess. Trump will have much to deal with in this first 4 years if they allow him to be inaugurated on January 20th … or maybe he will be tried as a ‘Russian spy’ and disallowed office? (crazy, crazy times).

      40

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        Money goes to money,
        Yes it always returns.
        Finds its way back to the big house,
        Where it lives all alone.
        Wraithlike silent partners,
        Operators of the system;
        Give words of quiet assurance,
        To an otherwise healthy victim.

        Deep Purple: “Money Talks”

        40

      • #
        Analitik

        +100 to everything said.

        I even wonder if Yellen will go into full Volcker mode and tighten monetary supply as well as hiking rates? It’s what the economy (worldwide, not just the US) needs to force realistic valuations but it will hurt on would make many of Trump’s policies impossible.

        Then again, it would give Trump an out for not going through with some of his high spending promises, especially since he warned about the economic bubble several times during the course of his campaign and in the debates.

        20

        • #
          Ernest Bush

          Between 2012 and 2014 shale oil and gas added 3.5 trillion US dollars to our economy. Several million good paying jobs were created both directly and indirectly. Obama does not get credit for this. He couldn’t stop drilling on state and privately owned lands. Now that Saudi Arabia has stopped pumping full out, the price of a barrel of crude is around 48 to 50 dollars and the amount of wells being drilled is increasing weekly. There is a probability that a renewed energy sector will add trillions more, especially if Trump opens up more public lands to drilling. Billions in taxes and land use fees will be generated as a result. If Trump can jump start the economy in other sectors, it will be get out of the way time. There will be plenty of taxes to fulfill his promises.

          00

  • #

    Thanks for a very helpful and encouraging analysis.

    My personal desire is that Trump will eliminate at least a few of the 12 unconstitutional federal government cabinet posts:
    http://www.hillsdale.edu/townhall

    111

    • #

      “Under Trump there are 16 cabinet posts and only four of these are constitutional (State, Defence, Treasury and Attorney General). Trump’s legacy will be defined by how many of the unconstitutional cabinet departments are eliminated:”

      Those four are likely needed for something the size of the USA. All else is to be left to the States, or the people therein! A true Republic, if you can hang to the thing! The Donald has less than two years to do ‘his’ thing! The 2018 replacement election will decide if the USA can possibly have a viable government!

      41

      • #
        RAH

        Trump will be president for four years minimum unless he dies, becomes incapacitated, or is impeached, as per the US Constitution. Though the party of the sitting president usually takes a beating during the midterm elections the one coming in 2018 has a very good chance of breaking that mold because the people are so unhappy and the democrats have a lot more senate seats to potentially lose. So if the Republicans can hold on to their majority in the House of Representatives during the mid term election in 2018 then there is a very good chance trump will have Republican majorities in both chambers of congress until January of 2020 when his term ends IF he has not won a second term.
        Terms in office:
        President – 4 years
        Senators – 6 years
        Representatives – 2 years.

        50

        • #
          RAH

          January of 2021 and not 2020. Sorry. President Trumps first term will end Jan 20th of 2021.

          30

          • #

            RAH December 18, 2016 at 12:02 am

            “January of 2021 and not 2020. Sorry. President Trumps first term will end Jan 20th of 2021.”

            You insist on fake ‘terms’, rather than is, or ‘may be’! The Donald becomes mostly benevolent US dictator by 2018 or the US has no has no viable government whatsoever!

            22

            • #
              RAH

              Nothing fake about it. As a US soldier I took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States. Not to a government or flag or man. If one does not understand that fundamental value they don’t understand what the United States is intended to be all about.

              “I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”

              60

        • #
          Rod Stuart

          Someone brought up Al Capp and L’l Abner the other day.
          Mammy Yokum used to refer to congress as the ‘House of Reprehensibles”.

          30

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    John F Kelly “Even those who reject the science …

    This is a man that hasn’t done his homework. He should know that “climate science” as presented by Al Gore and the rest of the catastrophic global warming (climate change) crowd is a pile of regurgitated baloney (aka guff, or worse).
    Almost all that read this will know the reasons so I won’t explain them (again) here.
    Someone that can contact this man should do so. Marines, step up.

    131

  • #
    Eric Simpson

    Tillerson is a mixed bag… He’s probably a skeptic,”

    I don’t think so. Tillerson IMO is a flat out warmist.
    Tillerson’s saying he believes the leftist science and saying “BUT I don’t think the debate should stop” is little consolation and is consistent with what Republican warmists like Chris Christie and Kasich say. But what ISN’T consistent with (small) number of Republican warmists is Tillerson’s apparently enthusiastic acceptance of the Paris Climate Accord. ALL Republicans warmists like Kasich rejected the Paris Accord. Honestly, because Tillerson embraces the Paris Accord it makes me think he’s in reality a Democrat.

    What’s more:
    Two days after Trump’s election Exxon tweeted “The Paris agreement is an important step forward by governments in addressing the serious risks of #ClimateChange.” Tillerson certainly signed off on that.

    The Sec of State will deal directly with the Paris Accord. I’m ‘alarmed’ because ~ last week Trump said he’s no longer sure what he’s going to do regarding the Paris A, and then he nominates a Paris A cheerleader! Trump needs to reassure his base that he’s going to keep his word on that accord. It will matter little what a skeptic run EPA does if we remain in the costly idiotic Paris A.

    These are the troubling words spoken just 2 months ago:
    Rex Tillerson Oct 2016: “At ExxonMobil, we share the view that the risks of climate change are serious. Addressing these risks requires broad-based, practical solutions around the world. Importantly, as a result of the Paris agreement, both developed and developing countries are now working together to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.” http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/442995/rex-tillerson-carbon-tax-backing-climate-change-believer

    32

    • #
      Richard Ilfeld

      I’d suggest the protecting the shareholders required adequate relations with the then-current govt. A tinge of green was a cost of doing business in
      a hostile environment, not a personal commitment. It was a business guy deciding that the best strategy was regulatory capture rather than resistance.
      Exxon will do better in a freer market.

      40

      • #
        Eric Simpson

        I question the idea that Exxon had to bow down to a liberal power in order to improve its business. I don’t think so.

        Conceivably they were cowed by political correctness, but there’s no govt compulsion for Exxon to go left on climate change: in fact Exxon seems to have done it under their own volition with no expectation of any regulatory benefit.

        As likely they combined motives of political correctness with the profit motive, because as I said in a downthread comment:

        Oil companies BENEFIT from the climate lunacy.

        Because it KILLS COAL … and oil is the substitution.

        21

        • #
          Richard Ilfeld

          Yup = that too.
          But I look for enough pragmatism in business to change when there is a new sherrif.

          20

  • #
    Mark M

    The Best Version of Michael Moore’s “The Biggest F*** You In Human History” Speech
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLfvXjKMwtI

    60

    • #
      Eric Simpson

      I actually like this audio only version of “The Biggest F*** You” the best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsPlwhahHAo

      That’s because you don’t have to see Moore speaking, as Moore is pretty unsightly. It’s true that there’s a static picture of Moore that stays up there the whole time (with a pic of Trump) but it looks like Moore is wearing a red Trump cap (actually a Rutgers cap…) and somehow it’s not so bad on your eyes.
      ~
      ~
      BTW, my comment #9 about Tillerson has been saying:
      Your comment is awaiting moderation.

      For hours… Can’t figure out why? The National Review link?

      10

  • #
    ROM

    Maybe, just maybe this is the first time ever where a big dealing Real Estate wheeler dealer has hogged so much of the MSM’s attention, has exerted so much influence and created so much plain straight out angst amongst so many individuals, groups and nations, who has George Soros and Tom Sayers and a whole host of other rather shady and unscrupulous far beyond filthy rich, socialistic to hard left nasty Washington beltway swamp alligators all trying to take a very big lump out of aforesaid Real Estate wheeler dealer that they think and possibly believe that the aforesaid real estate wheeler dealer might just create conditions favourable to their possible extinction or at least relegation to the Washington swamp’s very unsavory backwaters.

    A real estate wheeler dealer who is hiring some very hard political hit men which is creating copious quantities of very nervous sweat across the whole vast swamp of bureaucratic Washington’s innumerable nasty swamp alligators and bloody big pythons and assorted political Skunk Apes that think they and they alone are entitled to run the place.
    And we ain’t talking about the “Everglades” either!

    A real estate wheeler dealer who has the entire and utterly arrogant EU executive running around in their tiny mindless self centred circles, they don’t know of or acknowledge anybody else’s circles, because not enough due deference is being paid to them both collectively and personally, who has the Chinese all flummoxed and upset that things are not being run the Chinese way so as to benefit the Chinese and nobody else, who has the Ayatollahs banging their heads on the floor even harder than usual as they develop signs of a rather nervous sweat, who has caused some Canadians so much angst that they even offered Trudeau to the Americans to sort things out as they just want to find somewhere other than Canada to park Trudeau for the duration, who has the Mexicans and other rather dubious and assorted South American outfits very worried that they might have to take back the scum they happily unloaded on the USA over the last eight years, who has Kim of North Korea geeing up his propaganda department on the possibility that fat Kim might not get away with what he has been doing for much longer.

    Not bad for a 70 year old real estate wheeler and dealer to have that much influence around the place and not even have any signs of any real hard power either political or financial

    Now compared to that real estate wheeler dealer you really just have to see and comprehend just what the real deal Dude, the black one who holds and wields real power, the real actual immense power of the world’s richest and most powerful nation in his hands is up to ??????? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz—————-!

    142

    • #
      Yonniestone

      As you suggest Trump is a good strategist especially when distracting the enemy, using the MSM’s predictability bias against its own puppet masters was something not seen for years, while the left obsess over their moral perceptions of him the real game is being played outside the stadium,

      Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate. Sun Tzu

      81

  • #
    Eric Simpson

    Tillerson is a mixed bag… He’s probably a skeptic” Part II

    Tillerson said 2 months ago “the risks of climate are serious.” That’ not a skeptic, that’s a warmist.

    Now I hear that oil companies, as a rule, are climate leftists! Some say “that’s because they are trying to appease the regulators whom are leftists.” I don’t think so. This is my latest thinking on oil companies & AGW and how that’s relevant to our debate with the leftist Chicken Littles:
    It turns out that the oil industry is stock full of wacky climate alarmists. That’s ironic as up to this day the leftists first try to discredit climate skeptics by tying them to “big oil.”

    But oil companies BENEFIT from the climate idiocy.

    Yes, because it kills coal, and oil is substituted.

    Again, the major point relevant to our debate is that when they try to discredit us because of an alleged oil connection we can throw back in their face “OIL BENEFITS FROM THE CLIMATE SCAM!”

    71

    • #
      Eric Simpson

      Wilbur Ross: Department of Commerce
      Ross will be managing NOAA. His views on climate change are not clear, but he has invested in oil and gas.

      Uh oh. “Invested in oil and gas” means the benefit to him is in killing coal and staying in the insane Paris Climate Accord.

      41

      • #
        RAH

        I think we’ll have to wait and see on Tillerson. But no matter what the guy thinks he is bound to follow the lead of his POTUS or he will be out the door.

        50

    • #
      el gordo

      Tillerson might best be described as an opportunist who bends with the wind.

      ‘Under Tillerson’s predecessor, CEO Lee Raymond, Exxon fought the Kyoto Protocol on global warming and other climate policies, frequently framing climate science as shaky at best.

      ‘After Tillerson took over, the company backed a tax on carbon dioxide emissions, implemented an internal accounting measure to put a fee on carbon emissions and stopped funding many groups that outright reject the scientific consensus behind climate change, all major shifts away from its previous positions.’

      The Hill

      50

      • #
        Eric Simpson

        In contrast to the population at large, Tillerson, Exxon, and all the oil companies in general seemed to have moved left on climate change in recent years. A strong part of that could be attributed to bowing to political correctness, but in all likelihood it also dawned on them that “climate change policy actually BENEFITS us!!” Because, as we know, it kills coal, and oil is substituted. So they can be PC and laugh all the way to the bank.

        Btw, in a previous comment I maintained that Tillerson is a straight warmist, not a skeptic in any way. Just to put up here a couple of points as that other comment appears to have been dumped in spam or something:

        Two days after Trump’s election Exxon tweeted: “The Paris agreement is an important step forward by governments in addressing the serious risks of #ClimateChange.” Tillerson certainly signed off on that.

        2 months ago:
        Rex Tillerson Oct 2016: “At ExxonMobil, we share the view that the risks of climate change are serious. Addressing these risks requires broad-based, practical solutions around the world. Importantly, as a result of the Paris agreement, both developed and developing countries are now working together to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.”

        Among the GOP, Republicans warmists are in the clear and now widely disparaged (by GOP voters) minority. But, though they are dubious ‘conservative’ warmists, the GOP warmists nevertheless ALL (or nearly all) rejected the Obama led Paris Climate Accord. BUT TILLERSON FAVORS THE PARIS ACCORD. So that’s something that’s very odd, and very un-Republican about Tillerson.

        31

        • #
          el gordo

          I take back my thinking that he might be an ‘opportunist’, Tillerson is a good boy scout.

          Let’s assume he had no opinion on climate change and while CEO at Exxon he had to maintain a steady ship, under shareholder pressure.

          ‘Tillerson re-established his position of chairman and chief executive officer during a shareholder meeting on May 28, 2008. The Rockefeller family sponsored a non-binding resolution to separate the CEO and chairman positions to maintain a system of checks and balances. The Rockefeller family also wanted Exxon Mobil to invest more in alternative energy, with Neva Goodwin saying in a public statement that the company “needs to reconnect with the forward-looking and entrepreneurial vision of my great-grandfather.”

          ‘However, the resolution did not obtain the necessary majority and Tillerson held on to both the chairman and chief executive officer job titles.’

          wiki

          60

        • #
          RAH

          They are there to protect their corporate interests and not oil or any other fossil fuel. If oil is where the money is at and they think that it will continue to be then they’ll support oil. If they think their primary product of oil is about to lose a substantial portion of it’s market share in the future then they will move to what they think is the up and coming source of energy.

          30

    • #
      ROM

      I beg to differ!

      A selfish ego is a very powerful influence in any political power play.

      These guys and gals are quite knowingly signing on to a Trump Presidential program that is going to upend the political and in many cases, the entire economic interests and agendas of most of totally committed, to their own self interests, very powerful and completely ruthless, unethical and immoral abusers of that political and financial power.

      Trump’s appointments go with Trump knowing they are going to attempt to overturn an entire deeply entrenched bureaucratic system which like maggots on a rotting carcase, are lobbyist over run and a political industry only Washington and east and west coast elitist run political system that has slowly over the years has been transfigured from a system that supposedly benefits all Americans to a bureaucratic and lobbyist driven elitist system whose by far the main benefits are to those elitists who reside in and control that political and bureaucratic system.

      Trump has promised to get Americans back to working in jobs that pay well and are rewarding.

      The very senior people who sign on with him for what no doubt will be a very nasty and difficult political fight to extract the power and benefits from the east and west coast elites and place them once again in the control of the ordinary American citizens are not going to be seen in any way to be favouring any sector of the politics or the economy or any particular grouping of American citizens outside of the elitist establishments which will be made to bear the full brunt of the Trump Presidential program.
      Their legacy [ Obama is so fond of polishing his own minuscule legacy ] and their own ego’s are going to want to be seen in future history to have given the middle class Americans their role back in the running and development of their nation.

      One of the keys to getting America back to work in the industrial Rust belt regions in the home states of middle class America as has so often been discussed here on Jo’s blog, is the absolute reliability and the cheap price of energy in all its forms.
      And that of course entails the elimination of any influences of the increasingly discredited CAGW/ Climate change cultist approach on energy supplies and energy prices and the negating of any serious attempts at the major energy corporations unduly influencing the deepest goals of the Trump presidency.

      And it might be relevant to remember one of those terms that Trump is famous for or to some, infamous for and which I suspect he will use without hesitation if somebody in his administration does not measure up or is seen to be too cosy with some major section of the American economy and social set up other than to the people who put him there.

      “You’re Fired”

      142

      • #
        Eric Simpson

        I largely agree with you. And I love your “You’re fired!” point.

        Plus you’re correct that the climate scam and especially the Paris Accord which will kill coal and cause energy prices to rise sharply will screw over the country’s productivity and ream in particular the rust belt. And I agree that department Secretaries are not likely fight Trump’s will.

        BUT … …. ….. here’s what’s got me worried:

        It’s >> the question of what is .. Trump’s will?

        Around a week ago or so Trump said, paraphrasing: “I’m not sure whether we’ll keep the US in the Paris Accord or not.” Wow, because that was in stark contradiction to what Trump had said over and over again on the campaign trail for 15 months.

        Well, many said “Trump’s just kind of playing footsie with the left. He’s not going to break his promise on Paris Accord.”

        So I wasn’t all that worried … UNTIL … days later Trump nominated for Sec of State (and the SoS would have responsibility for the Paris A.) someone who appears to strongly favor the Paris A!!

        So, the nomination by itself wouldn’t have caused me to flip out, but it’s the combination with Trump’s unexpected (and inexplicable) ambivalence about the Paris A just a few days before. And many now are worried that a pro-climate change and pro-Paris Sec of State could have an undue influence on Trump.

        If Trump wants to save the Tillerson nomination I really think he needs to set the record straight and reassure us that he’s not going to go back on his word on the Paris Accord.

        Trump needs to reassure the base, and skeptics, on the P Accord because I already sense a small but growing disquiet about Tillerson’s leftism on climate change. It’s kind of low-key right now, like the distant but unnerving hum of the Langoliers (see Stephen King).

        I get a feeling for how these things grow and grow in intensity in the blogisphere, and then TV talking heads also chime in, echoing the internet.

        As a sign of things to come today we had Santorum saying that he’s not so sure about Tillerson’s climate views. The unease will steadily become greater, and it likely will become, at some point soon, too late for Trump to defuse the growing unease, as the climate change concerns will combine with the doubts of others such as the neocons.

        At that late stage, when the negative vibes on Tillerson are a hot swirling enveloping haze, Trump could say to us: “DON’T WORRY, TILLERSON IS NOT GOING TO KEEP THE US IN THE PARIS ACCORD!” And Tillerson could agree. Too late probably.

        It would be much better for Trump to nip that growing unease about Tillerson in the bud!

        Trump could achieve that by removing the uncertainty that Trump himself instilled regarding the Paris Accord. That’s the only thing that will save Tillerson’s nomination. Because the (future) fury cannot be overcome.

        If Trump keeps the base fully behind Tillerson, from the start, then he will likely head off the neocon doubters.

        Otherwise not.

        40

        • #
          ROM

          My guess and guess is all it is , is that Trump, to a far less degree than any one else, along with the whole of the political operatives in the American political, financial and corporate elites has been caught out by his unexpected win as the POTUS Elect.

          [ POTUS for those innocent non Americans is shorthand for President Of The US[A] ]

          Something that even Trump in his victory tour speeches that is currently underway in the USA has alluded to in that there were times when even he didn’t think he could win the Presidency.

          But something I mentioned here on Jo’s blog soon after Trump won the Presidency is that Trump does not have a political background nor much association with politics in the active political sense and therefore is not carrying a politically conditioned mentality with him that would be a very considerable hindrance to him as he tries to overturn the current east and west coast elitist dominated bureaucracy and power structure inside of the Washington beltway when he finally steps into that ultimate political position of the Presidency.

          Trump as a long time real estate developer and wheeler dealer probably has some firmly fixed goals on what he wants to achieve as President.
          But how he might achieve those goals is very flexible indeed as befits a long term wheeler dealer who has had to deal with some very wiley and not necessarily upright honest citizens and wheeler dealers themselves who like Trump were out to get the maximum they could out of any deal that was going.

          Trump in short does not think, act or respond like a long term politically programmed presidential candidate would have done.

          And his choice of personnel to fill his senior administrative positions aren’t the normal run of political operatives or politically brain washed candidates that any average long term politician would have selected as his inner cabinet.

          Consequently the Washington establishment and all the brain washed politically orientated outfits that are attacking Trump just don’t understand his response or lack of responses or his reactions to their attacks, all of which leaves them even more breathless and spitting chips at Trump’s apparent casual insouciance towards them, those oh so important former ruling elites he is now ignoring.

          Nor will they possibly ever fully understand the way he thinks and operates, a trait which at his age he will not change now that he is in the Presidency.

          Trump and his family before him were real estate wheeler dealers and developers and the mentality they have has been shaped and carved through out his lifetime by that fact, a characteristic manner of thinking and acting and negotiating along witha fixed goal to achievement but a wide flexible responses necessary in the big time, very big money and very fast changing and easily lose everything industry he was in when he made his pile before he won the Presidency.

          He will take a very flexible stance and take a hold of a factor what ever it is, whenever he sees such a response taking him further along towards his goal as President.

          I would suggest that people avoid passing judgement on Trump’s sayings and actions or lack of as well as lack of stated and firmly fixated policies that can be torn apart by political brain washed mentalities.

          He might well up end and put out of business a lot of very high profile political operatives because they will badly misjudge him and his driving force because they are limited in their mentality to only judging and acting and reacting within the limitations of their own politically brainwashed mentalities.

          We live in interesting times with Marie Le Pen in France, Gert Wilders in The Netherlands, the Italians giving the two fingered salute to EU promoted reforms and many other populist right wing movements and new political operatives coming out of the wood work across all of the former elitist dominated democracies.

          And of course, Pauline Hanson before her time a decade ago but now a possible rising star of the nascent populous uprising by the middle class even here in Australia.

          100

  • #
    el gordo

    Francis Menton reckons there is only a couple of years left in the AGW game.

    http://manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2016/12/13/some-predictions-for-the-future-in-the-climate-game

    70

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Interesting blog. He makes some very good points, especially about Trump and his tactics and watch who he appoints not what the AGW mob would like to believe what he said.

      30

  • #
    Whalehunt Fun

    That sound is not popcorn nearby. It is greenfilth heads exploding …. all about.
    Oh joy! Oh bliss. Perhaps Frightbat Farrelly wil be arrested if she transits US airspace.

    71

  • #
    Amber

    Exxon was picked by the little band of AG’s foe a reason . My guess is they saw a soft willing target .
    A lot of Oil/ Gas people could care less if there was a carbon tax … they just pass it on and the consumer gets screwed .
    They could then look green .

    71

    • #
      ivan

      Do you mean that the Oil/Gas people actually care about a carbon tax and they now, maybe, care a little less about it? Or do you mean that they could not (couldn’t) care less about it?

      The use of the Americanism ‘could care less’ when people really mean ‘couldn’t care less’ amazes me because the two have different meanings.

      30

  • #
    doubtingdave

    Its worth pointing out that the Republican majority in both houses is united in support of Trumps administrations views on global warming , the leader of congress , Paul Ryan , may find ways to obstruct Trump on immigration and trade , but when it comes to pulling out of the Paris agreement , cutting back on green energy subsidies , dismantling EPA regulations and reversing Obama’s executive orders , he has the full support of Republican senate and congress , no wonder the likes of ” horrible ” Harry Reid and especially ” bonkers ” Barbara Boxer have surrendered to retirment

    90

  • #
    Egor TheOne

    At this stage, I would trust all Trump’s appointees, and would not try and guess what they may or may not do.

    ‘The Donald’ is pro coal worker and anti Paris CAGW BS.
    He is putting shrewd business people in place of dumb politicians and losers.

    I think ‘the Donald’ is setting up to be the best President ever by being for the people, the way it should be.

    Out with the incompetent ratbags and in with real life achievers can only be a good thing.

    So far everything is looking much better just as the US stock exchange has shown optimism and confidence in ‘the Donald’.

    Jan 20 cannot come quick enough.
    Until then all is speculation as Swamp Draining can only begin from then, once El Presidente O’Bummer is handed his hat and shown the door…..Hooray for that!

    130

  • #
    GregS

    This is better than sex. (I suspect)

    50

    • #

      GregS December 17, 2016 at 7:48 pm

      “This is better than sex. (I suspect)”
      If you think something “better than sex”, You have not experienced our girls! If you think you have something ‘idiot proof’, you have not experienced our “idiots”.
      All the best! -will-

      30

  • #
    Steve borodin

    Any suggestions for the next Director General of the BBC. Mr Trump?

    50

  • #
    Peter C

    My big anxiety now is the vote of the delegates, which takes place in 2 days time.

    Trump won the election but the states delegates still have to vote him in. They are only bound by convention.

    We are seeing a pushback now about RUSSIA influencing the election!

    30

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Peter C:
      10% of Trump’s delegates would have to change their vote, in the knowledge that they risk being lynched if they do so. Apart from one or two idiots No Way.

      50

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Absolute desperation and anger from the left that knows no bounds, well considering where their beliefs have taken them it makes sense in a way.

      I suspect Wikileaks will later expose bribery, blackmail or delegates that met their fates in unusual circumstances.

      50

  • #
    Reinder van Til

    Please change the word “denial” to realism in the OP header!

    30

  • #

    Peter C December 17, 2016 at 8:44 pm

    “My big anxiety now is the vote of the delegates, which takes place in 2 days time.”

    Can you please state what you may mean? The vote of the electoral college is controlled only by the specific state.

    “Trump won the election but the states delegates still have to vote him in. They are only bound by convention.”

    Negative they are all bound by state law, never convention, that is exactly how the election was run, not by your opinion.

    60

    • #
      Yonniestone

      He may be thinking of the Faithless Elector possibility within the electoral college,

      In United States presidential elections, a faithless elector is a member of the United States Electoral College who does not vote for the presidential or vice-presidential candidate for whom they had pledged to vote. That is, they break faith with candidate they were pledged to and vote for another candidate, or fail to vote, or choose not to vote. A pledged elector can become a faithless elector only by breaking their pledge; unpledged electors have no pledge to break.

      Also in the Wiki link is their take on the possible ‘Faithless electors in the United States presidential election, 2016′, it reads a lot like ‘fake news’ but its Wiki after all.

      40

      • #

        Agreed! All of this was vetted by all sides and campaigns managed appropriately! Please think of the bucks spent on the 2016 election by all sides. This was no play-school yard!

        I would suggest that the actual ‘Electoral College’ be re-introduced… All now 535 locals, qualified to be president, ride to Philadelphia, with favorite bat. Then all duke it out until only one is left mostly-standing. Such is declared President. While the last to fall, if revived, is declared vice-president. No need for term limits, or some-re-election BS.

        The ‘Electoral College’ is the only thing offered by the US founding fathers that may possibly correct the failures of all other forms of government!
        All the best! -will-

        30

        • #
          ianl8888

          For a considerable time now, I’ve been trying to decide if you actually know anything or simply had a touch too much acid earlier in life.

          Well, now I know.

          All the best.

          30

          • #
            Mark D.

            Ian, could there be another possibility? That he’s a genius AND has had a touch too much acid earlier today?

            20

  • #
    pat

    13 Dec: Desmog: Donald Trump’s Aide at EPA Myron Ebell Meets with Who’s Who of Climate Science Deniers
    By Graham Readfearn
    A key figure (Myron Ebell) picked to prepare the federal environment agency for life under a Donald Trump administration has met in Washington D.C. with some of the world’s most notorious and longest-serving climate science deniers…
    E&E News reported that Ebell was at one meeting hosted by the CEI and held in the hearing room of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee.
    The EPW committee is chaired by Senator James Inhofe who, like Trump, has described human-caused climate change as a hoax.
    The meeting was not open to the public or the press, E&E News reported, with Ebell refusing to give any details…
    But details of the gatherings have been made public by some of the climate science denialists who attended. The attendee list reads like a who’s who of the climate science denial industry.
    Australian Senator Malcolm Roberts, of the far-right One Nation party, who is in the U.S, revealed he had given a speech at a CEI meeting with Ebell.
    Roberts wrote the meeting was a gathering of the Cooler Heads Coalition and then listed some of the participants…
    The full line-up of attendees at the Cooler Heads Coalition listed by Roberts was Tony Heller, Tim Ball, Fred Singer, Ken Haapala, Craig Rucker, Randy Randall, Steve Milloy, Marc Morano, James Delingpole, Chris Horner, Myron Ebell, Tom de Weise, James Taylor, Pat Michaels, Austin Smithson, Brandon Middleton, Marlo Lewis and “Mandy from Senator James Inhofe’s staff”.
    (A MERE 5 COMMENTS)
    https://www.desmogblog.com/2016/12/13/exclusive-myron-ebell-donald-trump-s-aide-epa-meets-who-s-who-long-serving-climate-science-deniers

    50

    • #
      David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

      Thanks Pat,
      I was wondering what Roberts was doing recently. His presence at, and contribution to the Ebell meeting is great news.
      Cheers,
      Dave B

      20

  • #
    pat

    Donald J. Trump Energy Plan speech delivered to Williston Basin Petroleum Conference in Bismarck, North Dakota on 26 May…read all:

    26 May: An America First Energy Plan
    Here is my 100-day action plan:
    •We’re going to rescind all the job-destroying Obama executive actions including the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule.
    •We’re going to save the coal industry and other industries threatened by Hillary Clinton’s extremist agenda.
    •I’m going to ask Trans Canada to renew its permit application for the Keystone Pipeline.
    •We’re going to lift moratoriums on energy production in federal areas
    •We’re going to revoke policies that impose unwarranted restrictions on new drilling technologies. These technologies create millions of jobs with a smaller footprint than ever before.
    •We’re going to cancel the Paris Climate Agreement and stop all payments of U.S. tax dollars to U.N. global warming programs.
    •Any regulation that is outdated, unnecessary, bad for workers, or contrary to the national interest will be scrapped. We will also eliminate duplication, provide regulatory certainty, and trust local officials and local residents.
    •Any future regulation will go through a simple test: is this regulation good for the American worker? If it doesn’t pass this test, the rule will not be approved.
    https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/an-america-first-energy-plan

    there is no need for Trump to do anything about the Paris Agreement; simply ignoring it is sufficient. getting rid of the Clean Power Plan will probably be the top priority:

    15 Dec: US News & World Report: AP: Officials in 24 states urge Trump to kill Obama carbon plan
    Officials in two dozen states are asking President-elect Donald Trump to issue an executive order on his first day in office declaring President Barack Obama’s plan to curb planet-warming carbon emissions to be illegal.
    The letter sent to Trump and congressional leaders on Thursday is signed by Republican officials from 22 states and Democrats from the coal-producing states of Kentucky and Missouri.
    The U.S. Supreme Court barred the Environmental Protection Agency from implementing the Clean Power Plan as lawsuits filed by more than two dozen states and fossil-fuel companies are weighed by an appeals court in Washington…
    http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-12-15/officials-in-24-states-urge-trump-to-kill-obama-carbon-plan

    15 Dec: West Virginia Gazette Mail: Andrew Brown: Manchin on ‘Meet the Press’: Trump will help miners
    West Virginia’s lone Democratic member of Congress was interviewed by “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd Wednesday, and told the NBC News reporter that Trump “wants to help coal miners,” something he believes his party’s outgoing president has not done.
    “Don’t tell me you are for the working person, when you are basically stopping the working person from working,” Manchin said of Obama and his administration…
    Manchin, one of Congress’ most centrist Democrats, tried to distance himself from his national party during the interview, saying it was the national party’s fault for Democrats from rural states getting their “brains beat in” during elections.
    “I’m different. I am not a Washington Democrat,” Manchin said. “If you’ve been in West Virginia, West Virginia Democrats are different.”…
    http://www.wvgazettemail.com/news-politics/20161215/manchin-on-meet-the-press-trump-will-help-miners

    50

    • #
      mike restin

      “…lawsuits filed by more than two dozen states and fossil-fuel companies are weighed by an appeals court in Washington…”
      Let’s ask Mark Steyn about the Washington courts.

      “West Virginia Democrats are different.”…
      But, they still vote for Clinton and other anti-American democrats.

      20

  • #
    pat

    globalists have reached a consensus – ***CHINA:

    15 Dec: UK Independent: Reuters: Kanupriya Kapoor: UN environment chief ‘concerned’ by climate change sceptics among Trump’s Cabinet nominees
    You will be in the Middle Ages if you deny science’, says UN Environment Programme Executive Director Erik Solheim.
    Some
    ???elite US politicians’ denial of the science backing up climate change is worrying, the United Nations environment chief has said, adding that the fight against global warming would continue, even without the United States…
    Erik Solheim, executive director of the UN Environment Programme, said in an interview he was not concerned about oil industry stalwarts in Trump’s cabinet, because they brought experience in handling major energy projects and negotiations.
    “However, I am concerned that some elite American politicians deny science. You will be in the Middle Ages if you deny science,” he told Reuters in the Indonesian capital, in response to a question about Trump’s cabinet picks…
    The majority of ???scientists around the world say global warming is causing rising sea levels, drought, and an increase in storms…
    “If the United States, in the worst case, were to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, ***we will depend more on China,” he added. ***“China and… many others will provide the global leadership we need.”…
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-un-environment-chief-erik-solheim-expresses-concern-climate-change-sceptics-cabinet-a7474366.html

    15 Dec: EU Observer: MEPs agree on future of emissions trading system
    By Aleksandra Eriksson and Peter Teffer
    Strasbourg/Brussels: The European Parliament raised the bar on the EU’s climate change commitments, after its environment committee on Thursday (15 December) broadly backed a more ambitious reform of the Emissions Trading System (ETS).
    The proposal was adopted with 53 votes in favour, five against, and seven abstentions, and followed extensive negotiations between political groups over compromise amendments…
    The reform is aimed at jacking up the price by making the carbon credits, or allowances, more scarce over time…
    Leading MEPs were elated after the vote.
    “Today’s vote gives us a clear mandate for further negotiations with the council,” conservative ECR group’s Ian Duncan, rapporteur for the file, told EUobserver after the vote.
    The reform needs approval from both the parliament’s plenary and the EU Council, where national governments meet…
    Next: China
    Sefcovic met with journalists alongside Christiana Figueres, former top climate diplomat for the United Nations.
    She also said she saw consensus “that putting a price on carbon is and would be the most effective policy” to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
    “When you put a price on anything, you are disincentivising. And that’s what we want to do. We want to disincentivise any carbon-intensive energy uses,” said Figueres, who until July chaired the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
    She noted that Europe’s emissions trading system has inspired other nations in the world to also adopt a similar scheme.
    ***Most notably, China will introduce its ETS next year.
    “Once we have a price of carbon in China, you have to understand that what that means is that there is an embedded price in almost everything that we use,” said Figueres, noting that many of our consumer goods are made in China.
    “There is going to be an embedded price on carbon in a huge portion of the global economy. That is going to have a ripple effect throughout the rest of our economies.”
    https://euobserver.com/environment/136291

    15 Dec: ClimateChangeNews: Why Trump presidency may not herald climate catastrophe
    Leading climate economist says environmentalists should be alert but not pessimistic over the impact of Trump’s presidency, reports the Guardian
    By James Randerson
    The impact of Donald Trump’s presidency on the environment may not be as catastrophic as some fear, says leading climate economist Lord Nicholas Stern…
    “If the US are not going to be in the vanguard other countries will take the leadership,” he said, ***“China has been crystal clear that they will carry on.”…
    “[Trump’s pick for head of the Environmental Protection Agency] Scott Pruitt can’t persuade people to build coal-fired power stations. Why would they?”…
    “There’s no point wringing hands and weeping into whatever it is we weep into,” he said, “at the same time, be alert, be very alert. These are difficult times.”…
    Richard Black, the director of the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, a non-profit thinktank, added: “There’s no way to present a Trump presidency as constructive for progress on climate change. But I think there’s a tendency to overestimate the effect of the administration,” he said. “The notion that a Trump presidency will transform the energy landscape of the US is probably a bit fanciful.”
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/12/15/why-trump-presidency-may-not-herald-climate-catastrophe/

    30

  • #
    Anton

    Glad tidings of great joy!

    But beware this stuff about Putin interfering with the election. Unless he can be shown to have committed fraud with ballot papers then it is irrelevant. Perhaps, though, it is Hillary and Obama testing the water in an attempt to subvert the democratic outcome of the presidential election. And perhaps only the existence of an armed population is preventing them declaring the result invalid; Americans should be glad of their Second Amendment.

    50

    • #

      PLease remember that the US second, is not about having a weapon. Such is only present to remind the Government of their proper place in the determination of government or viscous rioting!

      31

      • #
        OldUnixHead

        Heh! I like the visual image of angry rioters slogging through cold molasses! Gives ‘em more time to think.

        00

  • #
    pat

    more China:

    15 Dec: ClimateChangeNews: Ed King: Mark Carney, the unlikely climate champion
    Former Goldman Sachs banker is calmly, steadily steering the financial sector in a greener direction
    Few world leaders have done more to warn of the potential impacts and opportunities of climate change than Mark Carney.
    In the past 15 months the governor of the Bank of England has delivered four keynote speeches focused on global warming and participated in a UN climate summit…
    As chairman of the G20 nations’ Financial Stability Board, Carney has overseen studies into the potential of green finance flows and the need for greater transparency on climate risk.
    The latter was presented in London this week in a smart but low-key launch at the Tate Modern, attended by media and representatives from banking and industry leaders.

    Mandated by the G20 and chaired by former New York mayor Mike Bloomberg, the thick report may prove to be a turning point in the way the financial services sector thinks about climate change.
    It sets out recommendations supported by Barclays, HSBC, Tata Steel and the ****China Development Bank for tougher climate risk analysis across all sectors – including fossil fuel majors…

    It’s a message he will doubtless take to the World Economic Forum in Davos next month, where he’s due to host a climate round-table.
    “Given the uncertainties around climate, not everyone will agree on the timing or the scale of adjustments required to achieve this goal,” he said at yesterday’s report launch.
    “But the right information will allow optimists and pessimists, sceptics and evangelists, to back their convictions with their capital.“
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/12/15/mark-carney-the-unlikely-climate-champion/

    2 pages: 14 Dec: Forbes: Dina Medland: Climate Related Financial Disclosure For Business: An Imperative For 2017
    2016 began – as recorded here on Forbes – noting that climate change was becoming very real in the financial world. As we head towards the end of what has been a tumultuous year, the Financial Stability Board (FSB) is clear the message needs to be reinforced, not dismissed…

    In London today the publication of its report, “Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures,” outlines a set of recommendations for voluntary, decision-useful, climate-related disclosures to be made as part of mainstream financial filings…
    “Climate change is not only an environmental problem, but a business one as well. We need business leaders to join us to help spread these recommendations across their industries in order to help make markets more efficient and economies more stable, resilient, and sustainable,” said Michael R. Bloomberg, Chairman of the Task Force…
    As the United Nations Special Envoy for Cities and Climate Change, he recently said in a speech that the U.S. would meet its climate-change commitments under the Paris Agreement even if the administration of President-elect Donald Trump backs away from the deal…

    ***“I am confident that no matter what happens in Washington, no matter what regulations the next administration adopts or rescinds, no matter what laws the next Congress may pass, I expect that the United States will meet the pledges that the U.S. made in Paris,” Mr. Bloomberg said at a gathering of the ***China General Chamber of Commerce in Washington…
    The release of the TCFD report today launches a 60-day public consultation period to solicit feedback on it and recommendations until February 12, 2017. The Task Force encourages the public to participate in the public consultation survey here(LINK)…
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/dinamedland/2016/12/14/climate-change-is-a-business-problem-not-just-an-environmental-one/#dbc7fb07d03e

    PDF: 111 pages: 14 Dec: Financial Stability Board: Implementing the Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures
    http://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/Recommendations-of-the-Task-Force-on-Climate-related-Financial-Disclosures-Annex.pdf

    40

    • #
      Environment Skeptic

      China shuts down due to malignant molecules of CO2

      “China Orders Shut Down Of 1,200 Factories After Smog “Red Alert” Declared In Beijing”
      “At 4:20pm on Friday afternoon, China’s environmental watchdog issued a five-day warning about choking smog spreading across the north and ordered factories to shut, recommended residents stay indoors and curbed traffic and construction work, as the main Chinese news agency tweeted “Smog invades Beijing,” while posting a timelapse as well. Another tweet from Xinhua showed the skies blackening on Friday.”
      http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-17/china-orders-shut-down-1200-factories-after-smog-red-alert-declared-beijing

      I remain skeptical about contemporary environmentalism in its current pathological form.

      40

  • #
    pat

    btw Steve Mnuchin left Goldman Sachs in 20002. MSM loves to push him as a GS guy, to make Trump look like a sell-out after criticising GS on the campaign trail.

    surely not being with GS for fourteen years should rate a mention, & emphasis given to his lengthy career as a movie producer from 2004 up to the present.

    Mnuchin founded Dune Capital in 2004. amusingly, since 2013, he’s partnered with James Packer & Brett Ratner, via RatPac-Dune. he has 35 production credits on IMDB, including “The Devil Wears Prada,” the “X-Men” franchise and “Avatar,” “Mad Max: Fury Road”,
    Mnuchin has known Trump for years and has been his campaign finance chairman for months.

    note: Steve Bannon also worked with Goldman Sachs…back in the 90s (like Anthony Scaramucci, who was named to Trump’s Presidential Transition Team Executive Committee).
    however, worth noting:

    16 Nov: Buzzfeed: J. Lester Feder: This Is How Steve Bannon Sees The Entire World
    BuzzFeed News publishes the complete (2014) transcript for the first time
    Bannon: That’s a great question. The 2008 crisis, I think the financial crisis — which, by the way, I don’t think we’ve come through — is really driven I believe by the greed, much of it driven by the greed of the investment banks. My old firm, Goldman Sachs — traditionally the best banks are leveraged 8:1. When we had the financial crisis in 2008, the investment banks were leveraged 35:1. Those rules had specifically been changed by a guy named Hank Paulson. He was secretary of Treasury. As chairman of Goldman Sachs, he had gone to Washington years before and asked for those changes. That made the banks not really investment banks, but made them hedge funds — and highly susceptible to changes in liquidity. And so the crisis of 2008 was, quite frankly, really never recovered from in the United States…
    I think you need a real clean-up of the banks balance sheets.
    In addition, I think you really need to go back and make banks do what they do: Commercial banks lend money, and investment banks invest in entrepreneurs and to get away from this trading — you know, the hedge fund securitization, which they’ve all become basically trading operations and securitizations and not put capital back and really grow businesses and to grow the economy. So I think it’s a whole area that just — and I will tell you, the underpinning of this populist revolt is the financial crisis of 2008. That revolt, the way that it was dealt with, the way that the people who ran the banks and ran the hedge funds have never really been held accountable for what they did, has fueled much of the anger in the tea party movement in the United States…
    https://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfeder/this-is-how-steve-bannon-sees-the-entire-world?utm_term=.qcwQQBrL2w#.udWNNoGpDP

    anti-Trump Matt Taibbi admits Bannon, Mnuchin are GS “veterans”, not the usual current employees who march into the White House, but he’s on more solid ground when he singles out Gary Cohn to criticise what he sees as Trump’s hypocrisy. time will tell:

    16 Dec: Rollingstone: Matt Taibbi: The Vampire Squid Occupies Trump’s White House
    After running against Goldman as a candidate, Donald Trump licks the boots of the world’s largest investment bank
    But the real shocker is the recent appointment of Goldman Chief Operating Officer Gary Cohn to the post of director of the National Economic Council. Bannon and Mnuchin were former, past Goldmanites. Cohn, meanwhile, is undoubtedly at least the number-two figure at the world’s most despised bank, if not the outright co-head with Blankfein. He has been at the center of many of its most infamous episodes, including the Greek affair.
    So much for draining the swamp…READ ALL
    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-vampire-squid-occupies-trumps-white-house-w456225

    40

  • #
    pat

    oops should have typed 2002, not 20002!

    “btw Steve Mnuchin left Goldman Sachs in 2002.”

    20

  • #
    Ruairi

    The warmists have left it too late,
    To begin a climate debate,
    With the skeptics at large,
    When Trump is in charge,
    Running every arm of the state.

    130

  • #
    PhilJourdan

    The MSM and the left still do not understand. The campaign is over. Now Trump is going about running the company. Which means he will do many things without telling them what his intentions, or even actions are. They will know him by his deeds.

    And that probably hacks them off more than the WHAT.

    50

    • #
      James Murphy

      I agree, the MSM and the far ‘left’ still do not understand what happened.

      In order to solve the problem, they have to understand that they were (are) the cause of the problem, and they have not done that at all. In the usual fashion, it is somebody else’s fault (Russia, “fake-news”, the ‘deplorables’..).

      That’s the extreme ‘left’ though, all faux-care, and no responsibility.

      50

    • #
      clive

      Cicero said “A horse can tell by the hand on the reins, if he has a fool for a rider”

      00

  • #
    Keith

    Jo,
    Jeff Sessions, the pick for US Attorney General was the guy who grilled Gina McCarthy, the present head of the EPA in a congressional hearing. He asked her about temperature graphs and her opinion of the “pause” but she refused to recognise the temperature graph he showed. It was clear from the questioning that he is a skeptic, and was trying to get her to acknowledge the pause.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24DP1uG-MEM

    40

  • #
    Keith

    Further to that comment, Jeff Sessions also hammered Gina McCarthy on whether there was evidence for increased extreme weather. She claimed there was but then refused to show any evidence, or acknowledge the evidence he was talking about that showed no such increase in extreme weather.

    His position as a skeptic is clear.

    40

  • #
    Keith

    For those commenters above worried about whether the Electoral College does actually vote for Trump as the voters wished them to, here is an interesting pushback from Wikileaks to say it was a leak rather than a hack

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html.

    30

  • #

    > We are ramping up the end of this series because we’ve been informed that both of David’s papers will be published in October — one on the error in the climate models and one on the notch delay solar theory [http://joannenova.com.au/2016/09/new-science-26-the-solar-fall-and-lag-means-david-evans-model-predicts-cooling-is-just-around-the-corner/]

    How’s that coming along?

    110

    • #
      Mark D.

      Ms. Connollie

      How the heck are you? It’s been a while since you were here making small talk. Why don’t you sit a spell and warm your self here by the fire? It’s pretty cold out there you know.

      I’m sure you are used to cold by now. Really really cold.

      70

  • #
    nstreech@gmail.com

    Please see the following attachment.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/12/10/the-doe-vs-ugly-reality/

    Credit to Watts Up With That

    50

    • #
      Mark D.

      Nice! more watermelons-a-poppin.

      30

    • #

      The Department of Energy should be defunded ASAP. Under the US constitution the powers they have usurped do not belong to the federal government.

      See the 10th amendment to the constitution which is part of the original “Bill of Rights”:
      “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

      50

  • #
    Reed Coray

    The times they are a changing. Today I put on my decoder ring and translated the past and future AGW Mantras.

    Past AGW Mantra: It’s wrong and even downright immoral to publicly debate AGW skeptics because the only result will be a forum for spreading their cockamamie and earth-destroying garbage.

    Future AGW Mantra: We must publicly and vigorously debate AGW skeptics so that the truth can be communicated to all unenlightened fence sitters.

    Decoder ring translation of the Past AGW Mantra: If we publicly debate AGW skeptics some of the heretofore malleable and easily fooled controllers of our money flow may become aware of the fallacies of our arguments and decrease our money flow. Therefore, no public debate.

    Decoder ring translation of the Future AGW Mantra: It looks like the chief deplorable and many of his appointees (deplorable minions) will soon have their hands on our major money flow faucets; and all indications are that those faucets are about to be closed. Although public debate will expand the public’s awareness of the weakness of our arguments, that is no longer important. What is paramount is that we put pressure on the money-faucet controllers. We’re going to lose general credibility, but we just might reach a few faucet controllers. Therefore, public debate is no longer immoral, it is virtuous.

    40

  • #
    Dean from Ohio

    How can I get a zero percent rating from the League of Conservation Voters? Sounds like a great bucket list item!

    30

  • #
    Michael P

    On another note Professor Palermo,writing for the Huffington Post, thinks anyone who doesn’t agree with climate alarmism shouldn’t be allowed to use any of the products of science.Therefore If Trump and his cohort believe the science of global warming is bogus then they shouldn’t be allowed to use the science of the Internet for their Twitter accounts, the science of global positioning for their drones, or the science of nuclear power for their weaponry.

    Full story at https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/12/28/wacky-professor-palermo-ban-trump-from-twitter-because-of-his-climate-skepticism/

    20