Real President Puts Focus On Real Issues: No Mention Of Climate Change In Hour-Long Speech

Plenty of superlatives have been used to describe President Donald Trump’s speech to the nation on Februrary 28.

Fox News called it “one for the ages” as the newly elected President spoke on a wide range of pressing issues and daunting problems the nation faces, like immigration, drugs, crime, runaway debt, urban decay, economic stagnation, over-regulation, education, terrorism…to name a few.

Not among the pressing issues was “climate change”. Not once did the President bring up the issue, which some on the opposition side have long been calling “the greatest threat to civilization“.

What can we gather from this as the President undertakes to work hard to mobilize and find the scrace resources needed to fix the out of control messes Washington has created over the past couple of decades? Expect the President to (finally) take the chainsaw to government programs promoting the climate hoax.

First place to start is to cut off the money pipeline to the non-problems and to divert it over to the matters that are really pressing, i.e. real problems mentioned above. The President thinks very little of climate change being a problem, and so did not mention it once. Rather, he mentioned coal and growth.

The climate scare and hoax are about to lose their last legs.

 

56 responses to “Real President Puts Focus On Real Issues: No Mention Of Climate Change In Hour-Long Speech”

  1. sod

    “The climate scare and hoax are about to lose their last legs.”

    no. The president is running on an anti-science position. Saying “climate change was invented by the chinese” is simply denying reality.

    There is very little good stuff about Trump (and the positive hype about this speech, which at best was something totally normal is the best example for this), but one good point is that people will no longer ignore the “alternative facts” on climate change.

    There will be serious pressure on Trump to proof his point and the scientists all over the world will watch in disgust how he fails and avoids to do this.

    You folks have won a battle, there is no argument against this. But watch and see how the real world reacts.

    1. John

      “The climate scare and hoax are about to lose their last legs.”

      Yes. Because the facts and the laws of nature will always win from lying greens like you. The Earth is no longer flat.

      1. sod

        “Yes. Because the facts and the laws of nature will always win from lying greens like you. The Earth is no longer flat.”

        the facts are on our side. Do you really think that Donald Trump has the facts on climate change while scientists have not?

        The EPA will stop enforcing rules on climate change. This will be challenged in courts. Then the Trump administration will have to explain what evidence they have.

        This will be like the travel ban disaster, just a little bit bigger.

    2. Graeme No.3

      sod:
      How would you know how the real world will react?

    3. AndyG55

      “is simply denying reality. ”

      Now if there were an expert on “denying reality” it would be you, sob/seb

      You are extremely well practiced, so much so it is basically your whole life’s “aim”.
      (I was about to say “work”, but I doubt you have done a day’s work in your life.)

    4. Henning Nielsen

      Dear sod, it is sad to see you use such a defeatist expression as “anti-science”. If you have followed this site at all, you MUST know that there is no such thing as climate science being in any way settled. Why continue your denial of this fact? It simply puts you in a very defensive position, and the deeper you dig that trench, the harder it will be to get over the top and into the difficult and dangerous no-man’s-land of open and real debate. Because that’s where you want to be, I hope?

      1. CK

        Why would anyone “follow this site” in the first place? It posts conjecture, straw arguments and manufactured claims. Why not go to the REAL EXPERTS and see what they have to say? Because this refutes everything that this site claims and makes up, that’s why! Why aren’t there any real climate scientists here? Or any real sources from climate scientists here? Why don’t they support the same position this website does? Why are they all so alarmed right now? Do you honestly think that non-experts, non-experienced and unqualified people are BETTER to inform you on climate science the the actual experts are? If you do, then you are a total moron.

        1. SebastianH

          Because it’s sometimes fun to correct them and watch what they come up with to explain their view of the world. This blog is one of the “saner” ones though … the deniosphere is filled with weird blogs about fantasy physics … and it’s better to spend time here than watching kittens on Youtube 😉

          1. AndyG55

            You haven’t managed to get one thing right the whole time yuo have been here.

            You haven’t ever corrected you misbegotten “belief” in your unsupportable AGW religion based on fairy tale unsupportable physics.

            You STILL haven’t presented one paper that shows CO2 causes warming in a convective atmosphere, that is how unsupportable your fantasies are.

            And you know that to be the truth, don’t you little wastrel.

          2. SebastianH

            That’s your opinion and I believe you that you think you are right and everyone else is wrong. But when presented with evidence you close your eyes and go into insult mode. It’s pointless to debate with you, but it’s fun to read your weird answers.

          3. AndyG55

            You have based all your beliefs on UNPROVABLE brain-washed propaganda pap.

            I cannot stop you being an anti-science gullible prat.

            Evidence ????????? When?????

            You can’t even produce any that supports the very basis of your AGW scam religion.

            I can produce many papers supporting the gravity/thermal theory , that works on all planets with an atmosphere.

            Your anti-science AGW thought-bubbles don’t even work on this planet.

    5. Fred Streeter

      sod: “There will be serious pressure on Trump to proof his point”

      SebastianH: “The Trump administration has to proof now that they are correct on this issue”

      “Two souls with but a single thought,
      Two hearts that beat as one!”

      Unless, of course, there is only one.
      In which case, sad, very sad.

      Mr Trump has no explaining to do.
      In their paper ‘Volcanic Contribution to Decadal Changes in
      Tropospheric Temperature, Nature 2014’, B D Santer, et al, remove Volcanic and ENSO forcings from the Satellite Tropospheric data the CMIP-5 multi-model.

      The resultant Temperature plot shows a reduced rate of warming from 1979 to 2013, with no warming for 1993 – 2013. No sign of a dominant CO2 forcing.

      The multi-model rate of warming is also decreased, but shows continued warming from 1993 – 2013.

      Plenty of other similar papers, but Dr Santer is an IPCC contributer, so no right-wing filter here.

    6. richard verney

      It may not have been created by the Cjhinese, but it has undoubtedly been exploited by the Chines.

      As the no 1 CO2 emitter in the world, the Chinese are leading the way by agreeing to dramatically increase their emissions between now and 2030.

      The Chinese are no fools, exploiting the weaknesses of the West. The are exploiting the carbon trading/floor price for carbon, repeaing the rewards of this on lower coal prices, exploiting the West’s crazy desire for solar panels which do not work well in mid to high latitute countries which are notoriously cloudy, similarly with wind turbines.

      To cap it all, China is enjoying low energy costs, and benefitting from the West’s restrictions on energy intensive?CO2 emitting industries such that these are now off shored to the Far East. The Far East is now making the goods that we in the Westcould make had it not been for our crazy so called green policies that have crupplied ou r own industries.

      It is simply a win, win, win, win scenario for China. They are taking us for the fools that we are. Our children, and grand children will not be thanking us for have screwed up our industries, job market and economies.

      We will be judged very badly by future generations, and our generation will be seen as the age of stupid.

      1. SebastianH

        Energy costs are a fraction of labor costs in production. The price of energy is not what caused outsourcing …

    7. Sunsettommy

      Sod and Sebastian,

      in America,the voters have long ago considered climate change a bottom level concern,in poll after poll. Trump is now echoing the position by dropping climate change baloney from the EPA, which was created to address pollution of air and water. Has stated the intention to withdraw from the Paris accords baloney,to simply defund the nonsense from GISS,which was originally founded to support NASA in space exploration.

      GISS,EPA and other agencies are being returned back to their original mission they were founded for,which is NOT climate change. That is why I applaud The Presidents decisions on this matter.

      1. sod

        “GISS,EPA and other agencies are being returned back to their original mission they were founded for,which is NOT climate change.”

        EPA has a direct meaning. Climate change is a danger to the environment.

        Pruitt also does not understand, what the agency is about.

        1. Kenneth Richard

          “Climate change is a danger to the environment.”

          Climate change is an enormous danger to the environment and biosphere when the climate changes from warmth to cold. That’s why they used to call the Medieval Warm Period the “Little Optimum,” and why they used words like climate “deterioration” in the 1960s and 1970s to describe the global cooling occurring at that time.

          Higher CO2 greens the planet, enhances crop yields, and is especially good for the biosphere. CO2 is not a pollutant.

          1. sod

            “Climate change is an enormous danger to the environment and biosphere when the climate changes from warmth to cold. That’s why they used to call the Medieval Warm Period the “Little Optimum,”

            some things have changed, since medieval times. Agriculture has become specialised and it is unclear, whether patterns can change fast enough and will work in a global market.

            “warmer is better and greener” is no longer an universal benefit.

            And places that get too warm are a huge problem, as modern borders are less flexible than those in medieval times….

          2. Kenneth Richard

            sod: “’warmer is better and greener’ is no longer an universal benefit.”

            So in what year was the threshold of “safe” warmth that was universally beneficial reached, and then beyond that the additional warmth became dangerous? Was the biosphere better off, or worse off, during the Maunder Minimum (1645-1710) than now? How about the early 19th century, when the Northern Hemisphere didn’t have a summer and crops couldn’t be grown in the snow and ice?

            What’s the optimal temperature of the planet, and on what scientific basis does this opinion rest?

        2. AndyG55

          The Climate Change AGENDA is certainly a massive danger to the environment !

          All the money wasted on destroying landscapes by putting up bird-minchers could have been used to solve so many REAL environmental problems.

          This is what Trump will do, gut the climate change malarkey, and concentrate on REAL issues.

  2. SebastianH

    The Trump administration has to proof now that they are correct on this issue (and everything else). We’ll see how they either succeed or fail and if a country with such a large science community can tolerate an anti-science goverment.

    All the other stuff? Sounds like a police state is imminent.

    P.S.: If you leave your right wing filter bubble you’ll get to read some interesting reviews of this speech. Nowhere it’s called “one for the ages” …

    1. Akatsukami

      You are confused. This was a speech by Trump, not Obama.

    2. AndyG55

      seb.. and if you leave your far-left-loonie-anti-knowledge religious scam..

      …maybe you will GET A CLUE.

      1. SebastianH

        “anti-knowledge” … from you? Oh the irony …

        1. AndyG55

          STILL no paper to support your anti-knowledge of CO2 warming a convective atmosphere.

          So yes seb , your AGW is a brain-washed anti-science, based on facts that are either provable WRONG or provably unsupportable by any real science.

          But like any good Jehovah witness, or radical mohammad worshiper, you still just have to “believe” because its all you have.

    3. toorightmate

      Seb old mate,
      I think you are talking about some other speech.
      Are you sure it wasn’t Joe from South Africa or Bob from Zimbabwe?

  3. John F. Hultquist

    “alternative facts”

    This is an existing legal concept not to be equated with lies or false statements.

    https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-102965188.html

    Title is:
    Statements of Truth – Alternative Facts.(Clarke v Marlborough Fine Art (London) Limited and Marlborough International Fine Art Establishment)

    Further for sod:
    Trump makes statements meant to send people into a tailspin if they have never interacted with a street-wise New Yorker.
    Consider your own citing of the “climate change was invented by the chinese” bit. You, I, and Trump, know this is not true — and it wasn’t meant to be. When I was young a common thing to say was “your mother wears combat boots” but this really wasn’t about the mother (usually a very nice person) — it was about your of-the-moment dislike of the kid it was said to.
    That you bring this up as though Trump is ill informed shows you are still not understanding the man that is now President.
    Let’s say Trump thinks there has been: “a maniacal Democrat Party obsession with so-called “climate change,” now the greatest threat to mankind according to none other than climate expert Barack Obama.” What to do? Make a nonsense statement somewhat like the “combat boots” thing. Thus, “the Chinese done it!” And media types, and you, spend months fixated on a nonsense statement. Good grief!

    1. sod

      “Trump makes statements meant to send people into a tailspin if they have never interacted with a street-wise New Yorker.
      Consider your own citing of the “climate change was invented by the chinese” bit. You, I, and Trump, know this is not true — and it wasn’t meant to be. ”

      sorry, but this attempt to argue away his lunacy is total rubbish.

      He is the President of the USA now. Your example explains this best. Whatever you used to say to your friends when you were young, the president can not say anything similar today (“the mother of the chinese president wears combat boots”).

      when the President says wrong stuff, the message will get heard.

      The chinese now know, that he will blame them for invented stuff. Politicians, scientists and journalists now know, that the denialist movement is a real danger to the environment and will act accordingly. Just sit and watch.

      1. AndyG55

        “Just sit and watch.”

        We do, we watch a z-rank clown with near zero intelligence yapping away.

        That would be YOU, sob/seb

        Its HILARIOUS to see how moronically out of touch you are with normal, real people.

        Are you a German public far-left SERVANT, perhaps ??? !!!

      2. AndyG55

        “He is the President of the USA now.”

        Yes he is, and he is already starting to destroy your cult AGW religion.

        Get used to it sob, there is FAR more destruction of the AGW scam to come.

        We all look forward to your increased desperation and idiocy over the next few months.

        Desperation and idiocy is all that the likes of you and sleb have in their meaningless, insignificant little lives.

      3. AndyG55

        “when the President says wrong stuff”

        But he HASN’T.

        He has been absolutely direct and on target on every action an word so far.

        Have you noticed just how much his words STING the loonie left anti-science, anti-human scum leftists like you ? !!! 🙂

        He is baiting you.. and you and your ilk are taking it hook, line and sinker. 🙂

        And that is something you and your psycho left-wing activists are just going to have to come to grips with. 🙂

        1. Henning Nielsen

          It is certainly great fun to see the bubble-world of the leftists being pricked by reality. Seems that they were so ensconced in this la-la-land, they never imagined it could be pulled from under their feet. It will be interesting to see the result of Trump’s announced severe cut in US funding of the UN. It is a clear sign of distrust of this institution, and not least of their CAGW agency IPCC. The UN can then choose between aligning itself closer to the world’s physical and political realites, or they can continue their path towards becoming an increasingly irrelevant club of parasites.

        2. sod

          “But he HASN’T.

          He has been absolutely direct and on target on every action an word so far.”

          he has said this (written on twitter actually):

          ““The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive,” Mr. Trump wrote. That message has been reshared more than 104,000 times and “liked” nearly 66,000 times.”

          And that claim, is false. It is absurd, that you want to deny that.

          1. AndyG55

            Trump is finding amazingly easy to hank the leftist chain, that is for sure.

            His use of the far-left oriented twitter/faceplant-verse has been masterful.

            He would like to thank them for being his major free advertising firm. 🙂

            And the leftists still haven’t figured out they have been flushed, have you sob. 🙂

      4. SebastianH

        Sod, the other commenters – even AndyG55 – a correct on this point. Donald Trump seems to be stupid and sometimes displays the confusion of an older person, but there is a plan to his weird statements. It’s bait! He wants everyone to talk aboout his nonsense and the media is picking everything up, e.g. when he published a list of terrorist attacks that allegedly weren’t cover by media … they took the bait and reported about having reported those incidents. Terrorist attacks were talked about again in the media and Trump reached his goal.

        Where the commenters here are not correct:

        He has been absolutely direct and on target on every action an word so far.

        There is not one day without a new lie told from the goverment of the U.S. Even the speech above contains falsehoods. His Twitter account is a joke and reads like the stuff an angry kid would tweet from the toilet seat. Trump is still a self centered “old boy” with very thin skin and views the media as the enemy (not Breitbart and Fox though, both being opinion plattforms instead of news plattforms) because they ask “unfair” questions.

        I’m not optimistic that this presidency will end well for the U.S., but I guess – like with climate change – only time will tell how bad it will get 🙂

        1. AndyG55

          Poor seb and sob, they are finding themselves on the wrong side of the ledger, and are continuing to see everything through their Marxist slime glasses.

          They can see their silly little AGW scam religion about to come crashing down, leaving them with even less in their pitiful lives. Empty and bereft.

          and its delicious to watch. 🙂

        2. DirkH

          “There is not one day without a new lie told from the goverment of the U.S. Even the speech above contains falsehoods.”

          Yet you are incapable of mentioning one.

          The German Liar press and its fanboys like you are just like warmunist scientists: A big mouth and a bunch of lies and nothing behind it.

        3. William Lawrence Hyde

          “sometimes displays the confusion of an older person,”
          So you’re an Ageist as well! I’m turning 74 in April and believe me, I’m not confused. How many other hateful notions do you possess? Keep on posting and I guess we’ll all find out what a despicable eugenicist you are. Keep it up, asshole, we’re all interested in how widespread your bigotry actually is!

          1. AndyG55

            I suspect seb is early twenties, yuppy living off inheritance money.

            Limited maths, science education…Learnt only how to yap.

      5. m e emberson

        Dear S*d.
        Nice to hear from you again.
        I have a good book for you to read.
        It is called.. Teaching Thinking.. by Edward de Bono.
        Many of the pitfalls which younger ( or more immature)brains encounter are explained. One seems to be the tendency to go off at a tangent to the subject which is being debated..
        If you can follow the thread of an argument and have enough skill in the English language you can then post objections.
        You will need to PROVE the connection though.

  4. Patrick healy

    But,but, I was hoping he might mention Mann made global warming – and tell it for the crock it is. Just hoping.

  5. RobK

    Sod,
    Economically China is the major beneficiary of the Paris Treaty. It sells most of the world’s solar panels, much of it’s wind machines and has no obligation to curb CO2 emissions until 2030 whilst the west is obiliged to distribute it’s wealth and squander it’s resources. Trump has a valid point.

  6. sod

    What Trump is doing at the EPA is totally insane. They want to keep the programs that do cleanup for corporations and cut funds for controlling corporations.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/02/heres-one-part-of-epa-that-the-agencys-new-leader-wants-to-protect/?utm_term=.9a5e7ef62fac#comments

    This is an obvious transfer of money to the rich.

    1. John F. Hultquist

      transfer of money to the rich
      Except he wants to increase wealth, not transfer it.

      Such as the land owners of Germany, and England and Scotland that lease land for wind towers — while the electrical rates for the poor person, least able to afford increases (think as a percentage of income), has no choice but to take a decrease in standard of living. Base load electric producers are destroyed. Wealth destruction at its finest. This is sad but fascinating.

      1. sod

        “Except he wants to increase wealth, not transfer it.”

        yeah. Allowing more pollution is increasing the wealth of the poor. For sure!

  7. John F. Hultquist

    @sod 3:34 PM (also see my comment at 6:08 AM)
    Still spouting the silly bit that Trump thinks the concept of global warming was created by the Chinese.

    A couple of years ago, on this site, Pierre posted a short history of the movement to the global warming concept and the Kyoto Protocol. It is an interesting history. Find and read it.

    Trump did not graduate from a fine political training school such as the Ecole Nationale d’Administration or St John’s College of Oxford, nor Yale University as did John Kerry. Trump studied real estate and economics at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. While there he worked at the family firm, Elizabeth Trump & Son, took the lead in 1971 and renamed it The Trump Organization.
    He had to deal with NYC and NY State politicians and labor unions. That he is still alive and did well is testament to his abilities.

    So, months ago, he threw a bone (the tweet about the Chinese) to the barking mad dogs of the media and Democrats and they are still chasing it. Meanwhile, Obama era regulations are being discarded like the fish & chip papers that were under the Parakeet.
    Welcome to the rough and tumble world of the NYC disrupter.

  8. sod

    “So, months ago, he threw a bone (the tweet about the Chinese) to the barking mad dogs of the media and Democrats and they are still chasing it. Meanwhile, Obama era regulations are being discarded like the fish & chip papers that were under the Parakeet.”

    that is your version of the story.

    In the real world, the president is simply constantly lying to the people.

    And his cut backs on regulations will be fought in court. You need a reason, to remove a law or rule.

    Again, i think that Trump will do enormous damage to the environment. But i also think that the backlash might be even bigger.

    you might wake up to a world, that has woken up to the dangers Trump poses to the environment…

    1. AndyG55

      “You need a reason, to remove a law or rule. ”

      It was called an ELECTION. Get over it.

      And he is not constantly lying. That is your meme.

      Every action taken so far is doing exactly what he said he would do… what he was elected to do.

      How long before the Germans wake up enough to see that they also need to “drain the swamp” !!

      1. sod

        “It was called an ELECTION. Get over it.”

        he did not win 60 seats in the senate. Any new environmental law will fail, as he will be filibustered i the senate.

        This leaves him changing some rules and interpretation of rules. Trump also has a huge influence over how much the EPA enforces rules and laws.

        But any changes here will be checked in courts. And Trump will lose over and over again, as he did with his travel ban, because he is basing his claims in contradiction to scientific evidence.

  9. sod

    Protecting lakes will also no longer be an EPA job:

    “The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative would be all but eliminated, going from $300 million budgeted in fiscal 2016 to $10 million in fiscal 2018 — a 97 percent cut. ”

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/white-house-gutting-38-epa-programs-draft-budget/story?id=45899235

  10. AndyG55

    Gotta love it 🙂

    GOP attorneys bring law suits against Trump administration… Listen

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/5346816638001/?#sp=show-clips

    Using law suits to speed up the process of removing “anti-progress” Obama and totalitarian control agendas.

    1. sod

      congratulations.you want to eradicate a fish, that survived since prehistoric times. GOOD JOB!”

      “In Missouri, this legal tactic centers on an endangered prehistoric fish that has outlived the dinosaurs, the Pallid Sturgeon. It reproduces in river shallows which have become fewer, due to the diking and channeling of the Missouri River. To resurrect the fish population, an Obama-era amendment to the Endangered Species Act allows the feds to designate as critical habitat areas where the fish may not even exist. The amendment was designed to expand ecosystems in order to maximize the endangered fish’s ability to spawn.

      But some landowners find the amendment intrusive. “This is the key part,” said Hawley. “We are an agricultural state. That would mean farmers and ranchers could find themselves unable to farm their land, unable to develop their land.” He said it’s “absolutely a killer for small businesses and small farms in our state.”

      Hawley is one of 18 Republican AG’s suing to overturn the rule.”

      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/03/republican-ags-helping-trump-by-suing-administration.html

  11. sod

    This article gives a good explanation for the problems that Trump is facing at the EPA.

    (sorry for the long quote, i try to avoid those normally!)

    “How will they fulfill their obligation to consider the best available science and base their decisions on well grounded, objective factual records? Let’s face it. Virtually every important decision EPA makes is met with a lawsuit, whether by industry, states, environmental groups or affected communities — or sometimes all of these. The concept of judicial review, where courts often have the final say, is alive and well in environmental law. And in our experience as the lawyers who have defended EPA in litigation for many years, the courts take their job seriously.

    Judges don’t make policy, nor should they. But they do expect clear and thorough explanations, supported by robust record evidence. They expect a science-based agency to embrace real science.

    Moreover, changes in policy direction, however desirable, cannot be achieved with the wave of a magic wand. As Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy recently reminded us, “an agency’s decision to change course may be arbitrary and capricious if the agency ignores or countermands its earlier factual findings without reasoned explanation… An agency cannot simply disregard contrary or inconvenient factual determinations that it made in the past, any more than it can ignore inconvenient facts when it writes on a blank slate.””

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/04/opinions/can-scott-pruitts-epa-do-its-job-cruden-shenkman/