{"id":382704,"date":"2025-06-11T08:34:51","date_gmt":"2025-06-11T06:34:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=382704"},"modified":"2025-06-11T08:34:53","modified_gmt":"2025-06-11T06:34:53","slug":"defund-the-national-academy-of-sciences","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=382704","title":{"rendered":"Defund The National Academy of Sciences!"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Manhattan Contrarian<\/a><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Francis Menton<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Here\u2019s an article you might find interesting from Science magazine on June 2. The headline is \u201cNational Academies, staggering from Trump cuts, on brink of dramatic downsizing.\u201d<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Science magazine is one of those formerly-prestigious \u201cpeer-reviewed\u201d journals where for many decades you just had to get your research published in order to become someone in a scientific field. Somewhere along the way, Science turned from scientific inquiry to orthodoxy enforcement. The National Academy of Sciences (\u201cNAS,\u201d and along with two fellow Academies of Engineering and Medicine sometimes called \u201cNASEM\u201d), meanwhile, is a federally-chartered but supposedly private entity set up to give \u201cindependent\u201d scientific advice to the government. The Academies raise meaningful amounts of private funds, but in the most recent reported year (2023) got the substantial majority of their funding (over $200 million) via contracts from the feds. (See Treasurer\u2019s Statement here.<\/a>). As far as I can determine, the main business of the National Academies, and particularly of the NAS, is also orthodoxy enforcement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The latest, from the June 2 Science article, is that the National Academy of Sciences \u201cis navigating a tense situation as the organization faces unprecedented contract losses and layoffs.\u201d<\/em> The President of the NAS is named Marcia McNutt. The Science piece describes a May 21 email sent by McNutt to colleagues outlining how the Academies (and their umbrella organization the National Research Council) plan to respond to funding cuts. Excerpt:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWhile it is too early to share specific outcomes, we anticipate that the NRC will emerge as a smaller organization with fewer units,\u201d McNutt wrote in a 21 May email.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

How big are the funding cuts?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Trump\u2019s inauguration to 6 May, NRC lost 41 U.S. government contracts and received another eight stop-work orders. . . . The DOGE website lists 36 of the canceled NASEM contracts, and Science calculated the total cost of these losses to be more than $25 million.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Well, so far by my calculation that\u2019s $25 million down and $175 million to go.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is there anything about the NAS that\u2019s worth preserving at all? To answer that question, you need to consider its long-time President, Marcia McNutt. Ms. McNutt transitioned from editor-in-chief of Science magazine over to President of the NAS way back in late 2015\/early 2016. At that time, I wrote two posts on that subject, here on December 18, 2015<\/a>, and here on February 8, 2016<\/a>. The focus of those two posts was what I called the \u201cepidemic\u201d of orthodoxy enforcement in the U.S. scientific establishment. And I identified the leader of that epidemic as Ms. McNutt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

In the December 2015 post I featured an extraordinary email submitted by Peter Wood of the National Association of Scholars opposing Ms. McNutt\u2019s candidacy for President of NAS (although there was no other serious contender for the position at the time). Mr. Wood identified three major areas of scientific inquiry, all with huge money at stake, where Ms. McNutt as editor of Science had led the forces seeking to suppress all dissenting evidence and data. The three areas were (1) the so-called \u201clinear no threshold\u201d hypothesis as to the effects of pollutants and carcinogens (including radiation); (2) the health effects of very small particulate matter (2.5 microns or smaller) in the air (known as \u201cPM 2.5\u201d); and (3) the so-called \u201cconsensus model\u201d of climate change driven by CO2 and other greenhouse gases. I will repeat here a long excerpt from Mr. Wood\u2019s email that I included in that 2015 post:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dr. McNutt has in her career found herself faced more than once with the challenge of what to do when an entrenched orthodoxy meets a substantial scientific challenge.  The challenge in each case could itself prove to be mistaken, but it met what most scientists would concede to be the threshold criteria to deserve a serious hearing.  Yet in each case Dr. McNutt chose to reinforce the orthodoxy by shutting the door on the challenge. . . .  Dr. McNutt\u2019s dismissive treatment of scientific criticisms is disturbing. . . .<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

1.  The status of the <\/em>linear no-threshold (LNT) dose-response model<\/em><\/strong> for the biological effects of nuclear radiation.  The prominence of the model stems from the June 29, 1956 Science paper, \u201cGenetic Effects of Atomic Radiation,\u201d authored by the NAS Committee on the Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation.  This paper is now widely questioned and has been seriously critiqued in many peer-reviewed publications, including two detailed 2015 papers.  These criticisms are being taken seriously around the world, as summarized in a December 2, 2015 Wall Street Journal commentary.  In August 2015 four distinguished critics of LNT made a formal request to Dr. McNutt to examine the evidence of fundamental flaws in the 1956 paper and retract it.  However, on August 11, 2015 Dr. McNutt rejected this request without even reviewing the detailed evidence.  Furthermore, Dr. McNutt did not even consider recusing herself and having independent reviewers examine evidence that challenges the validity of both a Science paper and an NAS Committee Report.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is a consequential matter that bears on a great deal of national public policy, as the LNT model has served as the basis for risk assessment and risk management of radiation and chemical carcinogens for decades, but now needs to be seriously reassessed.  This reassessment could profoundly alter many regulations from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Environmental Protection Agency, and other government agencies.  The relevant documents regarding the 1956 Science paper and Dr. McNutt can be examined at <\/em>www.nas.org\/images\/documents\/LNT.pdf<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

2.  Extensive evidence of scientific misconduct in the epidemiology of <\/em>fine particulate air pollution<\/em><\/strong>(PM2.5) and its relationship to mortality.  Since 1997 EPA has claimed that lifetime inhalation of about a teaspoon of particles with diameter less than 2.5 microns causes premature death in the United States and it established a national regulation based on this claim.  Science has provided extensive news coverage of this issue and its regulatory significance, but has never published any scientific criticism of this questionable claim, which is largely based on nontransparent research.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Earlier this year, nine accomplished scientists and academics submitted to Science well-documented evidence of misconduct by several of the PM2.5 researchers relied upon by EPA.  The evidence of misconduct was first submitted to Dr. McNutt in a detailed June 4, 2015 email letter, then in a detailed July 20, 2015 Policy Forum manuscript \u201cTransparent Science is Necessary for EPA Regulations,\u201d and finally in an August 17, 2015 Perspective manuscript \u201cParticulate Matter Does Not Cause Premature Deaths.\u201d Dr. McNutt and two Science editors immediately rejected the letter and the manuscripts and never conducted any internal or external review of the evidence.  This a consequential matter because many multi-billion dollar EPA air pollution regulations, such as, the Clean Power Plan, are primarily justified by the claim that PM2.5 is killing Americans.  The relevant documents regarding this controversy can be examined at <\/em>https:\/\/www.nas.org\/images\/documents\/PM2.5.pdf<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

3. Science promotes the so-called <\/em>consensus model of climate change<\/em><\/strong> and excludes any contrary views.  This issue has become so polarized and polarizing that it is difficult to bring up, but at some point the scientific community will have to reckon with the dramatic discrepancies between current climate models and substantial parts of the empirical record.  Recent evidence of Science bias on this issue is the June 26, 2015 article by Dr. Thomas R. Karl, \u201cPossible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus\u201d; the July 3, 2015 McNutt editorial, \u201cThe beyond-two-degree inferno\u201d; the November 13, 2015 McNutt editorial, \u201cClimate warning, 50 years later\u201d; and the November 25, 2015 AAAS News Release, \u201cAAAS Leads Coalition to Protest Climate Science Inquiry.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Further to the subject of climate orthodoxy enforcement, my February 2016 post quoted from a July 2015 editorial in Science authored by Ms. McNutt. Excerpt:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The time for debate has ended. Action is urgently needed. The Paris-based International Energy Agency recently announced that current commitments to cut CO2 emissions [known as Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs)] from the world\u2019s nations are insufficient to avoid warming the entire planet by an average of more than 2\u00b0C above the preindustrial level. To set more aggressive targets, developed nations need to reduce their per-capita fossil fuel emissions even further, and by doing so, create roadmaps for developing nations to leapfrog technologies by installing low-CO2\u2013emitting energy infrastructure rather than coal-fired power plants as they expand their energy capacity.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the time since 2016, Ms. McNutt and the NAS have been central actors in suppressing dissenting voices in the climate debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And here\u2019s something else from the June 2 Science piece:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The presidents of those three honorific societies that together with NRC comprise NASEM\u2014McNutt, John Anderson, and Victor Dzau\u2014each earned more than $1 million in 2023. . . . At a time when hundreds of jobs are at risk, \u201cIt is galling that the leadership of the institution makes that kind of money,\u201d says one senior program officer with a decade of experience at the institution.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I can\u2019t think of any reason why any organization headed by Ms. McNutt should get a dime of taxpayer money. Can you?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Here\u2019s an article you might find interesting from Science magazine on June 2. The headline is \u201cNational Academies, staggering from Trump cuts, on brink of dramatic downsizing.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":382709,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691818056,691835753,691835752,691835751,691835628,691825826,691832593],"class_list":{"0":"post-382704","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-climate-change","9":"tag-consensus-model-of-climate-change","10":"tag-ine-particulate-air-pollution","11":"tag-linear-no-threshold-lnt","12":"tag-marcia-mcnutt","13":"tag-national-academy-of-sciences","14":"tag-science-magazine","16":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/0Screenshot-2025-06-11-083347.png?fit=1325%2C837&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1ByE","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":381622,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=381622","url_meta":{"origin":382704,"position":0},"title":"National Academies Face Extinction Because\u2026 TRUMP!","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/06\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Last Saturday, the morning after a news article announced major job losses coming at the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), National Academy of Sciences President Marcia McNutt wrote an apologetic memo to employees. Her statement to STAT that 250 people could lose their positions by summer\u2019s\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)\"","block_context":{"text":"Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=department-of-government-efficiency-doge"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/ChatGPT-Image-28.-Mai-2025-09_53_37-1.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/ChatGPT-Image-28.-Mai-2025-09_53_37-1.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/ChatGPT-Image-28.-Mai-2025-09_53_37-1.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/ChatGPT-Image-28.-Mai-2025-09_53_37-1.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/ChatGPT-Image-28.-Mai-2025-09_53_37-1.png?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":404894,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=404894","url_meta":{"origin":382704,"position":1},"title":"STEVE MILLOY: Rigged Report By National Academies Aims To Thwart Trump Energy Agenda","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"25\/09\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The National Academy of Sciences just released its so-called\u00a0review\u00a0of the Trump EPA\u2019s proposal to rescind the endangerment finding for greenhouse gases. It is every bit the rigged and predetermined outcome\u00a0predicted.","rel":"","context":"In \"COVID crisis\"","block_context":{"text":"COVID crisis","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=covid-crisis"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQMin_4mmuh8GVU193_HG_5IAqT9N8PhXZVPxRl-X11TtyFqnKHmVickBbNIbeUiakKarsGiFnaLgolpMgfg98jV32HIZkBUkMyG-PnTRfKYzkyl0AvlBKTU9vL7K_eK.jpeg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQMin_4mmuh8GVU193_HG_5IAqT9N8PhXZVPxRl-X11TtyFqnKHmVickBbNIbeUiakKarsGiFnaLgolpMgfg98jV32HIZkBUkMyG-PnTRfKYzkyl0AvlBKTU9vL7K_eK.jpeg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQMin_4mmuh8GVU193_HG_5IAqT9N8PhXZVPxRl-X11TtyFqnKHmVickBbNIbeUiakKarsGiFnaLgolpMgfg98jV32HIZkBUkMyG-PnTRfKYzkyl0AvlBKTU9vL7K_eK.jpeg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQMin_4mmuh8GVU193_HG_5IAqT9N8PhXZVPxRl-X11TtyFqnKHmVickBbNIbeUiakKarsGiFnaLgolpMgfg98jV32HIZkBUkMyG-PnTRfKYzkyl0AvlBKTU9vL7K_eK.jpeg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQMin_4mmuh8GVU193_HG_5IAqT9N8PhXZVPxRl-X11TtyFqnKHmVickBbNIbeUiakKarsGiFnaLgolpMgfg98jV32HIZkBUkMyG-PnTRfKYzkyl0AvlBKTU9vL7K_eK.jpeg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":400868,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=400868","url_meta":{"origin":382704,"position":2},"title":"James Comer Probing Major Science Group Over Potential Partisan Climate Review","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"08\/09\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Chairman James Comer announced Wednesday he is investigating the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) over an expedited review that possibly was designed to undermine President Donald Trump\u2019s agenda.","rel":"","context":"In \"Environmental Protection Agency\u2019s (EPA)\"","block_context":{"text":"Environmental Protection Agency\u2019s (EPA)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=environmental-protection-agencys-epa"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQOU-aZUGVJqzJWaFocsIFyDMIluUITwBQgmaT8yWXP1OqSoyp8aAb1GpKI02kE2SOUBuRenECaCA9aTLF-A3aHSJw1tddNWpu1QqZdZ2O48Ldgmy1w-kSiFMr0kIfgtZEElTMrH_yZYGQriBOLSdu2xAkAsxQ.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQOU-aZUGVJqzJWaFocsIFyDMIluUITwBQgmaT8yWXP1OqSoyp8aAb1GpKI02kE2SOUBuRenECaCA9aTLF-A3aHSJw1tddNWpu1QqZdZ2O48Ldgmy1w-kSiFMr0kIfgtZEElTMrH_yZYGQriBOLSdu2xAkAsxQ.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQOU-aZUGVJqzJWaFocsIFyDMIluUITwBQgmaT8yWXP1OqSoyp8aAb1GpKI02kE2SOUBuRenECaCA9aTLF-A3aHSJw1tddNWpu1QqZdZ2O48Ldgmy1w-kSiFMr0kIfgtZEElTMrH_yZYGQriBOLSdu2xAkAsxQ.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQOU-aZUGVJqzJWaFocsIFyDMIluUITwBQgmaT8yWXP1OqSoyp8aAb1GpKI02kE2SOUBuRenECaCA9aTLF-A3aHSJw1tddNWpu1QqZdZ2O48Ldgmy1w-kSiFMr0kIfgtZEElTMrH_yZYGQriBOLSdu2xAkAsxQ.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/AQOU-aZUGVJqzJWaFocsIFyDMIluUITwBQgmaT8yWXP1OqSoyp8aAb1GpKI02kE2SOUBuRenECaCA9aTLF-A3aHSJw1tddNWpu1QqZdZ2O48Ldgmy1w-kSiFMr0kIfgtZEElTMrH_yZYGQriBOLSdu2xAkAsxQ.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":265942,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=265942","url_meta":{"origin":382704,"position":3},"title":"National Academies \u201cClimate Junk Summit\u201d 7\/11-7\/12 is open to all","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"07\/07\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) are holding a \u201cClimate Crossroads Summit\u201d on July 11-12. Virtual attendance is open to all.","rel":"","context":"In \"climate alarmism\"","block_context":{"text":"climate alarmism","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-alarmism"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/OIG-14.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/OIG-14.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/OIG-14.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/OIG-14.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":401343,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=401343","url_meta":{"origin":382704,"position":4},"title":"Chinese Communist Party- funded research has flooded academic journals","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/09\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Top-tier academic journals such as\u00a0Nature,\u00a0Science, the\u00a0New England Journal of Medicine,\u00a0and the\u00a0Lancet\u00a0have published reams of research funded by the Chinese Communist Party in recent years, a\u00a0Washington Examiner\u00a0review\u00a0found.\u00a0","rel":"","context":"In \"85 climate experts\"","block_context":{"text":"85 climate experts","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=85-climate-experts"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0AQOc2PU8w8Kp6NuzlMGsA7_BaWEjGmKDhp_o2bCxgySfTKxS-78beMFuvPTIXdb_QEk_-txdTMbZvSAI90XkUb7N5n60LHRXnOG-SxxvFb8XqBfY8A9zN0UNfErNJE-ZvdIv4xhQpp7xzwQB5fODZhWd07BDbg-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0AQOc2PU8w8Kp6NuzlMGsA7_BaWEjGmKDhp_o2bCxgySfTKxS-78beMFuvPTIXdb_QEk_-txdTMbZvSAI90XkUb7N5n60LHRXnOG-SxxvFb8XqBfY8A9zN0UNfErNJE-ZvdIv4xhQpp7xzwQB5fODZhWd07BDbg-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0AQOc2PU8w8Kp6NuzlMGsA7_BaWEjGmKDhp_o2bCxgySfTKxS-78beMFuvPTIXdb_QEk_-txdTMbZvSAI90XkUb7N5n60LHRXnOG-SxxvFb8XqBfY8A9zN0UNfErNJE-ZvdIv4xhQpp7xzwQB5fODZhWd07BDbg-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0AQOc2PU8w8Kp6NuzlMGsA7_BaWEjGmKDhp_o2bCxgySfTKxS-78beMFuvPTIXdb_QEk_-txdTMbZvSAI90XkUb7N5n60LHRXnOG-SxxvFb8XqBfY8A9zN0UNfErNJE-ZvdIv4xhQpp7xzwQB5fODZhWd07BDbg-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0AQOc2PU8w8Kp6NuzlMGsA7_BaWEjGmKDhp_o2bCxgySfTKxS-78beMFuvPTIXdb_QEk_-txdTMbZvSAI90XkUb7N5n60LHRXnOG-SxxvFb8XqBfY8A9zN0UNfErNJE-ZvdIv4xhQpp7xzwQB5fODZhWd07BDbg-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C1200&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":211818,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=211818","url_meta":{"origin":382704,"position":5},"title":"Study Human extinction? Climate doomers want to find a nuclear-winter-level scare to motivate people","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"04\/08\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"I\u2019m rating this a full instant BINGO on the climate change propaganda card. Climate change just isn\u2019t scary enough. The Merchants of Panic want to find the climate change equivalent of the Nuclear winter Bomb Scare \u201cto compel\u201d people: Climate change: More studies needed on possibility of human extinction Climate\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-70.png?fit=1200%2C937&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-70.png?fit=1200%2C937&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-70.png?fit=1200%2C937&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-70.png?fit=1200%2C937&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/image-70.png?fit=1200%2C937&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/382704","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=382704"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/382704\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":382711,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/382704\/revisions\/382711"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/382709"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=382704"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=382704"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=382704"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}