{"id":391974,"date":"2025-07-31T20:24:05","date_gmt":"2025-07-31T18:24:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=391974"},"modified":"2025-07-31T20:24:27","modified_gmt":"2025-07-31T18:24:27","slug":"a-case-for-climate-humility-analyzing-the-does-a-critical-review-of-impacts-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions-on-the-u-s-climate","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=391974","title":{"rendered":"A case for \u2018Climate Humility\u2019: Analyzing the DOE\u2019s \u2018A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"723\" height=\"723\" data-attachment-id=\"391977\" data-permalink=\"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?attachment_id=391977\" data-orig-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?fit=1280%2C1280&amp;ssl=1\" data-orig-size=\"1280,1280\" data-comments-opened=\"1\" data-image-meta=\"{&quot;aperture&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;credit&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;camera&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;caption&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;created_timestamp&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;copyright&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;focal_length&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;iso&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;shutter_speed&quot;:&quot;0&quot;,&quot;title&quot;:&quot;&quot;,&quot;orientation&quot;:&quot;0&quot;}\" data-image-title=\"AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE\" data-image-description=\"\" data-image-caption=\"\" data-large-file=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?fit=723%2C723&amp;ssl=1\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=723%2C723&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"A split image showcasing two coastal scenes; on the left, a sunny beach with gentle waves under a clear blue sky, and on the right, a dramatic coastline with overcast skies and waves crashing against the shore.\" class=\"wp-image-391977\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=1024%2C1024&amp;ssl=1 1024w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=300%2C300&amp;ssl=1 300w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1 150w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=768%2C768&amp;ssl=1 768w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=1200%2C1200&amp;ssl=1 1200w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=800%2C800&amp;ssl=1 800w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=600%2C600&amp;ssl=1 600w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=400%2C400&amp;ssl=1 400w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=200%2C200&amp;ssl=1 200w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=450%2C450&amp;ssl=1 450w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=60%2C60&amp;ssl=1 60w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?resize=550%2C550&amp;ssl=1 550w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?w=1280&amp;ssl=1 1280w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 723px) 100vw, 723px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">From <a href=\"https:\/\/wattsupwiththat.com\/2025\/07\/30\/a-case-for-climate-humility-analyzing-the-does-a-critical-review-of-impacts-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions-on-the-u-s-climate\/\">Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">By <a href=\"https:\/\/wattsupwiththat.com\/author\/wattsupwiththat\/\">Anthony Watts<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Honestly, I never thought I\u2019d see the day. To quote Mr. FOIA from ClimateGate, \u201c<em>A miracle has occurred.<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Yesterday\u2019s release of the DOE\u2019s&nbsp;<em>A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate<\/em>&nbsp;is a watershed moment in the ongoing debate over climate policy in America. Why? Because for the first time, a major U.S. government agency\u2014on official letterhead and with a blue-ribbon cast of authors (John Christy, Judith Curry, Steven Koonin, Ross McKitrick, and Roy Spencer)\u2014has published an open challenge to the central claims, data handling, and even the motivations behind mainstream climate science and policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This isn\u2019t just another technical report. It is a systematic rebuke of accepted climate \u201cwisdom,\u201d and it does so with unusual clarity, scientific rigor, and (at times) a sense of humor often absent in climate documents. Most importantly, it directly confronts the exaggerated and politicized rhetoric that has dominated headlines for decades.<br><br><strong>The Executive Summary from the&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.energy.gov\/topics\/climate\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">DOE web page<\/a>:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This report:&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Reviews scientific certainties and uncertainties in how anthropogenic emissions of CO<sub>2<\/sub>\u00a0and other GHGs have affected, or will affect, the Nation\u2019s climate, extreme weather events, and metrics of societal well-being.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Assesses the near-term impacts of elevated concentrations of CO<sub>2<\/sub>, including enhanced plant growth and reduced ocean alkalinity.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Evaluates data and projections regarding long-term impacts of elevated concentrations of CO<sub>2<\/sub>, including estimates of future warming.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Finds that claims of increased frequency or intensity of hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and droughts are not supported by U.S. historical data.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Asserts that CO<sub>2<\/sub>-induced warming appears to be less damaging economically than commonly believed, and that aggressive mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Finds that U.S. policy actions are expected to have undetectably small direct impacts on the global climate and any effects will emerge only with long delays.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>What Makes This Report Unique?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ol start=\"1\" class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Official Status and Author Independence<\/strong><br>Unlike think tank white papers or \u201cdissenting\u201d journal articles, this report comes from within the federal government, under the Trump administration\u2019s DOE. Yet the authors assert full independence\u2014no editorial oversight, no political vetting. It\u2019s rare to see scientists of this caliber (with backgrounds at NASA, IPCC, and major universities) allowed to directly challenge prevailing policy narratives with government resources behind them.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Comprehensive Critique, Not Just a Narrow Rebuttal<\/strong><br>Rather than focusing on a single point of controversy, the report systematically evaluates everything from CO2\u2019s physiological role in plant growth, to climate sensitivity estimates, to the track record of climate models, to the real-world impacts (or lack thereof) on extreme weather and U.S. agriculture. Each chapter is loaded with extended quotes from peer-reviewed literature and clear explanations of scientific uncertainty and model error.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Explicit Address of Policy Missteps and Economic Risks<\/strong><br>Most uniquely, the report doesn\u2019t stop at \u201cscience.\u201d It details the economic costs of climate policy\u2014especially the social cost of carbon modeling games and the virtually undetectable impact U.S. mitigation will have on the global climate. This is a rarely admitted fact, buried in most government assessments but here discussed openly and at length.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Direct Critique of Media, IPCC, and U.S. National Climate Assessments<\/strong><br>In one chapter after another, the report highlights the misuse of worst-case scenarios (RCP8.5), the prevalence of \u201cpublication bias\u201d in alarming ocean acidification studies, and the outright neglect of positive CO2 impacts like global greening. The report does not hesitate to call out \u201csystemic misuse of scenarios in climate research\u201d and points to specific agencies and news outlets responsible for propagating misleading claims.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>My List of the Eight Most Important Findings in the Report<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ol start=\"1\" class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>CO2 Is Not a Conventional Pollutant and Has Direct Environmental Benefits<\/strong><br>Unlike actual pollutants, CO2 has no toxic effect at ambient levels, is essential for plant life, and has caused global greening\u2014a fact barely acknowledged in IPCC summaries.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>\u201cOcean Acidification\u201d Fears Are Overblown<\/strong><br>Oceans are still alkaline, and changes in pH are within natural variability; most ocean life evolved under much lower pH. The report exposes publication bias and lack of reproducibility in many alarming acidification studies. The Great Barrier Reef is currently thriving.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Climate Models Consistently Overestimate Warming<\/strong><br>Most climate models run \u201chot,\u201d overstating recent warming at the surface and in the troposphere. Data-driven climate sensitivity estimates are lower and more constrained than model-based ones, challenging the high ECS values used to justify drastic policy measures.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>No Evidence for Increases in Most U.S. Extreme Weather<\/strong><br>U.S. historical data shows no long-term upward trend in hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, or droughts. Claims of worsening disasters are unsupported by observations; fire trends are largely due to land management, not climate change.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Sea Level Rise Is Not Accelerating Dangerously<\/strong><br>Global sea level has risen about 8 inches since 1900, but regional U.S. sea level trends are dominated by local land movements, not acceleration from climate change. Tide gauges do not show alarming acceleration.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Attribution of Warming to CO2 Is Far Less Certain Than Claimed<\/strong><br>Natural variability, incomplete data, and significant model uncertainties make attribution of observed warming and extremes to human CO2 emissions tenuous. Solar variability may be underestimated in mainstream assessments.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>The Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) Is Largely Arbitrary<\/strong><br>SCC estimates, which drive regulatory costs, are shown to be highly sensitive to model assumptions, with no robust economic basis. The report demonstrates that realistic ECS values and updated economic inputs lead to much lower SCC estimates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>U.S. Emission Reductions Will Have Negligible Impact on Global Climate<\/strong><br>Even extreme U.S. policy actions will produce climate changes too small to detect for generations\u2014an inconvenient truth almost never discussed in mainstream policy or media reports.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Here is a Breakdown of How the Report Challenges Mainstream Climate Science<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>CO2: Pollutant or Plant Food?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The DOE report begins by demolishing the notion that CO2 should be treated as a conventional pollutant, as regulated under the Clean Air Act. It cites OSHA exposure limits (5,000 ppm\u2014orders of magnitude above outdoor levels) and presents robust evidence from plant physiology showing that rising CO2 enhances growth, improves water use efficiency, and has led to the global greening phenomenon observed by satellites.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Notably, the report details how IPCC assessments downplay or omit this global greening effect, despite its direct connection to rising CO2. Even the IPCC\u2019s own Special Report on Land concluded \u201cwith high confidence\u201d that greening has occurred, yet this is absent from summary reports intended for policymakers and the public.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Ocean \u201cAcidification\u201d: A Manufactured Crisis?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The report\u2019s treatment of ocean acidification is a case study in scientific skepticism. It points out that \u201cacidification\u201d is a misnomer\u2014oceans remain alkaline, and pH fluctuations are within historic norms. Life in the ocean evolved under a much broader range of pH conditions. More importantly, the DOE authors highlight the growing recognition of \u201cpublication bias\u201d: studies with null or minimal impacts from declining pH are difficult to publish, leading to a skewed scientific record.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A meta-analysis cited in the report finds a strong \u201cdecline effect\u201d in ocean acidification impacts on fish behavior: early alarming results are rarely replicated by later, larger studies, which usually show negligible impacts. In short, the \u201ccrisis\u201d has been grossly exaggerated in the literature and the media.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Model Failure: The Emperor Has No Clothes<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The centerpiece of the DOE critique is the performance of global climate models. The report notes that despite decades of effort and billions spent, model projections have failed to narrow the uncertainty in equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS). In fact, the spread of ECS in the latest (CMIP6) models has grown wider, not narrower, and the majority of models produce too much warming compared to observations\u2014both at the surface and throughout the troposphere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Crucially, the report provides detailed side-by-side comparisons of model projections versus observed data (see page 33\u201337). It notes that only models with the lowest ECS values match the actual temperature record since 1979. The majority of models overestimate warming, in some cases by more than a factor of two.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The report also skewers the widespread misuse of \u201cworst-case\u201d emissions scenarios (RCP8.5) in research and media. It cites analysis showing that the vast majority of climate impact papers used RCP8.5 as a business-as-usual baseline, despite the scenario being grossly implausible and far above observed emissions trends.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Attribution and Natural Variability<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The report spends several chapters dissecting the uncertainties around attribution\u2014the attempt to link observed warming and extreme events specifically to human GHG emissions. The authors document the wide range of natural variability (including the still-uncertain role of solar variation), and show that statistical \u201cfingerprinting\u201d methods are often inconclusive or circular. In some key cases, model simulations of vertical temperature profiles and the geographic distribution of warming simply fail to match real-world data\u2014a fact not honestly conveyed in mainstream summaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>The Social Cost of Carbon: An Economic Mirage<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">One of the most policy-relevant chapters debunks the \u201csocial cost of carbon\u201d (SCC) calculations used by regulatory agencies to justify massive economic interventions. The DOE report shows that SCC values are essentially \u201cmade up,\u201d highly sensitive to a few subjective assumptions about climate sensitivity, discount rates, and economic damages. When updated with realistic parameters and best-estimate ECS values, the SCC drops dramatically, sometimes to near zero or even negative (i.e., net benefits from CO2 emissions due to agricultural gains).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>U.S. Policy: All Pain, No Gain<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Perhaps the most striking section (and one likely to cause heartburn in certain policy circles) comes at the end: the scale of the U.S. impact on the global climate. The report quantifies just how little effect even the most aggressive U.S. mitigation policies will have\u2014using the very models and assumptions of mainstream climate science. The answer: \u201cundetectably small\u201d impacts, appearing only after centuries, if at all. This fact is never honestly presented in the typical policy debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Of course, the Media is Panning It<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Predictably, the release of the DOE report has drawn fire from mainstream outlets and climate advocacy groups. For example, the ever angry and alarmed,&nbsp;<em>The Guardian<\/em>&nbsp;wrote:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>\u201cClimate scientists have condemned the DOE\u2019s new report as \u2018dangerous disinformation,\u2019 claiming it was designed to mislead the public about the risks of greenhouse gas emissions and to justify a rollback of U.S. climate policy. Several experts criticized the report for cherry-picking studies and downplaying the consensus on climate risks.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">LOL. Let\u2019s address these lightweight claims, point by point:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Claim: The report is \u201cdisinformation\u201d and \u201ccherry-picks\u201d studies.<\/strong><br><strong>Pushback:<\/strong>&nbsp;The DOE report is authored by respected scientists with deep experience in climate modeling, attribution, and atmospheric science\u2014many of whom have published widely in peer-reviewed journals. The report is&nbsp;<em>overwhelmingly<\/em>&nbsp;referenced, including citations from the very IPCC reports it critiques, and in fact spends entire chapters reviewing both sides of contested issues. The presence of extended quotations from mainstream literature, including detailed reviews of opposing arguments, refutes the idea that it is simply \u201ccherry-picking.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Claim: The report \u201cdownplays the consensus\u201d on climate risks.<\/strong><br><strong>Pushback:<\/strong>&nbsp;The DOE report does not deny climate change or human influence. It argues, with substantial evidence, that the&nbsp;<em>level of risk<\/em>&nbsp;is greatly overstated, that models exaggerate sensitivity, and that the costs of mitigation policies are vastly underestimated. It is not \u201cdisinformation\u201d to present documented, peer-reviewed evidence that calls into question apocalyptic scenarios\u2014especially when such scenarios are contradicted by the data.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Claim: The report is designed to justify policy rollbacks.<\/strong><br><strong>Pushback:<\/strong>&nbsp;The report\u2019s authors explicitly state their independence and reject any suggestion of political vetting or pressure. They also include dissent and debate within the team. The report\u2019s focus is on&nbsp;<em>evidence<\/em>, not policy prescription. The fact that it challenges established policy is a sign of its intellectual independence, not its bias.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Gavin Schmidt\u2019s \u201cRealClimate\u201d website&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.realclimate.org\/index.php\/archives\/2025\/07\/the-endangerment-of-the-endangerment-finding\/\">barely managed a whimper<\/a>, starting an open thread, saying:<\/strong><br><br><em>The EPA, along with the \u201cClimate Working Group\u201d of&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.realclimate.org\/index.php\/archives\/2025\/07\/melange-a-trois\/\">usual suspects<\/a>&nbsp;(plus Judith Curry and Ross McKitrick) at DOE, have just put out a document for public comment their attempt to rescind the 2009 Endangerment Finding for greenhouse gas emissions.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">I got a real laugh out of one of the four comments so far:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Secular Animist&nbsp;says<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.realclimate.org\/index.php\/archives\/2025\/07\/the-endangerment-of-the-endangerment-finding\/#comment-836565\">29 Jul 2025 at 4:35 PM<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>The proposed rule to rescind the 2009 Endangerment Finding is an ACT OF WAR against the human species by the fossil fuel industry.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">LOL, bring it, you anonymous dork.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>My Cold Hard Facts Conclusion<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The DOE\u2019s&nbsp;<em>A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate<\/em>&nbsp;stands out as a landmark challenge to the status quo in climate science and policy. It is a detailed, referenced, and balanced review\u2014one that will make uncomfortable reading for those invested in climate alarmism or rigid consensus. It doesn\u2019t offer certainty; it offers scientific humility, transparency, and an honest assessment of the uncertainties and limitations in current climate science.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The real \u201cdangerous disinformation\u201d isn\u2019t in this report\u2014it\u2019s in the repeated failure of the mainstream media and science to confront inconvenient evidence, model errors, and the economic reality of climate policy. It\u2019s long past time for the climate debate to embrace the kind of open, skeptical, and evidence-based assessment represented in this DOE report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>REFERENCES:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>DOE Report (Main Document)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>DOE, A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate, July 2025\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.energy.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/2025-07\/DOE_Critical_Review_of_Impacts_of_GHG_Emissions_on_the_US_Climate_July_2025.pdf\">https:\/\/www.energy.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/2025-07\/DOE_Critical_Review_of_Impacts_of_GHG_Emissions_on_the_US_Climate_July_2025.pdf<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Key Peer-Reviewed and Official References Used in the DOE Report<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>1. IPCC Assessment Reports<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6, 2021)<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ipcc.ch\/assessment-report\/ar6\/\">https:\/\/www.ipcc.ch\/assessment-report\/ar6\/<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5, 2013\/2014)<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ipcc.ch\/assessment-report\/ar5\/\">https:\/\/www.ipcc.ch\/assessment-report\/ar5\/<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>2. Climate Model Performance and Sensitivity<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Hausfather, Z., et al. (2019). Evaluating the Performance of Past Climate Model Projections.\u00a0<em>Geophysical Research Letters<\/em>\u00a047(1).<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1029\/2019GL085378\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1029\/2019GL085378<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Scafetta, N. (2021). Testing the CMIP6 GCM simulations versus surface temperature records\u2026\u00a0<em>Climate<\/em>\u00a09(11):161.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/cli9110161\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/cli9110161<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Sherwood, S. C., et al. (2020). An assessment of Earth\u2019s climate sensitivity using multiple lines of evidence.\u00a0<em>Reviews of Geophysics<\/em>, 58(4).<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1029\/2019rg000678\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1029\/2019rg000678<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Lewis, N. (2023). Objectively combining climate sensitivity evidence.\u00a0<em>Climate Dynamics<\/em>\u00a061, 3155\u20133163.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00382-022-06398-8\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00382-022-06398-8<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Pielke Jr., R., &amp; Ritchie, J. (2020). Systemic Misuse of Scenarios in Climate Research and Assessment. SSRN.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/ssrn.com\/abstract=3581777\">https:\/\/ssrn.com\/abstract=3581777<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Hausfather, Z. &amp; Peters, G. P. (2020). Emissions \u2013 the \u2018business as usual\u2019 story is misleading.\u00a0<em>Nature<\/em>.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/d41586-020-00177-3\">https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/d41586-020-00177-3<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>3. CO\u2082, Global Greening, and Fertilization<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Zhu, Z., et al. (2016). Greening of the Earth and its drivers.\u00a0<em>Nature Climate Change<\/em>, 6, 791\u2013795.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/nclimate3004\">https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/nclimate3004<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Chen, C., et al. (2019). China and India lead in greening of the world through land-use management.\u00a0<em>Nature Sustainability<\/em>\u00a02, 122\u2013129.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/s41893-019-0220-7\">https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/s41893-019-0220-7<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Keenan, T. F., et al. (2023). A constraint on historic growth in global photosynthesis due to rising CO\u2082.\u00a0<em>Nature Climate Change<\/em>\u00a013, 1376-1381.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/s41558-023-01867-2\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/s41558-023-01867-2<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Haverd, V., et al. (2020). Higher than expected CO\u2082 fertilization inferred from leaf to global observations.\u00a0<em>Global Change Biology<\/em>\u00a026, 2390\u20132402.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/gcb.14950\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/gcb.14950<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>4. Ocean \u201cAcidification\u201d and Coral Reefs<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Clements, J. C., et al. (2022). Meta-analysis reveals an extreme \u2018decline effect\u2019 in the impacts of ocean acidification on fish behavior.\u00a0<em>PLOS Biology<\/em>, 20(2), e3001511.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pbio.3001511\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pbio.3001511<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Browman, H. I. (2016). Applying organized scepticism to ocean acidification research.\u00a0<em>ICES Journal of Marine Science<\/em>, 73(3), 529\u2013536.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/icesjms\/fsw010\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/icesjms\/fsw010<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Australian Institute of Marine Science. (2022). Continued coral recovery leads to 36-year highs across two-thirds of the Great Barrier Reef.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/www.aims.gov.au\/sites\/default\/files\/2022-08\/AIMS_LTMP_Report_on%20GBR_coral_status_2021_2022_040822F3.pdf\">https:\/\/www.aims.gov.au\/sites\/default\/files\/2022-08\/AIMS_LTMP_Report_on%20GBR_coral_status_2021_2022_040822F3.pdf<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>5. Extreme Weather Data<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) U.S. Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters:<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ncdc.noaa.gov\/billions\/\">https:\/\/www.ncdc.noaa.gov\/billions\/<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Rutgers University Global Snow Lab:<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/climate.rutgers.edu\/snowcover\/\">https:\/\/climate.rutgers.edu\/snowcover\/<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>6. Solar Influence and Natural Variability<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Connolly, R., et al. (2021). How much has the Sun influenced Northern Hemisphere temperature trends? An ongoing debate.\u00a0<em>Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics<\/em>\u00a021(6).<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/iopscience.iop.org\/article\/10.1088\/1674-4527\/21\/6\/131\">https:\/\/iopscience.iop.org\/article\/10.1088\/1674-4527\/21\/6\/131<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>7. Social Cost of Carbon and Economic Analyses<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Dayaratna, K., et al. (2017). Empirically-Constrained Climate Sensitivity and the Social Cost of Carbon.\u00a0<em>Climate Change Economics<\/em>.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1142\/S2010007817500063\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1142\/S2010007817500063<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Dayaratna, K., McKitrick, R., Michaels, P.J. (2020). Climate Sensitivity, Agricultural Productivity and the Social Cost of Carbon in FUND.\u00a0<em>Environmental Economics and Policy Studies<\/em>.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10018-020-00263-w\">https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s10018-020-00263-w<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>8. Emissions Scenarios Critiques<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Burgess, M., et al. (2021). Plausible 2005-2050 emissions scenarios project between 2 and 3 degrees C of warming by 2100.\u00a0<em>Environmental Research Letters<\/em>\u00a016 014016.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/iopscience.iop.org\/article\/10.1088\/1748-9326\/abcdd2\/meta\">https:\/\/iopscience.iop.org\/article\/10.1088\/1748-9326\/abcdd2\/meta<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Official &amp; U.S. Government Data<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory CO\u2082 Trends:<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/gml.noaa.gov\/ccgg\/trends\/\">https:\/\/gml.noaa.gov\/ccgg\/trends\/<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>U.S. EPA Criteria Air Pollutants:<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/www.epa.gov\/criteria-air-pollutants\">https:\/\/www.epa.gov\/criteria-air-pollutants<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Carbon Dioxide:<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/www.osha.gov\/chemicaldata\/183\">https:\/\/www.osha.gov\/chemicaldata\/183<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Additional Useful Reports for Context<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Pielke Jr., R., Burgess, M. G., &amp; Ritchie, J. (2022). Plausible 2005\u20132050 emissions scenarios\u2026\u00a0<em>Environmental Research Letters<\/em>\u00a017 024027.<\/strong><br><a href=\"https:\/\/iopscience.iop.org\/article\/10.1088\/1748-9326\/ac4ebf\/pdf\">https:\/\/iopscience.iop.org\/article\/10.1088\/1748-9326\/ac4ebf\/pdf<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Yesterday\u2019s release of the DOE\u2019s\u00a0A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate\u00a0is a watershed moment in the ongoing debate over climate policy in America. Why? Because for the first time, a major U.S. government agency\u2014on official letterhead and with a blue-ribbon cast of authors (John Christy, Judith Curry, Steven Koonin, Ross McKitrick, and Roy Spencer)\u2014has published an open challenge to the central claims, data handling, and even the motivations behind mainstream climate science and policy.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":391977,"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":"Explore the groundbreaking DOE report challenging mainstream climate science, revealing new insights on CO2, extreme weather, and economic impacts.","jetpack_seo_html_title":"Critical Review of Greenhouse Gas Impacts on U.S. Climate","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":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691829997,691818153,691830175,691836923,691836921,691824914,691836924,691822741,691836925],"class_list":{"0":"post-391974","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-carbon-dioxide-co","9":"tag-climate-models","10":"tag-greenhouse-gases-ghgs","11":"tag-model-failure","12":"tag-mr-foia-from-climategate","13":"tag-ocean-acidification","14":"tag-social-cost-of-carbon","15":"tag-u-s-department-of-energy-doe","16":"tag-u-s-policy","18":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/AQNpCI4qtsnOfwn3eHhO_DdgOtzWb_4LOSrxlG1M20v8eMsjldSBoiMNTGp5UoSKT5qE5zST-KImSd0-dW__wlpXh7XAwJWd9Z72iHqEUwGWUUe7klxTCc6INgPCgkE.jpeg?fit=1280%2C1280&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1DYa","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":402599,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=402599","url_meta":{"origin":391974,"position":0},"title":"Attack on DOE Climate Report is a comedy of criticism","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"09\/16\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The DOE science report saying the impact of CO2 on climate is exaggerated was quickly followed by a\u00a0massive alarmist report.\u00a0The alarmist report\u00a0claimed to refute the DOE report, and the press dutifully reported it doing that.","rel":"","context":"In \"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)\"","block_context":{"text":"carbon dioxide (CO\u2082)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=carbon-dioxide-co%e2%82%82"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0AQNbnnLIcdMHEF3rfzqz5iFwusXYT2U3cQTkALZg8DN6Cz9TAFbTORInKT5WaZ7A7UOOi6oip7zHiZQ1igkEpZuMASOOkKAXMC1cd3aYQSW3OPr8VoN4uFE2cRD-UEnZ-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C875&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0AQNbnnLIcdMHEF3rfzqz5iFwusXYT2U3cQTkALZg8DN6Cz9TAFbTORInKT5WaZ7A7UOOi6oip7zHiZQ1igkEpZuMASOOkKAXMC1cd3aYQSW3OPr8VoN4uFE2cRD-UEnZ-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C875&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0AQNbnnLIcdMHEF3rfzqz5iFwusXYT2U3cQTkALZg8DN6Cz9TAFbTORInKT5WaZ7A7UOOi6oip7zHiZQ1igkEpZuMASOOkKAXMC1cd3aYQSW3OPr8VoN4uFE2cRD-UEnZ-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C875&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0AQNbnnLIcdMHEF3rfzqz5iFwusXYT2U3cQTkALZg8DN6Cz9TAFbTORInKT5WaZ7A7UOOi6oip7zHiZQ1igkEpZuMASOOkKAXMC1cd3aYQSW3OPr8VoN4uFE2cRD-UEnZ-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C875&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0AQNbnnLIcdMHEF3rfzqz5iFwusXYT2U3cQTkALZg8DN6Cz9TAFbTORInKT5WaZ7A7UOOi6oip7zHiZQ1igkEpZuMASOOkKAXMC1cd3aYQSW3OPr8VoN4uFE2cRD-UEnZ-1.jpeg?fit=1200%2C875&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":258760,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=258760","url_meta":{"origin":391974,"position":1},"title":"Montana Lawmakers Rein In Judicial\u00a0Climatism","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/23\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"It builds off of a decade-old law barring the state from including \u201cactual or potential impacts that are regional, national, or global in nature\u201d in environmental reviews.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate warning\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate warning","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-warning"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/0-Montana.jpeg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/0-Montana.jpeg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/0-Montana.jpeg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/0-Montana.jpeg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/0-Montana.jpeg?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":269200,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=269200","url_meta":{"origin":391974,"position":2},"title":"States Reconsider: The Folly of Fear-Driven Climate Policies","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"07\/24\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Finally, some common sense is returning to the climate change debate. Governors Glenn Youngkin of Virginia and Joe Lombardo of Nevada are prioritizing the well-being of their citizens and the unique needs of their states over ill-founded climate alarmism.","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\/016899740_web1_GLENN-YOUNGKIN-SEPT16-22__015.webp?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/016899740_web1_GLENN-YOUNGKIN-SEPT16-22__015.webp?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/016899740_web1_GLENN-YOUNGKIN-SEPT16-22__015.webp?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/016899740_web1_GLENN-YOUNGKIN-SEPT16-22__015.webp?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/016899740_web1_GLENN-YOUNGKIN-SEPT16-22__015.webp?fit=1200%2C800&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":228418,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=228418","url_meta":{"origin":391974,"position":3},"title":"CNN Is Right, Carbon Credits Won\u2019t Reduce Emissions","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"11\/10\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"A recent article by CNN describes U.S. climate \u201cczar\u201d John Kerry\u2019s latest plan to use carbon credits to raise enough money to help developing nations recover from alleged climate change impacts, as well as fund the development of renewable energy projects in \u201cvulnerable\u201d nations.","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/0scam-g733e04ae0_1920.jpg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/0scam-g733e04ae0_1920.jpg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/0scam-g733e04ae0_1920.jpg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/0scam-g733e04ae0_1920.jpg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/0scam-g733e04ae0_1920.jpg?fit=1200%2C900&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":442800,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=442800","url_meta":{"origin":391974,"position":4},"title":"Climate TRACE Underestimates U.S. Urban Vehicle CO\u2082 Emissions by 70%, NAU Study Finds","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"05\/06\/2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Recent research by climate scientist Kevin Gurney of Northern Arizona University (NAU) has identified significant underestimations in the Climate TRACE global greenhouse gas emissions database, particularly for urban vehicle CO\u2082 emissions.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate TRACE (CT)\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate TRACE (CT)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-trace-ct"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Climate-TRACE-Underestimates-U.S.-Urban-Vehicle-CO%E2%82%82-Emissions-by-70-NAU-Study-Finds.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Climate-TRACE-Underestimates-U.S.-Urban-Vehicle-CO%E2%82%82-Emissions-by-70-NAU-Study-Finds.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Climate-TRACE-Underestimates-U.S.-Urban-Vehicle-CO%E2%82%82-Emissions-by-70-NAU-Study-Finds.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Climate-TRACE-Underestimates-U.S.-Urban-Vehicle-CO%E2%82%82-Emissions-by-70-NAU-Study-Finds.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/0-Climate-TRACE-Underestimates-U.S.-Urban-Vehicle-CO%E2%82%82-Emissions-by-70-NAU-Study-Finds.jpg?fit=1168%2C784&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":400318,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=400318","url_meta":{"origin":391974,"position":5},"title":"Big Climate Strikes Back \u2014 The Climate Realism Show\u00a0#172","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"09\/05\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"When five independent scientists dared to produce the first U.S. government report to reject the climate alarmist narrative, Big Climate vowed to strike back. And it has.","rel":"","context":"In \"2025 Climate Working Group\"","block_context":{"text":"2025 Climate Working Group","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=2025-climate-working-group"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0Screenshot-2025-09-05-153150.png?fit=1200%2C665&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0Screenshot-2025-09-05-153150.png?fit=1200%2C665&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0Screenshot-2025-09-05-153150.png?fit=1200%2C665&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0Screenshot-2025-09-05-153150.png?fit=1200%2C665&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/0Screenshot-2025-09-05-153150.png?fit=1200%2C665&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/391974","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=391974"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/391974\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":391979,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/391974\/revisions\/391979"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/391977"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=391974"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=391974"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=391974"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}