Skip to main content

DOE: Climate change isn't that bad?

Image
By scooby

 The DOE has released a new climate change report, going into detail about how in many aspects it may not be as serious as previously claimed:


https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2025-07/DOE_Critical_Review_of_Impacts_of_GHG_Emissions_on_the_US_Climate.pdf

https://youtu.be/r--BO8VXgnU?si=F6vvif9rMFJMZdGx

Comments

Anonymous said…
This "data" has no credibility considering it comes from a MAGA administration.
Next quarter, the bureau of labor stats will say inflation is at 0.0001% and 1 million jobs were created.
8/21/2025 5:35 PM
Anonymous said…
If Musk said he would give a billion dollars in grant money show climate change is not that bad every single one of the climate scientists would have a new model or modify their simulations to show things are not that bad.

I would like to think I am being cynical but I know way too many climate scientists.
8/21/2025 9:32 PM
Anonymous said…
Deep irony, 5:35.
8/22/2025 4:01 AM
Anonymous said…
So it sounds like they are admitting that green house gases are changing the climate. The magnitude I can see myself and I have been clearly seeing it for 20 years or more.
8/23/2025 9:02 PM
Anonymous said…
9 out of 10 researchers agree with the person/agency funding them.

Let's clean up the air so we can have a clean slate to measure from when the Yellowstone Caldera takes us out.
8/26/2025 3:20 PM
Anonymous said…
Factcheck: Trump’s DOE climate report includes more than 100 false or misleading claims:

https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/doe-factcheck/index.html
9/01/2025 5:02 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

LLNL un-diversity

By scooby
Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
79 comments
Read more