Trump calls out the UN climate change hoaxers

Op-ed views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author.

President Trump told the United Nations General Assembly this week that climate change is “the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world.” Dire scientific predictions of global warming by climate researchers, he said, have been politically motivated and economically harmful. He stressed that global efforts to reduce carbon emissions have been damaging to Western economies.

Environmental organizations condemned Trump’s remarks as an attack on the alleged “scientific consensus” that global warming poses severe risks to human health, security, and economies. The scientific consensus argument is a sham. “The oft-repeated claim that nearly all scientists demand that something dramatic be done to stop global warming is not true,” a group of credentialed scientists revealed in the Wall Street Journal. “In fact, a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed.”

In support of this conclusion is the Global Warming Petition Project, in which 31,000 physicists and physical chemists contend that “there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

Ironically, the climate change hysteria was a creation of the UN. The threat of horrific global warming was set in motion in 1972 by the UN-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Its conclusions were based on faulty science that subsequently has been debunked. The reality is that climate change is a natural phenomenon, says geologist Ian Plimer. “It has been going on for millions of years.” He is supported by Nobel laureate Ivar Giaever. “Climate changes all the time,” says Giaever, “and it’s nothing to do with global warming.” In other words, there is no problem. Who in their right mind wants a solution to a non-existent problem?

Climate Change Business Journal quantified the cost of proposed anti-global warming measures at a whopping $1.5 trillion per year. That’s $1.5 trillion to solve a non-existent problem. And what do we get for this waste of time, money, and effort? Danish environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg calculates that even if every nation in the world adheres to its climate change commitments by 2030, by the end of this century it will reduce the world’s temperatures by a mere 0.048°C or 1/20th of a degree Celsius. In other words, the whole thing is a bad joke.

The actual purpose of the UN climate strategy is out in the open. “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy,” confessed German economist and UN official Ottmar Edenhofer. “Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection. The next world climate summit is actually an economy summit during which the distribution of the world’s resources will be negotiated.”

In case you don’t understand what that means, UN bureaucrats—under the guise of responding to climate change—want to take what you have and give it to people in the less developed parts of the world. The inevitable result is the destruction of the US economy and standard of living.

Author Ben Shapiro summed it up when he observed that the environmental movement creates a crisis and then lies about it, falsifying evidence to convince people to give up their standard of living or we will all die. The truth is just the opposite. If we allow special interest groups like the UN to have their way, it means economic suicide. We are fortunate that President Trump refuses to sacrifice the US economy on the counterfeit altar of climate change.

Ed Brodow, is a conservative political commentator and author of THE WAR ON WHITES: How Hating White People Became the New National Sport.

Latest posts by Ed Brodow (see all)

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.