Trump Picks More Losers …

The rollback of regulations that were meant to protect the environment and the withdrawal from the Paris Accord were bad enough.  The nomination of climate change deniers Scott Pruitt and Ryan Zinke to top positions in agencies whose primary functions pertained to protecting the environment added insult to injury.  And now, to ice the cake, Trump has appointed William Happer for the key job of “senior director for emerging technologies” at the National Security Council.Will-Happer-climate-science-denierWant to know what’s wrong with William Happer?  Happer is a “theoretical physicist”, whatever the heck that is, at Princeton, and is one of the most demented climate change deniers in existence.  Here are just a few of the things he has to say about climate science …

  • In Defense of Carbon Dioxide: “The demonized chemical compound is a boon to plant life and has little correlation with global temperature.”

  • “This is George Orwell. This is the ‘Germans are the master race. The Jews are the scum of the earth.’ It’s that kind of propaganda.”

  • “The demonization of carbon dioxide is just like the demonization of the poor Jews under Hitler. Carbon dioxide is actually a benefit to the world, and so were the Jews.”  Say WHAT???

  • “Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. Every time you exhale, you exhale air that has 4 percent carbon dioxide. To say that that’s a pollutant just boggles my mind. What used to be science has turned into a cult.”

So, just what qualifies him for this position?  Well, for many years, he was chairman of the board of the George C. Marshall Institute, which was funded in part by the Koch brothers to promote climate science denial.  He also writes and co-signs anti-science Wall Street Journal op-eds.

Will-HapperThe reality is that Happer knows little about emerging technologies or real threats to America’s national security but he does know a great deal about denying climate science. And, sadly, that appears to be the only qualification you need to join the Trump team these days.

Another Trump nominee, J. Steven Gardner, had been nominated to lead the Interior Department’s mining agency, but withdrew his nomination earlier this week.  Gardner was a long-time coal advocate who applauded the decision last year to allow coal companies to dump their toxic waste into streams.

According to Tom Morris of the Sierra Club …

“Gardner has shown time and again that he will try and fight anything that gets in the way of profits for coal executives — even if it means sacrificing the health of the families and communities …”Steven GardnerLike Zinke, Pruitt, Happer and all the rest in the current administration, he is a denier of climate science.  Some of his beliefs:

  • Mining is simply “accelerated erosion”
  • Mountaintop mining is good because it creates flat land
  • There is no such thing as renewable energy

Fortunately, Gardner has withdrawn his nomination in light of the stalled confirmation process, and certain requirements by the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) with which he was unwilling to comply.  Good riddance, but who will be next?  No doubt another person who doesn’t believe in science, but rather puts corporate profits above preserving our lives.Patrick Chappatte / International New York Times


32 thoughts on “Trump Picks More Losers …

  1. Pingback: Bad People Doing Bad Things … | Filosofa's Word

  2. Dear Jill,

    What is the worst that would happen if we took the issue of climate change seriously. We would make the environment around us more pleasant, cleaner, healthier, more beautiful. We could become energy independent, save monies, provide jobs, etc.

    What is the worst that could happen We could make this planet uninhabitable. This would become the by far, the number one national security threat to this country as resources like water, food becomes scarcer.

    If the power brokers weren’t so greedy, we’d all be in a better situation. Thanks Koch brothers, climate change deniers, etc. for contributing to a possible legacy of Hell, here on earth.

    Hugs, Gronda

    Liked by 1 person

    • Exactly, my friend! If we err, let us err on the side of caution. I have a really hard time feeling sorry for the coal barons who already have more money than they know what to do with. We are the 2nd highest polluter, yet refuse to provide help to rectify the problem. Sigh. I hang my head in both shame and sorrow.
      Hugs, dear friend.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. None of this is going to end well…not for us but for the generations to come. And the people who truly care can do nothing. We are at the mercy of corporations and their supporters, their profits and the lies told to “gin” it up.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Don’t forget that the United States is only a small part of the world. Every other country on the planet — every single one — remains committed to the Paris agreement. China and India, two of the biggest greenhouse-gas emitters, are investing massively in clean energy. So is Europe. There are huge solar power plants being built in places like Morocco and Mexico. (Solar power is a natural fit for the Arab countries, with their vast areas of useless sun-drenched desert and being just across the Mediterranean from the world’s biggest energy market.) Even some US states and cities have committed themselves to abiding by the agreement. Yes, Trump has taken the US federal government out of the fight, but he doesn’t have as much impact as he thinks he does.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Ohhhh … I’m not ready to be that sure that it won’t end well, for there are states, cities, and some corporations even that are working hard to make a difference, to switch to renewable energy sources, clean up the earth. Plus, every other nation in the world is working toward a commitment to reduce CO2 over the coming years. The U.S. is the only holdout, and also the 2nd biggest polluter! We are not doing our part, but I think that with different leadership we could step back up to the plate. Never give up hope, my friend.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Hi Jill. From your post I followed a suggestion that took me to a climate-change disbeliever’s post, and this is the comment I left for him or her. I hope they enjoy it:

    Your children’s children will certainly applaud your wisdom, living inside of gas masks and acid-resistent clothing. But that’s okay, you won’t be there to have to look at them, or listen to them, or live with them. Your lungs will have stopped working from the inside out by then, and your oxygen-starved blood will have deprived your brain of its ability to sustain intelligence. They will be happy to feed you through IV-tubes, and clean up your messes because you cannot walk to a bathroom. After all, you are their grsndparent, and they will love you despite knowing you turned their world into a place of horror.
    Love conquers all…

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Good Afternoon, good being a matter of perspective…as in, a declaration that it is good and/or the hope that it is good for you. I am a follower of EcoWatch, a most interesting and informative newsletter. The Sept.7th. post included a piece on Happer. William Happer, age 79, is a renowned physicist of atomic physics and optics. He is known as a pioneer of “adaptive optics”. This same man, lacking education and experience in, has called climate science a “cult movement”…a perfect fit for Team Trump! J. Steven Gardner, no doubt, will be replaced by another of Trump’s endless line of swamp dwellers. Thank-you!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Good evening to you also, my friend! Do I detect a bit of a dark mood today? 🌪️ What with ‘good’ being a matter of perspective, and depending on whose perspective one takes into account, good is also relative. Relative to having been struck by lightening and run over by a Mack truck, my afternoon was good, but relative to winning the lottery and finding that I am really only 30 years old, it was anything but good. So, meh … I’m average with an average afternoon behind me and an average evening ahead. And you? 😊


  6. The thing about CO2 is that the oceans absorb it. They also exude it. What mechanism is there to show me, Earth is in imbalance because of it?
    Is our climate changing? Yes daily.
    Changing because of CO2? That’s hard to prove. Easier to prove CO2 increases along with temperature. Harder to show it produces change for our planet in any significance.

    There was a “Happer” character in the movie “Local Hero”, I think?
    For anyone trying to understand Watt is going on, hehe?
    Watts up with that
    Cheers Jamie

    Liked by 1 person

    • The atmospheric concentration of CO2 has been increasing since the industrial revolution, with the trend accelerating since the middle of the twentieth century. Average planetary temperature has risen in the same pattern (we have reliable scientific measurements of the Earth’s temperature going back to 1880, so 138 years of data to work with). The increase in abnormal weather events and shrinkage of polar ice and glaciers especially over the last two decades fits the pattern. One has to be impossibly obtuse — or working for the fossil fuel industry (whose campaign of denial on this issue resembles the fake “research” tobacco companies used to sponsor to “prove” smoking wasn’t linked to cancer) to fail to see what’s happening.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Sorry? Where are the facts. Yes, you are making statements but where is your researched evidence? The statement that Earth’s temperature has risen? Abnormal weather? Where? To link cancer to climate change is a bit of a stretch! I do not deny there are climate changes on earth. Linked CO2 … ? Another stretch. How does this explain the loss of ice cap on Mars during the same time frame? Or other planetary changes within our system. People have the wrong scapegoat. I am not obtuse. Hahaha a whole 138 years?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Jamie … can we just agree to disagree on this one, please. When you cannot breathe the air nor drink the water, I will be long gone, so you won’t be able to say, “Hey, you were right after all”. Cheers


          • You are muddling things up. Breathing the air or drinking the water is POLLUTION, not CO2. Gotta’ keep your culprits right. We’ll both be long gone, before any of it comes to fruition. Pollution is created mainly by homo sapiens. CO 2 is a natural part of this world. Greenhouse gases not CO2, I can see some dilemma there. Yet the planet can take care of it. It has for billions of years. Politicians seized upon this. Politicians like Al and Tipper Gore. Hey they even gave him a Nobel award…. ? So we all paying taxes; for the damage done by industrialists? Yet they were the ones doing it. These industrialists just look for the biggest profits not good health for us. The same bankers do not want the poorer countries to develop, with refrigeration, a/c’s etc. Tax them ….! Oh and the planetary heating, if you really examine it. May be caused by the increased volcanic activity and eruptions? There are many, under the oceans too. They certainly pump a lot of CO2 into the air. It is an electric universe. Cheers Jamie


    • I am not a scientist, so I cannot understand all the results of the research. But, I do believe the conclusions that the bulk of climate scientists have drawn, that we are on a path to making this planet uninhabitable for humans and other life forms as well. PLUS, dear Jamie, look around. Do you see as many bees as you once did? Have you seen as much snow in the past few winters as usual? How was your summer? Most of the northern hemisphere was miserably and abnormally hot. I have severe asthma … and I can feel the difference in the air quality with every breath I take when I’m outdoors. My a/c bill for this year is already $500 higher than last year, and do you know how many walks I have been able to take this summer? 3. Last summer and the one before, I walked 4 miles a day, except on rainy days. This summer, I do well to make it to the park, let alone walk 4 laps around it. So yeah, I am convinced that it is real. Bottom line, though, is this … are you so convinced that it is a hoax … perpetuated by … some unknown person or persons for reasons unknown … that you’re willing to bet the future of the human race on it? Your kids lives, grandkids lives (I’m assuming here, for I don’t know if you have either)? And for what? So coal barons can have more money, when they already have more than they know what to do with? Denying the science is not going to benefit any of us average people, but it will put lots of lovely money in the bank accounts of those who are already greedy hoarders. Cheers!


  7. Good morning Jill! In reading that above, does the word “imbeciles” come to mind?
    “The first method for estimating the intelligence of a ruler is to look at the men he has around him.”
    ― Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince

    Liked by 2 people

    • Good morning … er, evening now! Yes, I use that word a lot these days, for some strange reason. That quote is a keeper! Perfect for our world today! Thanks for sharing it … I shall use that one soon!


  8. Welllll, yesssss, plants do breath in CO2. Yes I know that. And they ‘exhale’ O2…Fine, fine, peachy. That’s how it should be. And animal life exhales CO2 and the plants breath it in….Even peachier
    HOWEVER, if there is an imbalance in the natural set up, then things go wrong. Plants, like die when excessive CO2 builds up, because of the affect this has on weather systems, floods, droughts etc. Unless of course the good fellow has an idea that he’s going to have the whole of the USA, most of Europe, South America etc covered in trees to breathe in all that extra CO2. In which case us humans will have to all crowd together, somewhere (I’m not gonna stand next to Trump or Boris Johnson!)
    It’s a question of balance…Read the fossil record….It’s a question of balance.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Balance? That is a word that is lacking in many people’s vocabulary. And remember … what you have said are “facts”, but in today’s world, we can have “alternative facts” that are more convenient to the goals of the rich getting richer. With alternative facts, we can deny scientific research and the evidence it produces, unless it fits in with our lifestyle. So, burning coal is bad for the environment, but let’s just use the alternative version, that burning coal puts more CO2 into the atmosphere which, like the Jews, is really good for us and then the coal barons can make more money and buy more useless junk and thereby stimulate the economy so that all of us who barely earn enough to put food on the table can have jobs. See how neatly that works??? Cynical? Moi? 🙄

      Liked by 1 person

  9. Jill, while it is hard to select the greatest type of infraction that Donald Trump will leave as his legacy, the one I feared the most going in is his impact on battling climate change and the environment. Now, I could argue that diminishing our position in the world and with our allies or his providing an example to our youth that lying and bullying is OK or not addressing our tremendous debt, etc. are as bad. But, visibly getting in the way of the climate change fight and hurting our environment may be the worst offense, because both actions harm and even kill people.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. The demonized chemical compound is a boon to plant life

    I love this one. Carbon dioxide is necessary for life, therefore it can’t be a pollutant. By that logic, since water is necessary for life, it’s impossible for floods and tsunamis to do any harm. Quantity matters.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s