December 20, 2017

President Trump Removes 'Climate Change' From Official List of National Security Threats

Rebel Staff

President Donald Trump fulfilled yet another campaign promise this week when he removed "climate change" from his government's list of national security threats. 

Breitbart reported that Barack Obama had added climate change to the list of national security threats during his presidency, but Trump's national security strategy released on Monday focused on other threats instead. 

“Climate policies will continue to shape the global energy system,” the national security strategy states. “U.S. leadership is indispensable to countering an anti-growth, energy agenda that is detrimental to U.S. economic and energy security interests. Given future global energy demand, much of the developing world will require fossil fuels, as well as other forms of energy, to power their economies and lift their people out of poverty.”

During his campaign, Trump often mocked Obama for his obsession with climate change. 

“So Obama’s always talking about the global warming, that global warming is our biggest and most dangerous problem,” Trump said. “I mean, even if you’re a believer in global warming, ISIS is a big problem, Russia’s a problem, China’s a problem. We’ve got a lot of problems. By the way, the maniac in North Korea is a problem. He actually has nuclear weapons, right? That’s a problem."

While some are fuming about what Trump just did, we applaud him for focusing on more pressing threats than the environment. How can we focus on climate change as a threat to our national security when ISIS is launching deadly attacks on the Western world every chance they get? Or when North Korea is threatening to nuke the U.S. on a daily basis?

In the end, Obama was far more concerned with political correctness than he was with actually protecting America's national security. Climate change was considered a "safe" topic for him because it did not involve criticizing a minority group. Obama's reluctance to take on the problem of radical Islamic terrorism is partly why so many Americans turned on him to vote for Trump. With that vote, Americans showed that they want a leader who is not afraid to take action to protect his people from legitimate national security threats. 

 

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2017-12-22 10:57:59 -0500
“Common Sense commented 2017-12-21 01:39:28 -0500
Andrew Stephenson, once again you copy/paste drivel, but each time you are proven wrong, you come back with a watered down version, changing outright false claims to something you think we be more palatable”
I have not changed my position.

Where’s it copy-pasted from? Accusations of plagiarism are grave, so clearly you must not be doing so baselessly. “What you still don’t do is prove your claims. You once said that a huge number of scientists back your claims, but you were proven wrong when told those scientists that created the climate paper for the IPCC had to threaten to sue the UN to get their names off said paper because the UN changed the data in their executive summary for the media. Crickets from you on that fact. Then you were shown the former chair of the IPCC had teamed up with Lord Moncton to propose to the world court in the Hague to make it a criminal offense to profit from the hoax of man made climate change, crickets again from you. Then you are told that the ball of fire 93 million miles from here is responsible for climate change, since time began, and it doesn’t accept cash or credit cards to change it’s effect on climate here, crickets from you.”

Political posturing has nothing to do with the underlying science. The latter is all I care about. Lord Monckton’s legal philanderings are essentially irrelevant, especially given that his arguments arise from deliberate misinformation. (for example, he projects atmospheric carbon at 575ppm by 2100, and accuses the IPCC of lying about it, since their range goes up to about 1000, even though the discrepancy is easily explained by pointing out that his 575 is derived from a linear projection of mid-2000s numbers (which is to say, that emissions stop growing at 2010 levels, actually essentially a best-case scenario), whereas 1000 arises from the worst-case scenario, in which coal increases its market share of global energy. This means it’s nothing more than different scenarios of future energy development, but apparently if you’re a climate change denier it’s proof of … some vast conspiracy or something. “The climate models you mention have been proven to be absolute rubbish, not the best we have to work with as you state, but absolute rubbish. Crickets again I expect from you.”

They are the best we have to work with. Some models say small contribution, some say large, but none say “none”. “Debunk any of these facts, just try it, and once again you will have opened your mouth and removed all doubt what a fool you are”

You haven’t actually made any scientific claims that can be debunked. You accused me of plagiarism, told a fun little tale in which special interests yell at each other about things that have nothing to do with the actual science, and the one claim you do make that pertains to the science (that the models are “rubbish”), was made without any supporting evidence to refute.

“Common Sense commented 2017-12-21 20:04:25 -0500
As always, crickets from Andrew. "

It’s almost as if I have a job or something.
commented 2017-12-22 10:29:23 -0500
“liza rosie commented 2017-12-20 19:25:54 -0500
Andrew Stephenson, pretentious diction.
The prevailing models have been proven way, way off base and consequently practically useless, basically nothing but supposition.”

Some have been. Most are pretty good. That’s how science works, discarding the bad hypotheses and building better ones as the data improves. The models do generally seem to be converging on humans having a noticeable influence – some of them say it’s not as much as we originally expected, but “less” is not “none”.

“Quantum gravity is a theory, gravity is a fact.
Anthropogenic climate change is a theory, Climate variations naturally occurring(out of mans control) are a fact. "

Gravity and varying climate are also theories. Very well supported theories, but theories nevertheless. Just for the sake of discussion – Newton’s law of universal gravitation is actually wrong since it predates relativity. Someone in 1890 would have said Newtonian gravity was a fact, but 15 years later, that would be proven wrong. There’s nothing to say it won’t happen again, and we still have no idea what gravity actually is.

The same is true of climate change. It changes. There are natural effects, but the existence of natural ones do not preclude human influences on top of it.

“Andrew says, "capitalism is ‘wealth redistribution’ "
There is a difference Andrew between taking from the makers and giving to the takers for doing nothing, and creating a climate in which baking more pie to go around is made possible, and making an economic climate where people can prosper if they get off the couch.
Look at the immediate results of Trumps tax changes this week as an example. Several large companies on their own accord are raising their minimum wage to $15 and even giving out bonuses to workers, even hiring more employees. No coercion, no legislation just some tax relief that then got passed down to employees."

You mean Target? They announced that in September. Considering the tax plan wasn’t a given until earlier this week, it’s a bit presumptuous to attribute it to the tax plan. Wal-mart began raising their own policy wages in 2015, and other retailers about the same time. It has to do with a tight labour market more than tax cuts – the US hit full employment (under-5% unemployment) in the summer of 2016 and the effects of that are being felt as companies have to bid for workers.
commented 2017-12-22 10:17:20 -0500
Peter Netterville commented 2017-12-20 18:19:15 -0500

That’s because anthropogenic climate change as shoved down our throats by people like you is a lie, pure utter horse shit.

History will record those who believed in anthropogenic climate change as the biggest fools to ever walk the surface of the planet. "

I notice your latter term is in future tense, meaning it hasn’t happened yet, meaning your first paragraph is presumptuous. Calling it “bullshit” is not empirically supportable – it is essentially flat out denial. It’s hard to explain recent trends without including human contributions. At best you can claim skepticism, but that is more akin to saying “we don’t have enough data to say” rather than insisting it’s not happening, a claim with much higher burden of proof.

“Peter Netterville commented 2017-12-20 18:34:22 -0500
The original lie was that carbon dioxide produced by the activities humankind creates a “greenhouse effect” which reflects a portion of the sun’s radiant energy back to the planet causing a slow but constant rise in the mean temperature of the planet.

Unfortunately for the AGW “Henny Pennies”, the global mean temperature of the planet has not risen for twenty years now. Whoops! So the cult members change the definition of AGW. "

How is it a lie? Radiative forcing from greenhouse gases is a well established phenomenon. The average surface temperature of the Earth is multiple tens of degrees warmer than that of the Moon due to atmospheric effects. So, this is clearly not a “lie”.

The earth’s temperature has continued to rise. The “pause” is predicated on a few tropical stations that have had limited change, but it was always expected to be a primarily temperate and polar effect. Global averages continue to increase.

Don’t believe me? We can measure sea levels rising due to thermal expansion. What else explains that? What other geological phenomenon explains rapid changes in radiative forcing? The most likely suspect is orbital parameters, which would actually indicate a slight cooling since the peak of the current interglacial 6-8000 years ago.
commented 2017-12-21 20:04:25 -0500
As always, crickets from Andrew.
commented 2017-12-21 13:27:27 -0500
“Andrew carbon taxes and wealth transfer and centralizing power do not prepare us for anything.”
That’s the definition of Statism right there.
The only thing that is missing is the gun pointed at our heads.
Ideas so good they need to be mandated.
commented 2017-12-21 03:28:42 -0500
Good move by Trump.
commented 2017-12-21 02:53:43 -0500
Andrew carbon taxes and wealth transfer and centralizing power do not prepare us for anything.
commented 2017-12-21 01:41:29 -0500
Dang autocorrect, should have read “Andrew Stephenson, once again you copy/paste drivel, but each time you are proven wrong, you come back with a watered down version, changing outright false claims to something you think may be more palatable.”
commented 2017-12-21 01:39:28 -0500
Andrew Stephenson, once again you copy/paste drivel, but each time you are proven wrong, you come back with a watered down version, changing outright false claims to something you think we be more palatable. What you still don’t do is prove your claims. You once said that a huge number of scientists back your claims, but you were proven wrong when told those scientists that created the climate paper for the IPCC had to threaten to sue the UN to get their names off said paper because the UN changed the data in their executive summary for the media. Crickets from you on that fact. Then you were shown the former chair of the IPCC had teamed up with Lord Moncton to propose to the world court in the Hague to make it a criminal offense to profit from the hoax of man made climate change, crickets again from you. Then you are told that the ball of fire 93 million miles from here is responsible for climate change, since time began, and it doesn’t accept cash or credit cards to change it’s effect on climate here, crickets from you. The climate models you mention have been proven to be absolute rubbish, not the best we have to work with as you state, but absolute rubbish. Crickets again I expect from you. Debunk any of these facts, just try it, and once again you will have opened your mouth and removed all doubt what a fool you are. Your employers should demand the money paid to you back, your trolling is rubbish, and you are failing them miserably.
commented 2017-12-20 22:23:24 -0500
We should be worried about islam its changing the climate far worse than anything else is .
commented 2017-12-20 19:25:54 -0500
Andrew Stephenson, pretentious diction.
The prevailing models have been proven way, way off base and consequently practically useless, basically nothing but supposition.

Quantum gravity is a theory, gravity is a fact.
Anthropogenic climate change is a theory, Climate variations naturally occurring(out of mans control) are a fact.

Andrew says, "capitalism is ‘wealth redistribution’ "
There is a difference Andrew between taking from the makers and giving to the takers for doing nothing, and creating a climate in which baking more pie to go around is made possible, and making an economic climate where people can prosper if they get off the couch.
Look at the immediate results of Trumps tax changes this week as an example. Several large companies on their own accord are raising their minimum wage to $15 and even giving out bonuses to workers, even hiring more employees. No coercion, no legislation just some tax relief that then got passed down to employees. That is respectable pie growing. It is not REdistributing anything, it is being allowed to grow more pie and paying employees what the market can bear. Which has a more positive effect on the country than using a big fat supposition to destroy an economy and steal yet more control over society.
commented 2017-12-20 18:34:22 -0500
Who knows precisely what the latest iteration of the “global warming/anthropogenic climate change” espouses. The AGW cult members change the definition on a regular basis.

The original lie was that carbon dioxide produced by the activities humankind creates a “greenhouse effect” which reflects a portion of the sun’s radiant energy back to the planet causing a slow but constant rise in the mean temperature of the planet.

Unfortunately for the AGW “Henny Pennies”, the global mean temperature of the planet has not risen for twenty years now. Whoops! So the cult members change the definition of AGW.
commented 2017-12-20 18:19:15 -0500
Andrew said, “He’s outright denying climate change entirely.”

That’s because anthropogenic climate change as shoved down our throats by people like you is a lie, pure utter horse shit.

History will record those who believed in anthropogenic climate change as the biggest fools to ever walk the surface of the planet.
commented 2017-12-20 18:12:20 -0500
“President Trump Removes ‘Climate Change’ From Official List of National Security Threats”

Every day I gain an even greater respect for the Prez.

At least he has the intelligence to realize that Anthropogenic Climate Change is a scam, unlike our PM … and the brain dead trolls that post their crap here on this website.
commented 2017-12-20 17:43:03 -0500
“liza rosie commented 2017-12-20 15:16:34 -0500
Is there any point in arguing with people who think not believing in [anthropogenic] climate change is equivalent to not believing in gravity?” Climate change, like gravity, is an effect, an observation. Anthropogenic climate change is like quantum gravity, a possibly mechanistic input. So, not believing in anthropogenic climate change is akin to not believing in quantum gravity. Yes, there is some controversy but it’s generally well accepted (but not universally so) among the scientific community despite some gaps, and the layperson probably isn’t qualified to make a detailed assessment on the matter, especially when that assessment is significantly different than what the experts generally think. Ultimately, we don’t know the cause of either climate change or of gravity, but the prevailing models are the best ones we currently have.

" There are more imminent threats to be dealing with and Trump recognizes that. Climate change religion is a globalist battering ram to keep us all in line and as has been mentioned, redistribute wealth"

Trump is telling his base what he thinks they want to hear, as he always done. There’s nothing scientific underlying it.

The entire principle off capitalism is ‘wealth redistribution’.

“Libs RMorons commented 2017-12-20 14:28:49 -0500
Hey Andrew, anybody with Intelligence above plant life knows that the climate change crap is a hoax.”

A claim, that once you filter out the appeal-to-authority and ad-hominem, is scientifically unsupportable.
commented 2017-12-20 15:18:27 -0500
damn spell check. Anthropogenic not anthropocentric .
commented 2017-12-20 15:16:34 -0500
Is there any point in arguing with people who think not believing in anthropocentric climate change is equivalent to not believing in gravity?
Lets keep our nest clean by all means, and adjusting to severe weather patterns has been a part of existence on this planet since its inception. There are more imminent threats to be dealing with and Trump recognizes that. Climate change religion is a globalist battering ram to keep us all in line and as has been mentioned, redistribute wealth. It is only a priority in that it must not be allowed to proceed with its plan for social control.
commented 2017-12-20 14:29:12 -0500
Hey Andrew, anybody with Intelligence above plant life knows that the climate change crap is a hoax. It is a globalist driven wealth transfer. You idiots go ahead and donate your own money to the tin pot dictators. If climate change is real there is nothing we can do about it anyways as soon you will have 9 billion people on this planet. Maybe invent a plaque to get it down to 5 million and you may make some headway.
commented 2017-12-20 14:28:49 -0500
Hey Andrew, anybody with Intelligence above plant life knows that the climate change crap is a hoax. It is a globalist driven wealth transfer. You idiots go ahead and donate your own money to the tin pot dictators. If climate change is real there is nothing we can do about it anyways as soon you will have 9 billion people on this planet. Maybe invent a plaque to get it down to 5 million and you may make some headway.
commented 2017-12-20 13:35:37 -0500
Andrew- Why do the words “cupid” and “stunt” come to mind when I see your posts?
commented 2017-12-20 13:12:42 -0500
" Preparing for weather events and variations are a part of living on this planet. All the curbing of humanity and industry isn’t going to make a lick of difference to solar storms or the axis shifting or any other natural cause for the variations which can’t be helped or hindered by man. Money and effort can and should be used for prep for rolling with the punches and I am sure the Donald is addressing that. ’

No, he’s not addressing it. He’s outright denying climate change entirely. Adapting to a problem requires acknowledging the problem exists. His virtue signaling stance is one of complete denial – that the climate isn’t changing at all. Which of course, is nonsense because it can and does change.
commented 2017-12-20 12:49:16 -0500
It is too significant a tool for social engineering and Justin isn’t about to abandon it, the same as Obama wasn’t. Justin is all in with the UN. and as with Obama, even if we get him out of power he will still be playing the game. They have too much invested.
commented 2017-12-20 12:32:09 -0500
Whilst Dear Leader Justin Trudeau does the exact opposite: doubling down on climate zealotry as the #1 concern for Canada’s survival, while welcoming ISIS terrorists as “extraordinary powerful voices” for Canadians to embrace and listen to.
commented 2017-12-20 12:10:23 -0500
Smart Move. There are serious things to be responding to, and shutting down the economy for a fairy dust industry premised on a lie isn’t one of them. Preparing for weather events and variations are a part of living on this planet. All the curbing of humanity and industry isn’t going to make a lick of difference to solar storms or the axis shifting or any other natural cause for the variations which can’t be helped or hindered by man. Money and effort can and should be used for prep for rolling with the punches and I am sure the Donald is addressing that. I whole heartedly agree with giving the finger to climate change hucksters, they are nothing but UN scumbag, globalists. It is well over due time to dismantle, and discredit those who are using natural occurrences as an excuse for their sick social engineering. It is nothing but a ploy for global totalitarian control.
commented 2017-12-20 11:49:56 -0500
IF YOU BELIEVE IN GLOBAL COOLING OR GLOBAL WARMING OR GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE OR SOLAR FADING OR POLAR ICE OR POLAR BEARS DYING OR WOLD FLOODING OR OTHER NATURAL OCCURRENCES …… GET A NEW RELIGION …. IF YOU BELIEVE IN GIVING TRY CHRISTIANITY….IF YOU BELIEVE IN KILLING JEWS AND OTHERS TRY ISLAM….BUT GET REAL GO HAVE A TURKEY DINNER
commented 2017-12-20 11:13:21 -0500
I would imagine a multi-trillion dollar a year government is capable of focusing on more than one issue.

You may dispute the cause, but climatic changes ARE a problem, particularly rising sea levels and rainfall patterns in the arid west. Who cares about wars of ideology on the other side of the planet when rising sea levels threaten to inundate a hundred million people domestically? Pretty much everyone else, certainly everyone with a grasp of the threat, is saying the exact opposite.