Exposing the Big Game

Forget Hunters' Feeble Rationalizations and Trust Your Gut Feelings: Making Sport of Killing Is Not Healthy Human Behavior

Exposing the Big Game

Impeachment articles omit Trump’s many climate crimes

Tuesday bottom cartoon
The United States House of Representatives on Dec. 18, 2019, approved two Articles of Impeachment against President Donald J. Trump. I believe a third article is needed, that of “Worsening of the Climate Crisis.”

The House of Representatives determines what constitutes “high crimes and misdemeanors,” and harm to the country is one practical criterion. Certainly, Article I and Article II describe significant potential harm to the United States. But Article III describes definitive injury to our country now, and the potential for devastating injury in the future. I propose the revision below of the Articles of Impeachment.

ARTICLE I: ABUSE OF POWER

ARTICLE II: OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS

ARTICLE III: WORSENING OF THE CLIMATE CRISIS

(1) Scientific Reality Denial. The heart of Article III is President Trump’s rejection of the science of climate change. The greenhouse effect was discovered in 1859. Upon that foundation was built a massive body of peer-reviewed scientific literature, establishing the details of man-made (anthropogenic) climate change. This science is accepted by essentially every reputable climatologist on Earth, hundreds of global scientific bodies, the U.S. military, most world religions and 197 nation signatories to the Paris Agreement. Yet President Trump rejects climate science and claims, without proof, that climate change is a “Chinese hoax.” This denial of climate change, a concept as well established as the theory of gravity, has resulted in many harmful Trump administration policies.

(2) Paris Agreement Withdrawal. President Trump filed his intent to remove the United States from the Paris Agreement, effective Nov. 4, 2020. The United States thus lost its international leadership role in dealing with the climate crisis and has sabotaged recent climate summits, including COP25 in Madrid. The United States has become a climate pariah under President Trump.

(3) Clean Power Plan Repeal. President Trump’s halting the rollout of this plan killed the United States’ most powerful strategy to cut the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that produce global warming. With Trump’s ineffective Affordable Clean Energy replacement power plan, an additional 1,700 Americans will also die annually from air pollution.

(4) Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards Weakening. By reducing these vehicle fuel-efficiency standards, President Trump would increase GHG emissions, increase dangerous tailpipe pollution, increase lung disease and cost citizens more in larger gasoline purchases. In the United States, 53,000 die annually from tailpipe pollution, according to a Massachusetts Institute of Technology study.

(5) Refrigerant Prohibition Repeal. President Trump stopped enforcement of a 2015 rule that prevented the use of the refrigerant hydrofluorocarbon, a greenhouse gas that is 5,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide over 20 years.

(6) Methane Emissions Reporting Cancellation. President Trump cancelled a requirement that oil and gas companies report their methane emissions. Measurement of methane is crucial in detecting leaks, which can lead to technologies to decrease the leaks. After carbon dioxide, methane is the second most important GHG and has 84 times greater warming potential than carbon dioxide over 20 years.

(7) Endangered Species Abandonment. President Trump withdrew protection of endangered marine mammals and sea turtles on the West Coast. This action was especially destructive at a time when we are experiencing the sixth mass extinction, with loss of 3 billion birds in North America since 1970, for example.

(8) Massive Ocean Extraction Proposal. President Trump proposed opening most of America’s coastal waters for offshore oil and gas drilling. This action benefits only the fossil-fuel coffers while extracting fuels we must not burn and exposing our pristine waters to the risk of another devastating Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

(9) Extensive Additional Deregulation. The examples of harmful deregulation above are only a few of 80 instances of Trump deregulation found in research by Harvard and Columbia law schools and analyzed by the New York Times. Some of these examples are now law, some have been rejected by the courts and others are under litigation.

In summary, President Trump is deemed unfit for office given the high crimes and misdemeanors described in Articles I, II and III. In our modern era, in which science and technology are critical for a functioning society, President Trump’s rejection of science is a dangerous incompetence. The gold standard of climate science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, states that the impacts of climate change are already evident, will multiply this century and will become devastating if global mean temperature increase is more than 1.5 degree Celsius. To prevent this temperature increase, the world must slash GHG emissions approximately 7% each year. In contradiction of this requirement, U.S. emissions rose 3.4% in 2018 under President Trump. This increase is not surprising as all the examples of deregulation above will increase greenhouse-gas emissions, as they benefit the fossil-fuel industry and other corporations.

California and Australia are scorched by hellish wildfires, Africans suffer famine from climate-worsened drought and sea-level rise is drowning homes of the Bangladeshi. Meanwhile, President Trump adopts policies that will enrich himself and the fossil-fuel industry, while inflaming this climate crisis. By the criterion of presidential harm to the United States (and the world), President Trump must be removed from office.

Revealed: Google made large contributions to climate change deniers

Google logo
 Google helps bankroll more than a dozen organisations that have pushed against moves to stop climate change. Illustration: Guardian Design

Google has made “substantial” contributions to some of the most notorious climate deniers in Washington despite its insistence that it supports political action on the climate crisis.

Among hundreds of groups the company has listed on its website as beneficiaries of its political giving are more than a dozen organisations that have campaigned against climate legislation, questioned the need for action, or actively sought to roll back Obama-era environmental protections.

The list includes the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a conservative policy group that was instrumental in convincing the Trump administration to abandon the Paris agreement and has criticised the White House for not dismantling more environmental rules.

Q&A

What is the polluters project?

Google said it was disappointed by the US decision to abandon the global climate deal, but has continued to support CEI.

Google is also listed as a sponsor for an upcoming annual meeting of the State Policy Network (SPN), an umbrella organisation that supports conservative groups including the Heartland Institute, a radical anti-science group that has chided the teenage activist Greta Thunberg for “climate delusion hysterics”.

SPN members recently created a “climate pledge” website that falsely states “our natural environment is getting better” and “there is no climate crisis”.

Google has defended its contributions, saying that its “collaboration” with organisations such as CEI “does not mean we endorse the organisations’ entire agenda”.

It donates to such groups, people close to the company say, to try to influence conservative lawmakers, and – most importantly – to help finance the deregulatory agenda the groups espouse.

A spokesperson for Google said it sponsored organisations from across the political spectrum that advocate for “strong technology policies”.

“We’re hardly alone among companies that contribute to organisations while strongly disagreeing with them on climate policy,” the spokesperson said. Amazon has, like Google, also sponsored a CEI gala, according to a programme for the event reported in the New York Times.

CEI has opposed regulation of the internet and enforcement of antitrust rules, and has defended Google against some Republicans’ claims that the search engine has an anti-conservative bias.

But environmental activists and other critics say that, for a company that purports to support global action on climate change, such tradeoffs are not acceptable.

“You don’t get a pass on it. It ought to be disqualifying to support what is primarily a phoney climate denying front group. It ought to be unacceptable given how wicked they have been,” said Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democratic senator from Rhode Island who is one of the most vocal proponents of climate action in Congress.

“What all of corporate America should be doing is saying if you are a trade organisation or lobby group and you are interfering on climate, we are out. Period,” he added.

On its website, Google says it is committed to ensuring its political engagement is “open, transparent and clear to our users, shareholders, and the public”.

But the company declined to answer the Guardian’s questions on how much it has given to the organisations.

On a webpage devoted to “transparency”, it describes the groups – among hundreds of others, including some progressive advocates such as the Center for American Progress – as having received “substantial” contributions.

Apart from CEI, they include the American Conservative Union, whose chairman, Matt Schlapp, worked for a decade for Koch Industries and shaped the company’s radical anti-environment policies in Washington; the American Enterprise Institute, which has railed against climate “alarmists”; and Americans for Tax Reform, which has criticised companies who support climate action for seeking out “corporate welfare”.

It has also donated undisclosed sums to the Cato Institute, which has voiced opposition to climate legislation and questioned the severity of the crisis. Google has also made donations to the Mercatus Center, a Koch-funded thinktank, and the Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action, a pressure group that said the Paris agreement was supported by “cosmopolitan elites” and part of Barack Obama’s “destructive legacy”.

Bill McKibben, a prominent environmentalist who has been on the frontline of the climate crisis for decades, said Google and other companies were engaged in a “functional greenwashing” given the contradiction in their public pronouncements and private donations. He said Google and other technology companies had also not used their own lobbyists to advocate for change on climate.

“Sometimes I’ll talk to companies and they will be going on and on about their renewable server farm or natural gas delivery, and I say thank you, but what we really need is for your lobbying shop in Washington to put serious muscle behind it. And they never do,” McKibben said. “They want some tax break or some regulations switch and they never devote the slightest muscle behind the most important issue of our time or any time.”

A spokesperson for Google said: “We’ve been extremely clear that Google’s sponsorship doesn’t mean that we endorse that organisation’s entire agenda – we may disagree strongly on some issues.

“Our position on climate change is similarly clear. Since 2007, we have operated as a carbon neutral company and for the second year in a row, we reached 100% renewable energy for our global operations.”

The company said it called for “strong action” at the climate conference in Paris in 2015 and helped to sponsor the Global Climate Action summit in San Francisco last year.

But that position is at odds with the support it gives to CEI.

The group’s director of energy and environment policy, Myron Ebell, helped found the Cooler Heads Coalition 20 years ago, a group of libertarian and rightwing organisations that have sowed the seeds of climate denial with funding from the fossil fuel industry.

When Donald Trump was elected to the White House in 2016, Ebell joined the transition team and advised the new president on environmental issues, successfully lobbying Trump to adhere to a campaign promise and abandon the Paris agreement.

Kert Davies, the founder of the Climate Investigations Center, a research group that examines corporate campaigning, said Ebell had led the anti-climate-action crusade for decades.

“They’re extremists,” he said, referring to the Cooler Heads Coalition. “They are never finished,” he said. “Myron has taken a lot of credit for Trump’s actions and is quite proud of his access.”

Recently, however, Ebell – who declined a request for an interview – has criticised the White House for not rolling back environmental protections aggressively enough, even though the Trump administration has gutted every major environmental act established under Obama.

His wishlist now includes reversing a 2009 finding by the Environmental Protection Agency that CO2 and other greenhouse gases endanger the health and welfare of Americans.

CEI said it “respects the privacy of its donors” and declined to answer questions about Google. A CEI spokesperson told the Guardian: “On energy policy, CEI advances the humanitarian view that abundant and affordable energy makes people safer and economies more resilient. Making energy accessible, especially for the most vulnerable, is a core value.”

One source who is familiar with Google’s decision-making defended the company’s funding of CEI.

“When it comes to regulation of technology, Google has to find friends wherever they can and I think it is wise that the company does not apply litmus tests to who they support,” the source said.

Greta Thunberg glares at Donald Trump arriving at United Nations after scolding international politicians over climate change

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/greta-thunberg-trump-glare-united-nations-climate-change-a9117476.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR3YLMOxMzn29Z1K4IuEEHMr3PAqwTrRTZRkTrzKvabQSYfgf1htRpecpcI#Echobox=1569267470

The 16-year-old activist’s reaction to the world’s most powerful climate change denier seems to speak volumes

A clip showing climate activist Greta Thunberg giving Donald Trump an ice-cold glare has gone viral, just after the Swedish 16-year-old told the United Nations that the leaders of the generations before hers had stolen her childhood and her dreams.

The video of Ms Thunberg shows her standing in the United Nations lobby in New York, just as Mr Trump arrived.

Cameras captured the moment in which the 16-year-old’s expression changes from a slight curiosity to what looks like steely anger as the American president walked by.

Ms Thunberg had just delivered a speech to the United Nations in which she called for urgent action on climate change.

“How dare you continue to look away, and come here saying that you are doing enough, when the politics and solutions needed are still nowhere in sight,” she told the United Nations.

She continued: “You say you ‘hear’ us and that you understand the urgency. But no matter how sad and angry I am, I don’t want to believe that. Because if you fully understood the situation and still kept on failing to act, then you would be evil. And I refuse to believe that.”

Mr Trump, for his part, has challenged the idea that climate change — which is supported by the vast majority in the scientific community, of which the American is not a member  — exists, and has openly mocked the idea, on one occasion suggesting it was a Chinese hoax.

Since taking office, Mr Trump has overseen an expansive effort to destroy his predecessor’s policies aimed at slowing the rate of climate change, including by easing up on restrictions for greenhouse gas emissions and bringing up new oil and gas leases.

Emails show Trump official consulting with climate change deniers to challenge scientific findings: report

Emails show Trump official consulting with climate change deniers to challenge scientific findings: report
© Getty Images

A Trump administration official consulted with advisers to a think tank skeptical of climate change to help challenge widely accepted scientific findings about global warming, according to emails obtained by The Associated Press.

William Happer, a member of the National Security Council, made the request to policy advisers with the Heartland Institute this March.

Happer and Heartland Institute adviser Hal Doiron discussed Happer’s scientific arguments in a paper attempting to knock down climate change as well as ideas to make the work “more useful to a wider readership” in a March 3 email exchange.

Happer also said he had discussed the work with another Heartland Institute adviser, Thomas Wysmuller, according to the emails obtained in a Freedom of Information Act request by the Environmental Defense Fund.

The National Security Council declined to comment on the emails.

Jim Lakely, interim president of Heartland Institute, told The Hill that the government’s stances on climate change are not above question.

“As for Wysmuller and Doiron, they are unpaid policy advisors and friends of The Heartland Institute and have known Dr. Happer for many years,” he said.

“It would be hard to find a group of men with more qualifications or experience to criticize NASA’s alarmist public statements on the climate than Happer, Doiron, and Wysmuller.”

The Trump administration is reportedly considering creating a new panel headed by Happer to the question the broad scientific consensus that climate change is driven by human activity and is potentially dangerous.

Democratic lawmakers have raised concerns over the proposed panel, saying it would fly in the face of scientific evidence.

Happer is a well-known climate change skeptic, having argued that carbon dioxide, the main heat-trapping gas from the burning of coal, oil and gas, is good for humans and that carbon emissions have been demonized like “the poor Jews under Hitler.”