Energy Dept. Attacks Climate Science in Contentious Report

The New York Times ^ | July 31, 2025, 11:52 a.m. ET | Maxine Joselow and Brad Plumer

[E. Pluribus Unum]

The agency asked five climate skeptics to write a report criticizing the consensus on global warming. Scientists are pointing out its errors.

Sea level rise is not accelerating. More carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will be good for plant growth. The computer models used to predict global warming tend to exaggerate future temperature increases.

These arguments, routinely made by people who reject the scientific consensus on climate change, were included in an unusual report released by the Energy Department on Tuesday. The report, which is meant to support the Trump administration’s sweeping efforts to roll back climate regulations, contends that the mainstream scientific view on climate change is too dire and overlooks the positive effects of a warming planet.

Climate scientists said the 151-page report misrepresented or cherry-picked a large body of research on global warming. Zeke Hausfather, a climate scientist at Berkeley Earth​ and the payments company Stripe, called the document a “scattershot collection of oft-debunked skeptic claims​” that “are not representative of broader climate science research findings.”

The report demonstrates the extent to which President Trump is using his second term to wage a battle against climate change research, a long-held goal of some conservative groups and fossil fuel companies. While the first Trump administration often undermined federal scientists and rolled back more than 100 environmental policies, officials mostly refrained from trying to debate climate science in the open.

This time, Trump officials have gone much further.

The Environmental Protection Agency this week cited the Energy Department report in its proposal to repeal a landmark 2009 finding that greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, pose a threat to public health. That determination, known as the endangerment finding, underpinned the agency’s legal authority to limit greenhouse gas emissions from cars, power plants...

---

TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: climatejunkscience; racketeering

[marktwain]

The title should be: Energy Dept. Attacks Climate Scam in Contentious Report

[Sacajaweau]

Absolutely. I remember when this all started with Gore. Hillary said the object was to sign up future voters with their cause...and indeed they did...They invaded our schools with Green Shirts...and false information.

[vikingd00d]

As it is now an official government report, it is therefore “settled science” that ‘climate change’ is a hoax. It is heresy to question it and those “scientists” engaging in wrong-think need to be punished and silenced.

I hope they enjoy living under the precedents they themselves set.

[Blueflag]

It’s not contentious at all.

It’s ACTUAL science.

#Trust the Science, remember???

[iamgalt]

The agency asked five climate skeptics to write a report“

The NYT never disappoints.

[Organic Panic]

“Climate Science”

The only science that is allowed to be wrong about everything all the time and still be called “science.”

[MNJohnnie]

It is not “science” when the Cult of Climate Change has to fake data, ignore contrary facts and change definition of words to “prove their science”. It not “science” when the cultists have to suppress contrary data and censor opposing viewpoints to validate their emotion base opinions.

[kawhill]

The climate sure changed here, went from 95 degrees to 75 degrees with rain too.

[sauropod]

Review

[Adder]

misrepresented or cherry-picked a large body of research on global warming.

Just like the “climate scientists” do when formulating the tenets of their religion...

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

“The agency asked five climate skeptics to write a report “

What exactly, does it take to be a climate \skeptic\?
What positions must one hold to be known as a skeptic of the climate?

[packrat35]

Climate Change is a false religion practiced by socialists and those with weak minds.

It is not and should never be used as a foundation for energy policy or anything else, for that matter.

[packrat35]

They even had to change the name from Global Warming to Climate Change, when winters got cold.

[Dick Bachert]

[alloysteel]

Science, REAL science, is not a matter of consensus, it is a matter of being able to cast doubt on conclusions previously made on the basis of incomplete information. And incomplete information of the factors that make up weather patterns pretty much describes our present understanding of climate “modeling”.

[Montana_Sam]

“... scientific consensus on climate change,...”

Sadly, many people who describe themselves as “scientists” are nothing more than mediocre (at best!) technicians.

All one has to do is define earth’s climate accurately: it is the thermodynamic system that causes earth’s weather. That ends the circular tail-chasing of how climate is described as the weather patterns over a given length of time, and weather is the result of climate. Once one breaks that circular dependency, one can easily examine how the earth’s surface is the heat sink for the sun’s heat source, and water vapor and water condensate are the only two true ‘greenhouse’ components of the atmosphere.

[beethovenfan]

“Energy Dept. Attacks Climate Pseudo-science.....”

[olezip]

Water vapor is at least twice as strong as a greenhouse gas than CO2 ...

Given that our climate system is nonlinear and dynamic, and given the sheer volume of water vapor in the atmosphere, orders of magnitude more than carbon dioxide, plus the wide variability of water vapor in the atmosphere from 0.4% to 5%, you would know that water vapor is the key factor in climate change.

Aerosols are a factor in cloud formation, in addition to cyclic Sun activity.

It is time to shift focus from carbon dioxide to water vapor and other factors in climate change. We have accomplished next to nothing except spending a lot of research dollars on the obsession with carbon dioxide.

The whole world seems bent on self-destruction chasing a false premise that we are all going to die if we do not control a trace gas that is needed for plant life.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

Absolutely. I remember when this all started with Gore...

In 2007, he said, "The planet has a fever."

Also predicted that the north polar ice cap would disappear by 2013.