Tuesday, September 9, 2025

Steve Koonin Continues Spouting Climate Propaganda in New WSJ Column.

 

                               Climate threat denier Steve Koonin - at it again

Writing in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal (At Long Last, Clarity on Climate, p. A12) , climate flake pseudo physicist Steve Koonin continued pumping out his half-assed delusions that the recent Trump Energy dept. report got it right about the threat of climate change,

Koonin writes:

A recent Energy Department report challenged the widespread belief that greenhouse-gas emissions pose a serious threat to the nation. It likely soothed Americans irked by forced energy transitions, but you would be wrong to assume it reassured many alarmed by hypothetical climate catastrophes.

There is a disconnect between public perceptions of climate change and climate science—and between past government reports and the science itself. Energy Secretary Chris Wright understands this. It’s why he commissioned an independent assessment by a team of five senior scientists, including me, to provide clearer insights into what’s known and not about the changing climate.

The goofball also claimed:

The Energy Department’s recent report is drawing predictable criticism from politicized scientists.”

Actually Koonin and his climate skeptic twits are the only ones "polticized" - like Trump's DOJ and his whole sorry ass, malicious, loser administration.

Problem is that the Energy Dept. report Koonin embraces is no more scientific than the peer-rejected codswallop behind the RFK Jr. drive to eliminate mRNA vaccines.

As Donald Wuebbles, professor emeritus of atmospheric sciences at the University of Illinois noted in an earlier (Aug. 2-3, p. A4) WSJ piece, it's not as if contrarian voices shouldn't be heard, but "do it in the right way".  Meaning get your contrarian views and arguments published in a peer reviewed journal.  Which none of the report contributors have managed to do.  Among them, Steve Koonin, who blabbed (ibid.)

"The science does not say what you think it says.  The reality of climate risks and benefits have been largely misportrayed in the media....Among other assertions he argued with his fellow authors that increasing carbon dioxide is good for plant growth."

Yeppers, "good" for increasingly invasive super weeds  like the pigweed shown below:

Pigweed - one benefactor of higher CO2 levels

For which documented specimens, i.e. found on farms, have been up to 6 feet in height with stalks as thick as Louisville Slugger baseball bats. In some cases these weeds have been so tough they've even damaged agricultural equipment, as well as being resistant to Roundup.  This has led many farmers to conclude they need to resort to more toxic weedicides like 2,4,-D, dicamba and paraquat.

Added to the super weeds are the pollen counts generated by ordinary plants, now at their highest points ever, in some cases 300-500% above pre-greenhouse era levels. with allergy season starting earlier with each passing year, e.g.

Allergy season is starting earlier and lasting longer. Pittsburgh doctors share their tips.

These clowns like Koonin also argue that "temperatures in the U.S. are "milder now than in the 1930s and that heat waves, floods and wildfires aren't getting worse."

Which makes one wonder what alternative Earth Koonin and his misfits have been living on. They obviously missed the memo that the past ten years, from 2015 to 2024, have been the hottest on record, with 2024 being the warmest year overall, according to scientific and weather organizations. This marks a significant shift, as all the warmest years in recorded history have occurred within this recent decade. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has confirmed that 2024 surpassed previous records, making it the first year to exceed the 1.5 degrees Celsius warming threshold above pre-industrial levels. 

The surest clue Koonin's  climate change minimizers are out of it was revealed in their ending quote in the earlier WSJ piece:

"Our goal was simply to bring an evidence-based perspective to understanding what the climate is doing and might in the future."

Okay, fine, but if the evidence is real - and not made up to suit Trump - have your "report" published in a peer-reviewed journal like Nature Climate Change, i.e.

https://www.nature.com/nclimate/

Do that and I might take your contrarian views more seriously, as opposed to being fodder for fools and Know-nothings, like the high IQ twits who side with this baloney.

See Also:


And:


And:


And:


And:


No comments: