RUTHFULLY YOURS

Trump met with Dr. Will Happer, an outspoken climate change skeptic, on Friday in New York and sources in Washington report the prominent Princeton University professor is joining the administration.

In 2015 Dr. Happer declared UN “policies to slow CO2 emissions are really based on nonsense. We are being led down a false path. To call carbon dioxide a pollutant is really Orwellian. You are calling something a pollutant that we all produce. Where does that lead us eventually?“

Dr. Happer, who specialises in the study of atomic physics, optics and spectroscopy, also blasted mainstream media pundits for distorting facts and misleading the public, declaring himself “outraged by distortions of CO2 & climate intoned by hapless, scientifically-illiterate newscasters.”

Trump is building a team of climate change skeptics, suggesting we are about to experience an abrupt change in policy. In November,Trump selected Scott Pruitt, the Oklahoma attorney general, to run the Environmental Protection Agency, signaling his determination to dismantle President Obama’s legislation on climate change.

“Obama thinks it’s the number one problem in the world today. I think it’s very low on the list,” Trump said on the Hugh Hewitt show, indicating a major shift in U.S. policy.

Trump continued: “You know in the 1920s people talked about global cooling, they thought the earth was cooling. I believe there is weather and I believe there is change and I believe it goes up and it goes down and it goes up again and it changes depending on years and centuries.”

Pointing out that U.S. manufacturing and the economy as a whole has suffered since climate change rules were introduced by global organizations – making everybody poorer, except the elites who profit from the fearmongering – Trump has promised to make America competitive again.

Trump’s anti-establishment views on climate change have come under sustained attack by the mainstream, but Dr. Happer has the president-elect’s back, criticizing the sheeplike groupthink of the majority and the attempt to limit freedom of speech and scientific endeavor.

“Isn’t the freedom to think what we like and say what we think at the very heart of the scientific endeavor? If so, then how did we get ourselves into this fix? The situation seems to many of us to be truly scandalous — one that historians of science are going to be making hay out of for decades and centuries to come.

“I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.”