Open Letter from Scientists to President-Elect Trump on Climate Change

"President-elect Trump has called climate change a Chinese hoax, vowed to dismantle America's climate and clean energy policies, and appointed climate deniers with ties to the fossil fuel industry to his transition team and Cabinet.

In response, more than 800 Earth science and energy experts in 46 states have signed an open letter to Donald Trump, urging him to take six key steps to address climate change to help protect “America’s economy, national security, and public health and safety.”

All signatories are pursuing or hold a PhD in relevant disciplines, with a few exceptions for other leaders in the field. All are either American or work in the United States."

The letter can be read here

Too bad he does not give a shit about facts or evidence. His politician supporters on his side are openly doubting what a fact is, and how you verify a fact.

To me, the most impressive aspect of this letter are the, basically, 800 PhD's that signed this letter. There is a massive amount of intellect present here.

A lot of scientists really need funding.

Who would've thought?

I always thought scientists were great people who worked for free and funded their own research. Like super-heroes. Really though, it's a very polite way of begging. I hope Trump wipes his arse with the letter.

If wanted to fund my projects, i'd jump on the climate change bandwagon as well.

I guess that is the only comment you can have against 800 PhDs.... nothing.

So that is the THIRD time he has gotten an open letter from the academics.

Edit: Lol at these climate change skeptics in this thread. Government grants amount to barely anything. But you know what ammounts to something, bribe money from the oil companies.

Not a global warming denier BUT it is absolutely not a settled issue as some of its proponents like to claim. There are plenty of valid criticisms and unanswered questions out there. Was told for decades by scientists that margarine was better for me than butter then all of a sudden ... oops!

Another thing that bugs me about this subject is that the so-called solutions always suck. They seem to always involve taking money out of one person's pocket and transferring it to someone else's pocket. If it truly is the monumental catastrophe that people claim it is and if you really, really believe it's gonna happen why not propose bigger, bolder, better solutions? Like greening the world's deserts for instance? Oh, but that costs money, doesn't make me any! When scientists decided to wipe out small pox they didn't do it with taxes, lol. Instead they thought big to fix a big problem and succeeded. That those at the top when it comes to proponents of this theory tend to think small instead, think of money collecting, for what is allegedly such a dire situation suggests to me that they aren't as convinced as they claim to be. When these people start talking more about spending money than they do extorting it I might become less suspicious of their motives.

Oh, I'm sure this will convince him.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

What is your point? No science is ever settled. Not even Darwinian evolution is. Nor is gravity. Anyone who says otherwise doesnt understand the scientific method.

Scientists make next to no money from grants. And trying to assert that this is a conspiracy is not very wise. Greening the deserts is far less practical than cutting down on fossil fuel consmumption. Which some countries have already done successfully. It also comes with additional bonuses like less smog which kills 200 times more than those terrorists are doing. Yet Trump seems a hell lot more concerned with the terrorists, particulary brown ones. than he is with dealing with an issue that claims 7 million lives every year.

Nuclear power is cheaper and cleaner. It is a win/win for everyone involved, except for the fossil fuel companies, who are currently bribing scientists and politicians to keep their ancient fossil of an industry from dying out. And unlike the conspiracy theories of Climate Change being a conspiracy for grant money or whatever, we have blatant evidence of bribery by the fossil fuel companies.

Edit: LolGS

@Wickerman777: That's not necessarily true. Solar power and wind energy are generally proven to be cost effective, even profitable (you can sell the energy back to power companies if you make a surplus).

The issue is not being able to afford being "green", it is that we have just made it so god damn cheap to be dirty.

But I agree with your overall sentiments; there are a lot of scam artists out there, people either capitalizing on the fear, or others that view it as a trend.

I think organic food is a good example; it's absolute shit (the exception being the high quality stuff purveyed to restaurants) and not done right most of the time (and pesticides really are not all that bad when used correctly), but people would have you believe organic produce is A.) higher quality and B.) better for the environment. It's bullshit, though; you're more likely to get a sub-par mealy apple covered in chicken shit when you buy organic.

There are just as many if not more in the science area that do not agree. There is one major fact without carbon, life on this planet could not exists. Question how much carbon is in the atmosphere? How much is too much? There are no answers for these questions. Because all scientists can not agree it is not settled science. To date all of the computer models have been wrong. Until there can be an open discussion in the scientific community where every position is studied and evaluated and not silenced because it does not fit a narrative a lot of damage will be done. The US is always being blamed for climate change yet the US has done more to clean up pollution than any other country because we had the will and the wealth to do so, but to destroy our economy over what could be a hoax is stupid. The fear that has been instilled in people with half truths is criminal.

Pretty much this.

The fact that they feel the need to do this says this is going to be bad 4-8 years. Also this is going to really be the last opportunity to really mitigate the effects of climate change. Worse yet the people he is filling his administration with in large part disagree with the scientists who signed this letter.

Well hopefully this will open up his eyes to the urgency of the situation but unfortunately I have little faith in Trump on taking climate change seriously.

This is outrageously false. It's amazing how everytime you post JimB it's only lies and made up garbage.

And that my friend is why he doesn't GET IT. Just as you have said, there is a massive amount of intelligence in that letter and we should all know by now that comprehension isn't one of Trumps strong points.

I don't think he ever does any independent study.....all comes from conservative sites.

I'm rooting for climate change on this one.

What's the worst that can happen? 4 or 5 billion dead?

We would still have a few billion left and with that amount of dead humans energy consumption would pretty much flatline and the planet would heal up pretty quick.

I'm going to go out later and burn some tires and do my part for the planet.

JimB is essentially the poster child for misinformation and fake news. He's exactly what the GOP and Trump want.

Education is a liability - a characteristic of the elite. Everyone knows schools are liberal indoctrination camps anyway. It's not that this party misunderstands facts and or doesn't comprehend the expertise which comes with education - they ignore one and despise the other because they simply don't want to acknowledge the conclusions that they come to.

Yeah but supporting the climate change idea is against his big-business-friendly policies.....

So reason doesn't really matter here. I expect a lot of this sort of thing.

Reminds me of something Rick Santorum said

A political candidate speaking out against a college education

Climate change shouldn't be a political issue.

OP, just to keep things in perspective: there are 2.5 million people in the U.S. with Ph.D's. https://www.reference.com/education/percentage-americans-phd-2508f1120884e2a3

Cheers

@R3FURBISHED: Yeah, Santorum's been feeding that narrative for a long time now.

Makes sense, there are a lot of colleges (as stated by teacher.org "many" colleges require the instructor hold a doctorate) and medical doctors in the US.

I made the remark I did just to emphasize the weight behind this document.

Most likely the reason.............

I was expecting a lot of the climatology and weather folks at NOAA to be signatories. Surprisingly, there are only two and none are weather or climatology specialists.

I guess they're doing their job and staying out of the politics.

Well the 800 scientists are already doing it wrong. You don't send a open letter to Trump, you notify him on Twitter with your 800 Twitter accounts.

I see very little here to get me off the side of climate change.

One of my favorites.

That probably would be more effective but then these signatories couldn't grandstand and show everyone how much they care with their letter.

What are each of you doing to combat climate change? I try riding my bike to work except in the winter because it's too slippery. I also turn off all the lights in rooms i dont use.

We are diversifying the regions from which we source ingredients so that as precipitation patterns and temperature patterns shift the effect on worldwide food availability will be less impactful.

I'm using up fossil fuels as fast as I can, so they run out quicker.

I'm emitting as much carbon as I can, so the temperature will rise faster and the earth will shake off the parasitic human race as soon as possible, allowing the earth to return to its pristine condition where the climate remains stable and never changes.

Riding your bike and turning off lights...........phhhttt..............half-stepper.

Of course Trump's not going to heed this letter, to do so would mean he'd first actually have to read it instead of tweeting constantly, and if he actually did follow its advice it would mean he wouldn't be able to enrich himself and his appointmented cronies.

This guy is like an 8 year old wielding a chainsaw throwing a tantrum inside a house while grown ups on the outside try to talk some sense into him. He has neither of the maturity nor temperament to listen to anybody. These scientists are far too good to waste their time on this imbecile. Unfortunately, imbeciles put him in power in the first place, so that's what they have to deal with.

Me?

I dont drive a car. I ride a bike or walk. I havent used my car in ages actually. I dont use my heater or cooler. I have dramatically cut down on meat consumption. I leave my lights out when I am not in the room.

But the best way to counter climate change is through regulation and technology. My country (sweden) gains less than 30% of its energy from fossil fuels as of 2013. Gaining most of its energy through renewable sources (50%) and nuclear power.

I drive my car much as possible and tend to throw garbage I don't want out of the window. I love steak, and tend to leave lights on when I sleep.

I'll admit I laughed at this lol

I too love steak.

It's the best. I usually try a bite out of one steak first to make sure i'm in the mood for it. If I am I throw the first one away (usually on the ground) then get another one.

I admit I chuckled from this.

Again I think both sides are oversimplifying a complex topic here. A lot of different issues often get grouped under one single subject of "climate change" and the label of climate change denier gets thrown around whenever someone questions or criticize certain aspects of that very broad topic. But reality is, many aspects of the whole global warming problem don't have overwhelming consensus with experts (not talking about merely the scientific community, more on that later on). I think most sensible individuals wouldn't deny the fact that the world gotten hotter in the past century. But beyond that I don't think the evidences are as substantive as other more widely accepted scientific theory such as evolution. Most casual supporters of climate change start with the obvious fact of a warming earth then accept the rest on more faith than critical thinking.

And I don't see economists in the signature list. While the signers are overwhelmingly climate and environmental scientists, there's almost no economic subject matter experts, but the letter goes on to talk about the economic impact and makes recommendations on economic policies. To actually cut Greenhouse Gas (GHG) to a level that would seriously effect a difference would result in most developed countries (especially the US) being less competitive in the global market, have negative GDP growth and become like the poorer developing countries. The suffering and death as a result of the unnecessary poverty would far exceed those cause by global warming in the future.

There's also no experts of international relations and policies. Even if the western developed countries were to all agree to reduce GHG to make a difference and endure the economic fallout of that decision, there's no guarantee that developing countries with large carbon footprints like China and India would follow suit. In fact, most experts of those countries will tell you with certainty that they won't. Anything less than an armed invasion of the said countries could not convince them.

Norwegian here... Norway create enough/close to enough electrical power from hydropower, yet we are being told that the energy we consume is not green... It comes from dirtier sources down in Europe.

Anyhow I'm lucky enough that I can walk to job, though I only walk home during the winter. Metro and bus to work. Generally biking in Norway is tiresome. I can't get to the main road from where I live without going down one hill and up another two. Though do it for a couple of months and the pounds should be falling off quickly if you have some to lose. :P

How would you react if numerous educated professionals sent him a letter contrary to climate change?

Irony here is Norway is the world's 5th biggest exporter of oil. Norway's standard of living would be non-sustainable if all of the nations of the world reduce their oil dependency and consumption to reduce GHG.

I, like most non delusional sociopaths, would listen to the experts, and not a bunch of pastors, and dipshits who are wrong about everything they speak of. If his little simulation is threatened by the facts, he throws out the facts, and attempts to discredit those speaking of them.

Yeah. Hydropower is extremely viable here in the nordic regions. Just like in some places geothermal is the best. For the most essential facilities, everything is within 15 minutes of walking. When I want to walk to the town the trip usually is a 45 minute walk. In some rare cases I may take a bus, such as when I come with a PC.

It also helps that even on average. Hydroelectric power is cheaper than conventional powre... hell... it is even cheaper than nuclear power. And I consider nuclear power to be the gold standard.

Clean, safe, cheap. :)

If Norway lost all its Oil revenue, it would survive. Take a fairly large blow, but the country would be fine.

Oil and gas makes up 22% of the norwegian GDP. Even with that money gone, it would still have a GDP/Capita of over 50k. Still putting it in the top 20 in the entire world. The side effects from a sudden crash could cause further complications, but if the government transitions properly. It could help with issues. But overall, the numbers are there, the economy would be fine, still a rich country. With high standards of living and all that nice stuff.