RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

McKibben writes: "President-elect Donald Trump has already begun to back off some of his promises: Maybe not all of Obamacare has to go. Maybe parts of his wall will actually be a fence. Maybe it's okay to have some lobbyists running the government after all."

Arctic sea ice. (photo: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center/flickr/cc)
Arctic sea ice. (photo: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center/flickr/cc)

Donald Trump Is Betting Against All Odds on Climate Change

By Bill McKibben, The Washington Post

20 November 16


resident-elect Donald Trump has already begun to back off some of his promises: Maybe not all of Obamacare has to go. Maybe parts of his wall will actually be a fence. Maybe it’s okay to have some lobbyists running the government after all.

But I fear he won’t shrink from the actions he has promised on climate change: withdrawing the United States from the Paris accord, ending President Obama’s Clean Power Plan and okaying every new fossil-fuel plan from the Keystone XL pipeline on down. He won’t back down because those are hard-to-hedge choices and because he’s surrounded by climate-change deniers and fossil-fuel insiders who will try to ensure that he keeps his word.

So let’s be entirely clear about what those actions would represent: the biggest, most against-the-odds and most irrevocable bet any president has ever made about anything.

It’s the biggest because of the stakes. This year has been the hottest year recorded in modern history, smashing the record set in 2015, which smashed the record set in 2014. The extra heat has begun to steadily raise sea levels, to the point where some coastal U.S. cities already flood at high tide even in calm weather. Global sea ice levels are at record lows, and the oceans are 30 percent more acidic. And that’s just so far. Virtually every scientific forecast says that without swift action in the next few years to cut carbon emissions, this crisis will grow to be catastrophic, with implications for everything from agriculture to national security that dwarf our other problems.

It’s the most against-the-odds bet because at this point there’s so little scientific dispute about climate change. Researchers have spent three decades narrowing the error bars and establishing an ever-clearer picture of the future. There’s always the chance that scientists have overlooked something, but it’s by now so narrow a chance it hardly deserves that description.

And it’s the most irrevocable bet because the next few years are crucial. This makes global warming unique: If you take away Obamacare, poor people will suffer until something replaces it — which would be bad, but that suffering would not make it harder to fix the problem later. Climate change, however, comes with a time limit, which is why senior scientists last week were saying that if Trump carries through with his wager, it might well be “game over.” If he loses his bet, he will have cost us the last years in which we might have made a real difference.

Against all this, Trump has merely the conviction that climate change is a hoax. It’s a conviction more or less shared by the man he has put in charge of his energy and environmental transition team, Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and a handful of other climate-change deniers at websites such as . Some, like Ebell, are funded by the fossil-fuel industry, and others are quite sincere freelancers who have involved theories about how some of the thermometers measuring the planet’s climate have been placed too near to airport runways or believe that sunspots or cosmic rays or “natural cycles” will soon cool the Earth. They are contemptuous of the consensus science (the product of “a lot of third-, fourth- and fifth-rate” researchers, says Ebell) and of anyone who takes it seriously. (Pope Francis, in his encyclical on climate change, was “scientifically ill informed, economically illiterate, intellectually incoherent and morally obtuse,” says Ebell.)

It’s easy to see why these kinds of pronouncements might appeal to Trump. It’s not just that they’re spoken in the brash language he likes to use, but they made it easy for him to justify, say, his promises to restore the nation’s coal mines to their glory days. It would indeed be much easier for all concerned if global warming were hogwash.

But as far as anyone knows, he has never tested his beliefs by sitting down with scientists for even a cursory examination of the data. So someone who has his ear needs to tell him that the opinions on which he’s relying are marginal at best.

And that friend might remind him, too, of the difference between issues governed by opinion and those governed by fact. If you don’t think poor people should get subsidized medical care, that’s ugly, but it’s an opinion you’re entitled to hold. Science isn’t like that: The heat-trapping properties of the carbon dioxide molecule simply a re. Which is why, even if we fail in our efforts to stop Trump from making his bet, it’s important for history to note what’s going on. One man is preparing to bet the future of the planet in a long-shot wager against physics. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+50 # jwb110 2016-11-20 14:47
If the Trump Troupe doesn't confront Climate Change they will certainly have to confront the effects of it. The home base for the Atlantic Fleet has already tried to state to the Darrell Issa committee that the ability of the fleet to function is endangered by the rise in the Atlantic. Issa hit the gavel and adjourned the committee before the Head of the Fleet could finish his comments. Now we are talking about National Security not just denials. The influx of immigrants displaced in Bangladesh along will be significant. Not to mention other countries. Mass immigration on those kinds of scales will make for more and more unstable governments. Once again matters of National Security. I am of a mind that if the argument taken to the Trumpers and to Congress was about National Security if becomes another sort of debate. Take the argument of the hands of the EPA and other enviro-groups and set it square in the lap of a National Security issue. There is a country on earth, the other that maybe Tibet and Switzerland, that won't be effected by the seas rising. Take the the debate out of the hands of liberals put it squarely in the hands of the conservatives.
+14 # economagic 2016-11-20 15:03
Terrible writing, but rock-solid thinking.
+15 # Jaax88 2016-11-20 18:05
The article by McKibben is good and important. However, given the mindset of the the GOP, conservatives and trump and his gang I do not see that that conglomeration of backward, dangerous mentalities, akin to the people who denied the earth was round, would change their beliefs and do anything useful and important.
+3 # Patriot 2016-11-23 03:34
And so they won't, if we give up before anything has happened. Write to your congressional delegation (2 Senators, 2 Representative) , every other Senator, and to every member of the House who accepts e-mail your support for the measures you mentioned, your concerns about repidly-acceler ating climate chnge--and so on.

INSTRUCT them to support efforts to slow, then halt, then reverse climate change. Don't ASK, TELL! They work for us, and we need to remind them of that constantly--and of the fact that we're tired of being ignored while they stuff their pockets on behalf of a tiny percent who only cre about profit and control, not about the survival of our planet as the only home for ALL of the species that inhabit it.

Don't think it will do ny god? Well, it might, if EVERYONE will do so--so get busy, and bug your friends to join your letter-writing campaign. You have nothng to lose by trying--and lifeitself to gain.
+4 # Vardoz 2016-11-21 01:06
The Pentagon has known about the consequences of doing nothing about climate warming for decades! hey are the masters of our doom.
+1 # Patriot 2016-11-23 03:38
Wrong! the Pentagon has asked for funds specifically to do research into climate change and how it will alter our national security, but the REPUBLICANS said the military should tend to its knitting and keep its nose out of things that don't concern it.

So, write to the JCS encouraging them to keep hounding Congress for funds to devise ways to counter climate change and to deal with its effects, then write Congress and tell them to stop pandering to the monied few and begin to look after the planet and the rest of us.
+31 # ChrisCurrie 2016-11-20 14:49
Donald Trump has a life-long history of making promises that he doesn't intend to keep. As a Presidential candidate, he spun around the ideological spectrum like a promise-spewing top to see which promises improved his chances of winning and which didn't. He then built his campaign on those promises which appeared to be working in his favor. Whether or not he will actually keep any of those promises remains to be seen. He will no doubt drop many of them, because of the obvious backlash he will receive otherwise.
+14 # Questions, questions 2016-11-20 15:39
Unfortunately, it's so much easier to screw up climate policy on the global level simply by inaction - since the Paris accords are so weak on follow-through requirements - as well as on the national level just by reversing Obama's good (though clearly inadequate) administrative efforts.

Yeah, there's no way in hell he's going to bring back all the coal mining jobs (and coal plants) lost to energy market shifts (not Obama, since his new regs don't even kick in for several years), but we may have to wait a while for someone to knock some sense into him concerning science or national security concerns!
+6 # gdsharpe 2016-11-20 16:44
Quoting ChrisCurrie:
Donald Trump has a life-long history of making promises that he doesn't intend to keep. As a Presidential candidate, he spun around the ideological spectrum like a promise-spewing top to see which promises improved his chances of winning and which didn't. He then built his campaign on those promises which appeared to be working in his favor. Whether or not he will actually keep any of those promises remains to be seen. He will no doubt drop many of them, because of the obvious backlash he will receive otherwise.

Don't we wish...
+4 # Texas Aggie 2016-11-21 00:40
It isn't so much that he went back on his promises as he denied that he'd ever made them in the first place. Unfortunately for the world, fighting global warming isn't likely to be something he's interested in doing despite what he said on the campaign trail.
+37 # economagic 2016-11-20 15:01
"Pope Francis, in his encyclical on climate change, was 'scientifically ill informed, economically illiterate, intellectually incoherent and morally obtuse,' says Ebell."

Clearly it is Ebell, along with Trump and the rest of his rogues gallery, to whom that entire description applies, although there may be some among them who understand the reality and don't give a shit about anything except their right to make money for a few more years, or who understand in part but are in denial about the rest because they wish it weren't so.

I suspect that few of them have even a foggy notion of the distinction between matters of opinion and matters of fact. Most people do not, because a clear and firm definition of a "fact" is itself elusive, while the entire question of how we know what (we think) we know is a deep philosophical question that is seldom discussed today even in college.

I fear the whole thing may be beyond Trump's attention span if not his ability to comprehend, but perhaps the DOD can convince him.
+9 # gdsharpe 2016-11-20 16:43
I have a strong suspicion that Trump has very limited reading ability, if he can read at all. So, scientific claims and their evidence are going to be beyond him.
+11 # economagic 2016-11-20 17:25
Not necessarily. Print is an important medium, critical for any approach to comprehensive knowledge. But knowledge can be gained through other channels. Trump supposedly graduated from the Wharton School, this country's premier college of business, and it's not hard for me to imagine that having grown up in a business environment (which is not to say that he is actually "grown up") he could have floated through in that relatively simple discipline without ever cracking a book. Whether he could do likewise with the concept of matters of fact and of opinion, not to mention science, is another question.
+6 # Carol R 2016-11-21 04:56
I've read that Trump has an attention span of 8 minutes. He doesn't read and will have daily reports read out loud.

This is no way to have deep knowledge about any subject.

Trump believes that he has great intuitive abilities and makes decisions by his 'gut' feelings.

I believe George W. did the same thing.
+1 # Patriot 2016-11-23 03:41
Shrub and Reagan both were near-illiterate s who never wanted to do any in-depth reading on their own, but relied upon digests prepared by their staffs.
+4 # mavrant 2016-11-20 18:32
This Ebell jerk off is in a class of mental giants of his own. As much of a sociopath as the pres elect may seem to be, and even if he doesn't give a hoot about this flat thing we call earth, he won't live to see the consequences of his, and his climate deniers "advisors", he does have children and will have at some point grand children who will need a boat to get to the trump tower entrance, on the 3rd floor.
+27 # Eliza D 2016-11-20 15:44
We really have to keep protesting on the streets. It's so heartening to see all the young people walking out of classes and marching on the Capitol. We look to you Mr. McKibben ,to steer the anti-Trump protests to environmental rallies with specific demands. This is the more important issue of the day as water continues to rise in the streets of Miami and wildfires and droughts in the West threaten the very existence of California,Ariz ona and New Mexico.
+18 # Glen 2016-11-20 16:14
Water is also rising at Mar a Lago and Trump's golf resort in Ireland. He has ordered sea walls built to prevent incursion of the sea at both locations. Trump is not unaware of changes world wide.
+12 # economagic 2016-11-20 17:28
That could indicate that he believes it to be a short-term deviation from the norm, or that he understands the reality but chooses to deny it for short-term personal gains, or that he is in full-blown denial and really does not understand what is happening, a significant possibility I think.
+2 # Glen 2016-11-21 06:37
He says what he feels voters want to hear. He is stupid/not stupid. He relies on others to control his interests to such an extreme that their prejudices and denials infect his policies. Climate is only a part of his coming shtick.
+19 # oakes721 2016-11-20 16:00
The House always wins at a Casino. SPIN the Wheel of Chance! Everyone's a Winner! But even the latest White House occupant gambler cannot put a fix on the spin of the Earth.
Trying to 'Beat the most Formidable Odds" is a Sucker's Game and he ought to know that much.
+8 # tedrey 2016-11-20 16:14
If Trump knew that when certain objective meteorological readings occurred he would be executed, do you think he would change his advisors?
+11 # dipierro4 2016-11-20 16:32
" '...Pope Francis...was.. . morally obtuse,' says Ebell...."

We can only hope that Mr. Ebell keeps saying such things, loudly. This will not exactly solidify Trump's position with certain parts of his winning coalition.
-4 # Carol R 2016-11-20 16:33
So now we have President elect Trump. He has proven to dislike women (#10 bodies are all they are worth), Muslims (they are terrorists). latinos (they only come to rape and murder), immigrants (they only take jobs) and he says climate change is a hoax started by the Chinese.

We are now stuck with him.

What happened to all of the Jill Stein supporters or Bernie or Bust voters who were voting for Jill or writing in Bernie's name? Some of you even voted for Trump. How do you feel now that Trump has won? Is this really what you wanted?
+8 # economagic 2016-11-20 17:37
Since I don't recognize your handle, you are probably unfamiliar with the credible arguments for refusing to claim that either evil was necessarily greater than the other, or even that the evil of Trump was the lesser, advanced on RSN over the past year. I don't think anyone commenting in this forum has ever suggested that a Trump presidency would be good for the country in any broad sense. But I get the impression you are not interested in rational argument contrary to your heartfelt beliefs, possibly not thoroughly examined.
-5 # Jaax88 2016-11-20 18:50
I think Carol R is right to point the naivety and wrong choice of the Stein/Bernie or bust people who refused to vote against trump. Who cares about arguments now? There are limits on self-righteousn ess in politics and when the health and safety of millions of Americans could be at stake.

Trump told the public what he would do. It is close to unforgivable to have not voted against trump for this and other reasons critical to the long term health of the nation.
-1 # economagic 2016-11-20 19:29
Jaax, you have been around long enough to know my reasoning, and you have yet to do anything other than insult me. Since you think I am mistaken, I would appreciate it if you would go back and read what I have said about that and teach me my errors, so that I might avoid them in the future. If you are too lazy to do that, say so, and I will repeat it one more time.
+3 # Jaax88 2016-11-23 00:44
Whoa there bud. If you feel insulted I am sorry for that. Not to have you feel insulted again, however, I do think you are too sensitive on this one. Carol has a right to criticize the voters and I was supporting her comment. Talk about insulting, you my friend just tossed an unnecessary insult directly at me.
+3 # Texas Aggie 2016-11-21 00:52
And if you didn't vote against Drumpf, at least have the mental acuity to realize that president Pence is a solid gold reason to vote against Drumpf no matter who is running on the other ticket.
+2 # AshamedAmerican 2016-11-21 22:20
We did vote against Trump, as well as Clinton. The health and safety of millions of USians, among others, were at risk from her as well, and not only because of her aggressions toward Syria and Russia.
+6 # dipierro4 2016-11-20 18:55
...Some of you even voted for Trump. How do you feel now that Trump has won? Is this really what you wanted?...

There were reasons to believe (or at least hope) that Trump might be the lesser evil. Consider Clinton's apparent commitment to re-escalating the Cold War and her history as to Latin America, Africa, Iraq, and Syria. The promise that Trump, for all his bad qualities, might look at the world through fresh eyes, along with his stated distaste for having military commitments everywhere, made it a very legitimate question, whether a "statement" vote for a 3d party candidate might be of more real value than a vote for Clinton. Maybe a few RSN regulars even voted Trump for the same reasons. While I wouldn't have voted for Trump myself, I can appreciate their reasoning.

Not to mention, Clinton was a poor candidate who was unsuited to the Presidency by personality and temperament IMO. Being dishonest and defensive, with a tendency to respond to adversity by lashing out, she might have ended up the way Nixon did, for the same reasons.

I cannot say I feel good about Trump. Every move he's made recently, seems to confirm my fears rather than my hopes. Hopefully there will be pleasant surprises? But either way, the election is water over the dam (or under the bridge, if you prefer). We gain nothing by snapping at each other.
+1 # economagic 2016-11-20 19:37
(quoting dipierro4, quoting Carol R)

"...Some of you even voted for Trump. How do you feel now that Trump has won? Is this really what you wanted?..."

My apology: I gave you a thumbs-down not recognizing that you were quoting, even though it didn't quite make sense in the context of the rest of your comment. It's a good idea to, er, put quotations in quotes! And if there are or are likely to be a number of messages in between, it's a good idea to reference the original comment by name, maybe including the time.
+4 # dipierro4 2016-11-20 19:43
economagic: Thanks.
+4 # Skyelav 2016-11-20 21:40
No but we have to take it or be stuck with a democrat party as corrupt as the New Jersey mafia
+2 # AshamedAmerican 2016-11-21 22:02
Carol R:
No commentor here seemed to want Trump. Those you refer to wanted someone decent, for a change. We failed for being outnumbered by people who seem willing to vote for the media-promoted evil democrat every four years til we have completely self-destructed . I know of no one who has wanted him as president at any point. But many get some consolation in the fact that at least he is not Clinton.
+4 # Ken Halt 2016-11-21 22:58
Carol: You ascribe RSN supporters with mythical powers that elected Trump to the oval office. Get real! We are not that powerful, unfortunately, or Bernie would be prez. HRC lost the election because she was a lackluster sameosameo candidate that did not inspire voters to come out for her, millennials stayed home by the millions. If you need a whipping boy I humbly refer you to the DNC, which skewed the playing field to produce an HRC primary victory. In the face of credible polls showing Bernie to be the stronger candidate in the general election, the DNC and DP shoved HRC down our throats and thus chose to gamble on the weaker candidate rather than nominate a sure winner. In exit polls conducted on election day, Bernie would have beaten Trump by double digits if he'd been the Dem candidate. That you want to hold the RSN thread responsible for Trump's victory is absurd!
+1 # willsud24 2016-11-22 07:38
You need to understand that if Trump didn't win, a figure even worse than him would have grown and would win in 2020. The Obama/Clinton brand of neoliberalism was killing us and Hillary would've extended this. I despise Trump, but a backlash to failed neoliberal, free-market ideology WAS GOING TO OCCUR, either in 2016 or in 2020. It might have been Ted Cruz, if not Trump. Neoliberalism has failed and in the future we must choose between socialism and barbarism. The voters chose fascism for the time being.
-1 # Patriot 2016-11-23 03:48
Carol R, don't take the descriptions of Trump too seriously. He obviously dotes on his daughters, at least two of the heavy-hitters on his campaign staff were women of whom he spoke very highly--and the first non-Republican he conferred with was a woman: Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI). Since the woman-hating meme is patently false, I wonder just how seriously he feels any of the other antipathies his rhetoric credited to him?
+17 # gdsharpe 2016-11-20 16:39
I bet if he owned a hotel on the Miami beachfront his tune would be different. The mayor of Miami has already commented on the fact that at high tide the ocean covers parts of US1 going through Miami along the coast.
+13 # economagic 2016-11-20 17:31
As above, he may be attributing that event to other causes, or failing to make the "obvious" connection. It's hard to convince a person that the world is a certain way when s/he has a vested interest in it being some other way, and the less mature the mind the easier the self-delusion.
+8 # Diane_Wilkinson_Trefethen_aka_tref 2016-11-20 22:20
Quoting economagic:
...the less mature the mind the easier the self-delusion.
You have made several polite references to Trump's mental acuity. I'd like to magnify that viewpoint.

The capabilities of Trump's mind are below average. His synapses close slowly. He can't extrapolate. His attention span is limited. He is incapable of considering two contradictory ideas and resolving them. His speech patterns reveal an adult whose intellectual growth stopped around 7 years of age, the point in time just before the human brain begins to develop an appreciation that things are not black and white. "Terrible," "great," "fantastic," "beautiful," "wonderful." Who but a small child calls someone "a very bad man" with a straight face? He cannot grasp satire; he takes it literally. He doesn't understand "code" words until they are patiently explained to him.

A President Trump is not going to formulate policy. He can't. He is not going to understand anything that isn't simple or easy to describe in simple terms. He's not a moron or stupid in the way we usually think of those words but he has, at best, a high-functionin g, thoroughly sub-par mind.

President-elect Donald J Trump is possibly the most perfect example of the Peter Principle that has ever graced the planet.
+7 # Texas Aggie 2016-11-21 00:48
Or he may be the most perfect example of HL Mencken's observation.

On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
H. L. Mencken

I had thought that W was the epitome, but drumpf just proved me wrong.
0 # Patriot 2016-11-23 03:54
Diane, please check your RSN mailbox to see if you received the note I sent you.
+1 # willsud24 2016-11-22 07:43
He owns hotel and condo properties 30 minutes in North of Miami in Ft. Lauderdale and also West Palm Beach, Boca Raton and Tampa. Not sure if he owns any in Miami, but I wouldn't be surprised.
+11 # DongiC 2016-11-20 17:36
And so it all ends, not with a bang or a fire, but with a splash. A warm one at that. This guy Trump is such cartoon character. Is he for real? Lies like a rug, rips off his associates, loves to sue and to bully and to dominate. What figure from our past does he remind one of? Hint: the brighest of all the angelic hosts who through his pride took a savage fall. I think the Donald is heading in the same direction.
+9 # dipierro4 2016-11-20 17:48
Be careful what you ask for: You may get President Pence.
+7 # gdsharpe 2016-11-20 19:27
Quoting dipierro4:
Be careful what you ask for: You may get President Pence.
At the very least, equally bad. At least Trump could (almost) conceivably be convinced to veto the worst of the extremist legislation. Pence? He's right in with the worst of the nutcases in the worst part of the Republican party.
Which is exactly why the party nutcases put him forward as a "good" VP candidate. They may very well be quietly plotting Trump's demise just to get Pence in as Prez.
+1 # elkingo 2016-11-20 19:46
This administration by any stretch of the imagination: morality, safety, humanity is illegitimate and needs to be impeached!
0 # gdsharpe 2016-11-20 20:15
Good luck with that!
+3 # Texas Aggie 2016-11-21 00:42
There is good reason to believe that Drumpf is being set up by the republican power structure for impeachment in order to get Mike Pence as president. Then we will be truly and royally shafted.
+4 # mashiguo 2016-11-21 06:08
Quoting Texas Aggie:
There is good reason to believe that Drumpf is being set up by the republican power structure for impeachment in order to get Mike Pence as president. Then we will be truly and royally shafted.

only if 2/3 of the senate votes to convict.
do you really think democrats hate trump enough to vote pence in?

i wouldnt put it beyond dems, but the thought of them rescuing trump from his own party is amusing.
+1 # Jaax88 2016-11-23 16:44
Just what administration are you referring to? trump is not in office, so what is what is on your mind?
+3 # vicnada 2016-11-20 20:49
"Which is why, even if we fail in our efforts to stop Trump from making his bet, it’s important for history to note what’s going on."

In the context of what preceded this statement, it's hard to understand how "it's important for history to note" anything as our planet will cease to exist...taking all history with it.

There's urgency: "...he will have cost us the last years in which we might have made a real difference". There's irreversibility : "’s the most irrevocable bet because the next few years are crucial". By these standards, the stakes Britain faced against Hitler were laughable. So what if English didn't establish itself as the political language guiding planetary destruction!

Why is this war only metaphorical? Are these odds of a global meltdown indeed real? Because Republicans just played Trump and ran the table. To them this is a game and they're calling our bluff.
+2 # DongiC 2016-11-21 08:17
When Miami, New Orleans, Biloxi, Galveston et al go under a few feet of water, even the Republicans will realize that the game of global warming is no game! But, by then, it will be too late. Trump and his colleagues will be marked as the worst in American History; people who were found wanting at the greatest crisis the human race ever faced.
0 # BREAKTHROUGHENERGYGUY 2016-11-21 13:43
Breakthrough technologies based on new science are designed to provide continuous, cost-competitiv e power - and in some cases air conditioning.

Initial production will involve 24/7 Gen Sets that need no fuel. These reflect a loophole in the Second Law of Thermodynamics. A similar loophole was recently acknowledged by a team of scientists. Two are at the Argonne National Laboratory.

AESOP engineers have published papers stating engines could run by substituting ambient heat for fuel. Chris Hunter converted a Ford engine to fuel-free operation, proving the concept. See

Atmospheric heat is a huge untapped reservoir of solar energy, larger than all earth's fossil fuels, which will provide a missing cheap green alternative.

Mitsubishi-Chrysler V6 and Briggs & Stratton engine conversions to fuel free operation are nearing completion. Independent laboratory verification and validation will follow.
0 # Patriot 2016-11-23 04:01
Breakthrough these are very, very encouraging lines of research. THANK YOU for posting such positive news!
+2 # elkingo 2016-11-21 13:50
Actually the peerless Bill McK puts it mildly. This seems more and more like a looming Armageddon, the final battleground of good and evil, sanity and madness, planetary destruction vs. planetary salvation, love vs. hate, life vs. death, Satan vs. the divine.

But the point really is here that it is no longer whacko, fantastic or science fiction to talk that way. At least in secular terms. I wonder what the whacko evangelicals would thing of this, but would probably not be bothered because J.C. is coming back to snatch all we (good) guys up to heaven anyway. Well, Headin' to Armageddon, guys.
+2 # elkingo 2016-11-21 14:23
Dipiero4 is right. Trump, via his lies, hypocrisy and sheer inconsistency might inadvertently do something right once and a while, while destroying the world. But Pence is worse because from his impeccably flat ironed white hair on down, he is a true believer, a fanatical ideologue - "A Christian, an American and a Republican, in that order." Probably believes Jesus will save us before the end of the would, which doesn'T really matter anyway.
+2 # willsud24 2016-11-22 07:31
We're already passed the point where alternative energy and recycling can stop this...if it ever could. Nothing short of the collapse of industrial civilization will stop abrupt climate change at this point. Civilization itself is a heat engine, even if everyone drives electric cars.
+1 # Patriot 2016-11-23 04:06
Global warming CAN be slowed, then stopped, then--MAYBE--re versed, but only if every human on the planet does all he can, and beats up on his government to do more.

So, let's get busy and change what WE each can, while pummelling the living daylights out of our elected officials, from our local council right on up to the Prez and Congress.


THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.