15 absurd over-reactions to Trump’s withdrawal from climate treaty

Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.


Regular readers can support Behind The Black with a contribution via paypal:

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


If Paypal doesn't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

Link here. Though Trump’s rejection of the climate deal is only tangentially related to the federal budget, it definitely has caused a lot of pigs to squeal. I especially like #13 from the leftwing American Civil Liberties Union, because it encompasses every absurd aspect of the modern left’s methods of debate:

Pulling out of the Paris Agreement would be a massive step back for racial justice, and an assault on communities of color across the U.S. — ACLU National (@ACLU) June 1, 2017

Read them all. And remember that these reactions came only an hour or so after Trump made his announcement. Expect even more silliness from the left in the days to come.



  • Garry

    I would not be surprised if this leads to boycotts of American products, services, and companies, a call to make the dollar no longer the currency for oil transactions, and other attempts to put lots and lots of pressure on Trump.

    In my view, this is the first tangible action Trump has taken that represents an existential threat to the pigs, and I think many of them will move on from squealing to more dangerous actions.

    It may just be a battle we have to fight (and win).

  • wayne

    The Paris Climate Agreement Scam
    Louder With Crowder

  • Edward

    All 15 of these overreactions are fighting the reality that we are now 1/6 of the way through the century, yet global warming and the rising seas have not risen by 1/6 of any of the values predicted for the end of the century.

    The climate scientists stopped making short term predictions of doom and disaster, because these kept failing to happen by their predicted dates, so to keep from being proved so blatantly wrong, they went for the long term predictions: the end of the century. Unfortunately for them, but fortunately for the planet, the predicted disastrous effects of humanity are not on track for fulfillment by 2100, or any other date in the future before the next coming ice age (due any millennium, now).

    This is why so many people can laugh at the predictions and at these 15 reactions. Everyone knows that the predictions are bogus — everyone — which is why everyone continues to use powered transportation, electricity, natural gas, and all the other “causes” of global warming. Even Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio as well as each and every one of the people, groups, editors, etc. who came up with these overreactions.

    Most embarrassing is Neil deGrasse Tyson, who apparently learned enough about what science is and how & why it works to understand that theories and hypotheses have to conform to observation. The rest of us have observed the lack of global warming and lack of oceanic rise compared to the predictions. The rest of us understand that these theories and hypotheses are not holding up to reality. This is inconvenient for the alarmists (note the alarm sounded in every overreaction), but it is convenient for everyone who wants to continue to use energy.

    A close second in embarrassment is Scientific American, which only asked the question whether the Earth would dry up and blow away. Asking questions is scientific, but not in the way that they asked theirs.

    Least embarrassing is Jon Ossoff, who is a politician, which puts him in the moron category, so we don’t expect anything resembling intelligence from him. I’m surprised he knows how to tweet — I stand corrected, the tweet is by “The Hill,” not him, it just quotes him.

    Then they all hopped into their cars and drove home, turned on their air conditioners, cooked dinner (right down to using their electric can openers), and ran their dishwashers (which used city water, powered by electrical pumps) as well as their clothes washers and dryers.

    Tomorrow morning, they all will take hot showers and blow dry their hair, before jumping back into their cars to start yet another day of using more power than they want to allow the rest of us to use. Because they don’t actually believe in anthropogenic global warming, and they know that climates change naturally, a change that cannot be stopped by any government or any species.

  • Edward

    Correction. It should read:
    “Most embarrassing is Neil deGrasse Tyson, who apparently never learned enough about what science is and how & why it works to understand that theories and hypotheses have to conform to observation.”

    The missing key word is “never.”

    (How embarrassing it is to have to make a correction on a comment about someone embarrassing himself.)

  • Dick Eagleson


    The left boycotts pretty much everything on some pretext or other. None of these noisily-announced “boycotts” ever amounts to a hill of beans.

    “Buy-cotts” by ticked-off right-wingers, though, are another matter. When the Chick-fil-A fast food chain was in the left’s sights over its owner’s un-PC take on gay marriage, their sales skyrocketed. Ditto cute little Jackie Evancho’s music download stats after she was savaged for agreeing to sing the National Anthem at Trump’s inaugural. Getting the Social Justice Warriors on your case can be very good for business.

    As for re-denominating oil transactions – good luck with that. What would the world switch to? The Euro? Looking pretty shaky of late. Rubles? Yuan? The mind fairly boggles.

  • LocalFluff

    Where will Europe turn now? Russia would be the natural partner, but Hillary’s Trump-Putin conspiracy theory to blame for her election loss, makes it hard to imagine. Europe is at least as much in a Russian phobia state as the US, and has been since many years with Kosovo, Georgia. Of course the political conclusion has been to continue degrading the defense capabilities. It’s European press that has contaminated American press with the Putin fright hysteria.

    The US has nothing to fear from the rest of the world. Everyone is strongly dependent on the US, while the US can do very well on its own. This is the best set out for negotiation that Trump has ever had. That’s why his presidency will be a historic success, at least in foreign policy. He’ll destroy or completely take over the UN, EU, IMF et cetera and go bilateral. The corrupt incompetent political leaders of other countries cannot unite against him. They keep stabbing each others’ backs all the time for short term personal profit. That’s the only thing they know how to do.

    France’s president Macron is in for five rough years. He begins as president with seeing the US taking the lead of the sunni muslims of the world and leaving the climate accord. That was about the entire Macron political identity suddenly being erased. Trade and defense will be other hard blows against France very quickly now. Maybe sever restraints on travels from France to the US must be imposed to protect against the nuclear islamic terror state of France.

  • Mitch S

    If i were advising Trump I’d tell him to leave the Paris deal alone.
    As Edward mentioned, the politicians who negotiate these deals don’t believe in or just don’t care about AGW.
    The purpose of the deals is to make the liberal/left constituencies feel good, they are never intended to be actually implemented.
    Besides, if you look at the studies, if AGW is the threat it’s believers say, then Paris, even fully implemented, would do almost nothing to help.
    All Trump had to do is say he’s planning on appointing a committee to investigate the best way to create a board to advise on how to implement the accord…
    Same as Europe, China etc – nobody is really planning on carrying out the major aspects of the accord.
    It’s just to keep the snowflakes happy in their bubbles.

    Crowder (Wayne’s link) mentioned Germany.
    Most of Germany’s electricity comes from coal. Yes, “filthy, carbon spewing” coal.
    And they’re burning more coal than before because in the panic after Fukushima they closed their nuclear plants.
    If Germans seriously thought AGW was a major threat they would have kept the nuc plants open – how many people died in German nuc accidents? How many German nuc plants are in danger of being hit by a Tsunami?
    There is no logic here.

  • wayne

    Good stuff.
    I do agree that nobody really intends to implement a lot of this stuff, but it always us giving our money to other countries, first.
    Best to kill as much of this as is possible before it embeds itself permanently.
    Our SOS however, loves the idea of carbon taxes, and Priebus, Ryan, and Mitch, aren’t done with this topic yet. They will engineer a “better deal,” sometime in the future, from behind the scenes.

    Libertarian Podcast 6-1-17
    “Forget Paris”
    Richard Epstein from Hoover
    embedded soundcloud player, 17 minutes

  • Joe

    The world is insane!, the pro one world media are also insane, no one thinks the world is going to fry anytime soon, this is de facto one world government and communism in action. People that live in places that don’t value liberty and freedom think we are the ones who are insane, get a clue socialist and communist nations, you don’t get wealthy by making other people poor!

  • Edward

    With all these reactions predicting worldwide disaster, how soon should we be expecting the war (#1), the land to become barren desert (#2), the ice caps to melt and the oceans to cover the land (#3), life on Earth to actually end (#8, #11 and #12), race riots (#13), the end of the human race (#14), and the death of the last of our children (#15)? Next week? Next year? Sometime after the end of the coming ice age (due in any millennium)?

    wayne wrote: “They will engineer a “better deal,” sometime in the future, from behind the scenes.

    Even Trump said that he would negotiate a “better deal.” Why am I not surprised that Trump wants to negotiate and not surprised that he immediately watered down his AGW-skeptic position?

    However, the rest of the world has a take-it-or-leave-it position. This position coming from countries that could not conform to the very Kyoto Accords that the US rejected, and this position delivered to the US, one of the very few countries that actually did conform to Kyoto, despite rejecting it.

    When it comes to reducing and cleaning pollution and reducing CO2 emissions, the US is one of the leaders (although the EPA has worked hard to hopelessly pollute the Western US). It is the rest of the world’s countries that refuse to clean up their own acts, continue to burn down their own rain forests, and continue to manufacture at low costs due to lax pollution standards — then complain that the US does not do enough. Please compare Los Angeles with Beijing or Mexico City.

    Give me a break.

  • Cotour

    (#1), the land to become barren desert A: I would expect the fertility of the land to remain aprox. at the same percentage of fertility for much longer than humans in time will care about. The fertility may move around, but essentially for our discussion about the same, give or take depending on the mood and moment of the Milanchovich cycle.

    (#2), the ice caps to melt and the oceans to cover the land A: Since we are still processing through the end of the previous ice age and still in its warming cycle that will probably continue for the next 10 to 15 thousand years (?), I would expect the sea to rise 200 feet (?) in that time frame and then we will descend into the next ice age where about 400 feet of sea level will be redeposited on a good portion of the land for about another 100 thousand or so years of ice. And the cycle continues. So get a good wet suit and buy property several miles from the existing coast in the Southern part of the country for very little waiting for the day that it becomes ocean front.

    (#3), life on Earth to actually end A: “Life” in all of its forms is a tenacious infection on planet earth and will probably exist in some form until the earth has begun to be consumed by our sun in about 3 to 4 billion years(?).

    (#8, #11 and #12), race riots A: I would say that they will be anticipated in about 6 months to two years, but I do not believe that they will happen. Even the race argument is being seen by most to be a Leftist / Liberal tool of manipulation and a way to keep the minority masses in modern day slavery. Even the minorities are getting tired of the Liberal argument.

    (#13), the end of the human race A: Do you mean the “pure” human race or the manipulated and enhanced human race? The pure human race I would expect to be a rarity within the next 100 to 300 years (?). The manipulated and enhanced human race, I would estimate that it will essentially become some measure of eternal. What ever that might mean in a time measurement.

    (#14), and the death of the last of our children A: Again, 100 to 300 years (?).

  • Cotour

    I will revise the #14 answer as I reread it:

    The death of the last of “our” children. If you mean pure human un biologically or technologically enhanced or manipulated children I would say more like 300 plus years. Biologically or technologically enhanced human children I would have to say that they will be around in some form or another for “ever” or until a human can be cloned / grown fully functional and “programmed” for life. Now that will be weird, no childhood? What a concept.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *