By KIM BELLARD
Science buffs will recognize the title as the (possibly apocryphal) quote Galileo muttered after he was forced by the Catholic Church to recant his assertion that the earth moved around the sun, contrary to church dogma. We’re in an era where it is the Trump Administration, not the church, forcing people and organizations to accede to things they don’t really believe in, whether they are law firms, universities, media companies, or big corporations, to name a few.
That’s why I was so pleased when last week the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) not only didn’t take a knee about the Trump Administration’s dogma about climate change being a hoax, they also didn’t just mutter their objections. They issued a lengthy report outlining how climate change is very real, is largely due to human contributions, and is extremely bad for us and the planet.
And yet it moves indeed.
The NAS was spurred into action by an EPA announcement proposing to rescind an Endangerment Finding issued in 2009 by the Obama EPA. “With this proposal, the Trump EPA is proposing to end sixteen years of uncertainty for automakers and American consumers,” EPA Administrator Zeldin said.“In our work so far, many stakeholders have told me that the Obama and Biden EPAs twisted the law, ignored precedent, and warped science to achieve their preferred ends and stick American families with hundreds of billions of dollars in hidden taxes every single year.” He was practically giddy.
Not so fast, the NAS report says. Its overarching conclusion: “EPA’s 2009 finding that the human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases threaten human health and welfare was accurate, has stood the test of time, and is now reinforced by even stronger evidence.”
The report lists five key conclusions:
Emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from human activities are increasing the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere.
Improved observations confirm unequivocally that greenhouse gas emissions are warming Earth’s surface and changing Earth’s climate.
Human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases and resulting climate change harm the health of people in the United States.
Changes in climate resulting from human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases harm the welfare of people in the United States.
Continued emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities will lead to more climate changes in the United States, with the severity of expected change increasing with every ton of greenhouse gases emitted.
Pulling no punches, it says:
In summary, the committee concludes that the evidence for current and future harm to human health and welfare created by human-caused GHGs is beyond scientific dispute. Much of the understanding of climate change that was uncertain or tentative in 2009 is now resolved and new threats have been identified. These new threats and the areas of remaining uncertainty are under intensive investigation by the scientific community. The United States faces a future in which climate-induced harm continues to worsen and today’s extremes become tomorrow’s norms.
i.e., “And yet we are endangering ourselves, and the planet.”
Shirley Tilghman, professor of molecular biology and public affairs, emeritus, and former president, Princeton University, and chair of the committee that wrote the report, was more diplomatic: “This study was undertaken with the ultimate aim of informing the EPA, following its call for public comments, as it considers the status of the endangerment finding. We are hopeful that the evidence summarized here shows the strong base of scientific evidence available to inform sound decision-making.”
There was, of course, reaction. For example, Representative James Comer of Kentucky, the leading Republican on the House Oversight Committee wrote the NAS President to issue his concerns, calling the report “a blatant partisan act to undermine the Trump Administration.” Pretty much what I’d expect from him.
The current flap is very similar to the reaction to a “report” issued in July by a working group for the Department of Energy disputing climate change. That resulted in a scathing response by dozens of leading environmental scientists:
Our review reveals that the DOE report’s key assertions—including claims of no trends in extreme weather and the supposed broad benefits of carbon dioxide—are either misleading or fundamentally incorrect. The authors reached these flawed conclusions through selective filtering of evidence (‘cherry picking’), overemphasis of uncertainties, misquoting peer-reviewed research, and a general dismissal of the vast majority of decades of peer-reviewed research.
Meanwhile, EPA is telling its scientists to stop publishing until/unless its political appointees approve of the research, similar to what has happened at NIH and NSF. Science isn’t supposed to be political, and suppression of convenient scientific findings can only last so long. Just ask the Catholic Church about Galileo’s theory.
If you’re still on the fence about climate change and think maybe the EPA has a point, I want to point out a couple of related studies issued recently:
Production Gap 2025 report: this report, issued by Stockholm Environment Institute, the Climate Analytics thinktank and the International Institute for Sustainable Development, points out that, although many countries have publicly pledged to reduce use of fossil fuels, they’re generally planning to increase production over the coming decades – more than doubling the amounts consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5°C.
Indicators of Global Climate Change 2024: over60 scientists from all over the worldpublished this update, and as one of them said, “the news is grim.”
The report states: “The indicators show that human activities are increasing the Earth’s energy imbalance and driving faster sea-level rise compared to the AR6 assessment.” Its indicators include greenhouse emissions, surface temperature changes, global land precipitation, and sea level rise. The authors warn: “This is a critical decade: human-induced global warming rates are at their highest historical level, and 1.5 °C global warming might be expected to be reached or exceeded in around 5 years in the absence of cooling from major volcanic eruptions.”
Health losses attributed to anthropogenic climate change: this meta-study summarizes a number of studies attributing climate change to impacts on human health, and concludes: “A clearer picture of the global burden of climate change could encourage policymakers to treat the climate crisis like a public health emergency.”
———–
So, sure, you can believe climate change is a hoax and that what we’re seeing is just “weather,” just as you can believe in the Emperor’s new clothes. If so, I have a bridge n Brooklyn you can buy, or you can just invest in Trump crypto.
As for me, I’m standing up with the NAS and others who continue to speak up about inconvenient truths (so to speak).
