'GOOD RIDDANCE': Trump dunks on climate alarmists over ridiculous doomsday scenario



President Donald Trump mocked climate alarmists on Saturday after another one of their doomsday scenarios was shown to be utter nonsense.

The admission by scientists that prompted Trump's derision is but the latest in a long series of embarrassments for those activists keen to use climate prophecies as an excuse to socially engineer human beings and regulate society.

Narrative collapse

The imagined threat of anthropogenic climate change has driven numerous public officials, scientists, and impressionable people bonkers in recent decades.

While Western politicians sacrificed energy security and hobbled industry in hopes of slowing natural phenomena and defeating the arch-villain carbon dioxide (plant food), similarly minded scientists proposed blotting out the sun; "culling" the emission-generating human population with a deadly pandemic; reducing or eliminating meat consumption; putting the population on a diet of bugs, weeds, and micro-algae; and having fewer children.

'Climate Activism has been used by Dumocrats to scare Americans, push horrible Energy Polices, and fund BILLIONS into their bogus research programs.'

This madness has been driven and exacerbated in large part by bogus claims and laughably wrong predictions. In most cases, all that's required to debunk such claims is time and a functional set of eyes.

Failed Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore, for instance, said at the Copenhagen Climate Conference in 2009 that new research indicated there was "a 75% chance that the entire North Polar ice cap during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years."

Just as Gore was wrong about a 20-foot rise in the global sea level "in the near future," polar bear drownings, and the snows of Kilimanjaro, he was wrong about the future of Arctic ice.

A paper published late last year in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Geophysical Research Letters concluded that over the past 20 years, "Arctic sea ice loss has slowed considerably, with no statistically significant decline in September sea ice area since 2005."

RELATED: Bizarre academic paper about releasing ticks resurfaces amid surging bites

Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis/Getty Images

If, perhaps, Gore confused the Arctic with the Antarctic, he'd still be wrong. Antarctica has enjoyed a massive gain in ice mass — at a rate of 119 billion tons per year from 2021 to 2023.

Polar ice is hardly the only planetary feature alarmists mistakenly suggested would fall victim to climate change.

Alarmists suggested in a 2017 study and elsewhere that climate change posed an existential threat to the world's coral reefs and that "immediate global action to curb future warming is essential to secure a future for coral reefs."

While dutifully claiming that "climate change mitigation" was still essential, researchers admitted in 2024 that "widespread and diverse coral species all exhibit the potential to adapt to the changing climate."

Former Jeffrey Epstein associate Bill Gates is one of the few alarmists to admit to having pie on his face.

Gates alleged in a 2021 work of climate alarmist agitprop that if humanity failed to eliminate so-called greenhouse gas emissions, "climate change will keep getting worse, and the impact on humans will in all likelihood be catastrophic."

After years of fear-mongering, he apparently felt compelled to admit that he too had gotten it wrong.

Gates noted in October that the "doomsday view of climate change" that says "cataclysmic climate change will decimate civilization" and that "nothing matters more than limiting the rise in temperature" is wrong.

UN wrong, again

The United Nations, like Gates a longtime proponent of climate hysteria, was recently confronted with evidence that it too is wrong.

The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project, an outfit led by a committee of top climate scientists, admitted in a study published last month in the journal Geoscientific Model Development that the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's worst-case future emissions scenarios are "implausible based on trends in the costs of renewables, the emergence of climate policy and recent emission trends."

Taking into account the world's future population, emission trends, energy sources, climate policies, and other factors, researchers have cooked up various climate scenarios for use in scientific modeling and activist propaganda.

In the early 2010s, such researchers developed a set of four scenarios for climate modeling, called "representative concentration pathways" or RCPs. The most extreme of these was RCP8.5.

The number 8.5 here signals the level of radiative forcing — the extra heat supposedly trapped in the Earth's system, expressed in watts per square meter — projected by the year 2100.

The IPCC projected in 2013 that under this scenario, there would be a temperature rise of 4.3°C by 2081-2100 when compared to the pre-industrial period.

Government of Canada

RCP8.5's successor, "shared socioeconomic pathway"-8.5, projected warming of 4.4°C by 2081-2100, with a "very likely" range of 3.3°C to 5.7°C, the Carbon Brief reported.

It was all nonsense.

Roger Pielke Jr., a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, noted, "The four scenarios were never apples-to-apples. They were four different fruits from four different trees. Yet, over more than a decade and in tens of thousands of papers, RCP8.5 was treated as where the world was headed and the other three scenarios — but especially RCP4.5 and 2.6 — as a world with climate policy interventions."

Despite numerous scientists stressing that the alarmist scenario was not only unlikely but misleading, the RCP8.5 scenario "came to dominate the literature to a degree that is impossible to overstate," Pielke said.

"RCP8.5 accounted for more than half of all RCP references in the 2018 U.S. Fourth National Climate Assessment, nearly 60 percent in the IPCC’s Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere, and about a third of all RCP references in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report," Pielke wrote. "By early 2020, researchers were publishing studies invoking RCP8.5 at a rate of roughly 20 per day. So far in 2026, studies using RCP8.5 (or its even more extreme successor, SSP5-8.5) are being published at a rate of ~30 new studies per day."

Now, the scientific community must contend with the acknowledgment that this scenario is bogus.

Science journalist Maarten Keulemans noted in a post that has been translated from its original Dutch, "The IPCC acknowledges what has been circulating for a long time: The highest disaster scenario, 8.5, no longer aligns with reality. WHAT CONSEQUENCES this has. ALMOST EVERYTHING YOU READ ABOUT CLIMATE FUTURE IS WRONG."

Keuleman suggested further that this admission effectively torpedoes claims that global surface temperature will increase 4-5°C by 2100; summers will all hit 104°F and agriculture in Western Europe will be unsustainable by century's end; tuna, swordfish, and other marine creatures will go extinct; there will be millions of climate refugees every year; and that there will be no more Winter Olympics by 2040.

Trump similarly weighed in, stating, "GOOD RIDDANCE! After 15 years of Dumocrats promising that 'Climate Change' is going to destroy the Planet, the United Nations TOP Climate Committee just admitted that its own projections (RCP8.5) were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!"

"For far too long Climate Activism has been used by Dumocrats to scare Americans, push horrible Energy Polices, and fund BILLIONS into their bogus research programs," the president continued. "Unlike the Dumocrats, who use Climate Alarmism nonsense to push their GREEN NEW SCAM, my Administration will always be based on TRUTH, SCIENCE, and FACT!"

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Digital ID mandate FORCED on UK citizens is a warning to America



British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has announced that the U.K. will force all workers to have a digital ID, which he claimed is a tool to help crack down on out-of-control immigration. But Blaze Media co-founder Glenn Beck is well aware that’s not the real purpose of the digital ID — and that Americans need to watch out for this kind of government response to similar issues.

“This government will make a new, free-of-charge digital ID mandatory for the right to work by the end of this parliament. Let me spell that out. You will not be able to work in the United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID,” Starmer said, addressing U.K. citizens.

“It’s as simple as that. Because decent, pragmatic, fair-minded people, they want us to tackle the issues that they see around them. And, of course, the truth is we won’t solve our problems if we don’t also take on the root causes,” he continued.


“Looking upstream to tackle poverty, conflict, climate change, issues that aren’t just intolerable for those of us who care about inequality and injustice where it’s found in the world, but which have clear consequences for our own citizens,” he added.

Glenn sees right through Starmer's attempt to explain the dystopian system away.

“They have a problem in England with people coming across the water and just invading the country. And then they’re taking all the jobs from, you know, decent Brits. And they haven’t stopped them, you know, they’re welcoming them in. They’re not turning them away. They’re not sending them back home or anything,” he says.

Instead of turning immigrants away or sending them back to solve the problem of illegal immigration, they’re implementing the digital ID.

“This is the way progressivism works. They create the idea and then they cause the problem so that they can go back and say, ‘We need to do this to solve this problem.’ OK? So they’ve caused the problem of illegal immigration. They’ve caused the problem of all of these things happening on their streets. But don’t worry, they’ve already designed the answer and it’s a digital ID,” Glenn says.

And what’s more worrisome, Glenn explains, is that the digital ID will “have complete control and oversight of your entire life.”

“They want digital ID to control the population. That’s what all of this is about. Control your every movement, your every thought, your every word. Control it, regulate it, and make sure that you’re kept in line,” he adds.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Trump Should Take Down The American Medical Association’s Licensing Grift

As a government-backed, overtly left-wing monopoly, the AMA no longer deserves a privileged role in the country’s health ecosystem.

Arabella Sheds Light On The Dark-Money Groups Remaking America Millions Of Dollars At A Time

The new book Arabella shows that the left’s network of influence far outpaces that of the right in areas such as elections, abortion, and climate activism.

Climate alarmist champions limiting families to one child; claims having more children is 'selfish'



Climate alarmists are becoming increasingly forthright about their hostility toward human life.

Donnachadh McCarthy, a failed politician involved in Just Stop Oil and one of the leading figures of Extinction Rebellion, recently went on British television to peddle depopulationist solutions to imagined problems. McCarthy suggested to GB News — just weeks after calling for Israeli forces to surrender — that "there is a moral issue" with having too many children and that families should be limited to one child.

When China adopted as policy the voluntary scheme McCarthy proposed Tuesday, it ended up with a half-billion dead children, a devastating sex ratio imbalance, and a demographic crisis. It's clear, however, that a similar population collapse is precisely what McCarthy and other alarmists want for the West.

McCarthy — who has previously shared a stage with photo opportunist Greta Thunberg — made clear that he regards children as mobile pollutants, citing disputed statistics as evidence.

"Every child in an industrial country like ours has around 505 hundred tonnes of carbon over their lifetime," said McCarthy, who has himself fed plants with his carbon dioxide for over 64 years. "That's equivalent to 1,000 years of electricity for a household. So each child has an impact, and we're saying one is great, two is plenty, and three is selfish."

McCarthy made clear that he is not only concerned about procreation in Western nations like the United Kingdom — which accounts for less than 1% of global carbon dioxide emissions. He similarly bemoaned the British government's apparent failure to do more to help the developing world abort its young.

"When women have access to family planning, rights to work and a right to education, the birth rate falls naturally," he said. "What I think is tragic is that the U.K. government have cut funds for girls in the developing world, and I think that is sad."

McCarthy appears to have been referring to the U.K.'s 2022 reduction in funding for foreign abortions, euphemistically referred to as sexual and reproductive health rights, by nearly a third.

The climate alarmist has long been a proponent of abortion, claiming that the pro-life position of the "patriarchal Abrahamic religions ... is a stain on human progress."

Despite his apparent desire to have the human population reined in, McCarthy's group Extinction Rebellion elsewhere claims to be a movement for the young dedicated to combating a system "contemptuous of humanity."

Nicole Ratcliff, a parenting coach on the GB News panel with McCarthy, said in response to the radical's depopulationist rhetoric, "I am one of four. I'm sorry, we've got a lovely family, and the idea that three is selfish is shocking."

"For me, I think if someone is choosing not to have children because of climate change, that is not somebody who is driven to have them," said Ratcliff. "The need to have children is something that is built within us, and if you are somebody that wants to have them, then you can't switch that urge off."

"There are people out there pending every single penny that they have got to have a child, and if they are made to feel guilty they are contributing to climate change — I feel quite offended by the idea that bringing a much-loved child into the world would be a bad thing to do," added Ratcliff.

— (@)

Like other radicals, McCarthy's climate hysteria has not only pitted him against big, happy families, but also againstdaily showers, affordable energy, holiday flights, road trips, water hoses, critics of communist China, meat, and pet ownership.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

U.S. Funding Pushes The World’s Poor Brown People To Kill Their Own Kids

Western governments prefer to provide nonessentials like contraception and abortion, undermining the pro-family cultures in many countries.

Kamala Harris declares US must 'reduce population' to combat climate change in yet another gaffe



Vice President Kamala Harris made yet another gaffe during a speech about green energy on Friday. In Kamala's latest slip-up, she accidentally said the United States needs to "reduce population" in order to combat climate change.

Harris gave a speech about "building a clean energy economy" at Coppin State University in Baltimore, Maryland.

Harris touted President Joe Biden's "ambitious goal" of reducing America's greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030 and having the U.S. economy reach net zero emissions by no later than 2050 — with or without approval from Congress.

She argued that the "climate crisis" is "one of the most urgent matters of our time," adding that we "must act" because "it is clear that the clock is not only ticking, it is banging."

Harris told the audience, "When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduce population, more of our children can breathe clean air and drink clean water."

— (@)

The words "reduce population" was a trending topic on Twitter on Saturday morning.

Many immediately interpreted the faux pas as a Freudian slip revealing a conspiracy theory that the government plans to carry out population control to fight climate change.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) asked, "Are you the population she wants to reduce?"

The White House website rushed to clarify the vice president's statement, noting that Harris meant to say "pollution" instead of "population."

Friday's verbal gaffe came just days after Harris was mocked for attempting to explain artificial intelligence.

"I think the first part of this issue that should be articulated is AI is kind of a fancy thing. First of all, it's two letters. It means artificial intelligence, but ultimately what it is, is it's about machine learning," Harris said on Wednesday during a roundtable discussion at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington, D.C.

On Tuesday, Harris made yet another head-scratching comment.

Kamala said, "This issue of transportation is fundamentally about just making sure that people have the ability to get where they need to go! It's that basic."

Earlier this month, Harris was ridiculed for her word salad explanation about what culture is.

Last month, Harris notched the worst net approval rating for a vice president in NBC News polling history.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

CBS kicks off new year with  'mass extinction' prediction from 'anti-human' depopulationist who spent his career being proven wrong



Biologist Paul Ehrlich, 90, has lived long enough to see his most dire predictions disproven, but evidently not long enough to reconsider his alarmist approach to demographics.

In a "60 Minutes" interview run on CBS Sunday night, Ehrlich suggested that a mass extinction — not wholly unlike the one he prophesied would take place in the 1970s but never happened — was under way.

Despite having had the primary claim in his magnum opus proven wrong by real-world trends, Ehrlich doubled down, concluding that the world now faces "too many people, too much consumption, and growth mania."

The biologist's remarks were subsequently denounced and ridiculed, with some critics suggesting that Ehrlich's "anti-human" rhetoric, which helped inspire China's one-child policy resulting in hundreds of millions of abortions, is as dangerous as it is still wrong.

What are the details?

Ehrlich is an American biologist and professor emeritus of population studies at Stanford University. Extra to being a member of the American Philosophical Society and a member of the Royal Society, he also served as a correspondent for NBC News.

Ehrlich told "60 Minutes" that the "rate of extinction is extraordinarily high now and getting higher all the time."

"Humanity is not sustainable," he claimed. "To maintain our lifestyle — yours and mine, basically — for the entire planet, you'd need five more earths. Not clear where they're gonna come from."

The biologist alleged that there are insufficient resources and waning biodiversity, such that "humanity is very busily sitting on a limb that we are sawing off."

In his popular 1968 book "The Population Bomb," Ehrlich suggested that hundreds of millions of people would soon perish from starvation on account of overpopulation.

As one partial remedy, he advocated for coercive population control, such as abortion and birth control, "if voluntary methods fail."

Big Think reported that at the 1974 UN World Population Conference, developing nations rejected coercive proposals to curb the population through eugenicist means, as proposed by Ehrlich, calling such bloody initiatives imperialist.

Ehrlich also predicted that civilization would meet its end in the 1970s; England would disappear by the year 2000; India was doomed; and American life expectancy would drop to 42 years by 1980.

These predictions clearly did not come true.

HumanProgress noted that contrary to Ehrlich's suggestions, the population rose from 3.5 billion in 1968 to 8 billion in 2022; the world produces record amounts of food; the global crude death rate has dropped by approximately 37%; and both London and India are still standing.

While American life expectancy has dropped in recent years, it stands at 76; 34 years higher than that foreseen by Ehrlich.

Scott Pelley, the reporter interviewing Ehrlich for "60 Minutes," conceded that contrary to the biologist's warning of widespread famine, "the green revolution fed the world."

Ostensibly holding out hope that some of Ehrlich's predictions might yet come true, Pelley noted that "he also wrote in '68 that heat from greenhouse gases would melt polar ice and humanity would overwhelm the wild. Today, humans have taken over 70% of the planet's land and 70% of the freshwater."

Researchers recently indicated in the journal Earth System Science Data that, contrary to Ehrlich's suggestion, only 14.6% of lands have been modified by humans across the globe.

A 2020 study suggested that roughly 50% of the earth's surface sees low human influence.

Ehrlich spoke to his evidently unwarranted 20th-century alarmism: "I was alarmed. I am still alarmed. All of my colleagues are alarmed."

No country for old men's anti-human alarmism

This renewed alarmism was not well received.

Andrew Follett, a senior analyst at the Club for Growth, stated, "Ehrlich has simultaneously the worst and most evil track record of any 'intellectual.' He's been consistently wrong about everything forever...and yet his 'ideas' appeal a lot to the elite because they think everyone who isn't them is yucky!"

\u201cCorrect.\n\nEhrlich has simultaneously the worst and most evil track record of any "intellectual."\n\nHe's been consistently wrong about everything forever...and yet his "ideas" appeal a lot to the elite because they think everyone who isn't them is yucky!\u201d
— Andrew Follett (@Andrew Follett) 1672693528

Steven Pinker, a Harvard professor and cognitive psychologist, wrote that he was "stunned to see always-wrong Paul Ehrlich softballed as an authority on imminent doom."

Media strategist Gabriella Hoffman tweeted, "Preservationist environmentalism like this poses a grave threat to people and nature. This thinking undergirds most climate alarmism too. Giving credence to Paul Erlich should instill doubt in one's credibility."

Jordan Peterson tweeted, "Paul Ehrlich has been famously wrong about everything he has predicted for six decades."

Twitter CEO Elon Musk responded, "His 'Population Bomb' book might the most damaging anti-human thing ever written."

\u201c@jordanbpeterson His \u201cPopulation Bomb\u201d book might the most damaging anti-human thing ever written\u201d
— Dr Jordan B Peterson (@Dr Jordan B Peterson) 1672631714

The Cato Institute's HumanProgress.org underscored how "Paul Ehrlich was wrong in 1968 and he's still wrong now," suggesting that CBS should be ashamed for "leaving his narrative unchallenged."

Marian Tupy, writing in HumanProgress, suggested that this is just the latest instance of "left-leaning media outlets" helping to normalize "their message of anti-humanism and anti-natalism."

William McGurn, the chief speechwriter for former President George W. Bush, wrote in the Wall Street Journal that Ehrlich's "crabbed worldview became an unquestioned orthodoxy for the technocratic class that seems to welcome such scares as an opportunity to boss everyone else around. In this way the missionary fervor once directed toward Christianizing the globe found its late-20th-century expression as proselytizing for population control."

McGurn suggested that "it turns out hell isn’t other people after all. To the contrary, human beings constantly find new and creative ways to take from the earth, increase the bounty for everyone and expand the number of seats at the table of plenty. Which is one reason Paul Ehrlich is himself better off today than he was when he wrote his awful book—notwithstanding all those hundreds of millions of babies born in places like China and India against his wishes."

Nazis And Eugenics Brought Us Chemical Abortion: Here’s Proof

Eugenic leaders laid the groundwork for today’s abortion industry, the majority of which in the U.S. is conducted through chemical abortion.

FACT CHECK: Did Vladimir Putin Say He Would Unveil The West’s ‘Depopulation’ Plan?

The quote is fabricated