Think of what we could do with $11.6 billion in useless 'climate change' spending

The U.S. government spent some $11.6 billion in 2014 on climate change research, technology, international assistance, and adaptation, according to the GAO (General Accountability Office).  This useless research actually harms Americans by advancing the ridiculous notion that mankind is responsible for the so-called warming of the Earth.  In fact, this idea is so foolish, given that the Earth has not warmed over the past approximately twenty years and we are now struggling today with record cold, that its proponents have changed their focus from global warming to extreme weather to climate change...always seeking the most effective way to scare people so as to assure a continued flow of pork.

It has not worked.

Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 survey respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem. 

Why not re-allocate these "low ROI" climate change funds to other, more desirable causes?  Let's review a list.

1. Border Wall.  There is no reliable price tag on completing construction on the border wall, but the Trump team has estimated the cost at $8 billion.  Recent congressional legislation pegged the number at $10 billion, and construction experts say it could be more than double that.  Let's assume they are correct and that the border wall will cost $20 billion and take ten years to finish.  No worries...Mexico will be paying long before that.  

2. A 355-Ship Navy.  With President-Elect Trump requesting more ships, the Navy is proposing the biggest shipbuilding boom since the end of the Cold War to meet threats from a saber-rattling China and obstreperous Iran.  Boosting shipbuilding to meet the Navy's 355-ship goal could require an additional $5 billion to $5.5 billion in annual spending in the Navy's 30-year projection, according to an estimate by naval analyst Ronald O'Rourke at the Congressional Research Service.  In addition to helping assure national security and the safe passage of global commercial shipping, a larger fleet would be better for both the sailors, who'd enjoy shorter deployments, and for the ships, which would have more down time for maintenance, said Matthew Paxton, president of the Shipbuilders Council of America, which represents most of the major Navy shipbuilders.

3. Permanent Moon Settlement.  NASA has estimated that building a permanent Moon base would cost $10 billion over the next five years.  The many benefits to establishing a base on the Moon include providing refueling stations that would save billions from future space missions – especially to Mars, which are planned for the 2030s – plus providing unique opportunities for scientific research and the testing of new technologies.

4. Trip to Mars.  Recently, the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee passed a bipartisan bill authorizing $19.5 billion for NASA to continue work on a future Mars mission, as well as efforts to transport astronauts on commercial rockets to the International Space Station from the U.S., reports USA Today.  According to the bill, NASA's official goal will be to launch a crewed mission to Mars within the next 25 years.  While it is unclear when this NASA funding bill will arrive on the floor of the full Senate, it is expected to pass once it does.

Let's add up the yearly costs of these four projects:

1.Border Wall ($20B over 10 years equals $2B per year)

2.355-ship Navy ($5.5B per year)

3.Permanent Moon Settlement ($10B over five years equals $2B per year)

4.Trip to Mars ($19.5B over 25 years equals $1B per year)

The total cost of these projects adds to about $10.5 billion yearly, which is substantially less than the $11.6 billion being wasted on climate change fraud.  There is even $1+ billion left over to kick-start Trump's $1-trillion infrastructure spending plan.  The fraudster scientists and engineers thrown out of their flimflam climate change racket can redeploy their skills to such useful exploits as improving fracking and horizontal drilling technologies, exploring space, and hardening our I.T. infrastructure against foreign hacking.  Otherwise, we hear there are some wonderful greeter jobs going begging.

The U.S. government spent some $11.6 billion in 2014 on climate change research, technology, international assistance, and adaptation, according to the GAO (General Accountability Office).  This useless research actually harms Americans by advancing the ridiculous notion that mankind is responsible for the so-called warming of the Earth.  In fact, this idea is so foolish, given that the Earth has not warmed over the past approximately twenty years and we are now struggling today with record cold, that its proponents have changed their focus from global warming to extreme weather to climate change...always seeking the most effective way to scare people so as to assure a continued flow of pork.

It has not worked.

Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 survey respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem. 

Why not re-allocate these "low ROI" climate change funds to other, more desirable causes?  Let's review a list.

1. Border Wall.  There is no reliable price tag on completing construction on the border wall, but the Trump team has estimated the cost at $8 billion.  Recent congressional legislation pegged the number at $10 billion, and construction experts say it could be more than double that.  Let's assume they are correct and that the border wall will cost $20 billion and take ten years to finish.  No worries...Mexico will be paying long before that.  

2. A 355-Ship Navy.  With President-Elect Trump requesting more ships, the Navy is proposing the biggest shipbuilding boom since the end of the Cold War to meet threats from a saber-rattling China and obstreperous Iran.  Boosting shipbuilding to meet the Navy's 355-ship goal could require an additional $5 billion to $5.5 billion in annual spending in the Navy's 30-year projection, according to an estimate by naval analyst Ronald O'Rourke at the Congressional Research Service.  In addition to helping assure national security and the safe passage of global commercial shipping, a larger fleet would be better for both the sailors, who'd enjoy shorter deployments, and for the ships, which would have more down time for maintenance, said Matthew Paxton, president of the Shipbuilders Council of America, which represents most of the major Navy shipbuilders.

3. Permanent Moon Settlement.  NASA has estimated that building a permanent Moon base would cost $10 billion over the next five years.  The many benefits to establishing a base on the Moon include providing refueling stations that would save billions from future space missions – especially to Mars, which are planned for the 2030s – plus providing unique opportunities for scientific research and the testing of new technologies.

4. Trip to Mars.  Recently, the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee passed a bipartisan bill authorizing $19.5 billion for NASA to continue work on a future Mars mission, as well as efforts to transport astronauts on commercial rockets to the International Space Station from the U.S., reports USA Today.  According to the bill, NASA's official goal will be to launch a crewed mission to Mars within the next 25 years.  While it is unclear when this NASA funding bill will arrive on the floor of the full Senate, it is expected to pass once it does.

Let's add up the yearly costs of these four projects:

1.Border Wall ($20B over 10 years equals $2B per year)

2.355-ship Navy ($5.5B per year)

3.Permanent Moon Settlement ($10B over five years equals $2B per year)

4.Trip to Mars ($19.5B over 25 years equals $1B per year)

The total cost of these projects adds to about $10.5 billion yearly, which is substantially less than the $11.6 billion being wasted on climate change fraud.  There is even $1+ billion left over to kick-start Trump's $1-trillion infrastructure spending plan.  The fraudster scientists and engineers thrown out of their flimflam climate change racket can redeploy their skills to such useful exploits as improving fracking and horizontal drilling technologies, exploring space, and hardening our I.T. infrastructure against foreign hacking.  Otherwise, we hear there are some wonderful greeter jobs going begging.

RECENT VIDEOS