Andy Miller

Nice article on the phys.org site summarizing a detailed rebuttal by Santer et al. of one of the erroneous claims in last year's deeply flawed DOE report. As Santer notes, the report is still on the DOE website, implying (incorrectly) that the report meets federal information quality requirements.

Just wild speculation, but my guess is that DoD would handily defeat CPB in a real fight.

Excellent article from @sundogplanets.mastodon.social.ap.brid.gy describing why we need to think of near-Earth orbit as part of our environment and what we need to do to protect it.

EPA Repeals The Legal Basis For Regulating Greenhouse Gases The endangerment finding forced the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Now, the agency says it doesn’t have the authority to do that.

Excited to let you all know that I had the chance to talk about the Endangerment Finding with @flichtman.bsky.social on @scifri.bsky.social! It's up on their website now: www.sciencefriday.com/segments/epa...

Linking Arctic variability and change with extreme winter weather in the United States Arctic climate change is a likely cause of recent episodes of extreme winter cold in the United States.

www.science.org/doi/10.1126/...

Another outstanding post by @marcusmarcusrc.bsky.social. I especially liked his analogy of climbing a mountain when describing EPA's flimsy "margin of error" argument: just because your GPS doesn't show a change when you take one step up the mountain doesn't mean that the step isn't real or helpful.

Through the Looking Glass - The De Minimis Deception Thoughts after the first week, and why 0.037°C is not “too small to matter”

I made one more post on Endangerment to address the week's news and the de minimis argument in more depth. Starting next week, I hope to begin posting on non-Endangerment subjects! thesaraphreport.substack.com/p/through-th...

Trump EPA Abandons Climate Working Group Report in Endangerment Finding Repeal Emails from the hand-picked, secretive group of climate crisis deniers revealed flaws in their methods and “animus” toward leading scientists.

An excellent dive into the emails of the Climate Working Group by @sharonkelly.bsky.social and the @desmog.com team. For a group who thought highly of their own observational skills, they should have seen up front that they'd eventually be thrown under the EPA bus.
www.desmog.com/2026/02/13/t...

This administration's wholesale demolition of science reminds me of the line from the Chernobyl miniseries: "Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." We're building up an enormous debt to the truth. Paying that debt is (and will be) even more costly.

GovInfo Official Publications from the U.S. Government Publishing Office.

You might find this document of interest - it's House of Representatives hearings about pollution control in general, but quite a few discussions of CO2 as a pollutant. 1966 (!)
www.govinfo.gov/app/details/...

GOP support for science has always been contingent on the topic. Perhaps they're less willing to throw out the entire field of science, but they've long been willing to severely limit parts of it (e.g. climate mitigation) when the findings became too uncomfortable for their patrons.

I also note that he used simplified climate models to generate EPA's estimates of how much the rule would affect temps and SLR, going in detail to explain that the simplified models were considered valid compared to the full versions. When it counts, Zeldin loves the consensus climate science.

Trump Administration Announces That We Don’t Know Where the Sun Goes at Night After deciding carbon dioxide does no harm, it was the logical next move.

Thanks to the Trump administration, you can now just decide that you don’t know things—even if you do know them, @petridishes.bsky.social writes:

I've never heard it before. I grew up in northern NM, which has lots of ties to TX and OK. I'd think that if it had been big in TX/OK, we'd have heard it in NM.

All of this is spot-on, but @andrewdessler.com's final point is the most critical from a climate science perspective. The DOE report was their best shot against mainstream climate science. It failed miserably and publicly when put to the acid test of legal acceptability.

The repeal is not good, but their removal of the science from the legal document is nothing less than a win for science. Don't let them convince you otherwise - the reality is that they took their best shot at undermining the science and were forced to admit they couldn't do it.

a white flag is waving in the wind against a grey background Alt: a white flag is waving in the wind against a grey background

In their final Endangerment Finding rule, EPA dropped their reliance on the DOE climate report "in light of concerns raised by some commenters." Despite their best effort, when it mattered most, EPA has effectively and officially conceded that the consensus climate science is correct. 🍾‼️

Final Rule: Rescission of the Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding and Motor Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards Under the Clean Air Act | US EPA The final rule on the reconsideration of the greenhouse gas endangerment finding and motor vehicle rule.

Here's the link to the actual rule rescinding the Endangerment Finding and vehicle GHG standards, for all those interested:
www.epa.gov/regulations-...

It hasn't been posted to the Federal Register, so the actual rule won't be on EPA's website. Not likely to happen until tomorrow.

ICE's Masks Are All a Lie Working for ICE is actually less dangerous than being an elementary school student in America.

Another excellent essay by @vermontgmg.bsky.social about ICE/CBP, this one about their use (or abuse) of masks.
www.doomsdayscenario.co/p/ice-s-mask...

Yes - an excellent article. But they're not as close to "total victory" as they imagine.

Political appointees could *always* override the civil servants. It's just that the politicals hate being embarrassed when lowly civil servants show that the politicals' 'evidence' is fabricated, wrong, and contrary to law. No reason for this rule beyond the fear of being outed as frauds.

Great to see my former colleague Bryan Hubbell is wasting no time in contributing to important work at @rff.org with this excellent report on the Zeldin EPA's decision to ignore the monetized health benefits of reducing air pollution.

Thrilled to see this paper, especially by someone with the stature of @gruberte.bsky.social. The inability to linearly reduce production to zero (or even close) is an issue that's been ignored by big energy system analyses and has enormous implications for energy and petro products more broadly.

That's it.

MAYBE the announcement (not a rule) against the Make Sunsets boys and their "geoengineering" performances releasing SO2 into the stratosphere? They were definitely operating at the gram/ounce scale...

One of my all-time favorite abstracts is from a 2013 Pindyck paper (NBER 19244), "Climate Change Policy: What Do the Models Tell Us?" The abstract answers: "Very little."

Six Ways to Reform ICE and CBP And why congressional "reform" isn't actually the real problem....

The problem of ICE/CBP reform is we have a monster rampaging through our democracy and are trying to restrict *which* cities it can pillage and *how many* civilians it can eat. The problem isn’t the restrictions on the monster; the problem is the monster. www.doomsdayscenario.co/p/six-ways-t...

It's clear from the emails that the authors knew they needed external review, and even discussed having NASEM conduct the review. They understood what the process was supposed to be, but I suspect were told from on high that would take too long.

I'm pretty sure "EPA staff" does not mean the same thing as during non-Trump administrations. In other administrations, it generally referred to long-term career staff with a few appointees. Now it's probably the cadre of appointees, with a few career staff who have no choice (or say) in the matter.