Trump Takes Climate Cues from Putin, Conspiracy Nutbag Jones

August 12, 2016

“And I’ll tell you it is surreal to talk about issues here on air and then word-for-word hear Trump say it two days later. It is amazing. And it just shows how dialed-in this guy is and that’s why they’re so scared of him.”
Conspiracy Nutbag Alex Jones

Donald Trump admires Vladimer Putin, denies climate change, and says he gets his foreign policy ideas from “watching the shows”.
If you wonder what shows he’s watching, see above.


Wildfires crackled across Siberia this summer, turning skies ochre and sending up enough smoke from burning pines to blot out satellite views of the 400-mile-long Lake Baikal.

To many climate scientists, the worsening fires are a consequence of Siberia getting hotter, the carbon unleashed from its burning forests and tundra only adding to man-made fossil fuel emissions. Siberia’s wildfire season has lengthened in recent years and the 2015 blazes were among the biggest yet, caking the lake, the “Pearl of Siberia”, in ash and scorching the surrounding permafrost.

But the Russian public heard little mention of climate change, because media coverage across state-controlled television stations and print media all but ignored it. On national TV, the villains were locals who routinely but carelessly burn off tall grasses every year, and the sometimes incompetent crews struggling to put the fires out.

While Western media have examined the role of rising temperatures and drought in this year’s record wildfires in North America, Russian media continue to pay little attention to an issue that animates so much of the world.

The indifference reflects widespread public doubt that human activities play a significant role in global warming, a tone set by President Vladimir Putin, who has offered only vague and modest pledges of emissions cuts ahead of December’s U.N. climate summit in Paris.

Russia’s official view appears to have changed little since 2003, when Putin told an international climate conference that warmer temperatures would mean Russians “spend less on fur coats” while “agricultural specialists say our grain production will increase, and thank God for that”.

The president believes that “there is no global warming, that this is a fraud to restrain the industrial development of several countries including Russia,” says Stanislav Belkovsky, a political analyst and critic of Putin. “That is why this subject is not topical for the majority of the Russian mass media and society in general.”

And with Russian media focused on the economic squeeze at home and events in Ukraine and Syria abroad, the absence of a robust media conversation on climate change means his scepticism goes largely unchallenged.

“It is difficult to spend editorial resources on things that are now a low priority in the midst of the economic crisis,” says Galina Timchenko, former editor-in-chief of the successful news site Timchenko now runs Meduza, a popular site that covers Russian news but devotes little space to climate issues.

“Unfortunately climate change is not very interesting to the public,” she says.

UPDATE: Climate is not the only issue that Trump cribs from Putin. See tweet from former US Ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul.



23 Responses to “Trump Takes Climate Cues from Putin, Conspiracy Nutbag Jones”

  1. […] via Trump Takes Climate Cues from Putin, Conspiracy Nutbag Jones — Climate Denial Crock of the Week […]

  2. webej Says:

    Jones does say some true things, e.g., “I start hyperventilating when I cover … issues.”

    There is no link between attribution of gas attacks in Damascus, CIA intervention in foreign countries and sponsoring of al-Qaeda (aptly named after the CIA’s data “base”), or Putin or Trump’s views on climate change. The idea that Trump is channeling Putin is bizarre, and smacks of conspiracy thinking. Issues should be separated and judged in terms of publicly available facts. There is, for example, no innate reason why conservative people cannot be convinced (many are) that conserving the earth is the overwhelming challenge of our time.

  3. Tom Bates Says:

    What the left establishment is doing is throwing mud at the wall and hoping some sticks. What Trump is doing is telling people truths even if the left does not want to hear it. Trump says the sky is blue and the left establishment says he wants to kill all non blue eyed babies. Lies, distortions and half truths are flying around like dirt in a tornado. Reminds me a lot of the lincoln campaign of 1860 with Trump being the Lincoln of today. Obama and Hillary helped start ISIS with their support of terrorist uprisings in Libya, Tunisia, Egypt and Syria. The killing of Gadhafi by Obama/Hillary was just icing on the cake and yes they conspired to kill him by destroying his army which was trying to keep order. Never mind that those very same forces were the people who rescued the survivors of Benghazi thanks to an army colonel who risked his career to get help while Hillary/Obama sat on their rear ends conspiring on how to contain the damage settling on a lie about a video.

    On climate, I am all for getting rid of pollution and making a better planet for my kids and yours. What I strongly object to is being told a lie about CO2 so the politicians can redistribute money to get reelected and get richer. In California the politicians have a new slush fund the cap and trade fund which is buying votes and doing zero to actually reduce pollution. NASA has a cause for long term warming. It is changes in earths tilt and orbit, 340 times more forcing than a NASA study found from CO2 increases which result in an increase of 0.08F.

    • I’ve just one word for Tom. Bollocks!

      • Probably, you can track the likely rise of an ISIS type uprising back to the colonial expansionism into Persia over the last few centuries. America supplying arms to Saddam, before he fell out of favour, by the likes of Raygun, certainly helped militarise the region. Then you have Saddams threat to oil supplies, with the Kuwait invasion, leading to GHW Bushs’ first gulf war, followed by the “Weapons of mass destruction” excuse for securing Iraqi resources by the second Bush. The unsuccessful attempt to create a model friedmanite neoliberal state basically left Iraq with a corrupt, nepotistic leadership creating the ideal vacuum for the rise of extremism. I won’t go into the climate related factors that fueled the Syrian uprising. In short, the Middle East would have been better off without their fossil hydrocarbon resource, certainly more peaceful!

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Here’s Tommy-Poo again, spouting his usual made-up BS and still not answering the questions that many of us have put to him MANY times.

      This is at least the second time Tommy-Poo has come up with this gem.

      “NASA has a cause for long term warming. It is changes in earths tilt and orbit, 340 times more forcing than a NASA study found from CO2 increases which result in an increase of 0.08F”.

      I will ask again ask for a source for this (for at least the second time).

      And doesn’t Tommy-Poo’s first paragraph sound exactly like Alex Jones? Is Tom Bates a pseudonym that Alex is hiding behind?

    • Mike Male Says:

      The politicians getting rich, dickhead, are the ones taking money from the very polluters you acknowledge are not “making a better planet for my kids and yours.” In return for that money they do their paymasters’ bidding to keep the status quo which is ruining the planet for my kids and yours.

      This continual weird internal juxtaposition you seemingly hold makes you a remarkable person and quite possibly insane.

      Oh and while you might claim an ad hom attack somehow negates my comment I’m just telling the truth……you know that thing you seem to demand of everyone? Dickhead.

    • Tommy-Poo,

      In an earlier comment thread here, you made this claim — do you remember it?

      …and only shows warming after that when they plug 66 percent of the data with estimates which are higher than the actual temperatures they replace.

      I proved you wrong by showing that the NASA warming trend can easily be replicated with raw data (no adjustments/estimates/etc.) Link here:

      When you continued to post here without retracting that completely false claim, I followed up with this:

      You also ignored that second request to retract your claim.

      And a third.

      And a fourth.

      And a fifth.

      And a sixth.

      So I’m following up with yet another request (this one is at least the seventh). Will you admit that you were wrong about NASA and how it processes temperature data?

      Every time you show up here, I am going to hit you with this. Every. Single. Time. And I won’t stop until you acknowledge that you were wrong.

      (Actually, I don’t really expect Bates to man up and admit that he was wrong; I’m simply using him as an example of how deniers are utterly and completely incapable of admitting error, even after they tell the most egregious whoppers).

    • Lionel Smith Says:


      NASA has a cause for long term warming. It is changes in earths tilt and orbit, 340 times more forcing than a NASA study found from CO2 increases which result in an increase of 0.08F.

      You are clearly behind the curve here for we understand the roll of orbital forcing as linked to the Milankovitch Cycle (first posited by Scottish scientist James Croll). The role of CO2, and other GHGs, in the atmosphere is also well understood from the micro scale of molecular dynamics to thermodynamic processes thus invoked.

      Maybe you have not heard of David Archer’s book and series of lectures under the title of ‘Global Warming: Understanding the Forecast’ it is to that latter I have just linked, a series of lectures also linked to some years back in a Real Climate post ‘A Gift’. There is therefore no excuse for your belligerently delivered ignorance.

      There are of course many other sources which could be cited, but I figure that is more than enough for you to swallow right now.

    • “What Trump is doing is telling people truths even if the left does not want to hear it.”

      I’m sure he did tell the truth, once or twice in his life.

  4. Trump is the Lincoln of today. That’s what someone here says. I won’t comment.

    • Lionel Smith Says:

      Trump the Lincoln of today, an old rust-bucket from which the wheels fell off.

    • ubrew12 Says:

      Ha Ha! Reminds me of a comment I read after Trump suggested Clinton be ‘dealt with’ by ‘the 2nd Amendment people’:
      “The Party of Lincoln has finally devolved into The Party of Booth.”

      • dumboldguy Says:

        I recently came across the fact that John Wilkes Booth was an investor in the original PA oil fields. He was also an early “fracker”, in that he used dynamite in 1864 to try to get a well to produce—–didn’t work and instead destroyed the well, causing Booth to lose ~$90,000 in today’s dollars, and resulted in him going home to MD to lick his wounds.

        Is it too crazy to think that Trump and Alex Jones might “trump” up some conspiracy theory about how “oil” was somehow behind the Lincoln assassination?

  5. Lionel Smith Says:


    “The Party of Lincoln has finally devolved into The Party of Wigs.”

    • dumboldguy Says:


      “The party of Swigs”, in that they have been drinking so many kinds of toxic Kool-Aid over the past 40 years, and especially so since Trump’s arrival. Trump’s “elixir” may prove to be fatal.

  6. So Trump and Jones are both tabloid bullshit sources…

    But it is an interesting thought…

    What is Russia’s/Putin’s position on Climate Change?
    This from RT (Russian Times)

    “We have gone beyond the target fixed by the Kyoto Protocol for the period from 1991 to 2012. Russia not only prevented the growth of greenhouse gas emission, by also significantly reduced it,” Putin said.

    “Nearly 40 billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent weren’t released into the atmosphere. As a comparison, the total emissions of all countries in 2012 reached 46 billion tons.”

    Russia is planning to keep progressing by bringing breakthrough technologies into practice, “including nanotechnology,” Putin continued saying the country is also open to exchange and share the findings.

    How much greenhouse gasses does Russia contribute?

    6% global emissions 2011

    What would you do if you had to look out for the best interest of Russian people and your economy????

    You are no longer a global super power but a small player….. (enough already of the “red scare” nonsense….. rolling my eyes at the attempted resurgence of the McCarthy Era bullshit….).

    Put yourself in Putin’s shoes….. thoughts anyone?

    • dumboldguy Says:

      No sane and moral person can put themselves in Putin’s shoes (or Trump’s). They are demagogues and oligarchs-plutovrats who care little for the “best interest(s)” of the Russian or American peoples and their economies beyond making money selling fossil fuels, and climate change be damned They really care only for their personal fortunes and those of the “mafias” that support them.

      Wake up and smell the BS in the RT link you provided, Louise. Putin stands up and talks about KYOTO? Russia LIVES by exporting fossil fuels to the rest of the world, and exports the emissions as well. Take a look at a more recent RT article that should get you “thinking” about how Putin and Russia regard climate change.

      “Russia tops Saudi Arabia as the world’s largest oil exporter” https”://

      Some excerpts:

      “Russia became the world’s leading oil and natural gas exporter last year, according to BP’s annual statistical review of world energy. The country has overtaken Saudi Arabia in crude exports, and retained the top spot in exports of natural gas.

      “Three-quarters of Russia’s oil production went for export in 2015. Exports of Russian gas reached 33.7 percent of overall production. The country also exported 41.8 percent of its coal”

      “Russia is the leading oil and gas supplier to Europe, accounting for 37 percent and 35 percent of European respective consumption,” said the report.

      “Russia’s oil production increased for the seventh consecutive year growing 1.2 percent in 2015 and reaching a new post-Soviet high of 11 million barrels per day.”

      “Energy production grew by 0.7 percent and the country accounted for 10 percent of the global primary energy output.

      “Energy consumption in Russia fell by 3.3 percent last year, yet it remained the fourth-largest energy consumer, behind China, the US and India.

      “Gas remained Russia’s leading fuel, with 52.8 percent of primary energy consumption, followed by oil (21.4 percent) and coal (13.3 percent).

      “According to Russian Federal Statistics Service Rosstat, the country’s oil production in March outpaced Saudi Arabia. Russian producers extracted almost 10.92 million barrels a day compared to 10.12 produced by Saudi Arabia.

      “Russia sold oil worth more than $10 billion through March this year, according to the data. Crude sales made up 23 percent of Russian exports compared to 25.2 percent in the same period of 2015.

      “The share of oil in the global economy will go down from 32 to 26 percent by 2040, while the share of gas as a more environmentally friendly energy source is expected to increase, according to Russian Energy Minister Aleksandr Novak.

  7. What is at question is Putin’s understanding and strategy for addressing climate change.

    Approx 14.5% of Russian GDP comes from direct oil and gas exports… and the total petroleum industry accounts for 26% of the Russian GDP.

    By comparison in 2014 the top four global producer of fossil fuel were has follows.

    Saudi Arabia 12.9% of Global Production
    Russia 12.6% of Global Production
    USA 12.1% of Global Production
    China 5% of Global Production

    So I think we are in agreement, there is no strategy to address climate change from any of the Global Leaders… (US, Russia, EU etc) lots of talk and rhetoric but that the end of the day no Nation will have the fortitude to stop the production and burning of fossil fuels.

    So sites like this are similar to the charter Don Quixote in the story “The Ingenious Knight of La Mancha”.

    We are tilting at wind mills….. (or are we?)

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: