· 3 min read
illuminem summarises for you the essential news of the day. Read the full piece on The Hill or enjoy below:
🗞️ Driving the news: Eighty-five climate scientists have published a comprehensive 450-page rebuttal to a Trump administration-backed Energy Department report that downplays the role of human activity in climate change
• The original report — released as part of efforts to overturn the EPA’s 2009 endangerment finding — claims that climate models are flawed, links between CO₂ emissions and climate change are weak, and that extreme weather lacks long-term trends
• The scientists’ review accuses the government report of cherry-picking data, misrepresenting findings, and omitting critical evidence
🔭 The context: The Energy Department's report, issued amid public comment, supports the Trump-era push to challenge the foundational EPA ruling that underpins U.S. climate regulations
• That 2009 finding legally established greenhouse gases as a threat to public health
• In response, climate scientists led by Texas A&M's Andrew Dessler and Rutgers University's Robert Kopp mobilized to offer a scientifically rigorous counterpoint, with wide academic participation and peer-reviewed sourcing
🌍 Why it matters for the planet: Undermining scientific consensus on climate change can weaken environmental policy, delay decarbonization efforts, and misinform public discourse
• The rebuttal reinforces the overwhelming evidence for human-driven climate change, accelerating sea-level rise, and the increasing intensity of extreme weather
• Accurate climate assessments are essential for informed policymaking, disaster preparedness, and long-term investment in sustainable infrastructure
⏭️ What's next: The Energy Department's report remains under public comment, after which it may be revised or used to inform regulatory decisions
• The scientists' review is expected to influence both public opinion and legal scrutiny surrounding the EPA’s endangerment finding
• Ongoing attention will likely focus on how the Biden administration or future governments respond to attempts to dilute climate policy under the guise of scientific reassessment
💬 One quote: “There’s a style throughout this of cherry-picking evidence that raises doubts about mainstream climate science while ignoring or downplaying the much larger body of evidence that supports it.” – Robert Kopp, Professor at Rutgers University
📈 One stat: The scientists' rebuttal spans over 450 pages—three times the length of the Energy Department’s 150-page report—addressing every section in detail with peer-reviewed sources and statistical analysis
Explore carbon credit purchases, total emissions, and climate targets of thousands of companies on Data Hub™ — the first platform designed to help sustainability providers generate sales leads!
Click for more news covering the latest on public governance
