At the 2025 United Nations General Assembly, President Donald Trump used his address to deliver one of his most provocative environmental pronouncements to date—labeling climate change activism a “con job” and “green scam.”
His return to the UN stage after a six-year hiatus was marked by tension: he defied the customary 15-minute limit (speaking nearly 57 minutes) and repeatedly challenged both the institution and multilateral climate frameworks.
What Trump Argued: Themes of His Climate Denial
In his address, Trump wove climate skepticism into a broader critique of immigration, European energy policy, and internationalism.
Climate change as a global “con job”: He asserted that climate predictions by the UN and other bodies were wrong, said to have been made by “stupid people,” and claimed they have inflicted economic damage on countries.
Renewables dismissed: Trump ridiculed wind and solar energy, calling them a “joke,” “pathetic,” or “scam,” asserting they are unworkable, overpriced, or overly dependent on subsidies and foreign supply chains (especially China).
Promotion of fossil fuels: He invited nations to buy U.S. oil and gas, praised “clean, beautiful coal,” and argued that traditional energy sources are the foundation of prosperity and national strength.
Linking climate policy to economic decline: Trump contended that carbon regulation, energy transitions, and “green” mandates are deindustrializing nations—especially Europe—and weakening sovereignty.
Delegitimizing climate science: He claimed future climate predictions were similarly flawed, dismissed the idea of a “carbon footprint” as a hoax, and urged leaders to “get away from this green scam.”
One passage in his talk went:
“This ‘climate change,’ it’s the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion. … All of these predictions made by the United Nations and many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong. They were made by stupid people … If you don’t get away from this green scam, your country is going to fail.”
He also targeted Europe:
“Immigration and the high cost of so-called green renewable energy is destroying a large part of the free world and a large part of our planet.”
Trump argued that U.S. or European efforts won’t matter because China will continue to emit—that “what we do is irrelevant.”
Renewables as ineffective or too expensive
Trump’s claim that renewables “don’t work” or are too costly also misrepresents the state of the energy market. The Council on Foreign Relations notes that wind and solar costs have plunged—onshore wind by ~70 % and solar by ~80 % in recent decades—and are now among the cheapest sources of new electricity in many countries.
While some European nations face energy challenges, attributing all to green policies oversimplifies complex interactions—market design, grid constraints, reliance on fossil fuels, geopolitical supply disruptions, and transitions all play roles. Trump’s causal link is overstated.
Climate science instead states that every ton of greenhouse gas avoided helps slow warming, and that developed nations bear disproportionate responsibility for cumulative emissions.
Some Grains Of Truth, But Heavily Distorted
It is fair to acknowledge that energy transitions involve trade-offs: infrastructure costs, intermittency, supply chains, and economic disruption in fossil fuel sectors are real challenges. But those are actively addressed by researchers, engineers, policy instruments, and market innovations—challenges are not evidence that the whole enterprise is a scam.
Thus, while Trump’s speech uses kernels of real issues, his framing overwhelmingly tilts toward caricature, exaggeration, and misdirection. In short: it is mostly a rhetorical, ideologically charged posture rather than a balanced or evidence-based analysis.
Expert Comments on President Trump’s Speech
Science media center has carried several expert responses to Presidents Trump speech, some of which were:
Prof Corinne Le Quere FRS, Professor of Climate Change Science, University of East Anglia (UEA), said:
“Mr Trump is endangering the lives and wellbeing of Americans and people around the world by wrongly denying the realities of climate change. We should be working together to protect people and businesses by limiting climate change as much as possible and adapting to reduce its widespread impacts.”
Dr Chris Huntingford of the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, said:
“All those involved in climate change research begin with the premise that climate is not changing, the so-called “null hypothesis”. Only after rigorous data analysis and conducting extremely careful physics-led simulations do we consider the “alternative hypothesis” that change is occurring. Unfortunately, as hard as we try to prove otherwise, almost every data stream aligns with calculations indicating the alternative hypothesis: the world is warming in response to greenhouse gas emissions.”
Prof Joeri Rogelj, Director of Research, Grantham Institute, Imperial College London, said:
“Dismissing climate change is as grotesque as it is wrong. Refusing to believe in thermometers will not make the warming go away. The evidence — measured, observed and understood — is clear: human activities are heating the planet, and ignoring that reality only leaves societies more exposed and less prepared.”
Meanwhile at the international level, many nations are updating their greenhouse gas targets ahead of COP30, with a push to accelerate clean energy investment and strengthen climate finance.
The Data Of Course Shows Alarming Trends
Today, the consensus in climate science remains robust: the planet is warming, humans are the dominant cause, and rising heat, extreme weather, sea level rise, and ecosystem stress are intensifying.
Global temperatures have been rising, ice sheets are losing mass, extremes (heatwaves, floods, droughts) are growing more frequent and intense, and many vulnerable countries—particularly small islands and low-lying coasts—are already experiencing existential threats.
Trump’s UN speech is unlikely to derail the global climate agenda, but it does represent a bold pivot in U.S. posture. The Council on Foreign Relations suggests that although U.S. influence is weakened in this domain, many other countries will press ahead with clean energy transitions regardless.
The Takeaway
Globally, leaders at UN forums and climate summits have responded by reaffirming commitments and even expanding pledges, seeking to use Trump’s rhetoric as a catalyst to double down rather than retreat.
Domestically, Trump’s climate policy trajectory is matched by funding cuts to agencies tied to climate and earth science. For instance, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) saw funding reductions, and climate adaptation center funding was also curtailed. Whether Trump’s rhetoric represents the start of a lasting realignment or a temporary diversion remains to be seen—but his denunciation of climate action ensures that the U.S. will remain a focal point of tension and debate in coming climate diplomacy
Hi, I’m Andrew, and I come from India. Experienced content specialist with a passion for writing. My forte includes health and wellness, Travel, Animals, and Nature. A nature nomad, I am obsessed with mountains and love high-altitude trekking. I have been on several Himalayan treks in India including the Everest Base Camp in Nepal, a profound experience.
