On Wednesday afternoon, MSNBC host Chris Jansing provided a forum to liberal environmental activist Michael Mann to complain about the latest deregulation moves by the Donald Trump administration. She was also so eager to link earthquakes to global warming by hyping recent studies that even Professor Mann cautioned her against buying into it.
The MSNBC host began the segment by recalling that, earlier in the day, unusually strong earthquakes had created a tsunami in the Pacific Ocean and then noted recent extreme weather like heat waves and deadly flooding before then fretting about new moves by the Trump administration: "The reality of these repeated and supercharged climate disasters come as the Trump administration is moving to overturn the legal opinion that serves as the basis for virtually all regulations to curb climate change."
After bringing aboard her liberal guest, Jansing cued him up to bash the move to cut regulations:
CHRIS JANSING: What exactly is the Trump administration trying to take away here?
PROFESSOR MICHAEL MANN, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: Thanks, Chris. It's good to be with you, and, well, what they're trying to take away from us essentially is the right to a livable planet. And it's ironic at a time when they're trying to eliminate the endangerment finding which was this monumental finding by the Supreme Court that climate change represents a danger to human health -- not just the health of human beings but, in fact, the health of our planet.
Mann then added:
And so this has been the law for the better part of two decades now, and at a time when, as you already alluded to here, we're seeing mortality tied to extreme weather events, floods, heat waves, wildfires that have been made worse by climate change. So there is a direct linkage between climate change and human life and, of course, human health as well. It's clear that we are endangered by the continued warming of the planet from the continued burning of fossil fuels. And that's what this administration now is essentially trying to deny with this new development.
After the MSNBC host then played a clip of EPA administrator Lee Zeldin complaining about the costs of environmental regulations, Mann complained that Zeldin has a "conflict of interest" in having ties to the fossil fuel industry and argued that failing to prevent climate change would have economic costs. Jansing then followed up by trying to link earthquake intensity to global warming:
So this morning when I woke up to all of the news about the 8.8 earthquake in Russia and then the effects it was having on the West Coast -- Hawaii, Alaska, California -- there is some research now suggesting -- a study recently, for example, by the Colorado State University, climate change can affect the frequency of earthquakes. There is more and more research looking into climate change and how it can alter the earth's seismic cycle.
She added:
And we've already seen -- and experts like you have come on this program and talked about how this frequency of these events related to climate change are increasing faster than a lot of people thought. They're getting worse more quickly than a lot of people thought. What would it mean if then you take away the protections? What would it mean for the frequency of these kinds of catastrophic -- potentially catastrophic events?
Mann suggested that she was making too much of the studies as he otherwise continued linking global warming to other disasters.
Transcript follows:
MSNBC's Chris Jansing Reports
July 30, 2025
1:26 p.m. Eastern
CHRIS JANSING: Today tsunami waves hit Hawaii and California after one of the strongest earthquakes ever recorded struck off the coast of Russia. And while the worst is now over, advisories are still in place with warnings that rapid swings in the tidal levels could create exceptionally dangerous conditions. At the same time, a different type of danger in the Southeast as record-breaking, oppressive heat continues. For areas like the Northeast, today is expected to be the biggest drain on the power grid -- heat so intense it prompted hours of delay on the New York City subway.
Plus, 15 million people today are under flood watches. Scenes of catastrophic flooding haunt Texas just three weeks after punishing floods took more than 130 lives. ... The reality of these repeated and supercharged climate disasters come as the Trump administration is moving to overturn the legal opinion that serves as the basis for virtually all regulations to curb climate change.
Joining me now, Michael Mann, the Presidential Distinguished Professor and director of the Penn Center for Science, Sustainability, and the Media. His new book, Science Under Siege, is out in September. Welcome back, Michael. What exactly is the Trump administration trying to take away here?
PROFESSOR MICHAEL MANN, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: Thanks, Chris. It's good to be with you, and, well, what they're trying to take away from us essentially is the right to a livable planet. And it's ironic at a time when they're trying to eliminate the endangerment finding which was this monumental finding by the Supreme Court that climate change represents a danger to human health -- not just the health of human beings but, in fact, the health of our planet.
And so this has been the law for the better part of two decades now, and at a time when, as you already alluded to here, we're seeing mortality tied to extreme weather events, floods, heat waves, wildfires that have been made worse by climate change. So there is a direct linkage between climate change and human life and, of course, human health as well. It's clear that we are endangered by the continued warming of the planet from the continued burning of fossil fuels. And that's what this administration now is essentially trying to deny with this new development.
JANSING: So the question becomes why, and the EPA administrator, Lee Zeldin, talked about why it's being rolled back. Listen.
LEE ZELDIN, EPA ADMINISTRATOR (from the Ruthless podcast): We want to be good stewards of the environment. There are people who then, in the name of climate change are willing to bankrupt the country. (editing jump) They created this endangerment finding, and then they're able to put all these regulations on vehicles -- on airplanes -- on stationery sources -- to basically regulate out of existence, in many cases, a lot forms of -- segments of our economy. And it costs Americans a lot of money.
JANSING: So the administration says this is a money problem. Is it?
MANN: It's ironic, and, you know, it's convenient for, you know, Lee Zeldin to say that given that he comes out of the fossil fuel industry. So, arguably, there's a bit of a conflict of interest when it comes to policies that impact the fossil fuel industry. But the real irony here is the true threat to our economy -- not just our health but our economy -- even if you don't care about the human health consequences of climate change. If all you care about is the economy, it is very clear from the research that has been done from authoritative reports by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and other expert reports and peer-reviewed literature that demonstrate that the cost of inaction -- the cost to the economy done by these unprecedented weather extremes in the hundreds of billions of dollars now outstrips any possible estimate of the cost of taking the action.
And, indeed, even framing it as a cost of taking action is ironic because, you know, when we invest in fossil fuel industry -- fossil fuel infrastructure, these people are happy. They call it an investment, but somehow investing in renewable energy -- which is not harmful to the planet in the way fossil fuel energy is -- they call that a cost. So there is an inconsistency even in how they're framing it. This is an investment. It's an investment in renewable energy in a clean energy transition that's good for the economy, it's good for jobs, and it preserves the livability of our planet. And it's crazy that, at a time like this, that they're trying to take us backwards.
JANSING: So this morning when I woke up to all of the news about the 8.8 earthquake in Russia and then the effects it was having on the West Coast -- Hawaii, Alaska, California -- there is some research now suggesting -- a study recently, for example, by the Colorado State University, climate change can affect the frequency of earthquakes. There is more and more research looking into climate change and how it can alter the earth's seismic cycle. And we've already seen -- and experts like you have come on this program and talked about how this frequency of these events related to climate change are increasing faster than a lot of people thought. They're getting worse more quickly than a lot of people thought. What would it mean if then you take away the protections? What would it mean for the frequency of these kinds of catastrophic -- potentially catastrophic events?
MANN: Yeah, well, with these geophysical events, that's a pre-tentative linkage, and so there really isn't a scientific consensus that climate change is making earthquakes, for example, worse. But it is clearly making all of these other devastating disasters -- heat waves, wildfires, floods, superstorms that are costing us, again, in the tens to hundreds of billions of dollars a year now -- there is no question that climate change is exacerbating those hazards, and, in fact, some of my own research demonstrates that the climate models that we use today to project the future are probably underestimating the extent to which climate change is exacerbating these very persistent weather extremes that we see now summer after summer.
JANSING: Michael Mann, your expertise is always invaluable on days like this. Thank you so much, and I have a feeling you're going to have to update the book on an ongoing basis, but we look forward to seeing it next month when it comes out. Thank you.
