1 dead, 2 wounded after shooting at New Hampshire country club: Police
New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office
(NASHUA, N.H.) — One man was killed and several people were wounded after a shooting at a New Hampshire country club Saturday evening, authorities said.
It happened at the Sky Meadow Country Club in Nashua when a man entered the club and fired several gunshots, according to the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office.
A “person of interest” in the shooting was detained at the scene by police officers, according to Peter Hinckley, senior assistant attorney general, who spoke to reporters during a news conference Saturday night.
Authorities said there was no further danger to the public.
Attorney General John M. Formella and Nashua Police Department Chief Kevin Rourke later released a statement naming the suspect as Hunter Nadeau, 23.
The victim was named as Robert Steven DeCesare, 59. Two other adults were shot and wounded, the statement said. There is “no known connection” between the suspect and the victim, Formella and Rourke said.
Nadeau was charged with one count of second-degree murder, the statement said. “Additional charges likely will be brought, including for the additional shooting victims,” the statement added.
Nadeau is expected to be arraigned in Nashua on Monday, Formella and Rourke said.
Initially, Nashua police said two armed suspects fled the scene of the shooting and that one was at large, but they later said surveillance video confirmed there was only one shooter.
The country club contains a golf course, a wedding venue and a restaurant. Authorities did not specify the exact location of the shooting.
A nearby Sheraton Hotel was being used as a unification site.
Nashua Mayor Jim Donchess said he was saddened by the shooting and thinking of the families affected.
“I’ve heard from other mayors in other places of course … It had always crossed my mind, ‘Well, it’s unlikely ever to happen in Nashua.’ But now it has,” he told reporters during the news conference. “And I think the message is for every community out there: No matter how unlikely it seems, it can happen. It can happen where you live.”
Nashua is a city of about 92,000 people in southern New Hampshire near the border with Massachusetts.
“As we learn more about tonight’s shooting in Nashua, my heart goes out to the families of those impacted,” New Hampshire Sen. Maggie Hassan said in a post on social media. “And I’m grateful for the work of the law enforcement officers and first responders at the scene.”
(ASBURY PARK, N.J.) — A lifeguard is in the hospital after she was impaled by an umbrella at a New Jersey beach on Wednesday morning, officials said.
The woman was found on the ground near the lifeguard stand with an umbrella stake that had pierced the front of her left shoulder and was sticking out the back of her arm by about 1 foot, Asbury Park Fire Chief Kevin Keddy told ABC News.
She was being treated by her fellow lifeguards, Keddy said, and when the fire department officials arrived they took over and stabilized her. The fire department responders also cut the umbrella stake in the front and in the back to make the wound more manageable, he said.
Paramedics then responded and took the lifeguard to a hospital, Keddy said, adding she was conscious and alert the whole time.
“She’s a tough young woman,” the chief said.
The circumstances surrounding the impalement were not immediately clear, but Keddy said his advice to beachgoers is to always make sure umbrellas are placed securely in the sand and are carried with the point down.
(NEW YORK) — New York City police are searching for the suspect who killed a 77-year-old man and a 78-year-old woman by stabbing them and setting them on fire in their Queens home, likely while searching for property to steal, sources said.
Neighbors reported a man knocking on doors on Monday, asking to charge a cell phone, with at least one neighbor turning the man away before he approached the victim’s house, the sources told ABC News.
Detectives believe they have identified the suspect, who has an extensive criminal record and was released from prison in 2023, sources said.
Surveillance video showed the suspect knocking on the victims’ back door and the 77-year-old victim opening it and letting him in around 10:15 a.m., according to sources.
Detectives believe the suspect spent five hours in the victims’ house, according to sources, likely searching for property to steal before setting it ablaze.
Surveillance video also showed the suspect leaving the home at 3:08 p.m., shortly before the house went up in flames, sources said.
Neighbors called the victim’s son, a New York City Fire Department paramedic who was off duty at the time of the fire, who rushed home to discover his parents dead, sources said.
The fire department responded to the location and put the fire out, the New York Police Department said in a statement. EMS pronounced both victims deceased at the scene.
The woman was found lying on the first floor and accelerant appeared to have been poured on her body, starting the fire, sources said.
The man was found in the basement where he was tied with bungee cords to a column supporting the house, sources said. He was also set on fire but that fire appeared to have extinguished itself, sources said.
The suspect is described as a male, with a dark complexion, approximately 30 to 40 years of age, medium build, and was last seen wearing a black hat, a black jacket, blue jeans, and black sneakers, according to the NYPD.
Anyone with information regarding this incident is asked to call the NYPD’s Crime Stoppers Hotline at 1-800-577-TIPS (8477) or for Spanish, 1-888-57-PISTA (74782). The public can also submit their tips by logging onto the Crime Stoppers website at https://crimestoppers.nypdonline.org, or on X @NYPDTips.
A sign marks the U.S. Department of Energy Headquarters Building on April 13, 2025, in Washington, DC. (J. David Ake/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A group of more than 85 climate scientists released a critical review of a recent U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) report on climate change, finding it “biased, full of errors, and not fit to inform policymaking.”
The DOE report, compiled by the agency’s “2025 Climate Working Group,” a five-person panel hand-picked in March by Energy Secretary Chris Wright, was released in late July alongside a proposed regulatory repeal of the Environmental Protection Agency’s “Endangerment Finding.”
In 2009, the EPA issued an Endangerment Finding determining that human-amplified climate change poses a threat to human health and safety, which became the basis for its regulation of greenhouse gas emissions.
“The rise of human flourishing over the past two centuries is a story worth celebrating. Yet we are told, relentlessly, that the very energy systems that enabled this progress now pose an existential threat,” Wright said at the time of the report’s release.
The Climate Working Group, which is at the center of a lawsuit against the Trump administration alleging it was improperly formed, operated without transparency and engaged in unlawful activities, began preparing its findings in early April and compiled the report in about two months.
The conclusions in the report are a stark contrast to well-known climate assessments, such as those from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and U.S. National Climate Assessment, which include contributions from thousands of scientists around the world and undergo a rigorous years-long process of open and independent review.
The IPCC found that “Human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming.” The U.S. National Climate Assessment determined that “Human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gases, have unequivocally caused global warming” and that “without deeper cuts in global net greenhouse emissions and accelerated adaptation efforts, severe climate risks to the United States will continue to grow.”
The release of the DOE report met swift backlash from veteran climate scientists who were critical of the findings, the process and the people selected for the working group. Dozens of members of the climate science community then got together to prepare a detailed, public rebuttal of the DOE report.
“This report makes a mockery of science. It relies on ideas that were rejected long ago, supported by misrepresentations of the body of scientific knowledge, omissions of important facts, arm waving, anecdotes, and confirmation bias. This report makes it clear DOE has no interest in engaging with the scientific community,” Andrew Dessler, a climate researcher at Texas A&M University, who helped organize the effort, said.
Experts involved in reviewing the report said that it includes “biased assessments” and “fundamentally flawed” arguments. They pointed out that the DOE report was produced by a small, hand-picked group, often writing outside their expertise, which led to basic factual errors. The report lacked peer review, was developed in secret, and showed no accountability to public input, these experts said in their review.
According to the rebuttal report, the DOE team “selectively cites outdated or discredited studies” and “misrepresents mainstream sources” of climate science. Reviewers also raised concerns that the report was purposely designed to support a predetermined policy agenda, particularly to undermine the EPA’s Endangerment Finding, rather than to offer an objective scientific assessment.
The DOE report claims that climate models used by scientists overestimate warming trends, that long-term trends for disasters generally don’t show much change and the economic impacts of carbon emissions are “negligible.” The DOE report also said there are advantages to a world with more carbon, like increased plant growth.
“The DOE report is not a neutral scientific assessment, it is a policy-driven document that selectively presents information to support a predetermined narrative. Rather than engaging with the full body of climate science, it highlights isolated findings that, when removed from context, give the misleading impression that rising CO₂ levels are broadly beneficial,” said Becca Neumann, associate professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Washington and head of the hydro-biogeochemistry research group.
In a statement to ABC News, a DOE spokesperson said, “Unlike previous administrations, the Trump administration is committed to engaging in a more thoughtful and science-based conversation about climate change and energy.”
The report was reviewed internally by DOE scientific researchers and policy experts from the Office of Science and National Labs and is open to wider peer review from the scientific community and general public via the public comment period, the DOE spokesperson said.
“The purpose of this report is to restore an open and transparent dialogue around climate science,” the DOE spokesperson concluded. “Following the public comment period, we look forward to reviewing and engaging on substantive comments.”
The benefits from rising carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere are among the key points made in the DOE’s report, emphasizing that higher carbon dioxide levels can enhance photosynthesis and boost crop yields and aren’t necessarily a bad thing. Neumann acknowledges that this effect is real and well-documented, but said it’s already factored into the climate and agricultural models the report seeks to discredit.
“What the report fails to acknowledge is that these benefits are offset by the broader impacts of climate change: rising temperatures, altered rainfall patterns, and more extreme weather—all of which pose serious challenges to agriculture. For most regions in the U.S. and globally, the net effect of climate change on food production is projected to be negative. Yet the report repeatedly suggests the opposite,” said Neumann.
The DOE report not only criticizes numerous climate science findings but also attempts to cast doubt on the reliability of the weather and climate data being collected for analysis, claiming that urbanization effects, like the Urban Heat Island, significantly bias global temperature observations.
However, the scientific consensus, reflected in IPCC assessments, finds that these effects have a minimal to negligible impact on global warming trends. Climate scientists explain that standard data homogenization techniques effectively identify and correct non-climatic biases, and these adjusted datasets are independently validated by rural-only networks and satellite observations.
The critical review, which totals more than 400 pages, was submitted to the Department of Energy during the report’s public comment period.
The DOE report is already facing legal challenges. In August, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and the Environmental Defense Fund filed a lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the District of Massachusetts, contesting the Trump administration’s use of a secretly convened group to undermine established climate science and regulations. The suit names Secretary Wright, the DOE, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, the EPA, and the Climate Working Group as defendants.
The lawsuit cites the Federal Advisory Committee Act, enacted in the aftermath of Nixon-era scandals, which requires that federal government advisory committees operate transparently, make their materials publicly available, and maintain balanced membership.
“Decades of rigorous scientific analysis shows burning fossil fuels is unequivocally contributing to deadly heat waves, accelerating sea level rise, worsening wildfires and floods, increased heavy rainfall, and more intense and damaging storms across the country. We should all relentlessly question who stands to gain from efforts to upend this unassailable and peer-reviewed scientific truth,” Dr. Gretchen Goldman, the president and CEO of UCS, said at the time the lawsuit was filed.
The EPA told ABC News regarding the lawsuit, “As a matter of longstanding practice, EPA does not comment on current or pending litigation.”
