Bitcoin Forum
May 22, 2024, 12:50:04 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: EPA Chief: Just Trust Us On Climate Science  (Read 547 times)
Chef Ramsay (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001



View Profile
June 05, 2015, 12:59:50 AM
 #1

Americans are just going to have to trust the EPA’s 44 years of experience dealing with environmental issues when it comes to figuring out ways to cope with man-made global warming, says the agency’s chief.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told Big Think in an interview that while there are limits to how much the federal government can do for issues like global warming, the public needs to trust how the EPA translates the “complicated” science into real-life actions.

“Well I think we all have to recognize the strengths and limitations of government action,” McCarthy said. “But here’s what I think we can do at the federal level more effectively. We can speak to the science because it’s complicated and we do a lot of research and we do a lot of translation of the science into what it means for people so that the decisions can be made on the basis of real science and on the basis of a real technical understanding.”

“That’s how it has worked in EPA’s career for 44 years at EPA is we’ve listened to the science and the law and we have let solutions take off in the marketplace which is where the cheapest, most effective always win,” McCarthy said. “That’s why EPA can move environmental standards forward so effectively and grow jobs at the same time.”

...

http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/03/epa-chief-just-trust-us-on-climate-science/#ixzz3c7WpS8kC
Spendulus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386



View Profile
June 05, 2015, 03:33:29 AM
 #2

Americans are just going to have to trust the EPA’s 44 years of experience dealing with environmental issues when it comes to figuring out ways to cope with man-made global warming, says the agency’s chief.

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told Big Think in an interview that while there are limits to how much the federal government can do for issues like global warming, the public needs to trust how the EPA translates the “complicated” science into real-life actions.

“Well I think we all have to recognize the strengths and limitations of government action,” McCarthy said. “But here’s what I think we can do at the federal level more effectively. We can speak to the science because it’s complicated and we do a lot of research and we do a lot of translation of the science into what it means for people so that the decisions can be made on the basis of real science and on the basis of a real technical understanding.”

“That’s how it has worked in EPA’s career for 44 years at EPA is we’ve listened to the science and the law and we have let solutions take off in the marketplace which is where the cheapest, most effective always win,” McCarthy said. “That’s why EPA can move environmental standards forward so effectively and grow jobs at the same time.”

...

http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/03/epa-chief-just-trust-us-on-climate-science/#ixzz3c7WpS8kC

So now we know why the EPA is so resistant to freedom of information requests.

They just want us to .... trust them ....
Chef Ramsay (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001



View Profile
June 06, 2015, 03:52:16 AM
 #3

Scientists May Have Lied To Promote EPA’s Global Warming Agenda

Scientists may have lied about the EPA’s involvement in a recent study put out earlier this year claiming Obama administration regulations on carbon dioxide emissions will save thousands of lives every year.

Emails obtained by the blog JunkScience.com’s Steve Milloy show Harvard University and Syracuse University researchers involved in the study consulted with the EPA while conducting their study, contradicting their previous statements the study was done independently of the agency.

“Emails obtained from EPA through the Freedom of Information Act show that Harvard University, Syracuse University and two researchers falsely claimed a study supporting EPA’s upcoming global warming rules was conducted ‘independent’ of the agency,” Milloy wrote.

In May, scientists released a study finding the EPA’s so-called “Clean Power Plan” — which aims to reduce CO2 emissions 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 — would prevent 3,500 premature deaths every year because cutting CO2 emissions will also lower traditional air pollutants and allegedly save lives.

...

EPA spokeswoman Liz Purchia told The Washington Post the study showed the Clean Power Plan “is on the right track.” She said the “benefits are in addition to the benefits that will be realized by addressing a changing climate.”

The study claimed to be done independently of EPA influence, and researchers declared there was no conflict of interest in their study. Harvard University and media reports stressed the study as “independent.”

...

Milloy, however, uncovered emails showing the study’s authors were in fact communicating with the EPA during the course of their study, setting up meetings to learn about the Clean Power Plan and meeting with key agency staffers to go over data.

On July 8, 2014 Harvard-Syracuse study author Kathy Lambert sent an email to EPA staffers Bryan Hubbell and Linda Chappell, the agency’s contact person for the Clean Power Plan’s cost-benefit analysis. Also copied on the email were Driscoll and Buonocore.

In the email, Lamberth works with EPA officials to set up an a conference call with the research team to “discuss methods for our next set of analyses.” Lamberth also asks the EPA for “IPM results for illustrative cases of [the] proposed carbon standard.”

In a follow-up email, EPA’s Chappell responded, saying she would loop in Amanda Curry-Brown who was responsible for the regulatory impact analysis “for the CPP final rule.”

Another email from Harvard’s Driscoll to EPA staffer Ellen Kurlansky sent on July 15, 2014, talks about how the study had been well-received by other groups (they aren’t specified) and even asks for help fundraising for the International Conference on Mercury as a Global Pollutant.

Milloy also found that authors involved in the Harvard-Syracuse study received or were involved with $45 million in EPA research grants. Driscoll has received or been involved with $3,654,608 in EPA grants and Buonocore has gotten $9,588 in grants. One of the study’s co-authors Joel Schwartz has received or been involved in $31,176,575 in EPA grants.

“Now how could Schwartz’s $31,176,575 or Levy’s $9,514,361 or Driscoll’s $3,654,608 from EPA possibly be considered as a ‘competing financial interest’ in an article they wrote in support of EPA’s flagship regulatory effort?” Milloy asked in a blog post.


...

http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/05/scientists-may-have-lied-to-promote-epas-global-warming-agenda/#ixzz3cEshQVV2
Wilikon
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1001


minds.com/Wilikon


View Profile
August 23, 2015, 07:05:40 PM
 #4


[...]

That report was from June of last year, but the EPA had more recent documentation on file. An “action plan” from three months ago also warned of the potential for a “blow out” if they opened up the mine. Their plan – such as it was – involved three basic steps which called for them to identify where the leak originated, block it and begin collecting any spilled material. That sounds great unless there’s millions of gallons gushing out and washing away the landscape.

One other aspect of this document dump caught my attention. (Additional emphasis added)

Much of the text in the documents released Friday was redacted by EPA officials. Among the items blacked out is the line in a 2013 safety plan for the Gold King job that specifies whether workers were required to have phones that could work at the remote site, which is more than 11,000 feet up a mountain.

Redacted? I’m sorry… did you say, “Redacted” by the EPA??? When our government releases records it’s common to redact information which can jeopardize national security and pose a danger to us or our allies. What precisely is it that the Environmental Protection Agency is doing which needs to be redacted? Are they afraid that the Russians will learn our secrets of how to kill off millions of fish and poison the drinking water?

Unless a better explanation is offered pronto, we need to find out what business the EPA has redacting anything which is requested and released by the press. Call me suspicious by nature, but this sounds like a case of covering somebody’s backside rather than guarding any of our national secrets.


http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/23/the-details-behind-that-epa-gold-mine-spill-just-get-worse-and-worse/


MakingMoneyHoney
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 504
Merit: 500



View Profile
August 24, 2015, 01:14:02 AM
 #5

Unbelievable. Oh wait. I mean totally believable.  Undecided
Spendulus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386



View Profile
August 24, 2015, 02:25:50 PM
 #6

Scientists May Have Lied To Promote EPA’s Global Warming Agenda

Scientists may have lied about the EPA’s involvement in a recent study put out earlier this year claiming Obama administration regulations on carbon dioxide emissions will save thousands of lives every year.

Emails obtained by the blog JunkScience.com’s Steve Milloy show Harvard University and Syracuse University researchers involved in the study consulted with the EPA while conducting their study, contradicting their previous statements the study was done independently of the agency.

“Emails obtained from EPA through the Freedom of Information Act show that Harvard University, Syracuse University and two researchers falsely claimed a study supporting EPA’s upcoming global warming rules was conducted ‘independent’ of the agency,” Milloy wrote.....
What, exactly, is your problem?

If they don't communicate with the EPA, how are they supposed to know what their scientific results should be?
TPTB_need_war
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 262


View Profile
April 25, 2016, 03:18:22 PM
 #7

Read all the 27 comments at the provided link. You can't just be lazy to read only what I commented here. I can't copy this entire linked page of comments into this thread.

There is no science of man-made global warming. Period. The comments at the linked thread are irrefutable.

Never in millions of years of cycles has temperature risen after CO2 does. Temperate always rises at least 600 years before C02 does. So C02 can't be the cause. Duh!

Al Gore lied. He didn't show his chart zoomed in.

Carrying on from the posts I made in the past refuting AGW:


5427
Blog/Uncategorized
Posted Apr 25, 2016 by Martin Armstrong

New-York-Under-Water

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong; I have read your thesis on global warming and that this is only part of a natural cycle. I admit that you have persuaded me whereas the claims are false especially that New York City should have been under water by now according Al Gore. You mentioned that there was global warming which enabled the Vikings to reach America because the ice melted. My question is rather blunt. If we are headed now into a global cooling period, what is the historical evidence that society also declines?

Thank you in advance

PD

ANSWER: I have reported that the peat fires in Borneo and Sumatra have now exceeded all the emissions from the entire U.S. economy. This whole movement is simply to raise taxes on the bogus theory of global warming. We are not so powerful to alter the course of cyclical movement of the planet. Bouts of global cooling (ice ages) as well as warming periods predate the combustion engine and mankind. It is rather questionable analysis to claim we have altered the climate. We are capable of polluting things, true. But actually altering the climate is something beyond our power.

Volcanoes are a major issue in climate change. Yes, studies reveal that the Hawaiian Kilauea volcanoe eruption discharges between 8,000 and 30,000 metric tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere each day, which has been going on for more than 20 years. However, gas studies worldwide by volcanologists have calculated that global volcanic CO2 production on land and under the sea release a total of about 200 million tonnes of CO2 annually. But this is really in the absence of any real catastrophic eruptions.  Volcanoes emit also Sulfur dioxide  SO2 which automobiles emit very little. When Mount St. Helens erupted on May 18th, 1980, it produced 1.5 million metric tons of sulfur dioxide on that one day and about 2 million metric tons for the entire event far more than automobiles.

Moreover, volcanic production of CO2 is by far not really the issue in climate change. Instead of global warming from  CO2, it is the plume of ash in the sky which actually blocks the sun and reverses the climate from warm to cold like sitting under an umbrella at the beach. I have discussed Mount Tambora  which erupted  in 1815 and threw into the air so much ash that it snowed during the summer of 1816 in New York City. It became known as 18-hundred-and-froze-to-death. I have shown the correlation of that eruption to wheat prices.

I have also written about the Maunder Minimum (<--- returning again in 2030!) which sent the Earth into a cold period 300 years ago from the perspective of the cycle energy output from the Sun. I have also gone into the evolution of science which has been set in motion by the very discovery of a frozen woolly rhinoceros which altered science in many fields. I have explain how the temperature at the time of the American Revolution was at its lowest point in the cycle.

All of that said, the ice core samples have revealed that there were two major volcanic eruptions in 536 and 540 AD which sent Europe into an ice age and wiped out the Roman civilization. Flavius Odoacer (433–493) was a soldier who in 476 became the first King of Italy (476–493) after deposing Romulus Augustus, the last official Roman emperor in the West.

Odoacer was overthrown by Theodoric the Great (454-526), the Ostrogoth. He was followed by Athalaric (526-534), and a few others then finally Baduila (541-552). So while Rome officially ends in the West with Romulus Augustus in 476AD, the Ostrogoths fade out after 552 due to the climate changes. In the East, the change in climate appears to have also possibly been linked to the Plague of Justinian (541–542) which was a pandemic that afflicted the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, especially its capital Constantinople, the Sassanid Empire, and port cities around the entire Mediterranean Sea. I have written about the political turmoil there in Byzantium which preceded the plague during the Nika Revolt of 532AD. I have also written about how empires die. It does seem that when temperatures decline, civil unrest rises and this increases the risk of revolutions.

When Thera erupted around 1645-1650BC, this created a climate change and marked the end of the Minoan civilization. They were conquered by the Mycenae who also captured Troy. As the weather turned cold, Greece goes into a Dark Age. The Greeks migrated and other places called them the “sea people” since they did not know where they came from as the invaded Northern Africa. Homer wrote about the period before the Dark Age known as the Heroic Period. Scholars thought this was fiction about Troy and Mycenae until Heinrich Schliemann (1822 – 1890) set out and discovered what Homer wrote about was history.

The historical evidence is rather extensive. It does appear that as we enter into a global cooling period, governments will fall, disease will increase, and the risk of Western Civilization declining sharply all become historically possible.


Spendulus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2898
Merit: 1386



View Profile
April 25, 2016, 04:06:57 PM
 #8



Redacted? I’m sorry… did you say, “Redacted” by the EPA??? When our government releases records it’s common to redact information which can jeopardize national security and pose a danger to us or our allies. What precisely is it that the Environmental Protection Agency is doing which needs to be redacted? Are they afraid that the Russians will learn our secrets of how to kill off millions of fish and poison the drinking water?

Unless a better explanation is offered pronto, we need to find out what business the EPA has redacting anything which is requested and released by the press....

Because it might hurt someone's feelings?
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!