Latest news

How Trump’s EPA can successfully challenge the agency’s 2009 greenhouse gas findings

The evidence Pruitt seeks to refute the Obama EPA’s politically-motivated finding is all around us

(National SentinelClimate hoax: In his first months on the job, Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt has managed to dismantle a host of strangling, expensive regulations enacted during the Obama era, but his biggest challenge is yet to come.

As noted by the Washington Times, Pruitt is set to challenge the agency’s 2009 endangerment finding regarding greenhouse gases, “a game-changing document that laid the foundation for many of the environmental and climate change regulations that followed.”

The paper noted that the finding — “a technical scientific conclusion that greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, pose a threat to human health and must be regulated under the Clean Air Act” — will be difficult to reverse, according to experts, as it would ignite a prolonged legal battle with environmental organizations and others who believe that so-called “global warming/climate change” is a real thing.

It’s not. It never has been, at least, not in the way its been portrayed by the radical Left: Humankind’s incessant modernization is somehow leading to destruction of the planet, via SUV exhaust and cattle farts.

The Times noted:

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has spoken at length of his deep desire to transform fundamentally his agency and move it back to its “core mission,” which he describes as making sure Americans breathe clean air and drink clean water. But he hasn’t said one way or the other whether he plans to go after the endangerment finding, which provided the legal underpinning for much of the Obama administration’s agenda inside the EPA.

Here’s how Pruitt’s lawyers should proceed: Prove that the entire notion of human-caused “global warming/climate change” is an elaborate fraud, therefore the EPA’s previous “finding” that carbon dioxide — necessary for life to even exist on this planet — is equally fraudulent.

There are literally dozens of instances where so-called “climate researchers” have been caught faking warming and climate figures and data — the most recent example having occurred in Australia, where “scientists at the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) ordered a review of temperature recording instruments after the government agency was caught tampering with temperature logs in several locations,” The Daily Caller reported. It added:

Agency officials admit that the problem with instruments recording low temperatures likely happened in several locations throughout Australia, but they refuse to admit to manipulating temperature readings. The BOM located missing logs in Goulburn and the Snow Mountains, both of which are in New South Wales.

That’s just the latest example. There are many others:

— A recently-released study published by a pair of scientists and a veteran statistician, found that there were adjustments made to global surface temperature readings by other scientists in the past few years which “are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data.”

— Regarding CO2, the “greenhouse gas” the EPA claimed authority to “regulate,” is not responsible for the warming, as this report notes:

When it comes to the global warming debate, both alarmists and critics agree on one thing: The earth has warmed by roughly 0.8 degrees Celsius over the past 150 years. It’s the cause of this warming, however, that remains in dispute. And while the public is constantly bombarded with messages about the evils of carbon dioxide emissions, there are actually compelling reasons to believe that contemporary global warming has been driven by rising solar output, not carbon dioxide.

— The oft-used statistic by global warming preachers — that “97 percent of scientists agree” it’s real, so therefore the “science is settled” — is a hoax. It is a cherry-picked figure taken from a highly flawed “research” survey and is incredibly misleading. In fact, scores of reputable scientists refute the narrative that human activity and CO2 is causing the planet to warm.

— U.S. agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and NASA have been caught faking their “climate change” data (here and here), indicating that these agencies have been politicized to use taxpayer money in a way that substantiates pre-conceived conclusions about “climate” and “warming.”

— It’s now known that global leaders have been duped into spending untold hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars developing strategies and implementing policies to ‘combat global warming’ based on this faked data. This is a scandal of tremendous proportions.

— A former top UN official with the Framework Convention on Climate Change has admitted the global warming hoax was a narrative created out of whole cloth to destroy the one economic system that has lifted billions out of poverty: Capitalism, in all its various forms. “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution,” Christiana Figueres told a climate conference in 2015. “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

— Other hoaxers have admitted the goal of the narrative is to reduce human populations (which, of course, would reduce ‘human-caused global warming’).

“Reversing the endangerment finding would be a heavy lift. They would have to put together a scientific record showing that greenhouse gas emissions do not endanger public health or the environment, put their case out for public comment and then issue a final rule that responds to all the comments they would receive from researchers around the world,” said Jeff Holmstead, the former head of EPA’s office of air and radiation and a leading climate change lawyer at Washington’s Bracewell law firm, in an interview with the Times.

Fair enough. But as we’ve demonstrated with just a few examples, the evidence Pruitt seeks to refute the Obama EPA’s politically-motivated finding is all around us.

Advertising disclaimer: Click here

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: