New Study Calls EPA’s Labeling Of CO2 A Pollutant ‘Totally False’

https://dailycaller.com/2017/04/24/e...totally-false/

“This research failed to find that the steadily rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations have had a statistically significant impact on any of the 14 temperature data sets that were analyzed,” the authors say in the release for the second edition of their peer-reviewed work.

“Moreover, these research results clearly demonstrate that once the solar, volcanic and oceanic activity, that is, natural factor, impacts on temperature data are accounted for, there is no ‘record setting’ warming to be concerned about,” the researchers say. “In fact, there is no natural factor adjusted warming at all.”

It's a scam. C02 wasn't a pollutant according to the EPA's official charge and therefore not within its perview to regulate.

Then some environmental group took the EPA to federal court and made them regulate it. The EPA didn't put up much of a defense because what govt agency doesn't want their scope and budget broadened?

It's a scam. C02 wasn't a pollutant according to the EPA's official charge and therefore not within its perview to regulate.

Then some environmental group took the EPA to federal court and made them regulate it. The EPA didn't put up much of a defense because what govt agency doesn't want their scope and budget broadened? Originally Posted by gnadfly

the article says that this is an effort to overturn the endangerment findings. they have to get past that before they can do any serious reforms within the EPA.

Then it's onto the "navigable waterways" over reach bullshit.

Then it's onto the "navigable waterways" over reach bullshit. Originally Posted by gnadfly

yes, that is where we are at right now with respect to CO2.

Just more overreach , That's how the progressives try to exploit fears ( climate change end of world , end of world if they don't get there way BS)

Just more overreach , That's how the progressives try to exploit fears ( climate change end of world , end of world if they don't get there way BS) Originally Posted by rexdutchman

there's been an update.. on this.


regarding the EPA science board, people connected to it are upset that the rules have changed. meaning if a scientist/researcher have a grant with the EPA, they cannot be on the board. however, they didn't include people with grants from businesses in that category.


its 45 member board, so that means 20 people who had EPA grants are disqualified to serve.


the conflict of interest regarding the grants is fairly obvious.



looks like they don't the sunlight being shown on their activities.

The govt doesn't like anyone seeing "behind the reasons"