Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 09/28/2011 9:17:08 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The data process used to arrive at the administration’s determination that greenhouse gases endanger “the public health and welfare” violated the Environmental Protection Agency’s own peer review procedure, a new report from the EPA Office of the Inspector General reveals.
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), ranking member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, requested this report in April, asking that the OIG determine whether the EPA “followed key federal and Agency regulations and policies in developing and reviewing the technical data used to make and support its greenhouse gases endangerment finding.” Now, Inhofe is calling for a series of hearings to further investigate the IG’s findings.
The Daily Caller’s Caroline May, with more:
“I appreciate the inspector general conducting a thorough investigation into the Obama-EPA’s handling of the endangerment finding for greenhouse gases,” Inhofe said. “This report confirms that the endangerment finding, the very foundation of President Obama’s job-destroying regulatory agenda, was rushed, biased and flawed. It calls the scientific integrity of EPA’s decision-making process into question and undermines the credibility of the endangerment finding.”
Inhofe lambasted the EPA for its failure to adhere to its own rules, outsourcing the science to the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — and refusing to conduct its own analysis of the science — in the period leading up to its final endangerment finding.
“The endangerment finding is no small matter: Global warming regulations imposed by the Obama-EPA under the Clean Air Act will cost American consumers $300 to $400 billion a year, significantly raise energy prices, and destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs. This is not to mention the ‘absurd result’ that EPA will need to hire 230,000 additional employees and spend an additional $21 billion to implement its [green house gas] regime. And all of this economic pain is for nothing: As EPA Administrator [Lisa] Jackson also admitted before the Environmental and Public Works] committee, these regulations will have no effect on the climate.”
You know what doesn’t cost consumers billions of dollars each year, raise energy prices or destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs? Yep, you guessed it — drilling for natural gas. Just ask the Pennsylvanians who’ve benefited from all the activity surrounding the Marcellus Shale.
Yet the GOP has the rep as the anti-science party? I’ll never understand it.
P.S. You know that big building pictured in the thumbnail to this post? HQ of the EPA? I can’t help but wonder how it’s heated …
We already live in a country that “orders us” not to go to certain places even if they pose no security risk to self.
What is happening to the so-called right to bear arms?
What has become of the Fourth and Fifth Amendment? X-ray machines at airports, camera’s everywhere...
You have a government telling you what you should eat, probably feeding your kids in school.
This government will tell you what light bulb you “will” use and they nudge you to buy certain cars.
They will define what free speech is for you, tell you that you’re not licensed to do certain jobs, they will dictate who you hire and mandate what cooking oil you use, set the rates you can charge for services, impose regulatory fees or taxes they feel appropriate on their own through internal adminstrative policy making...
Freedom in America is a hollow word thrown around by demagogue politicians and the idiotic that have no clue that they already live in a slimmed down version of the DDR. The only difference is that this is a slightly softer version of a tyranny and the fences and walls are more subtle. When in Iraq I asked people if they thought they were “free,” surprisingly they thought so. There is this miss-belief that people elsewhere feel oppressed and that they seek our version of “freedom.” Truth is, freedom is a perceptive phenomenon that we perceive through a cultural filter, and we today are not free in the sense our founding fathers perceived and intended it to be. The point is that the traditional meaning of freedom has been perverted and we are already far removed from even what the Bill of Rights were intended to prevent or protect us from.
If you want to know how oppressive the nanny state is, you need to go someplace where they don't have one.
Then you see.
Peer review? We don’t need no steenking peer review.
Apparently they skipped a step or two along the
way to getting the conclusions they desired.
Supposedly Carbon Glacier has retreated slightly in the decades since I was in school. When my wife and I visited it last year we didn't have any survey equipment or the records that were kept by my long retired science teacher. I couldn't tell that it had retreated at all.
I have no doubt that many of the glaciers around this part of the country have retreated. From the time I was in school until ten years ago the world was in a cyclic warming trend. Our house is located in a spot that was covered with a thousand feet of ice just 10,000 years ago, a blink of an eye in geologic time. It would be really great if these global warming stories like the one I read yesterday in the Seattle PI about glaciers retreating could be accompanied with pictures taken over a period of time, taken at the same time each year, along with survey information.
I wouldn't hold my breath while waiting for pictures and actual data... When I was in school we went to the mountain and were actually shown how to measure the glaciers ourselves... Now we good children are expected to believe what we are told because of faith not because of data or our own observations. It seems very sad to me actually. Those who question, those who want to measure, those who want to see where and how others data was collected are now attacked and ridiculed.
One should ask themselves if name calling and ridicule actually are a substitute for scientific observation and method. In a recent study from Yale University... “Professor Dan M. Kahan and his team surveyed 1540 US adults and determined that people with more education in natural sciences and mathematics tend to be more skeptical of AGW climate science.” What a surprise... these democrats who believe that a supposed consensus is a subtitute for reason and scientific method are less educated. Who'd a think it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.