Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The EPA’s Science Problem: Startling revelations about the agency’s misrepresentation of data.
Frontpage Mag ^ | 04/15/2014 | Arnold Ahlert

Posted on 04/15/2014 12:09:14 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 04/15/2014 12:09:14 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

” She defended the EPA’s “high-quality science,”....”

The scientific method involves trying to disprove hypotheses.

Politics involves trying to convince voters that you’re right. When politicians use ‘science’ to make their case, what they really mean is some ‘scientist’ found something that supports their case. A polite term for this is “confirmation bias”. There are innumerable less polite terms for it. Whatever it’s called, it is most certainly not “high-quality science”.


2 posted on 04/15/2014 12:16:43 PM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Next, ask her to produce all of the scientific data used to justify the rules and regulations they have imposed on Americans via the Clean WATER Act.

I’ll bet she can’t do that, either.


3 posted on 04/15/2014 12:22:14 PM PDT by WayneS (Help Control Politician Overpopulation - Spay or Neuter Your Senator or Congressman Today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

No scientific basis for EPA policies. What a surprise.


4 posted on 04/15/2014 12:24:15 PM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (Cruz/Palin 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

these are end-justifies-the-means socialists. they are also we-are-experts-and-know-whats-best-for-you asshats as well.

best thing we could do is find an active volcano and do a mass drop of these people into them.


5 posted on 04/15/2014 12:27:37 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Well there is SCIENCE and then there is EPA scioganda where the greenies propaganda trumps actual SCIENCE facts.
6 posted on 04/15/2014 12:28:11 PM PDT by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"that the agency neither possesses, nor can produce, all of the scientific data used to justify the rules and regulations they have imposed on Americans via the Clean Air Act"

Wteffing-f???

SHUT THEM DOWN

7 posted on 04/15/2014 12:28:13 PM PDT by Mr. K (If you like your constitution, you can keep it...Period. PALIN/CRUZ 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
If science is what we get when we produce empirically observed, recorded and verified information... WHY on earth can't SOMEONE produce the data which is the basis for the whole Liberal shell game on environmental regulations in this country??

With that kind of ammunition... there’d be NO objection whatsoever to the kind and extent of regulation the Liberals routinely foist on us.

It doesn't exist... and never did.

We have given the EPA and their Liberal shills a latitude on this that NO college kid in any lab or science class gets just writing a term paper! STUDENTS are held to a higher standard on verification and transparency than THESE jerks are!

8 posted on 04/15/2014 12:33:59 PM PDT by SMARTY ("When you blame others, you give up your power to change." Robert Anthony)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Take a look at what their so called scientists did to an oyster farm in northern California .... in the face of all facts and reason they made up lies and did what they wanted to anyway. Surprise surprise

Thank you Dick Nixon....even from the grave you are docking with us


9 posted on 04/15/2014 12:46:41 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

In fields other than climate science [sic] publishing the data and the process is part of the peer review process.


10 posted on 04/15/2014 12:47:25 PM PDT by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

IOW, they just make stuff up.........................


11 posted on 04/15/2014 12:48:09 PM PDT by Red Badger (LIberal is an oxymoron......................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Shut it down, shut it down NOW!


12 posted on 04/15/2014 12:48:24 PM PDT by Envisioning (It's the Jihad, stupid......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
The peer review process is the foundation of science inquiry in our society, and is a trusted evaluation of scientific evidence around the world.

I guess this means that if you aren't a member of the scientific peerage you won't be allowed to see the data and must trust in the scientists' word on the results.

Funny, I had always thought that the idea of peer review was free exchange of all of the data and allowing for the reproduction of the experiments. I guess that just applies to those who know the secret handshakes though and not to the peons.

From President Eisenhower's farewell address.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers. The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present -- and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

Nice little circle of life: The EPA funds the scientists, the scientists produce the results the EPA wants and nobody is allowed to look at or question anything going on. The whole peer review system was meant to stop this type of hijinks rather than perpetuate it.
13 posted on 04/15/2014 12:56:24 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (Republican amnesty supporters don't care whether their own homes are called mansions or haciendas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

Science? Science? We dun need no stinkin' science!

14 posted on 04/15/2014 1:07:10 PM PDT by Enterprise ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

Based on this admission by the EPA I guess I’ll be buying cheaper filters for the home air conditioning next time!


15 posted on 04/15/2014 1:10:06 PM PDT by zipper ("The Second Amendment IS my carry permit!" -- Ted Nugent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
"It’s time for a thorough cleaning ELIMINATING of the EPA itself."

Fixed...

16 posted on 04/15/2014 1:22:46 PM PDT by SZonian (Throwing our allegiances to political parties in the long run gave away our liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Time to RIF the EPA to nothing.


17 posted on 04/15/2014 1:24:07 PM PDT by Dapper 26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
In a stunning admission, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy revealed to House Science, Space and Technology Committee chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) that the agency neither possesses, nor can produce, all of the scientific data used to justify the rules and regulations they have imposed on Americans via the Clean Air Act. In short, science has been trumped by the radical environmentalist agenda.

Although this issue is seldom discussed, it is generally true of every "environmental" law since 1972. Including the creation of the EPA itself.

There are silver bullets to end that whole phony charade; if only the proper organization or true science group could find the gonads, time and determination to pursue it.

And...
Federal Rules of Evidence, Dec 1, 2013
Federal Rules of Evidence

18 posted on 04/15/2014 3:02:07 PM PDT by publius911 ( At least Nixon had the good g race to resign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: publius911
Federal Rules of Evidence, Dec 1, 2013

Just to clarify, the original Federal Rules of Evidence were adopted in 1975, and updated from time to time based on precedent and court clarifications of the ambiguous language.

19 posted on 04/15/2014 3:19:57 PM PDT by publius911 ( At least Nixon had the good g race to resign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; ...

Court upholds EPA emission standards
Associated Press | Apr. 15, 2014 4:05 PM EDT | Pete Yost
Posted on 4/15/2014 4:17:23 PM by Olog-hai
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3144732/posts


20 posted on 04/15/2014 6:28:55 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson