Posted on 06/23/2017 10:05:19 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
This spring, political officials at the Environmental Protection Agency removed the agencys climate change website, one of the worlds top resources for information on the science and effects of climate change.
To me, a scientist who managed this website for more than five years, its removal signifies a declaration of war on climate science by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. There can be no other interpretation. I draw this conclusion as a meteorologist with a specialization in climate science and as an independent voter who strives to keep my political and scientific views separate. I concede that this specific issue is personal for me, given the countless hours I spent working on the site. But it should be obvious to anyone how this senseless action runs counter to principles of good governance and scientific integrity.
The sites overarching conclusion, informed by these scientific organizations and reports, was that recent warming is largely a result of human activities, specifically the burning of fossil fuels, which releases large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Pruitts order to delete the site feels purely spiteful, as if he simply couldnt abide knowing that the agency he leads was publishing information he doesnt believe. But science is not about belief its about evidence. And of all people, the head of the EPA should have the utmost respect for this evidence and its transparent communication. Pruitts choice to destroy carefully vetted scientific information rather than preserve it is a reckless and dangerous abdication of his responsibility.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Jason Samenow www.neefusa.org
Dear Jason:
Elections have consequences. We won. Get over it.
How much are these “large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere”? With all that education and seal of approval, does he know that the total amount of CO2 produced by man for the whole of the industrial age is just 0.00022% in relation to the total tonnage of atmosphere—please explain to everyone how just 0.00022% of the atmosphere can cause global climate change? It seems that Jason Samenow is trolling for someone to make his bank account bigger.
Why the isiot does not show the Climate Change taxing formula. Carbon foot print is not based on consumption but level of economic development. Ie it is like a retroactive reparation tax!
Jason, another nobody isiot who got picked up by communists because he is a nobody idiot.
Life’s a bitch when the tit you’ve been sucking on goes dry.
It's "just a go@#%mned piece of paper."
Not required reading for L.I.F.E.R. parasites riding the Deep Dish/State gravy train.
Who wants CPizza?
The very idea that a so-called scientist would call removal of a website a “declaration of war” is standalone proof positive of a profoundly unscientific outlook thoroughly unqualified to tell anyone else what to do or how to think.
Then bring on your war, you scientificically illiterate buttwipe.
Then bring on your war, you scientificically illiterate buttwipe.
I guess this makes Sec Pruitt a Climate Website Denier.
Oops, scientifically. Got a bit overcome at the marshmallow majors out there who sctually think they understand physics.
“The sites overarching conclusion, informed by these scientific organizations and reports, was that recent warming is largely a result of human activities, specifically the burning of fossil fuels, which releases large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. “
Fake science.
All Scam websites should be removed
Yea... I wouldn't trust this guy to tell me if its raining outside.
“To me, a scientist who managed this website for more than five years, its removal signifies a declaration of war on climate science by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt.”
Climate scientists come out and plaaaaaay.
Climate scientists come out and plaaaaaay.
Climate scientists come out and plaaaaaay.
He should start a business where his work will be subject to market forces.
He could have gone the other way. Used the website to publish the East Anglia emails, the fake data used to create the hockey stick graph, the letter from Dr Jones at E. Anglia saying he won't give his data out because it will just be nitpicked. And then give real science and data showing there has been little to no global warming and an explanation of the downsides of the Paris Accords.
But that could be expensive and no one really reads the stupid website anyway.
Tell that to the people who say "but a consensus of scientists believe..."
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.