Posted on 11/02/2018 8:21:49 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
More than a year after the US Environmental Protection Agency took down information on climate change from its website for an update, it now seems uncertain whether it will ever reappear.
In April last year, the EPA replaced its online climate change section with a holding page that said the content was being updated to reflect the agencys new direction under President Donald Trump.
Information previously found at epa.gov/climatechange made it clear that human activity was warming the planet, resulting in harm to Americans health as well as crucial ecosystems on which humans depend.
The update page has now given way to a page that simply states: We want to help you find what you are looking for. There are links to search the EPA website, as well as to an archived snapshot of the site from the day before Trump became president in January 2017.
Its an embarrassment. It is a ghost page, said Judith Enck, who was EPA regional administrator during Barack Obamas presidency. Its a bit like Amazon not allowing the public to order books its that fundamental. Theres no other issue at the EPA more important than climate change; it affects air, water, health and whether large parts of the world will survive.
Enck said that EPA career staff are frustrated and ashamed about the new stance on climate change and urged her former colleagues to speak out.
The administration also began taking the ax to climate change language across other government websites in the spring of 2017.
The EPA website is used by decision and policy makers, she said. The lack of timely, accurate information is part of a much deeper problem that the agency is on the sidelines of the most urgent environment issue of our time.
The EPA was contacted for comment.
(Excerpt) Read more at theguardian.com ...
Global Warming on Free Republic here, here and here
That's an excellent idea. It would be educational.
Roger Pielke Jr did great work on the "costs" of global warming before he was drummed out of the field by a Democrat witch hunt. He showed that costs are flat or declining: http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/admin/publication_files/2013.38.pdf and a few other brave scientists have kept his work up-to-date: http://www.icatdamageestimator.com/toptendamages for example with hurricanes. It shows that the normalized damage from hurricanes is not increasing over time. There are bad ones as there will always be.
Even looking worldwide the deadliest hurricane season was 1780 and we've seen nothing like it since (e.g. a stronger hurricane than Michael hit near Pensacola and that was not the deadliest of the season). It's easy to point to hurricanes without the data from past hurricanes as context. Major hurricane numbers over 1218°N (the most accurately and reliably sampled Atlantic sector) were 20 from 1701 to 1800, 19 from 1801 to 1900 and 16 from 1901 to 2000 and zero from 2000 through 2007 (when the study was done).
So there's no drawback in terms of hurricanes, but what about the benefits? The CDC data http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/MortFinal2006_WorktableIV_part1.pdf shows that there are 636,605 deaths in winter, 573,946 in summer, about 10% more deaths in winter thanks to cold dry air (in the US). In bad flu seasons the number is about 20% more:
Winter is deadly and global warming is good. Even global models like FUND, now censored from most reports, show benefits from warming based on "explicit harm-reducing adaptation to sea level rise and also assumes that increasing wealth reduces the harm to the energy sector and human health." https://www.law.virginia.edu/system/files/faculty/hein/2016/Johnston_Regulation%2C%20Spring%202016%2C%20at%2036..pdf (see figure 4).
The "hiatus" is over: http://images.remss.com/msu/msu_time_series.html but because of the 2016 super El Nino. It will be back, especially as solar activity crashes (has crashed all this past year). There was high enough solar to feed the 2016 El Nino and temporarliy warm the planet. Notice how the 2010 El Nino got short-changed. That was due to low solar. In a nutshell: the sun heats the oceans and the oceans heat the atmosphere in wildly varying amounts, from a lot in a super El Nino, to not at all other times.
But taking away the super El Ninos there's a relatively steady but small amount of warminng. That is manmade, and it is good (see my previous post).
MAGA!
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.