Media Freaks Out Over Something The EPA Chief Has Been Saying A Long Time

Media outlets are feverishly reporting Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt’s remarks that carbon dioxide is not the primary driver of global warming.

Environmentalists are calling for Pruitt to resign over the comments, arguing he “misled Congress” about his beliefs in global warming. Democratic senators have chastised Pruitt for his “ignorant display.”

But Pruitt’s comments to CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” which have outraged many on the left, are no different than what he’s been saying for a long time.

“I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see,” Pruitt told CNBC Thursday.

“But we don’t know that yet,” Pruitt said. “We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis.”

Sounds oddly similar to what he told “Exploring Energy” at least twice throughout 2016 about the role human activities play in global warming. Pruitt’s consistently argued there’s considerable debate about the extent to which man-made greenhouse gas emissions impact the climate.

“It gets cooler, it gets hotter. We don’t know the trajectory, if it is on an unsustainable course,” Pruitt said in early 2016. “Nor do we know the extent by which the burning of fossil fuels, man’s contribution to that, is making this far worse than it is.”

Pruitt gave “Exploring Energy” a similar explanation in October 2016: “Is it truly man-made and is this just simply another period of time where the Earth is cooling, increasing in heat? Is it just typical, natural type of occurrences as opposed what the administration says?”

Pruitt co-authored a May 2016 op-ed in National Review that claimed “[s]cientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind.”

News outlets labeled Pruitt a “climate denier” almost immediately after President Donald Trump nominated him to head the EPA in December.

The New York Times ran with the headline: “Trump Picks Scott Pruitt, Climate Change Denialist, to Lead E.P.A.” Reuters reported this when the Senate confirmed Pruitt in February: “Climate change cynic Scott Pruitt takes over as Donald Trump’s head of Environmental Protection Agency.”

So, you’d think the media wouldn’t come out guns blazing when Pruitt says the same thing he’s been on record saying for months. Guess again.

Major news outlets put out stories on Pruitt’s comments, interviewing a host of politically active climate scientists to denounce the EPA chief.

Read rest…

Comments (3)

  • Avatar



    Pruitt is correct, there’s no way of knowing the exact proportion of and the sum of all the effects on Earth’s mythical average temperature. IF the science is settled, why continue spending on research? Because thousands of AGW pawns have become dependent on the grant money. Can the AGW-CLIMATE believers prove that $trillion$ spent so far on green energy installations has had a net benefit to life on Earth? No. Certainly there are large swaths of our planet that would be more hospitable to all forms of life IF the temperature went up ( ice is not life).

  • Avatar

    R. Johnson


    Really environmentalists want Pruitt to resign? These nut jobs want him to step aside to let the circus continue? Not gonna happen. It’s past time to reign in the EPA; environmentalists’ goose is about to be cooked–no more golden eggs.

Comments are closed