Environmentalists want the Environmental Protection Agency’s inspector general to investigate whether Scott Pruitt violated internal policies when he suggested carbon emissions might not contribute to climate change.
The Sierra Club asked the independent watchdog in a letter Wednesday to check whether the former Oklahoma attorney general violated the EPA’s 2012 Scientific Integrity Policy when he told a reporter emissions were not a “primary contributor” to so-called man-made global warming.
“It’s pretty unprecedented to have the head of the EPA contradicting basic scientific facts,” Sierra Club Senior Attorney Elena Saxonhouse told reporters Wednesday.
The group’s lawyers said Pruitt’s comments contradicted a “comprehensive review” of research on climate change. EPA requires its officials and employees respect the basic findings of the scientific community.
The agency said Pruitt’s comments do not appear to run contrary to research from climate studies.
“Administrator Pruitt’s comments are perfectly in keeping with the scientific integrity policy,” John Konkus, an EPA spokesman, said in an email. “There is an ongoing scientific debate on climate change, its causes and its effect. That debate should be encouraged as the Administrator has done, not discouraged as Sierra Club is attempting to do.”
Some media outlets, meanwhile, criticized Pruitt’s comments but made allowance for at least one of his points, namely that it is difficult to determine what is causing so-called man-made global warming.
The Washington Post, for one, wrote last week that “Scientists cannot say exactly how much warming will occur after a given amount of carbon dioxide is pumped into the atmosphere — and probably will not be able to until after the warming has occurred.”
Activists railed against the EPA administrator, suggesting Pruitt had hoodwinked Congress.
Former Vice President Al Gore called his comments an “obviously false assertion” and the American Meteorological Society (AMS) said it was “indisputable” that humans are causing global warming.
Yet, he has consistently argued there is ongoing scientific debate about the extent to which man-made greenhouse gas emissions impact the climate.
Basic scientific facts? No one has proved carbon dioxide affects the temperature in the atmosphere or anywhere else. Agreeing with each other about something not proven by anyone is NOT Science.
Absolutely true.
There is NO laboratory demonstration of the mythical ” Greenhouse Effect “.
Further
With the exception of water vapour,
Thermal Infrared Spectroscopy clearly shows there is NO other gas
that could possibly absorb, trap, or reflect thermal rays to any degree greater than
Nitrogen, Oxygen and Argon.
Your “evidence” is simply propaganda aimed at children. ” However it should be stressed that scientists are in general agreement that an average increase of just 2¬∞C across the planet could have catastrophic effects on crop production and cause sea levels to increase significantly resulting in major flooding.”
Scientists are in general agreement? Based upon what? The completely invalidated Models? LOL… They forget history, the Global Medieval Climate Optimum was over 2 degrees warmer than today and life flourished, https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=36&v=ta-0mo7UjUE
The temperatures are not increasing as predicted, even after the fraudulent “adjustments” made by NASA and NOAA.
Crop production has not suffered any “catastrophic” effects, in fact the opposite is true. And what flooding? The flooding in places alarmists “predicted” permanent droughts? LOL… Duh-Rooski the Use full Idiot-troll-ski strikes again with yet another new login name…
I liked this failed experiment better. https://wattsupwiththat.com/climate-fail-files/gore-and-bill-nye-fail-at-doing-a-simple-co2-experiment/
“No other atmospheric constituent is better known to the general public as a ‚Äúgreenhouse gas‚Äù than CO2. In actuality, water vapor has a larger overall impact on the radiative energy budget of the atmosphere..
True on both previous points, but much more importantly, these “environmentalists” blatantly want to ban Pruitt’s Constitutional right to free speech.
Socialist environmentalists are so threatened by truth and real science they now openly stand for tyranny as a means to get what they want.
Money is the biggest cause of “man made ” global warming .
The Sierra Club is such a joke on the most over exaggerated scientific scam ever .
The notion that the science is settled was pure and simple impatience by rent seekers getting frustrated they couldn’t move their business plans along fast enough .
Scott Pruitt is absolutely correct climate scientists know that they are really just beginning to understand natural variables which are overwhelmingly still
shaping climate as they always have .
When scientists can more accurately model natural variables they will have accomplished something . Isolating a portion of a positive trace gas and making bold
doom and gloom predictions with implied great certainty is unscientific propaganda .
Mr. Pruitt’s up against a $trillion dollar con-game that will do all it can to keep the cash flowing from tax payers with government middle men taking a piece .
Fortunately he is well aware of the hostile territory he is in and so is President Trump .
Roger Waters would agree with your first sentence . I agree with the rest of your post. Money is powerful . How you handle power defines your character. I side with Adam Smith . If everyone tries to pitch in, society wins. Got more than you need? Pass it on. Socialists take a short cut. Grab power without pitching in.
G20 Finance Ministers just shut off the global warming cash dispenser .
The USA senior government officials are no longer even prepared to be politically correct about the exaggerated global warming scam . When the money stops magically so will the biggest fraud science fiction fraud in history .
The G20 have got major issues to work on and it won’t be the earth has a fever BS .
Obama’s top world threat just got ignored . What a legacy what a fool .
For world socialists the global warming scam is all they’ve got. They’ll keep beating this dead horse until its nothing more than a rotting, bloody pulp… and then they’ll beat it some more. Look for the leftists to become even more sanctimonious and desperate – if that’s somehow possible.
Look for the left-media to willingly follow ANY orders given by their socialist puppet masters. It’s all they’ve got too…
I must admit, it’s kind of fun to watch – kind of like a slow motion replay of a massive NASCAR pile-up on turn 3.
Ohhhhh… We really hit a nerve! The truth bites doesn’t it Comrade Drewski?
Verifiable evidence? That’s a rich demand for a group that’s willing to perpetrate a massive scam on science while threatening the livelihoods and free speech of scientists who would dare question or doubt.
Okay, I’ll play along …
Sort of…
I’ll just employ the same juvenile demand on you…
Verify everything you’ve ever posted here NOW!!! …to MY satisfaction! …or you’re a big fat liar! Hurry up! Get busy! (Wow, now I remember what it’s like to be 10 years old again!)
Thanks for the comic relief Drewski. You make my day!
A couple of citations from an obscure webpage that anyone could have written is not evidence.
The rest of us are still waiting for proof that human produced carbon dioxide is causing catastrophic global warming, er, sorry climate change.
AMBERBLAHBLAH you are correct. This is a lot of data to support the climate change cause. For example, there is the fraudulent data where NOAA adjusted the early temperature to be lower than it was, and more recent data to be higher, and made adjustment to make it appear that the pause wasn’t happening. The data I’m going with is the raw satellite data and weather balloon data that clearly show we don’t have a problem.
.
The most compelling is that 40% of the warming blamed on man occurred between 1910 and 1941 when the carbon dioxide levels were relatively low and raising very slowly. In general, there is a poor correlation between CO2 levels and the earth’s average temperature.
Are you aware that the hottest decade of the 20th century was the 1930’s ?
Are you aware that the hottest years were 1936 – 1937 ?
Obviously, the worldwide economic depression and gearing up for worldwide hostilities must have caused the global warming .
ANDRZEJEWSKI
A better method is
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
which both you and your cited references
IGNORE and contemptuously hold as
NOT WITH STANDING
by your arrogant ignorance of them.
There is no scientific method proof of a
GREENHOUSE EFFECT
as cited your alarmist cabal.
And no amount of your or their lying
will ever change that.
Given your history of lying arrogant political posturing,
GO A HEAD AND STUPIDLY MAKE SURE
YOU HAVE THE LAST WORD.
ONLY if I approve of your blogs Comrade Drewski.
There are millions of pages and citations on both sides of this issue… You really can’t see what a juvenile pi$$ing match you insist on, can you?
Of course, through the leftist funding of billions of dollars in public grant funding you have provided well-funded careers who those who produce only results with a politically predetermined outcome. All others are unwelcome.
It used to be the left disdained the corrupting effects of money, (Capitalist greed and all that stuff), but as soon as your guys controlled the purse strings you took scientific corruption to stratospheric heights.
Go on, please defend the job threats and free speech restrictions called for by your fellow socialists against scientists who dare question the paid-for results you parrot.
As a scientist working in medicine, that kind of activity is antithetical to basic scientific principle. Medical history is full of examples of scientists who changed the face of medicine precisely by challenging the status quo. Your philosophy is much closer to the priests of the Spanish Inquisition than anything remotely scientific.
Going back to the early 1970’s many liberals have thought that the Bill of Right should only apply to those that they considered politically correct. I remember arguing with one woman who thought that religions that had difference between men and women shouldn’t be allowed to do so.
The double standard applied beyond the Bill of Rights. The same people campaigning for academic freedom so they could use publicly funded schools to advance their agendas were trying to throw ROTC out of the colleges.
Today the Bill Rights protect people who make statements that are clearly wrong, such as severe weather events are increasing or that the vast majority of scientists support the climate change agenda. This is the way it should be. However, just as was happening in the 1970’s, many think that Bill Rights isn’t suppose to protect people who are politically incorrect even if they are in fact right. This has been shown in the attorney generals wanting to prosecute companies or the call that Scott Pruitt is guilty of an ethics violation.
Note that I said many liberals. I don’t want to be unfair to liberals who do not believe in the double standard.
ANDRZEJEWSKI
David is talking about something you can’t understand.
The G20 Finance Ministers are the $$ gate keepers and the climate change Armageddon industry needs billions in tax payer money to keep the earth has a fever campaign going . Not going to happen . The USA and others are wake up to the very poor return on investment of pretending to adjust the earths thermostat by spending $trillions to reduce a trace gas favorable to the environment .
As UN officials have admitted it was never about the science anyway . It was a cause designed to rally public support for their globalization agenda .
Climate science and humans impact isn’t “settled ” . it is just beginning .
Armageddon is the stick in the carrot and stick shtick used by mind control cults. Have you read Heaven and Hell?
Anyone who supports or defends peer intimidation, job harassment, threats of jail, and restriction of free speech against scientists holding contrary opinions doesn’t deserve to be engaged in honest debate. Those people certainly doesn’t deserve to be considered as respectable scientists. The moment these people resorted to threats based on differing thought they boldly crossed the line from science to political tyranny.
If I were on that side of the line I would be profoundly embarrassed. I would be seriously rethinking any “scientific” premise that tolerates that kind of abusive belief system and embraces that kind of viscous group-think.
Still waiting for that earth fever to break and the ice free Arctic .
More benefits with warming and humans thanks for ay contribution .
Think how far $$trillions could go to solving other environmental and social challenges .
Is there any doubt global warming fear mongering was over played in order to
justify the fleecing of tax payers ?
Conserving energy doesn’t require global warming fear mongering to justify action.
“Environmentalists want the Environmental Protection Agency‚Äôs inspector general to investigate whether Scott Pruitt violated internal policies when he suggested carbon emissions might not contribute to climate change.”
Maybe these enviro UN-MENTAL-ists never got the memo. The “internal policies” just got rewritten…LOL…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q5HK9HsBSU
For Drewski! Enjoy! LMAO!