People at the top level are at last coming out with what we should have been hearing a decade and a half ago. In The Australian, the article EPA head Scott Pruitt claims carbon dioxide emissions don’t cause global warming commences:The new head of the US Environmental Protection Agency has called into question the organisation’s legal right to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, a signature effort by the Obama administration.
As always, the reader comments are well worth perusing vis-à-vis the “fundamental facts” of the activists. Here are a few:
In a speech on Thursday to a room full of energy executives in Houston for CERAweek by IHS Markit, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said there was a “fundamental question” about whether Congress gave the agency the authority to “deal with the Co2 issue.”
“It’s a question that needs to be asked and answered,” Mr. Pruitt said. In an interview earlier Thursday, Mr. Pruitt said carbon dioxide emissions weren’t the primary cause of global warming. “I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see,” Mr. Pruitt told CNBC’s Squawk Box.
There is consensus in the scientific community [No, there isn’t, really, just the appearance of it by reason of the constant parroting of the alarmist narrative by most of the media] that carbon dioxide, a bi-product of burning fossil fuels, and other greenhouse gases is a significant driver of climate change. Mr. Pruitt said further analysis and debate on the subject are needed.
Mr. Pruitt’s statements mark a dramatic shift from Obama administration policies, which sought to use agencies like the EPA to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.
Environmental activists quickly condemned his comments. “This is like hearing the head of NASA saying the Earth is flat,” said Vera Pardee of the Center for Biological Diversity. [The customary “environmental activist" penchant for gross hyperbole, not to put too fine a point on it] It’s absolutely terrifying that the man in charge of the EPA denies fundamental facts about climate change.” [“fundamental facts”! What was I saying about hyperbole, not to put too fine a point on it?]
In an interview on the sidelines of the conference, Mr. Pruitt said the EPA will take more cues from states in the future instead of leading federal top-down efforts to regulate air and water emissions. “There are some changes in how we endeavour to lead and act as an agency, ” Mr. Pruitt said.
T33 MINUTES AGO
Some facts (and comments):
1. Climate change is real and natural - if not, how did the Ice Age ever finish? The question is whether humans are having a profound impact.
2. CO2 is a tiny part of the air. Nitrogen and oxygen make up 99% of the air and CO2 doesn't even come next. It's a miniscule 0.04% of the air, and therefore a trace gas. To argue that it's the dominant cause of planet warming would require that it has to have a disproportionate effect like methane. CO2 is quite unlike methane.
3. Greenhouse gases are important to have. Without them, our temperature would be about 33C below what we have now and the global temp would be about -18C.
4. The greatest greenhouse gas is water vapour (cloud). It's between three and eight times more effective than CO2 but we only seem to hear about CO2. It's a lot harder to blame clouds.
5. Politicians and scientists benefit from climate change scares, and most are not independent contributors to the debate.
6. The planet has barely warmed since 1998 despite CO2 emissions soaring. That should bring into question whether the link to CO2 is anywhere as strong as first believed.
7. Climate science is still extremely theoretical. No climate models are able to conclusively explain or predict. There's a lot of conjecture out there.
8. Most warming alarmists exaggerate their claims. Flannery predicted that the sea would be lapping the 8th floor windows of buildings despite the scientists saying oceans could rise 30cm (tops). Elsewhere, there's been plenty of concealing or downplaying of data that doesn't fit the scare campaign.
FLAGSHARE
Rick33 MINUTES AGO
There is consensus in the Green activists community, not the scientific community, that carbon dioxide, a bi-product of burning fossil fuels, and other greenhouse gases is a significant driver of climate change. At best, science tells us that CO2 is one of many greenhouse gases that cause the earth to be warmer than it would otherwise be. Climate change, on the other hand, is caused be many things. Changes in solar intensity being a major one.
The claim that human emissions of CO2 is causing dangerous global warming is a Green claim designed to promote their deindustrialisation campaign. It's not based on science.
FLAGSHARE
Terence34 MINUTES AGO
Thank God for the Americans. They show us the way.
Terence M2
FLAGSHARE
3
Jerry36 MINUTES AGO
The fight back has started, about time.i hope Mr Pruitt knows what he will be in for.
FLAGSHARE
Damon37 MINUTES AGO
Given the VP Mike Pence does not believe in evolution it shouldn't come as a great surprise that this sort of ignorance is still at the highest levels of government in the USA as frightening as it is...
FLAGSHARE
David41 MINUTES AGO
That's more like it drain the swamp
FLAGSHARE
Adam44 MINUTES AGO
Finally! Some common sense!!!!
FLAGSHARE
Bob29 MINUTES AGO
@Adam Adam - Unfortunately its too late for Australia. The energy crisis is real and the result of green zealots in charge over the last 10 or so years decarbonising our economy. If we start today it will take another 10 years to fix.
FLAGSHARE
Hayden46 MINUTES AGO
I think I hear the sound of a draining swamp.....Psssssssssssss
FLAG
Responses