| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| EPA Ignores Protests; Will Control Carbon |
| 2010-08-03 |
| The Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday blew off requests to overturn its finding that greenhouse gases endanger human health. And they still don't like Climate-Gate either, because it weakened their position. The EPA's decision to reject those petitions was hardly a surprise - the agency was, in effect, being asked to check its own work. But the EPA used the occasion to attack the arguments of its critics, many of them reliant on the "Climate-gate" episode, in which hackers released embarassing emails sent by climate scientists. Because the British media showed no inclination to investigate the issue, since the 'science' was certain. The EPA's response cited several Just yesterday, I saw National Geographic had an article saying global warming was a certainty, based on present temperature measurements, nevermind that messy history stuff. The finding had been challenged by the states of Virginia and Texas, as well as the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Ohio Coal Association, and |
| Posted by:Bobby |
| #18 Then watch the usual suspect use the |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-08-03 19:24 |
| #17 The EPA has come a long way since Nixon set them up to protect bald eagles. Hopefully the new Republican House will defund them in January. Obama will veto any attempt to eliminate the agency, but he can't force Congress to appropriate money to pay for it. |
| Posted by: rwv 2010-08-03 18:41 |
| #16 Thanks, Mods, for corrrecting the yellow highlight on the first paragraph. I was momentarily confused between re-writing and commenting. After it went up, I decided it shoulda been yellow. |
| Posted by: Bobby 2010-08-03 18:25 |
| #15 The NG article on Israel several years back was the final straw for me. Cancelled and never looked back. |
| Posted by: Laurence of the Rats 2010-08-03 18:16 |
| #14 The left is always ready to quote Eisenhower on the 'military industrial complex' but has also buried what immediately followed that quote - Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers. The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-08-03 17:48 |
| #13 Ditto immigration. It is another piece of stealth |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2010-08-03 17:25 |
| #12 Shut up peons. Swallow hard and like it. We don't really care if you like it. Just shut up you are getting it anyway. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2010-08-03 17:23 |
| #11 Liberals, the new aristocracy or autacracy if things continue the way they've been. |
| Posted by: miscellaneous 2010-08-03 16:53 |
| #10 Watts Up is also on a slant but with the opposite slope of SA. Watts Up still views the news primarily from a scientific view, not ideological as does SA, but it still has a slant. New Scientist is in the middle. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2010-08-03 16:18 |
| #9 Lex, the best thing I can do is recommend "Watts up with That?", an online "magazine" that deals primarily with climate, but digresses into other science quite frequently. There are NO print magazines that are even halfway as honest as WUWT. They've been voted "the best science news site on the Web" for the second year in a row. Lots of top-named "skeptics" contribute articles there, and the readership is about as diverse as Rantburg. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2010-08-03 15:48 |
| #8 Tree huggers now run the EPA with the support of tax and spend politicians who see a different kind of green potential, your money going to them. The conspirators have got it all worked out. |
| Posted by: Hupoting Fillmore9546 2010-08-03 13:36 |
| #7 I gave up on SA, too, but still get Discover. Not quite as high-brow... |
| Posted by: Bobby 2010-08-03 12:44 |
| #6 I'll second that lex. I dropped SA for exactly those reasons a couple opf years ago. |
| Posted by: Hellfish 2010-08-03 12:28 |
| #5 when I dropped it for being too much politics and not enough science Same problem with Scientific American, which now has as many non-science articles as science ones. Can anyone recommend an excellent, reasonably highbrow science publication for laymen that is NOT infected with heavy political bias? Open to anything in English or French at this point. Russian too, if such a journal exists. |
| Posted by: lex 2010-08-03 10:44 |
| #4 Family had a long, continuous tradition of taking National Geographic, from early 50's (grandparents), through 70's (parents), until a few years ago, when I dropped it for being too much politics and not enough science. Great maps and pretty pictures just weren't enough. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2010-08-03 10:39 |
| #3 I read an article on Israel in NG a few years ago. It was so slanted that I would have cancelled the subscription based on that alone -- but the subscription was paid by my doctor's office, so their balance sheet remained safe. They did a big write-up on Afghanistan more recently, complete with the poster-sized maps they do so well. Again, party line, despite the gorgeous photos. I wouldn't have known, had I not been a loyal Rantburger. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2010-08-03 10:36 |
| #2 I've had a subscription to National Geographic for 35 years, and I'm actually considering canceling it because of the way they are ignoring the discrediting of global warming. It used to be an occasional article which could be over looked but they are becoming increasingly shrill just like the rest of the loonies. |
| Posted by: NCMike 2010-08-03 08:21 |
| #1 Congress can amend the statutes regulating what the EPA can and can't do at any time they wish. These protests should be directed to Congress & expressed at the ballot box. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-08-03 08:15 |