Furor Erupts Over EPA Pulling ‘Climate Change’ Employees From Conference Or Something

This state of affairs has many in the media with Cult of Climastrology leans to become apoplectic. Slate, Washington Post, Engadget, and The Hill are just a few. And here’s the USA Today

Furor erupts over EPA decision to pull climate scientists from panel discussion

The Environmental Protection Agency is drawing heat for pulling its scientists from a panel discussion Monday in Rhode Island as part of a conference spotlighting the effects of climate change on the Narragansett Bay.

The withdrawal of the two scientists as well as an agency consultant has sparked fresh criticism about EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s skepticism toward the broad scientific community’s conclusion that human-caused global warming is a proven fact and a growing concern.

The conference where the scientists were scheduled to speak is coinciding with the release of a report showing the threats of climate change to Narragansett Bay, the 196- square-mile estuary whose watershed encompasses 1,705 square miles with more than 100 towns and cities that are home to nearly 2 million people.

Guess what? Hillary lost. Trump won. These employees do not set policy at the EPA. If they do not like it, they are welcome to resign and go work for an organization that wants to do this. There’s no reason the taxpayers should foot the bill for these employees to take fossil fueled trips (and possibly hotels and surely company paid for meals) to discuss the climate scam. Priorities can change at companies, and this applies to government agencies, as well.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

17 Responses to “Furor Erupts Over EPA Pulling ‘Climate Change’ Employees From Conference Or Something”

  1. drowningpuppies says:

    Notice all the weasel words in the short piece;
    Furor erupts
    sparked fresh criticism
    proven fact
    growing concern
    threats of climate change
    Ad nausem.

  2. BB-Idaho says:

    By all means get rid of scientists. Replace them with businessmen,
    lawyers and religious leaders, who are much more educated in atmospheric physics, thermodynamics, gaseous chemistry, free radical reactions and actual data. You guessed, I’m a scientist!

    • Bob spelled backwards says:

      Perhaps replace scientists that are businessmen chasing govt grants for bad science. What you subsidize you get more of. And just because I’m a glutton for punishment, what, pray tell, are you a scientist of? Science is from the Latin word for knowledge, so you could be a political scientist or some other soft science BS. “Scientist” means exactly nothing.

  3. Jeffery says:

    Update: Thanks TEACH, your promotion of Dr. Mann’s Kickstarter funding for a children’s book on global warming was a huge success already reaching 120% of the goal!


  4. Jeffery says:

    Science, not ideology should inform policy. tRump’s censoring of scientists is an outrage. The ignorati have won.

    • o0Nughthawk0o says:

      Science, not ideology should inform policy.

      And yet you continue with the 97% consensus fallacy.

      • Jeffery says:

        97% consensus fallacy

        Nice diversion. How is this related to tRump censoring EPA scientists?

        From your own research, what percentage of climate scientists accept the evidence that greenhouse gases from human burning of fossil fuels is causing the Earth to warm?

        • o0Nughthawk0o says:

          Not a diversion. You spout SCIENCE,SCIENCE, SCIENCE all the time but continually parrot the debunked many, many times over 97% consensus fallacy.

    • Dana says:

      P’raps our host will remind you of your statement the next time you say something along the lines of girls will be boys, and boys will be girls, it’s a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world.

      • Jeffery says:


        Certainly off topic, but by all means expound your theory of sex. Be sure and include discussions of sex steroids, pituitary glycoprotein hormones, and obviously, the NR0B1 gene on the short arm of the X-chromosome.

        Science didn’t stop in the 1800s.

        • Dana says:

          It’s simple: if you are born without a birth defect, if you have a penis and testicles, and XY chromosomes, you are male, period, and no mental illness, hormone treatments or surgery can change that. If you are born with a uterus, vagina, ovaries and XX chromosomes, you are female, period, and no mental illness, hormone treatments or surgery can change that.

          Unhappy, unhappy
          You have no complaint
          You are what your are and you ain’t what you ain’t
          So listen up buster, and listen up good
          Stop wishing for bad luck and knocking on wood. Dear Abby by John Prine.

          • Jeffery says:

            if you have a penis and testicles, and XY chromosomes, you are male

            If it were that simple, but science didn’t stop in the 1800s, except for some.

            And daddy won’t you take me back to Muhlenberg County
            Down by the Green River where Paradise lay
            Well, I’m sorry my son, but you’re too late in asking
            Mister Peabody’s coal train has hauled it away

            Paradise – John Prine

          • david7134 says:

            Jeff, No. Science has not progressed beyond that point. If you are a phenotypical male and think you are a woman, you are considered ill. Try looking it up on one of the medical sites such as Uptodate which provides the latest in opinion,.

  5. rotterdam says:

    Why is Warren Buffet, Jeff Bezos, George Soros, Bill Gates, T. Boone Pickens to name just a few leftist billionaires not investing in companies that will build wind, solar powered infrastructure around the US. Or combining forces to put together and R$D Department that will work on energy solutions including Automobile battery packs that are much more efficient and less costly?

    Apple is setting on almost a trillion dollars in cash from raping world citizens of their over priced products, the CEO preaches to us that if we do not believe in Global warming we should not buy their products and yet they do not SPEND A DIME on AGW other then low energy light bulbs.

    I should think that if each of these guys got together and dumped a couple billion per year into Green energy that they would begin making a difference.

    Why are States full of AGW proponents not spending a boat load of money thru bond programs building Wind and solar?

    I suspect that the real reason is two fold. AGW is nothing but a political football that the billionaires now for sure is not worth touching with their own funds. States know the same thing as well. Why spend hard earned state funds when they can sue the US government to coerce them into AGW policies that only benefit a small select group of people.

    In the EU, Germany shut down their Nuclear power plants and have gone to Wind power and solar power.

    Germany’s power grid almost collapsed in January due to poor performance from wind turbines and solar panels, according to data from a major trade union.

    Wind and solar power plants under-performed in January, 2017, because of cloudy weather with little or no wind, setting the stage for massive blackouts.

    Germany was forced to recommission coal power plants to simply keep the lights on. The country’s green energy plans calls for the shut down of 30 such power plants by 2019.

    Now I’m all for Green energy. But the panic stricken masses of the AGW movement have failed to get their heads around the true culprit of why the massive spike in Co2 and that is the clear cutting of the rain forests all along the Equator in many different countries. A forest that cannot be replanted. A system that by itself affects weather in great ways as well as by cutting it, it leads to extreme heating, rising co2 as well as Droughts. All of which we are facing.

    A brief OPEN LETTER to you AGW proponets. YOU ARE DESTROYING THE WORLD. When this world dies. It will be your fault. You can look your grandchildren in the eye and say it was ME and My stupid pawns who failed to grasp the reality of what was really happening on a global scale.

    The greatest crisis facing the world? Not NOKO or AGW but rather the decimation of the rain forests in poor countries that could benefit from all those billions of dollars spent on extorting nations to stop burning fossil fuels and to rather invest in these poor countries who are clear cutting the rain forests just to eek out a living.

    You AGW clowns are destroying this planet. Not deniers. Not skeptics. Not the fossil fuel industry. YOU AGW Nazi’s will one day have a communist world but it will not matter, because we can no longer breath, grow food and will be living in a world in which everyone but the uber rich are struggling just to survive. At least those of us still left.

    Get on board with the real culprit in all of this. Rain forests and the massive use of pesticides and fertilizers that are destroying this planet far more quickly then are fossil fuels.

  6. Jeffery says:


    You keep claiming that the “decimation of the rain forests” is the primary cause of rising atmospheric CO2, yet offer no evidence in support of your “hypothesis”.

    Can you direct us to your supporting evidence? Thank you.

    • david7134 says:

      Maybe he read a book Jeff. I suggest that you do as well, on many subjects.

      • rotterdam says:

        Actually I work for a foundation who specializes in saving the rainforests. Its my lifes work.

        There has been a tremendous amount of research done on this subject. Including studies by the EU which is certainly AGW friendly as well as other studies conducted by your very own institutions of higher learning.

        Again the Amazon rainforest does not fit in with the narrative that the radical left wants to put out there. Therefore its been decided long ago to ignore any reason why CO2 might be rising in favor of fossil fuels as the only source. This fits a narrative that can embezzle money from the west rather than put any blame for rising co2 on poor nations such as Brazil, Venezuela, Indonesia, etc..etc.

        I’m not even going to bother to point to research that suggests a correlation between rising co2 and the loss of a major heat sink, in addition to the burning of these massive co2 sinks for the last 40 years putting this co2 back into the atmosphere. Then on top of that you have now lost an estimated 40 percent of the rainforest sinking ability combined with the rise in massive uses of dirty fossil fuels by China.

        Then any one with a penchant for the real truth can look at the devastating effects fertilizers have on sinking co2 because farmers no longer rotate their crops and let part of their acreage set idle.

        Now, a group of scientists at the University of California, Berkeley have found a way to “fingerprint” various sources of nitrous oxide — and they’ve determined that the accelerated increase in atmospheric nitrous oxide in the last few decades has indeed been due to synthetic nitrogen fertilize

        One last aspect of this research offers a compelling reason that climate advocates and farmers (along with the rest of us) need to get behind this understandably wonky issue of fertilizer efficiency. The study found that nitrous oxide — independent of its nature as a greenhouse gas — also blocks one of the atmosphere’s natural cooling processes. So, cutting nitrous oxide emissions could also enhance the atmosphere’s ability to shed warmth.

        This last paragraph is of utmost importance. Not only do fertilizers deplete the ozone layer but the shed the earths ability to actually cool themselves.

        But go right on targeting Fossil fuels and believeing that building windmills will save the planet. AGW proponents are mostly political hackeys with a political agenda and no desire to actually fix whats broken with our planet.

Pirate's Cove