Shocking News: EPA Has No Scientific Basis for Regulations

I’m sure this will come as quite a shock to our faithful readers, but the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) admitted that it can’t actually reproduce the “science” it has been using for years as the justification for its Clean Air Act.

I remember very distinctly the attitude on the Georgia Tech campus toward the environmental “science” department. I’m sure that much of what was studied by environmental science majors was legitimate, especially as it concerned local phenomena and processes. But when it comes to the global aspects of environmental science (weather systems, causation, the long-term effects of pollution, etc.), it becomes obvious that environmental scientists are less reliable than weathermen and relying heavily on extremely speculative models of explanation.

Pollution is defined by concentrations. Nothing that is considered a pollutant is necessarily bad intrinsically or necessarily. Even toxic elements occur naturally at low concentrations. The EPA determines what those concentrations are allowed to be in order to still be considered “safe.” And recently, the EPA has been narrowing those regulations even further, most recently in an attempt to force businesses to “go green.” But as it turns out, for years, the EPA has created and enforced regulations based on data that it pawned off as “hard science” that is impossible to reproduce independently. It was secret science. Pet science. Not hard science:

. . . The House Science Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, . . . issued its first subpoena in 21 years last August after being stonewalled by the EPA for two years . . .

However, despite “multiple interactions with the third party owners of the research data in an effort to obtain that data,” [EPA Administrator Gina] McCarthy wrote, some of the data subpoenaed by the committee “are not (and were not) in the possession, custody or control of the EPA, nor are they within the authority to obtain data that the agency identified. . . . The EPA acknowledges, however, that the data provided are not sufficient in themselves to replicate the analyses in the epidemiological studies, nor would they allow for the one to one mapping of each pollutant and ecological variable to each subject.”

So, in other words, the actual particulars of how much particulate pollutants are considered dangerous are totally arbitrary. The EPA largely set those regulations how they wanted to, and supported their legitimacy with a thin fig leaf of “science.” What did you expect though? Politicized science is always suspect.

99 responses

        • They do use it. And they use some of the smartest environmental engineers in the country. But that doesn’t matter to people that don’t believe in science.

          • But you are ok with the EPA making regulations based on NO science because it furthers your agenda. These engineers serve at the pleasure of their political masters which is why their “science” is questionable. You suck up every pronouncement from the Government as gospel. All governments trend towards tyranny and tools like you aid the process with your childish trust of the nanny state.

      • A recent the study was able to uncover some genetic links to daftness. It turns out that these brain-dead people had what scientists have now dubbed the stupid gene. Dr. Jesser

        Speaking in terms of genotype, everyone is a carrier for the stupid gene. It is literally in everyone. But when a particular set of parental characteristics coincide, then the stupid gene is exhibited phenotypically. And let me tell you, the first time you see the stupid gene in all its glory, it will utterly astound you.

        But if the stupid gene is in all of us, how can you really tell if you are affected? Well, there are signs, according to Jesser:

        first off have you asks the question, “How do I know if I have the stupid gene?” Well, if you are asking that question, you are probably of sound mind. Everyone who came in with the stupid gene was cock-sure he or she was the smartest person in the room. It was quite astounding really. But there are a few initial tests you can do—although the only real way to determine it is through blood testing and neural scans.

        If you have ever written “Your stupid” as a comment on the internet, you probably have it. In fact, if you are regularly
        involved in this kind of activity on the internet, you should get checked out.

    • Your proof that the GOP really is in favor of dirty air and dirty water. It’s unbelievable how detached from reality you teabaggers really are.

        • I do like them. It’s you IDIOT rightwing extremist TEABAGGER SCIENCE DENIERS that want to destroy the environment.

          • Never. What you tea baggerS don’t get is that FARMERS are the biggest welfare queens IN THE WORLD!!! I collect rent for a living. I was fortunate to get some really good financial advice from my parents. They said”here’s a TON of money, now DON’T LOSE IT!!”

          • You mean the farmers that Obama and his goons want to grow food stamps? You mean the parents that right up stairs?

          • Still obsessed with teabagging, aye Bobby? Tell us what your fascination with this practice is. Are you the baggie or the bagger? Tell us Bobby.

          • He doesn’t consider getting paid to post comments being on the dole. He may even be technically correct on that point.

          • Science deniers? You are describing the EPA and the global warming scammers. They make it up as they go along, it’s all about control and power. The leftist elites want to control every breath we take, and of course keep themselves permanently in power (and in our pockets). Actual science destroys their schemes, so like you, they resort to insults, smears, and censorship.

          • The person that fathered all of this.Al Gore Goes all over the globe. As the only passenger in his huge Jet. Those jets use about 2,000 gallons of fuel per hour. He has traveled thousands of hours. Does he have the only jet that produces no POLLUTION.

          • Leave Al Gore alone….. He invented the Internet you know. And he gets to use absurd amounts of energy – because – well – he is that important.

          • AHHHH Barbie, earth to Barbie, the entire article is about the EPA ignoring science, and making up shit as they go along, it has nothing to do with Republicans, or Tea Party activists, or even Right wing extremist’s. Just lying stinking progressives as usual…….

    • No, the GOP is not in favor of dirty air and dirty water. I don’t know where LABobE comes to this conclusion … it must be written in the Liberal Progressive Cheat Sheet that comes out periodically. The EPA was established during the Nixon Administration, whom I recall was a member of the GOP.

      We had some real environmental disasters back then like Love Canal. And we certainly do not want the kind of air they have in Red China or in central Sumatra a month or so ago. So, yes, a certain level of regulation is needed. But the EPA has definitely gone into the over-reach mode with this greenhouse gas stuff as it relates to the Clean Air Act and interfering with private land owners to manage their water ways and ponds as they relate to the Clean Water Act.

      There needs to be common sense check and balance

      • Warning:
        The Joint Threat Research Intelligent Group and its counterparts in Canada and the United States have been systematically attempting “to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discussions the promotion of their disinformation and propaganda campaigns on the internet.using agent’s “trolls”. This according to documents that Snowden has uncovered, these documents indicate that they will to
        sink to despicable lows in the promotion of their agenda.
        Have you seen anyone who would fit this mold?

        • Should I roll the credits?
          Algore, Obama, Biden, Reid, Pelosi, Boxer, Lisa Lee Jackson and on and on. Preliminary indications are that the Democrat Party is full of them.

    • and I must say that I am shocked to hear that the EPS cannot back up their claims; and yes this article really opened my eyes 🙂

    • Incorrect. We heard about this scary global warming thingy and found that large amounts of hot air are being emitted from DNC headquarters, a big white house in DC, and the Senate side of the Capitol building.

  1. EPA isn’t the only bureaucracy in DC that should be shut down, lets see, how about the DOE, which has outlived it’s usefulness, if it ever had any, then the Dept of Education, education is a local issue, shut it down, then the thug BATF that operated the….oops that was ‘Fast and Furious’ wasn’t it? Those 4 alone would cut the federal budget by billions if not trillions. Of course all those government workers would be out of work, but we are hemorrhaging money every day. For the most part there is nothing these do that can’t be states issues, and if it involves more than one state there are other ways to resolve it than these inefficient thuggish bureaucracies.

    • You people aren’t the “don’t tread on me’ small goverment libertarians that you claim to be. You people want the government involved in every area of life from sexual orientation to marriage to woman’s reproductive health!!! Your the exact OPPOSITE of what you claim to be!!!

        • I used to be in the GOP until they became the party of religious KOOKS and science deniers. BTW, is it any coincidence that the the same people that believe the earth is 6,000 years old, believe in talking donkeys and bushes are the same people that deny climate science???

          • Your hatred of all things Christian (you don’t have the testicular fortitude to direct your hatred toward Muslims) tells me that you probably had a “teabagging” experience with a priest and the resulting oxygen deprivation has rendered you mentally retarded or, in other words, a liberal.

      • Can’t wait for the day the shtf. My entire yard will be filled with rabid evil scumbags (your kind)…impaled on spikes. The only way back is to purge the evil from our midst. Tired of people making it a right to be wrong while making laws against even saying anything about it (which is a violation of our actual/natural rights). The sentence for each of those crimes against nature is death!

    • I liked Hong Kong and Beijing as well as Singapore. going back in January.

      will never appreciable manipulated facts. As you see no need for truth in government here is a question are you a member of that self-righteous,intolerant, morally superior cult that demonizes those who disagree, re-writes history when that serves your purpose, identifies evil in its opponents but not in yourself, acts without regard to the law or the need for transparency or the absolute obligation to tell the truth. Are you willing to go to any length to obliterate those who oppose your chosen agenda?

  2. Just want to point out that the original scientific prediction was weather extremes – the warming portion was a minor part of the model, but the media for some reason loved to latch on to it.

      • I have read all of your posts and have yet to see you write anything intelligent indicating you know anything about science other than what you might be spoofed from your Liberal Progressive poop sheet. What is your academic background?

        Up here in Northern California, over in Sonoma County the local EPA types are getting on the case of the local garbage collector because all of the organic matter he is supposed to collect separately and compost has run-off when it rains to Dictch A which feeds to Stream B which goes to Creek C then River D and finally to Bay E and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. This run-off would contain, horror of horrors, ‘organic material’. The idiots that run this agency don’t seem to realize that the run-off from hundreds of thousands of acres contains decaying plant matter and animal poop as it has for millennia. Now we are also learning that composting is bad, because the microbes that turn grass and leaves to mulch produce … Brace yourself …. Carbon Dioxide and Methane!

        All of this environmental crap is to shutdown the oil industry and our economy as well as tell us that we cannot have lawns or gardens anymore and instead should install moonscape instead.

        • I’m not a scientist, but I do have an MBA from NYU. Both of those gases you lists are greenhouse gases. I may not be a scientist, but I know when not to argue with the experts who have studied in their respective fields their entire lives. Greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane contribute to climate change, which is why we need to do everything we can to curb those emissions. Typically, anyone arguing against that is some kind of shill for the oil industry that stands to gain financially from keeping their pollution legal.

          • Co2 and methane are not greenhouseggases. They are measured in parts per million, and methane is parts per billion. And the amount in the air has no affect on earths tempuratures. The main contributing “gas” due to warming is water vapor, not co2. Because as temperatures rise from natural change, co2 follows, not the other way around.

          • Thanks for your response. As an MBA you have been trained to run a business or perhaps run a specialized part of the business such as Supply Chain, Finance, HR etc. Your indication of your reliance on experts for your stance on climate change indicates you do that as well on the job, which is good. But to run a successful business, you do need to have some level of knowledge of these subject matter experts know and they need to know your area to a certain extent in order to have discussions, sometimes frank, about why things happen the way they do, the path forward, etc. I should know because I have been on the other side of these conversations as an engineer.

            I do suggest you exercise caution at accepting at face value what experts tell you. In some cases things are indisputable fact (e.g., water runs downhill). In other cases there are degrees of uncertainty. Yes, there are a body of scientists who believe in man caused global warming/climate change. But there are also an equally significant body of scientists who do not believe man is making a significant, if any, contribution to global warming / climate change.

            I have watched Mr Gore’s documentary. And he makes a very compelling case. Although I am not a climate or atmospheric scientist, as a chemical engineer, I took many many classes in chemistry and physics and have a pretty good understanding of thermodynamics and transport phenomenon (basically fluid fluid and heat transfer). Unless fluids are in a well contained system (like water flowing from the water heater in your house to the sink), the computer models that describe use a lot of assumptions … the best guesses by the most knowledgeable scientists … but they are still educated guesses. So for something as complicated as the earth’s atmosphere, I will admit that I am a global warming skeptic and not a shill for the oil industry.

            You may be surprised to know that greenhouse gases are not bad things. Without greenhouse gases, life as we know it on earth would not be possible. These gases trap a certain amount of solar energy as well as deflect a certain amount of solar energy so that we have climate instead of very severe temperature extremes between the surface that faces towards the son and the surface that faces away from the sun (like the moon or Mars). Also, if you look at Wikipedia, you will find that the largest contributor to the greenhouse effect is water vapor.

            Life has existed on earth for millions of years. During these millions of years the amount of water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases have likely fluctuated. The planet has never been destroyed during all of this time. We all know the dinosaurs became extinct because of climate change (the ice age) and many of these cold blooded creatures could not survive, but warm blood creatures could thrive. Did the dinosaurs cause climate change because of pooping, flatulating, and belching out more carbon dioxide and the twenty time stronger green house gasser methane? If so, I would like to see the study and I would be less of a skeptic. If not, I would say that climate change was due to some other terrestrial (volcanic eruptions) and/or extra terrestrial (solar flares) activity.

            As an MBA, if you are in the business of manufacturing or producing a physical product or providing a service you must know how your energy bill relates to your bottom line. Right now, a significant amount of energy is supplied by oil, natural gas, and coal (not so much in your neck of the woods). This energy is currently much more abundant and cheaper than the popular renewables (solar and wind). If your energy bill were to go up (carbon taxes) or your energy supply to become unreliable (fossil fuel power plants shut down), your business would likely be in jeopardy. So you should join me as a shill in challenging where all of the governmental initiatives related global warming/climate change are going. Putting millions out of work results in less environmental awareness by the populace because people will do anything to survive, such as cut down their forests.

            For the record, I am very much for renewable energy sources, but they must be cost effective and not artificially subsidized by tax credits or special government programs

          • When it comes down to it, we either rely on the experts that have spent their entire lives studying the climate or we pretend like we know more than they do. For the life of me, I can’t figure out why those in the GOP think they know more than scientists that have devoted their lives to the climate. Remember, these are the same people that believe the earth is 6,000 years old and believe in talking snakes!!!

          • Yes we need to rely on experts, but that does not mean we always need to blindly believe everything they tell us. There are certain things that are measurable facts like if you fully combust a gallon of gasoline it will produce certain quantity of carbon dioxide and water vapor. This you can precisely determine. Other things, such as climate change, are based on measurements of various things such as global land and sea temperatures and carbon dioxide content and proposing a correlation because the data seems to track or trend implying a relationship between them. Certainly there is a body of scientists who believe that one causes the other. There are others who dispute the data. Still there are others who agree that they track but do not agree that one causes the other. Maybe there is some third culprit out there that influences both.

            I would weight much more heavily the opinion of a recognized climate scientist than I would the opinion of President Obama or El Rushbo. I am 59 years old. In the area of diet and exercise, we have heard from experts who tell us to eat this, don’t eat that, and do these types of exercises. Then a few years later, we find out that this is all wrong and we can eat that, but not this other stuff. So, who do we believe? As a learned individual, you need to form your own opinion so you can take action that you feel is most appropriate for yourself. do suggest you research where this 97% scientific consensus came from. I also have been told that there is a petition signed by over 31,000 American scientists disputing the role of carbon dioxide in global warming / climate change and urge rejection of the Kyoto Treaty. So who do you believe and why?

          • For some reason, could not continue to edit my comment below, but want to add….
            The economic impact to implementing carbon dioxide reduction is huge. The impact has more certainty that carbon dioxide has to global warming/climate change. So, naturally it falls into the political arena. The ecological activists are mostly lined up with the Left. The business interests and small government advocates are mostly on the Right. So the two major parties are basically mouthpieces for their constituency groups.
            I have not seen anywhere that the GOP believes the earth is 6000 years old or believes in talking snakes. I have however seen when Democrats can no longer support their position with fact, they tell all of us ‘the discussion is over’ and resort to petty name calling.

          • April 9, 2014

            Report CO2 Is Not a Pollutant, Provides ‘Beneficial Impacts’ to Planet
            Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but a naturally occurring chemical compound that benefits plants and thus, the planet and its inhabitants, according to a lengthy report released Wednesday by the free-market Heartland Institute.
            “Carbon dioxide is an aerial fertilizer that provides many beneficial impacts,” said Craig Idso, one of the lead authors of the report, when asked him to name the most salient finding of the 37 scientists from 12 countries who contributed to it.
            “You can look at thousands of studies real world data studies that have actually been conducted that demonstrate beyond any doubt that higher levels of CO2 are going to increase the productivity of plants,” Idso said.

            “They’re real,” Idso said of the benefits of CO2“ They’re not imagined. They’re not projected. They’re real, and they’re occurring now.”

            On December 2009, the Environmental Protection
            Agency (EPA) issued a final regulation listing CO2 as one of the greenhouses gases that is considered a pollutant that “endangers public health.” The regulation is part
            of what the EPA says is required under the Clean Air Act.

            The EPA relies heavily in its environmental assessments on the climate change reports produced by the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which issued its fifth report in September 2013.

            Joseph Bast, president of the Heartland Institute, said the IPCC report has been “largely discredited” by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change’s (NIPCC) “Climate Change Reconsidered II” series of reports, including a 1,000-page report on the physical science of climate change that was released in 2013.

  3. all the more proof that the Obama administrations goal is the destruction of the United States. the restrictive laws on emissions that have been made up by the affect of law. the reduction of a viable market place as the Obama EPA restricts electrical production from abundant sources to limited strangle hold methods that are assured to curtail production and drive up the cost.
    implementing made up science with out bases in facts to further ruin the nations economy which seems to be their goal with all the global warming and or cooling, CO2 emissions, green house gasses natural occurrence world wide, while allowing others like China and Asia to continue unabated pollution.

  4. And what type of scientific basis do they need. People that deny the EPA probably think LA, Beijing, Cairo, etc. smog comes from migrating birds.

    • the tag team is back

      Have any doubts, (EO 12866 was issued by President Clinton in 1993.) A recent office of Management and Budget statement notes that careful consideration of both costs and benefits is important in determining whether a regulation is worth implementing at all.

      Indeed, any valid and honest benefit-cost (B-C) analysis likewise requires that agencies consider both the benefits and the costs of carbon-based fuels and carbon dioxide emissions.
      Thus far, the EPA and other government agency analyses, press releases and regulatory proposals have highlighted only the alleged
      costs of carbon-based fuels and their supposed effects on climate change. They have never even mentioned the many clear benefits
      associated with those fuels and emissions.
      Had they followed the law and B-C rules, they would have found that: Hydrocarbon and carbon dioxide benefits outweigh the cost by as much as 500 to 1.
      This is real science and some of the efforts to deny it.

  5. In the beginning, the level particulate pollutants was zero. PPs are not natural, and don’t even think of comparing them to something like volcanic ash.

  6. I can only guess that the author is a paid shill for the oil industry. How much are they paying you to write this crap???

    • So, I’m guessing you’ve got no life. You’ve spent alot of time typing alot of words here but not said anything intelligent so far. Keep trying. You must have something between your ears besides air.

      • Unlike you, I actually accept the fact that there is a such thing called the scientific method. You science deniers reject science and would rather believe in the invisible spaghetti monster of pastafarianism.

    • Have any doubts about the EPA?
      (EO 12866 was issued by President Clinton in 1993.) A recent office of
      Management and Budget statement notes that careful consideration of both costs and benefits is important in determining whether a regulation is worth implementing at all.
      in fact any valid and honest benefit-cost (B-C) analysis likewise requires that agencies consider both the benefits and the costs of carbon-based fuels and carbon dioxide emissions.
      Thus far, the EPA and other government agency analyses, press releases and regulatory proposals have highlighted only the alleged costs of carbon-based fuels and their supposed effects on climate change. They have never even mentioned the many clear benefits associated with those fuels and emissions.
      Had they followed the law and B-C rules, they would have found that: Hydrocarbon and carbon dioxide benefits outweigh the cost by as much as 500 to 1.
      This is real science and some of the efforts to deny it.

  7. Since obama started campaigning and I figured out that he is a Muslim Marxist, I have not believed anything this administration says. Obama and his gang of thugs just constantly prove I am right whenever they make a move. What they say and what they do are two different things. You can never trust a communist.

    • Sam, do you believe that if a Marxist/communist was elected president the result would be that the stock market & corporate profits would SOAR to ALL TIME HIGHS? Do you believe a Muslim would smoke, drink, eat pork go to a Christian church, support gay marriage & be pro choice? If so, you may wanna look up the meaning of words like Marxist, communist & Muslim because you’re obviously clueless as to what they mean.

      • Doesn’t need to look them up Bobbybagger…got your words of brilliance to show him. By the way, your troll masters should have informed you that the stock market hasn’t exactly been “soaring” lately.

  8. When 2% of a population bands together to take control over the whole population, that’s Racketeering and EVIL! Not democratic! When that minority does this focused takeover on all important nations, one community, one state, one nation, then one world at a time, then that’s a Luciferian Agenda! When that minority took over International banking, then International Warring (bankrupting any nation resisting) that’s EVIL! When they take over national and International media then that’s Racketeering! When they dictate to local medias then that’s EVIL and should not deserve the 4th Amendment protections! When they take over publishing and scholastic educational system, then that’s EVIL and Brainwashing to innocent children! When they take over politicans and artists who perform on their controlled stages thru Washington lobbyists and Hollywood, that’s Racketeering! When they came out of hiding, killing our president (Kennedy), and demanding all governing parties, local, state, and national, to put their hands into the blood by helping cover up, then that’s an EVIL coup! When they create a Homeland in a religious crossroads with an International body to endorse and pretend to protect the world in whole, then that’s a Luciferian base grooming a world takeover! When our national agencies of citizen protection override state concerns to introduce poisons in our local city water to sedate the population at large, then that’s an EVIL AGENDA! When they allow poisons to be sprayed into the air, GMO fake food on the table, solely back Rockefeller medicines that don’t cure, stop reporting radiation that sickens, hide technology that attacked a major city (blaming a bogeyman traveling thru foreign countries, then destroying each country), then that’s International AND local terrorism! That’s Lucifer’s EVIL Agenda for taking over the world thru deception and our own advanced technology! When required vaccines are engineered to soft kill your immune system rather than strengthen it, while liquidating your accumulated wealth, then that’s EVIL RACKETEERING for Lucifer! When allowing fracking and cracking of the mantle with poisonous chemicals and allowing toxic oil to rise up into the aquafirs while suppressing free energy development, then that’s anti-Human! When a government takes over a private car company and not increase competition by quadrupling gas mileage, or producing cheap electric vehicles, or selling personal anti-gravitic vehicles so one could explore the world, makes me PISSED! Screw Lucifer and Up With Mankind!
    Let’s disband the U.N, dissolve Israel, end private International Banking and national usery to governments not printing their own money, share developed technology, promote a national manufacturing base to protect or develop a thriving middle-class, replace our controlled Congress, White House, and Courts with people genetically not related to our controlling 2%, or economically compromised, or connected in anyway to any lobby, help develop lesser nations with sound principals of growth not enslavement, end our own energy enslavement and release compartmentalized technology, encourage birth control not death or abortion, abandon nuclear technology and expose it for the economical enslavement, environmental folly, and bomb-making that it is, and expose Lucifer’s Perpetual Agenda to rise to power and the historical destructiveness for mankind he causes!
    If the Jews would help expose the Luciferian Khazarians amongst them, if the Catholics would out the pedophiliacs and Luciferian elite among them, if the TV evangelists would tell say you’re titheing Lucifer’s Homeland, If the Mormons would tear down the Luciferian temples, etc., then we could all get along and look forward to the future in a rich and plentiful environment of the Creator’s blessing, enhanced by man’s technology, as the Native people had here in America before the Luciferian-aided whiteman came to destroy, pollute, and kill!

    • You are just full of sick hate for everyone, except Muslim and communist !
      Why don’t you and your dear leader go on back to Kenya.

      • No hate in me, but I’m full of ANGER!!! The same anger the “Prince of Peace” displayed when he went into the temples and was confronted by the money-changers that insisted that one had to buy their expensive animal for a blood sacifice to be able to speak to God! My leader is coming soon and he ain’t no CIA cloned-and-raised brat who’s turning into the anti-Christ a little more each day! Are you a Talmud worshipper who also thinks Christ “Is a bastard that’s boiling in his own excrement and urine every day”?, I quote. You DO know what they did to another John, don’t you – “the Baptist”? What type of citizen democracy do you believe in that our constitution was founded upon? I believe it’s the whole 100% EQUALLY, not a 2% takeover!!! Go eat your GMO foods, drink the fluoride, take the pharmaceuticals, watch the TV, and only believe what the 6 o’clock news tells you! Have a nice day.

  9. it’s all about power, control and the destruction of our constitution, america and freedom so they can become marxist dictators.

  10. They are part of the communist ploy to slow down and destroy this country’s progress and prosperity period!

  11. I remember the pre-EPA days – that’s when New England snowfall would be white for about 4 hours – after that a black layer of soot would clearly be visible. Then came the nasty EPA – snow stayed white for days. Bad, bad, EPA, wasting tax money on keeping the snow white.

  12. Surprise! Surprise!! Surprise!!! The EPA and junk science strike again. This is exactly why the dumbing down of Americans is so vital. . .they’re too stupid to realize how duped they really are and they believe in Al Bore and his inconvenient truth.

  13. Duh! This agency along with many others was hijacked by the progressives long ago and have since been quietly restricting our rights with their ridiculous regulations. It’s time to stop this nonsense and permanently crush the progressives and their agenda. Abolish the EPA and most other federal agencies.

  14. The EPA has been making up statistics and facts for decades. Nothing new here, except maybe that more folks are beginning to see the truth they previously believed were just “Conspiracy Theories.

Leave a Reply