EPA cover-up
Which says, in part:
"About a week before the House vote on "cap and trade," the Washington, D.C.-based Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) released some EPA e-mails, demonstrating that an internal report by Alan Carlin, a 35-year career EPA analyst, criticizing EPA's position on global warming, had been squelched for political reasons."
and also says:
"The Competitive Enterprise Institute summarizes Dr. Carlin's report saying, "(T)hat EPA, by adopting the United Nations' 2007 'Fourth Assessment' report, is relying on outdated research and is ignoring major new developments. Those developments include a continued decline in global temperatures, a new consensus that future hurricanes will not be more frequent or intense, and new findings that water vapor will moderate, rather than exacerbate, temperature. "New data also indicate that ocean cycles are probably the most important single factor in explaining temperature fluctuations, though solar cycles may play a role as well, and that reliable satellite data undercut the likelihood of endangerment from greenhouse gases."
While WEW is just echoing CEI, partly because he really doesn't know anything about the subject, I should point out a sound refutation of the Carlin "report" online:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/06/bubkes/
and since that came out, there's more here:
More heavy lifting with “suppressed” Alan Carlin
Funny little bit: [Update, July 8: In another astonishing twist, I have just discovered that Marlo Lewis, the National Review columnist whose piece Carlin lifted as discussed below, is - wait for it - a Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which just happens to be the right-wing think tank that has been touting the so-called "suppression" of Alan Carlin's report.Snake biting it's own tail!
“Suppressed” Carlin report based on Patrick Michaels attack on EPA
EPA’s Alan Carlin channels Patrick Michaels and the Friends of Science
The incestuous relationship of pundits, right-wing think-tanks, and pseudoscientific skeptics could not be more obvious than here. WEW is demonstrating abject ignorance of climate by continuing to post second-, third-, and fourth-hand redigested malodorous effluence from other sources.It's really simple, Walter: ten years of data isn't enough. I could explain that to you.
No comments:
Post a Comment