Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I would expect nothing less from that group.  They claim to know what our climate will be like 100 years from now but can't perform verifications on a fraud's resume.  They then start him at a salary normally reserved for someone who has been in the environmental field for 20 years on day one with zero experience.  Then his superiors believe some cockamamie story that he is affiliated with the CIA.  You can't make this stuff up it's so outlandish; and we're suppose to have faith that they know what they're talking about?

"The product of his labors have remained intact and have been shielded from any meaningful scrutiny, much the same way Beale was protected by an inner circle of career staff who unwittingly aided in his fraud," the report says. "Accordingly, it appears that the Agency is content to let the American people pay the price for Beale and EPA's scientific insularity, a price EPA is still trying to hide almost twenty years later."

 

The report goes on to argue that the 1997 standards that resulted "set in motion" the way the EPA issues regulations under the Clean Air Act. The report alleges that this included "inflating benefits while underestimating costs."

 

The report says the air quality standards have also been used to defend 32 major rules since 1997, which together account for billions of dollars in costs to U.S. businesses.

 

Per nutbags like yourself, Crash, CO2 is an air quality issue.

 

Read the full article here:  http://www.foxnews.com/politic...s-behind-costly-epa/

This is proof positive of the level of idiocy that exists in the EPA leadership.  If they are so incompetent that they couldn't see through this guy's BS, it makes you wonder what else they screwed up.

 

Here you go crash:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Beale

 

John Charles Beale (born 1948[1]) is a former climate policy expert of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Beale was convicted of felony theft of government property after it came to light in 2013 that he had defrauded the government out of $886,186 starting in 2000, primarily by pretending to be an agent for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).[2]

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:

Crash is so obtuse that he can't see the forest because the trees are blocking his view.

_____________________

the term 'low information voter' was coined .. just for people like you. you just can't help yourself.


The term dumb a s s was coined...just for people like you. 

Last edited by Mr. Hooberbloob
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:

Crash is so obtuse that he can't see the forest because the trees are blocking his view.

_____________________

the term 'low information voter' was coined .. just for people like you. you just can't help yourself.


The term dumb *** was coined...just for people like you. 

--------------------

poor poor hoob.. you couldn't buy a clue.

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:

yes, dire.. a scientific board needs to take a look at EPA policy.. and see if it's correct... however, could you inform your 'rt. wingnut brethren' that the 'clean air act' has zero to do with 'climate change' and the EPA doesn't write 'climate change' policy.


The EPA restricts CO2 under the clean air act.  That IS climate change policy.

 

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007)—which clarified that greenhouse gases are an “air pollutant” subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act (CAA)—the Environmental Protection Agency promulgated a series of greenhouse gas-related rules.

First, EPA issued an Endangerment Finding, in which it determined that greenhouse gases may “reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” See 42 U.S.C. § 7521(a)(1). Next, it issued the Tailpipe Rule, which set emission standards for cars and light trucks. Finally, EPA determined that the CAA requires major stationary sources of greenhouse gases to obtain construction and operating permits. But because immediate regulation of all such sources would result in overwhelming permitting burdens on permitting authorities and sources, EPA issued the Timing and Tailoring Rules, in which it determined that only the largest stationary sources would initially be subject to permitting requirements.

Petitioners, various states and industry groups, challenge all these rules, arguing that they are based on improper constructions of the CAA and are otherwise arbitrary and capricious. But for the reasons set forth below, we conclude: 1) the Endangerment Finding and Tailpipe Rule are neither arbitrary nor capricious; 2) EPA’s interpretation of the governing CAA provisions is unambiguously correct; and 3) no petitioner has standing to challenge the Timing and Tailoring Rules. We thus dismiss for lack of jurisdiction all petitions for review of the Timing and Tailoring Rules, and deny the remainder of the petitions.

 

 

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:

Crash is so obtuse that he can't see the forest because the trees are blocking his view.

_____________________

the term 'low information voter' was coined .. just for people like you. you just can't help yourself.


The term dumb *** was coined...just for people like you. 

--------------------

poor poor hoob.. you couldn't buy a clue.


I actually have this classic board game and I did in fact buy it.

 

 

Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:

Crash is so obtuse that he can't see the forest because the trees are blocking his view.

_____________________

the term 'low information voter' was coined .. just for people like you. you just can't help yourself.


The term dumb *** was coined...just for people like you. 

--------------------

poor poor hoob.. you couldn't buy a clue.


I actually have this classic board game and I did in fact buy it.

 

 

_______________

thanks for proving my point.

My own opinion, for what it's worth (not much), is that climate change is obviously real for it is going to change and will continue to do so REGARDLESS of, or because of, mankind.  One Volcano will have far more dire effect on our Global climate than man, in the history of mankind.  The crazy thing about "Global Warming" is how so many are being taken in to an equally obvious politically sponsored event.  There is not only political mileage to be gained here but as Al Gore proves, tons of economic funds to be had and pocketed on sewing fears and discord.  

 

The sad thing is just how rigid some people are regarding it to the point of disqualifying many qualified , honest, and intellectually superior people just because they don't buy into the party line.  How many jobs and scientist are denied credibility just because they doubt man made global warming.  The humorous thing about it all though is every time they (Global Warming folks) seem to conjure up some great big group meeting it's either overshadowed by news about new record cold weather and made inaccessible due to some freak blizzard or some other event that totally flies in the face of what they are trying to lead everyone to believe is happening.  Or someone releases some facts about made up emails or created or doctored data made to support something that just isn't there.   Having to create picture opportunities by stranding some Polar Bear on some floating piece of ice that looks like he's destined for a slow death as it slowly sails into warmer water and then drowns the bear only to find out that the bear finds an ice bridge shortly after and wanders back to the polar pack and enjoys a long life as Polar Bears usually do.  

 

I'm not against they people believing in it or even selling it but when they get aggressive to the point that they control the field of ideas and play, when they cause obviously talented people to have to forfeit their positions or fail to find jobs account of their disagreement with their philosophies or theories then that's going a bit too far.

Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:

Crash is so obtuse that he can't see the forest because the trees are blocking his view.

_____________________

the term 'low information voter' was coined .. just for people like you. you just can't help yourself.


The term dumb *** was coined...just for people like you. 

--------------------

poor poor hoob.. you couldn't buy a clue.


I actually have this classic board game and I did in fact buy it.

 

 

_______________

thanks for proving my point.


The only point I've proved is the one affiliated with the tip of your head, devoid of reason, logic, and recognition of the obvious.

Last edited by Mr. Hooberbloob

Yes, Beale us a sleazy character, but his role in EPA regulations is vastly overstated.  I worked at the EPA and was involved in the development of several regulations. The process of producing an EPA regulation  typically involves numerous people and several levels of review.   The Beale story has gone rampant the last couple of days. I heard one of the fools on American Family Radio make the bald statement that Beale had written ALL the air  regulations that EPA had generated during the Obama administration. THAT is an absurdly ignorant and naive statement. No one person "writes" a regulation in anything like the singular manner claimed by APR.  The Beale story is simply another flimsy attempt by the wingnut right to discredit EPA. The guy was a swindler, what with his CIA story, but he did not personally write the large volume of complex regulations that AFR fatuously claims.  Scores of persons worked to produce those regulations.

 

AFR and its witless co-conspirators will go to any length to push their so-called "Christian world view" agenda and to oppose any government activities that they imagine to be contrary to it.

Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:
Originally Posted by Crash.Override:
Originally Posted by Mr. Hooberbloob:

Crash is so obtuse that he can't see the forest because the trees are blocking his view.

_____________________

the term 'low information voter' was coined .. just for people like you. you just can't help yourself.


The term dumb *** was coined...just for people like you. 

--------------------

poor poor hoob.. you couldn't buy a clue.


I actually have this classic board game and I did in fact buy it.

 

 

_______________

thanks for proving my point.


The only point I've proved is the one affiliated with the tip of your head, devoid of reason, logic, and recognition of the obvious.

______________________

again.. thanks for proving my point... the epitome of low information voters.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×