It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump Picks Climate Change Dissenter to Lead EPA

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

I heard insulting people is the best way to turn them on to new ideology.




posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: projectvxn
This admin is turning into a pantheon of anti-science gods.

This isn't a good thing folks. And I voted for the guy.

Who the hell is going to be his science advisor, Andrew Wakefield?

I was going to wait 6 weeks after his inauguration before trashing the admin, but here we are.

And who picks which "science" is real ?


Yep, we're rolling back to the very beginning of stupidity aren't we. And how do we know for certain 1 is really 1 and who gets to decide that 2 comes after 1? And flap a dap who says what co stiplaps a sentence? The gramma police?



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
Trump Picks Scott Pruitt, Climate Change Dissenter, to Lead E.P.A.
www.nytimes.com...

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald J. Trump has selected Scott Pruitt, the Oklahoma attorney general and a close ally of the fossil fuel industry, to run the Environmental Protection Agency, signaling Mr. Trump’s determination to dismantle President Obama’s efforts to counter climate change — and much of the E.P.A. itself.


What the F is this?

There's really not much to say about this. Con man, villain, or total dumb#ss.... take your pick. Seems like an unwise move to me.... that is, if your goal for the EPA is Environmental Protection.

Just more of the same from the worst President Elect of all time. Share... discuss... talk about how the New York Times is leftist garbage. Or Climate Science is a Chinese hoax. I haven't yet plunged a coat hanger into my brain, so I still see this for the repugnancy it is. BUT maybe some of the more specially educated and lesser principled individuals can enlighten me to the greatness in this.

For everyone else... We're in a villain's world now. So... Here's more villainy for you. Enjoy.




This is the absolute worst of his picks so far. It's a slap in the face.

His linkedin profile says that he is dedicated to working against the EPA.

Putting an anti-environmentalist and anti-EPA person in charge is an atrocity, and completely irresponsible. It's just more par for the course for Republican dismantling of environmental protections and complete disregard for the planet we all derive live, breath, water from.

Sorry guys, the Republican attitudes and policies on environment are on the absolute wrong side of history.


edit on 7-12-2016 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-12-2016 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

That is a misnomer.

Peer reviewed scientific endeavor is what I put my trust in. Not political bull#.

Politicizing science does a disservice to us as a nation.

There's no conservative or liberal science.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: projectvxn

Don't be too harsh...just yet.

“Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind,” he wrote in National Review earlier this year. “That debate should be encouraged — in classrooms, public forums, and the halls of Congress. It should not be silenced with threats of prosecution. Dissent is not a crime.”

www.nytimes.com...



The vast majority of "peer-reviewing" scientists see the data as conclusive.

Also, this AG has also sued the government over basic environmental regulations.

He's an ally of big oil and gas.

The absolute worst choice almost to head to EPA.

It's a slap in the face to not only us, but the planet.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:16 PM
link   
Even if climate change isnt real or man made, I still want to take care of our environment. We do live in it after all. We dont want our country polluted like china.

Its putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.

I didnt vote for Trump, but so far he has been disappointing on a lot of his cabinet picks, imo as an independent / libertarian.
edit on 7-12-2016 by pirhanna because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Yeah, no kidding.

An oil industry puppet running the Environmental Protection Agency...

What could possibly go wrong ?




posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Steak
Great Pick By President Trump.


Explain why.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14
www.nationalreview.com...

I don't believe there is any discrepancy in the claim that he is an ally of oil and big gas.

Still doing some digging.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Just as an FYI, the biggest greenhouse gas is not CO2 it is water vapor. Natural gas is mainly methane which has a much stronger greenhouse effect than CO2; roughly 25:1. Given the leakage rates of the natural gas pipelines in the world, the use of natural gas to save the world from evil coal may be just about at a break even point.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

This is the absolute worst of his picks so far. It's a slap in the face.



Has there been a good one?

Cuz I haven't seen it.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn

Politicizing science does a disservice to us as a nation.

There's no conservative or liberal science.



See, we can agree



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Science issues are about the only place we do agree.

But that covers a lot of ground, so not really a bad thing.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: projectvxn
This admin is turning into a pantheon of anti-science gods.

This isn't a good thing folks. And I voted for the guy.

Who the hell is going to be his science advisor, Andrew Wakefield?

I was going to wait 6 weeks after his inauguration before trashing the admin, but here we are.

And who picks which "science" is real ?


Yep, we're rolling back to the very beginning of stupidity aren't we. And how do we know for certain 1 is really 1 and who gets to decide that 2 comes after 1? And flap a dap who says what co stiplaps a sentence? The gramma police?

First , the use of stupidity. Shows a certain level of intellectual ability of some folks . Dont belittle yourself like that
Second , we should roll back science. Lets roll back science a few 10s of thousands of years. Look at the "real" established science. Climatology is not one.Started by the UN and Gore. First head of the IPCC was a railroad engineer with a major in business . Get it , business.Nothing at all to do with the climate. Unfortunately , he was forced to resign due to a certain sexual litigation case against him. About par for the UN.

Shall we continue ?
No , not till you become better informed.
"Nuff said"



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:31 PM
link   
While its a bad appointment imo, I do think almost every government agency should be greatly reduced including the epa. Let them focus on the things that matter most. They have gone overboard with red tape. I know this as someone that has had to apply for an epa registration for something that is completely natural and harmless.

I also think carbon taxes are bs, one of the biggest money making scams in the history of the world. Why? Because it doesnt address polution. I would welcome real strategies to combat pollution.

Theres a lot to be said about a pragmatic middle of the road approach that everyone seems incapable of these days.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:35 PM
link   
a reply to: pirhanna






Theres a lot to be said about a pragmatic middle of the road approach that everyone seems incapable of these days.


What a true and sad statement. Sad because middle of the road/center is where the vast majority of Americans would actually be politically.

Imagine trying to run on that platform.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Annee

Science issues are about the only place we do agree.

But that covers a lot of ground, so not really a bad thing.



I really wish I'd had the aptitude for Science. I'd love to be a hydrologist.

Back to Crazy Trump.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
De-carbonization of energy source been happening since the late 1800's.

Coal has more carbon atoms than oil, which has been slowly phasing out, and is no longer the predominant energy source.

Oil has more carbon atoms than Natural Gas, and is slowly being replaced by Natural Gas.

This whole climate change threat and needing to take action is a huge scam, the problem is already self-correcting itself.

After Natural Gas, it will be an energy source that utilizes pure hydrogen, and we don't need to waste billions of dollars at the altar of fear.
edit on 7-12-2016 by GodEmperor because: content

edit on 7-12-2016 by GodEmperor because: sp



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

This is the absolute worst of his picks so far. It's a slap in the face.



Has there been a good one?

Cuz I haven't seen it.


Not that I can see so far... True. I already was pissed over Carson yesterday, because my current work includes working with Hud-related topics
.



posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 08:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: GodEmperor
De-carbonization of energy source been happening since the late 1800's.

Coal has more carbon atoms than oil, which has been slowly phasing out, and is no longer the predominant energy source.

Oil has more carbon atoms than Natural Gas, and is slowly being replaced by Natural Gas.

This whole climate change threat and needing to take action is a huge scam, the problem is already self-correcting itself.

After Natural Gas, it will be an energy source that utilizes pure hydrogen, and we don't need to waste billions of dollars at the altar of fear.


Can you show your research on that? Even the energy industry has had to admit that fossil fuels pose and have posed a serious threat to the environment, through air pollution, greenhouse gases, extraction, leaks, spills, etc. There are documents from the industry itself that they recognized this decades ago.
edit on 7-12-2016 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join