It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Greven
Alarmists are going to be discredited.
Lamar Smith is going to make the EPA great again.
That pause might be making a comeback.
Invigorated by the new climate change-doubting presidential administration, a Texas congressman known for his ardent skepticism of manmade global warming — and early support for President Donald Trump — has scheduled a committee hearing next week “to examine the Environmental Protection Agency’s process for evaluating and using science during its regulatory decision making activities.”
The hearing, titled “Make EPA Great Again,” will be the first time the committee has met since Trump took office and the 115th Congress convened.
Invited witnesses, including the head of an industry group, “will discuss how EPA can pursue environmental protection and protect public health by relying on sound science,” according to a charter for Tuesday’s hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology. The committee's chairman, San Antonio Republican Lamar Smith, has been an especially vocal skeptic about widely accepted science on climate change. In a 2015 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, he described global temperature increases over the past 15 years as “negligible” and said links between climate change and worsening weather events had been debunked.
All they did was compare their independent datasets to the other ones. Their datasets also showed no "hiatus." Why are you hung up on the fact that they compared their data to ERSST data?
Should the independent review of Berkley Earth not be asked if they knew that the ERSST v. 4.0 data was based on raw data with only a 90 % confidence interval and what difference it would have made to their analysis?