Pop icon Cher has joined the chorus of liberals demanding that Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt be imprisoned for his alleged crimes against nature.
The “Believe” singer took to Twitter on Sunday and said, “Scott Pruitt deserves to be in prison.”
Cher followed that missive with another, saying, “I Hope Any poison He’s Allowed To come in contact with innocentChildren,comes back to him 10,000 TIMES.”
The singer and actress was responding to an article by the left-wing group Think Progress that accuses Pruitt of jeopardizing public safety by rolling back Obama-era regulations on risk management.
The rule will ensure that the regulatory science underlying Agency actions is fully transparent, and that underlying scientific information is publicly available in a manner sufficient for independent validation.
“The era of secret science at EPA is coming to an end,” said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. “The ability to test, authenticate, and reproduce scientific findings is vital for the integrity of rulemaking process. Americans deserve to assess the legitimacy of the science underpinning EPA decisions that may impact their lives.”
This represents a massive victory for both Pruitt and President Trump in their war on the Green Blob. It’s a victory too for the taxpayer and for free markets.
It means that if this or any future administration in the U.S. wishes to create new environmental policy it must do so on the basis of science which is credible and reproducible and independently verifiable. No longer can policy be slipped through the system on the say-so of a cabal of eco-activists whose “science” is to be taken on trust.
President Trump has once again come out in defense of his embattled Environmental Protection Agency administrator Scott Pruitt.
While Security spending was somewhat more than his predecessor, Scott Pruitt has received death threats because of his bold actions at EPA. Record clean Air & Water while saving USA Billions of Dollars. Rent was about market rate, travel expenses OK. Scott is doing a great job!
Trump has finally risen to the defense of his embattled EPA chief Scott Pruitt. Quite right too, for Pruitt is by some margin the best Administrator the Environmental Protection Agency has had since it was founded by Richard Nixon in 1970.
This is not just because Pruitt is so good. It’s also because his predecessors were so bad. Not merely incompetent, but in several cases actively corrupt, dishonest, and criminal.
As Steve Milloy notes here, all three past Democrat EPA administrators flagrantly violated public records laws, including the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA):
President Trump is winning at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
There can be no better proof of this than the latest anguished editorial in the New York Times, lamenting the changes made by EPA administrator Scott Pruitt.
The EPA, it claims, is the “epicenter of denial.” Its new regime is “terrified” of thwarting “Trump’s promise to ease regulations on fossil fuel companies and increase their profits”. Its every new action flies in the face of all the regulatory efforts made by such experts as Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi, ex-EPA administrator Gina McCarthy and some guy from the Union of Concerned Scientists.
What’s not to like?
Steve Milloy, a writer more familiar with the EPA’s past dirty tricks than almost anyone, has compiled a glorious, line-by-line demolition of the Times‘s editorial.
Junk science is no longer welcome at the Environmental Protection Agency. Administrator Scott Pruitt has declared war on what he calls “secret science” – the process whereby EPA regulators have been able to craft rules using non-publicly-available science data.
Pruitt told Daily Caller:
“We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record. Otherwise, it’s not transparent. It’s not objectively measured, and that’s important.”
This decision will correct a longstanding injustice at the EPA, perpetrated against the U.S. taxpayer. For years the EPA has been able to behave as a law unto itself, cavalierly passing regulations which restrict freedoms, hamper business and hold back the U.S. economy for reasons which have much more to do with left-leaning environmentalist politics than with objective science.
President Trump’s best hope of draining the Green Swamp has just been nixed by his Chief of Staff. The New York Times has the bad news:
John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff, has killed an effort by the head of the Environmental Protection Agency to stage public debates challenging climate change science, according to three people familiar with the deliberations, thwarting a plan that had intrigued President Trump even as it set off alarm bells among his top advisers.
The idea of publicly critiquing climate change on the national stage has been a notable theme for Scott Pruitt, the administrator of the E.P.A. For nearly a year he has championed the notion of holding military-style exercises known as red team, blue team debates, possibly to be broadcast live, to question the validity of climate change.
And yes – that really is bad news. In my view, it’s one of the biggest mistakes so far of Trump’s otherwise winning presidency.
The climate loons – and their amen corner in the liberal MSM – want you to panic about a new study claiming that sea level rise is accelerating.
‘Miami could be underwater in your kid’s lifetime,’ says USA Today.
‘Satellite observations show sea levels rising and climate change is accelerating it,’ says CNN.
‘Melting ice sheets are hastening sea level rise, satellite data confirms,’ says the Guardian.
At the current rate, the world’s oceans will be on average at least 60cm (2ft) higher by the end of the century, according to research published in Monday’s Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences.
Based on 25 years of satellite data, however, the research shows that the pace has quickened. It confirms scientists’ computer simulations and is in line with predictions from the UN, which releases regular climate change reports.
“It’s a big deal” because the projected sea level rise is a conservative estimate and it is likely to be higher, said the lead author, Steve Nerem of the University of Colorado.
Don’t believe a word of it.
Or, as Paul Homewood puts it:
To call it junk science is being too generous.
You can read his full scientific explanation here.
I’ll give you the short version which is that – yet again – the doomsday scenario is based on computer modelled projections which, in turn, are based on false assumptions.
Slowly but surely the Trump administration is draining the climate swamp.
Here’s the latest good news, courtesy of American Geophysical Union’s Eos, in a pieceheadlined “Prestigious Climate-Related Fellowships Rescinded.”
It reports on the reduction (by half) of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) “prestigious” Climate and Global Change Postdoctoral Fellowship Program — or what I would call a madrasa for climate change alarmists.
Since 1992, at a cost of around $2 million per annum, the program has sponsored eight fellows a year in order “to help create the next generation of researchers needed for climate studies.”
The graduates’ list is a veritable Who’s Who of prominent climate alarmists.
Among the program’s alumni is Myles Allen, a man-made climate change specialist at Oxford University; Gavin Schmidt, now head of the notoriously climate alarmist NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies; and Heidi Cullen, who writes alarmist propaganda for the website Climate Central.
Not all alumni, it’s true, go on to shill for the great global warming scam.
For example, one alumnus — Chris Landsea, a meteorologist specializing in hurricanes — took the brave and principled decision of resigning in 2005 from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report. Landsea objected to the way his views were being misrepresented by one of the report’s lead authors, Kevin Trenberth.
Trenberth wanted to promote the idea that “global warming” (as it was then known) would lead to an increase in intense hurricane activity.
Landsea was outraged because this contradicted all available scientific studies, including his own. So he resigned in protest, no doubt costing himself a well-paid career on the climate change gravy train.
But Landsea is almost certainly the exception rather than the rule.
Environmental Protection Agency officials are “leaving in droves”, reports the New York Times.
More than 700 people have left the Environmental Protection Agency since President Trump took office, a wave of departures that puts the administration nearly a quarter of the way toward its goal of shrinking the agency to levels last seen during the Reagan administration.
What marvellous news to ease us all into the festive Christmas spirit, eh readers?
Why, it’s like the final scene in A Christmas Carol where Scrooge repents of all his miserliness, his nephew Fred gets a big fat turkey, Bob Cratchit gets a pay rise and Tiny Tim declares “God bless us, every one!”
Not, of course, that this is quite the way the New York Times sees it. It wants us to believe that this is an attack on both science and the environment.
Within the agency, science in particular is taking a hard hit. More than 27 percent of those who left this year were scientists, including 34 biologists and microbiologists; 19 chemists; 81 environmental engineers and environmental scientists; and more than a dozen toxicologists, life scientists and geologists. Employees say the exodus has left the agency depleted of decades of knowledge about protecting the nation’s air and water. Many also said they saw the departures as part of a more worrisome trend of muting government scientists, cutting research budgets and making it more difficult for academic scientists to serve on advisory boards.
