If global warming is just a government hoax, why does the US EPA stonewall against CO2 regulations?

Question

Probably the most frequent argument we see from man-made (anthropogenic) global warming (AGW) 'skeptics' is that AGW is just a massive government hoax and/or scientists are perpetrating the hoax to get government grant money, etc.

If that's true, then why did the Supreme Court have to order the US EPA to regulate CO2 emissions, and why has the EPA continued to delay doing so?

http://envirowonk.com/content/view/87/2/

And why did a report from the Union of Concerned Scientists recently find in a survey of 1,586 people working for the EPA that 889 reported that they had personally experienced political pressure in the course of performing their duties?

http://envirowonk.com/content/view/172/1/

If it's a government scam, why is the US government putting political pressure on the EPA not to take any action to regulate CO2 emissions?

Answer 1

Did you get that peer reviewed scientific report stating that the sun warms us yet?

Answer 2

Wow, you REALLY don't listen to the skeptics.  You can't even get their arguments right.  It's about raising taxes, not killing the economy.  They don't want to STOP emissions, they want to draw tax revenue from it.

Answer 3

Dana with respect, I think that you should stop asking questions that will only illicit an ill informed response from those with their heads in the sand and who often haven't got the slightest idea about empirical scientific analysis. Look back to your previous question and lets talk about practical action. Those who aren't convinced by now won't be until the effects of AGW impact on their lives in a very tangible and real way.

It's time to move on. No more proselytising. Those of us who are willing to make a change lets get to it and lead by example.

Regards Damien, from the EU where we're all busily plotting (with Al Gore) to destroy America's manufacturing base. Perish the thought that it's too expensive to maintain a manufacturing base in the west when all the cheap labour is to be found in Asia.

Answer 4

It's not OUR government, its the freaking UN and the EU.

Why do they look the other way at China

Why do they look the other way to India

Why do they look the other way to Mexico or any other nation EXCEPT the US??

We are their ONLY source of real competition in most categories.

The ONLY purpose is GW, is to end the American manufacturing base.

Answer 5

It isn't a government hoax, it's a scientific one.  But it has political and business interests.  There is a core of about 50 scientists perpetrating the g/w theory.  The rest of the crowd is made up of political activists and business/social lobbyists.  They want to carbon-tax everything and have the world sign on to the Kyoto Accord.

What they have to gain is pure left-wing political gains.  Spread the wealth from developed countries to those who are less developed.  Strip the 'rich countries' of everything they have and severly regulate what's left.  Non compliance would be harsh.

It's good that people are slowly waking up to this scam, though in the long run it was doomed to fail anyhow.  Left wing politics is expensive and restrictive.  The world's economies couldn't support it for long, though by then I guess we'd all be living in caves, with no electricity or cars and food prices high enough to starve us all.

Pro g/w scientists aren't after government grant money as much as they're after your  money, and support.  Giving it won't change climate in any way, because we don't have any capacity to climate-tamper even if we wanted to.  Theoretically you could burn every fossil fuel on the planet and not influence temperature by more than one degree.  The parts per million of carbon released simply wouldn't make a difference.  

I think those in the EPA realize this, and for the good of the country are not willing to follow wrong decisions.

Answer 6

Good points Dana.  However I doubt this will make any difference to any skeptic.  They will probably believe it is a hoax perpetrated by the EPA while a few brave people who know the truth hold back the enviro-n***s.  

You should specify what the political pressure on the individuals was.  Otherwise Skeptics (who do not tend to look into data, its not their strongest point) will say that the pressure was to 'perpetrate the hoax'.

Answer 7

CO2 levels in the atmosphere today are at record high levels = FALSE.

Carbon Dioxide is such a small component of Earth's atmosphere (380 ppmv)  Compared to former geologic times, Earth's atmosphere is "CO2 impoverished."

In the last 600 million years of Earth's history only the Carboniferous Period and our present age, the Quaternary Period, have witnessed CO2 levels less than 400 ppm, except during periods of glacial expansion during ice ages.

Can't ignor facts.

Answer 8

Bush has made a political promise to the oil companies and car companies that it wouldn't happen on his watch.  Bet he got a fat check for that one!

edit

Let me get this straight "I Believe".  An American Governmental Agency is doing the bidding of a bunch of foreign governments, but not the one that funds it.  Where di you acquire this bit of insight?

edit

You know Chris A and Geoweeg, you and the rest of the Neocons might one day get some respect if you could lay off the Red -baiting long enough to state your point of view (if you had one).  You make the Conservatives pretty angry when you call us liberals, marxists and enviro-n***s.  Where was your Momma when she was supposed to be teaching you fellows how to act?  It's hard to understand political thinkers who don't know their Right from their Left.  People cannot simultaneously be marxist and liberal AND n**i, anymore than they can simultaneously be Chinese and full blooded Cherokee.  You are an embarrassment to anyone who remembers when the schools actually educated.

Answer 9

Like the EPA the sumpreme court also faced pressure to motion global warming.  Just because they're supposed to be impartial doesn't mean they always are.  It needs to seem like someone in the government is doing something.  when in reality nothing is actually happening

Answer 10

It's not a government hoax, its a liberal/marxist hoax

Answer 11

It is a hoax but liberals like you can't see that.

Answer 12

the government never tells global warming is real. they only tell people to care for the environment but never cared much if global warming is true.

it only turns out that the government is saying global warming is real because they follow those "tips" on how to lessen the effects of global warming. the government just follow those "tips" because they only want to save resources, not really to contribute to the saving of nature.

take some kinds of biofuels for example. the government promotes such kind because it can save resources and make money but the truth is that some biofuels are not really eco friendly.

global warming is not really a government hoax. (but still, global warming is not a hoax)

Answer 13

Bush and Cheney have to please their former employers and campaign contributors in the oil industry.  To accomplish this, Bush named former Utah governor Mike Leavitt to head the EPA.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/...

Here's one example of one of Mike Leavitt's secret deals to benefit the oil and gas industry:

Utah Auctions Off 360,000 Acres of Public Land to Oil & Gas Industry

Sale includes 40,000 acres of legislatively proposed wilderness

http://www.wilderness.org/NewsRoom/Relea...

The total public land sale of 360,000 acres was the largest oil and gas lease sale since the Utah and Colorado BLM began breaking with tradition by auctioning off these lands in Utah and Colorado, a direct result of a secret deal cut in April 2003 between Interior Secretary Gale Norton and former Utah Governor (now EPA Administrator) Mike Leavitt that prohibited BLM from protecting potential wilderness.

“This sale is evidence that the Interior Department is targeting Utah’s most spectacular lands for oil and gas leasing and development,” said Liz Thomas of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. “Instead of protecting these lands for future generations, they will be lost for what amounts to just a drop in the overall oil and gas bucket.”

As a gift to the coal industry, Mike Leavitt wants your children exposed to more mercury emissions:

Plan would ease rules on mercury emissions

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/pf.asp?da...

Until recently, the EPA was on track to issue new rules this month requiring the nation's 1,100 coal- and oil-fired power plants to install equipment to achieve the maximum possible reductions in mercury and nickel emissions, which can cause severe neurological and developmental damage in humans. The plan has drawn fierce resistance from industry groups and their congressional allies who say the new regulations would be excessively costly and should be softened or delayed beyond the 2007 target date.

Now, the White House and EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt are considering rescinding a December 2000 EPA ruling, which concluded that mercury emissions are a public health menace that requires power plants to meet a "maximum achievable control technology," or MACT, standard to sharply reduce toxic pollutants.

Tuesday night Leavitt confirmed the EPA is considering reversing the Clinton administration finding in favor of a more flexible enforcement system.

Here's Bush's record on energy and his campaign promise to reduce carbon pollution:

http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/airenergy...

The situation is so bad that both Republican and Democrat former EPA heads have gone on record against Bush and the current EPA:

Ex-heads of EPA blast Bush on global warming

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10913795

There does appear to be a hoax, but the hoax is the blatant lie that current EPA plays any role in protecting the environment other than protecting oil and gas and coal companies from being inconvenienced by it.

davem -

Why would "liberal" scientists want to tax themsolves and send their money to developing countries?  Your conspiracy theory makes no sense.  Why would conservative scientists (such as NASA director James Hansen) not simply expose or coutradict any liberal scam?  Your theory doesn't hold up to any scrutiny at all.

Why do former EPA heads appointed by Republican Presidents blast the current EPA?  Global warming has nothing whatsoever to do with politics, but the EPA's decision to ignore it does appear to be simply Bush's latest gift to the oil and gas and coal industries.

Answer 14

It is a hoax but not a government hoax.  Try another strawman.

Answer 15

I just love surveys like that.  You are misrepresenting the numbers, and I doubt there was any scientific analysis of the results.  If was a canvassing of 5,419 of which 1,586 responded.  Of that, was there a political bias in the respondents?  Just looking at the numbers, and who conducted the survey, the best conclusion, would be be "inconclusive".  Once again we find ourselves existing in hyper reality, questioning the relevance of a pseudo-event.