Elections have consequences
(CNBC) Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt said Thursday he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming.
“I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see ,” he told CNBC’s “Squawk Box.”
“But we don’t know that yet. … We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis.”
Doesn’t he know that modern science requires a closed mind, one sided research, and declaring that it’s settled so shut up?
Pruitt’s view is at odds with the opinion of NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
“The planet’s average surface temperature has risen about 2.0 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere,” NASA and NOAA said in January.
The only problem with that is they have to actually prove it. Which they can’t, at least using the long established Scientific Method. Regardless, Warmists are no longer in charge at the EPA, nor at NASA and NOAA. One has to wonder, why are Warmists so afraid to attempt research that might invalidate their beliefs? If they’re really about Science, they would welcome all forms of scientific inquiry.
#SoNotTiredOfWinning
Great day for real science.
Using Jeff’s techniques, I have come to the undebatable conclusion that the rise in population of brown haired people is the reason for increase atmospheric CO2. As such, we should limit and destroy the populations of brown haired individuals. Then we can wait and see if this actually has an influence on the climate as CO2 concentrations decrease.
The statement that the world temperature has risen 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the late 19th Century is misleading.
The accuracy of measurements taken in the 1800’s and early 1900’s has to be taken with a grain of salt. Also, the temperature was based on the world’s temperature at the point when it was .6 degrees Celsius below the 20th-century average when the world was colder than average.
A better comment would be to say what the temperature was in 1900 and what it is today in real numbers.
I am unaware that warmists are no longer in charge at NOAA and NASA.
That seems too good to be true.
I am waiting for the Ontario election here to remove the Carbon Tax.
The money so far has been misspent. However, the world’s temperature has been dropping since 1998 with the exception of last year which may have exceeded the temperature in 1998, so maybe it works after all!
Scott Pruitt is a lawyer, not a scientist, but he has been confirmed as the head of a scientific enterprise, so he should know more than he does.
There is no scientific debate about whether CO2 is causing the Earth to warm.
Pruitt is making politician’s arguments.
Guess who isn’t a scientist either, little guy?
“There’s no scientific debate…” Spoken like a true politician, not like a scientist. Good job, J. Actually, there’s been close or a thousand peer-reviewed papers in the last several yrs disputing that, so it’s obviously not true.
Jeff,
I am a scientist and will tell you that the whole thing is crap.
dave typed:
LOL.