News About 'Cap and Trade' -- Text of Suppressed EPA Report

[FrankRep]

News About 'Cap and Trade' -- Text of Suppressed EPA Report


Larry Greenley | John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/)
06 July 2009

YouTube - Beck on the Suppressed EPA Report (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJNRbpGNAj0)


View the video of Glenn Beck's interview with Dr. Alan Carlin (http://carlineconomics.googlepages.com/), EPA research analyst, who wrote an internal report (http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf) about some problems with using so-called global warming science to prove endangerment to "US Health and Welfare" from increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide. Based on internal EPA emails (http://michellemalkin.com/2009/06/24/the-climate-change-e-mails-epa-doesnt-want-you-to-see/), Dr. Carlin's report was suppressed (http://cei.org/news-release/2009/06/25/cei-releases-global-warming-study-censored-epa) because of pressure to support the Obama administration's agenda of getting a 'cap and trade' bill through Congress.

The title of the internal EPA report is "Proposed NCEE Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act." The "Preface" of this report includes this statement: "As discussed in these comments, we believe our concerns and reservations are sufficiently important to warrant a serious review of the science by EPA before any attempt is made to reach conclusions on the subject."

For more information about why 'cap and trade' climate change bills amount to extraordinarily expensive energy taxes on everyone see "Oppose the Cap and Trade ‘Tax’ Increase Bill, H.R. 2454 (http://www.jbs.org/freedom-campaign/5033)" and "Defeat the 'Cap and Trade' Energy Tax Bill in the Senate (http://www.jbs.org/energy-blog/5053)."

As stated in the articles referred to in the previous paragraph, a cap and trade bill has already passed in the House, however, the Senate is not expected to vote on its version until this fall. Take immediate action by clicking here (http://www.votervoice.net/Core.aspx?AID=972&Screen=alert&IssueId=18625) to contact your senators in strong opposition to any form of cap and trade legislation.

UPDATE: Since posting this article a couple hours ago, I've found the final version (http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/endangermentcommentsv7b1.pdf) of Dr. Carlin's EPA report along with some explanation (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/27/released-the-censored-epa-document-final-report/) of how this report has come to be publicly available. While I'm at it, I've found another interesting article, "EPA May Have Suppressed Report Skeptical Of Global Warming (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/26/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5117890.shtml)," about this whole EPA report controversy.


SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/energy-blog/5088

[ItsTime]

Thanks I was looking for the report.

[Dr.3D]

What?
The Earth revolves around the Sun?
Such heresy!

[FrankRep]

Thanks I was looking for the report.

no problem!

[misterx]

His own graph shows an uptrend in temperatures. The first graph is only for six years, making it meaningless.

[tmosley]

His own graph shows an uptrend in temperatures. The first graph is only for six years, making it meaningless.

It shows a very significant break from the climate model's predictions. This means that now is NOT the time for action. If it spikes back up over the next couple of years, then MAYBE they will have a case.

Even then, the case would be pretty shaky, as the solution basically requires humans to stop acting as a sentient species, and return to the trees, but only after decreasing our population by 99.5% fold or more.

[Knighted]

I've tried digging deep for real evidence to offer proof of AGW but continue to come up short. I'm truly starting to believe that there is no hard scientific evidence to support the notion that humans are causing global warming and that all of the scare mongering is merely conjecture.

The closest thing that the mainstream seems to think is "proof" of AGW is the climate models presented by the IPCC. They say that their models can't account for the rise in temperatures over the last century unless the models factor in the rising CO2 levels. That is apparently the closest thing to real proof that exists for global warming being caused by man, at least that I can find. But the IPCC readily admits that these models could be flawed by leaving out countless variables that could be important - variables that they admittedly do not fully understand. And then there is the issue that the earlier models completely failed to predict the flat/slightly cooling trend since 1998, predicting temperatures would continue to set new records. And of course, there is the fact that increases in CO2 levels have historically lagged temperature increases by hundreds of years. Another piece of the puzzle that the AGW proponents admit isn't fully understood.

It's amazing that the Democrats are trying to cram life-changing climate legislation down our throats as if the world is going to ignite into a ball of flames at any moment if we don't act. I think at least another decade of research should be in order before there is even the thought of climate change legislation.

[dannno]

His own graph shows an uptrend in temperatures.

Turn your monitor right-side up ;)