Trump EPA: Jury Still Out On CO2 & Climate Impact

I really tire of these religious litms tests regarding leftist ideas. Have you ever noticed how the left will say things like:

“Would you a least concede that co2 is the leading cause of climate change?” or other such benchmarks from which they can build their case? i.e.

“Killing babies is wrong.”

“What about in cases of rape or incest?” (so few that it’s statistically irrelevant).

Or with ‘assault weapons’ which are used in very few murders, comparatively, etc. I’m glad Trump’s EPA is re-introducing science to the scientific community.

“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.”

Pruitt also called the Paris Agreement, an international accord aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change, “a bad deal.” He said it puts the United States on a different playing field than developing countries like China and India.

“I happen to think the Paris accord, the Paris treaty, or the Paris Agreement, if you will, should have been treated as a treaty, should have gone through senate confirmation. That’s a concern,” he said.

The Paris Agreement was negotiated by the State Department, and future adherence to U.S. commitments made under Obama will be guided by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson

Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Trump EPA: Jury Still Out On CO2 & Climate Impact

  1. R.D. Walker says:

    There isn’t a legitimate climatologist in the world, even among the most extreme alarmists, who believes that CO2 alone is a strong enough greenhouse gas to cause significant global warming. In fact, they know it cannot.

    All legitimate theories of catastrophic man-made global warming involve CO2 causing climate forcing resulting in other, stronger warming factors… and there there be unknowns.

    • Rich says:

      Climate scientists via analysis of ice core samples have long known and accepted that on a macro scale CO2 levels follow temperature changes proportionally but lag behind temperature by some 200 to 800 years. So if temperature rises, some 200 to 800 years later you will see a proportionate rise in CO2 level. Because temperature changes drive CO2 changes, any effort to mathematically model the climate based on the incorrect belief that CO2 change causes temperature change cannot succeed. And as all current climate models are based on said incorrect belief, one would expect that such climate models will fail to predict climate accurately. And indeed such is the case. All the fraud, hiding of data, data manipulation and bullying of non-AGW inclined scientists by the AGW crowd follows from the foregoing.