Since we be talking smoking–how bout a toke?

I admire a certain writer who puts up this fine piece on why small particles–tiny dust–don’t kill nobody the way the EPA claims.

The Acute standard for small particles is 35 mics per cubic meter, but cigarette or MJ smoke has thousands of mics per cubic meter, and no one drops dead at the time or in the next few days.

However EPA researchers claim “premature deaths” within days of exposure to an ambient small particle increase. They slice and dice the daily deaths to find small, ridiculously small and unreliable “associations” and then project them to the population to get premature deaths in the hundreds of thousands.

Their research on ozone and asthma shows the same bad epidemiology and their lab experiments exposing people to small particles and ozone show nothing–nothing.

That’s called a lie.

Read what it’s all about in the context of the latest really big lie about taking down coal plants under the new carbon dioxide rules called the Clean Power Plan rules. The EPA talking points describe CO BENEFITS from reducing small particles and ozone because there are no benefits from reducing carbon dioxide–it is not a toxin and there is a strong argument is not adverse–it is beneficial.

They got an endangerment finding on the cheap, now they are conflating benefits by using their previous lousy junk research on small particle and ozone toxicity or lethality.

Carbon dioxide is not toxic or a pollutant, and we make it in our bodies and exhale it at a concentration of 40,000 PPM, compared to 400 PPM in the ambient air. All they have on CO2 is the tenuous argument about warming that is falling apart in the face of failed models and the “pause” in warming while CO2 is rising.

I have to say this short monograph is a gem written by a very good commentator we all know well here at Read a cogent and insightful review of the environmental insanity that is the EPA regime.

3 responses to “Since we be talking smoking–how bout a toke?

  1. 4th para. “Their research … ” ;)

  2. If the claim of small particles harming people is true then millions of people world wide should be dead. Why does MJ smoke not cause lung cancer and why does it not tar up the lungs?
    I grew up with asthma and smog in the 50’s and I am still here.
    Claims of second hand smoke harming people are not true. Show me the bodies. Data mining can give any result you want by limiting the type of data used.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s