Comments for JunkScience.com https://junkscience.com All the junk that’s fit to debunk. Sat, 19 Aug 2017 17:24:09 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.8.1 Comment on NYTimes praises murderous Lenin for environmentalism by Andy Pattullo https://junkscience.com/2017/08/nytimes-praises-murderous-lenin-for-environmentalism/#comment-8317976315264122476 Sat, 19 Aug 2017 17:24:09 +0000 https://junkscience.com/?p=92221#comment-8317976315264122476 “keeping free a few vast landscapes on this planet where humans do not tread.”

Pretty much says it all. Stalin, Hitler, Mao and many other mass murderers have greatly advanced the cause of radical environmentalism by systematically relieving the planet of millions of humans who might otherwise have burdened nature with their footprints. Unfortunately when taken to extremes there would not be any humans left to appreciate the wonder of such achievements. This is the humophobic core of what has become the modern radical environmental movement, which ignores the very obvious truth that real world experience shows us: when human society reaches a comfortable and stable level of development it reduces its footprint on nature and will act to preserve the wonder of nature without the need for mass atrocities to decimate large populations of our brothers and sisters.

]]>
Comment on Researcher claims EPA carbon monoxide rules based on fabricated data by Andy Pattullo https://junkscience.com/2017/08/researcher-claims-epa-carbon-monoxide-rules-based-on-fabricated-data/#comment-8317976315264122475 Sat, 19 Aug 2017 17:14:48 +0000 https://junkscience.com/?p=92248#comment-8317976315264122475 True that CO is toxic but, as with ALL toxins, toxicity only occurs above a certain concentration. Below that it is harmless. Clearly the authors of the EPA sponsored study had a mission to deliver a certain message and so one might well suspect their methods, especially if the original data was discarded and can’t be used to verify their methods and results. What responsible researchers would destroy data bought at a $2.5 million cost to taxpayers and used to support such a far reaching and hugely expensive regulatory burden on those same taxpayers? That said, clearly Mr. Donnay also has an axe to grind and we cannot take his accusations of research fraud at face value without strong evidence. If this study is so critical to expensive EPA regulation, and the EPA believes it defendable, but can’t find the actual data, it would seem a small expense, and consistent with normal scientific practice that they support a reproduction of the study to prove their point and to allow the entire scientific community to review both methods and outcomes.

]]>
Comment on Claim: Researchers discover potentially harmful nanoparticles produced through burning coal by Andy Pattullo https://junkscience.com/2017/08/claim-researchers-discover-potentially-harmful-nanoparticles-produced-through-burning-coal/#comment-8317976315264122474 Sat, 19 Aug 2017 16:58:16 +0000 https://junkscience.com/?p=92228#comment-8317976315264122474 Detection Bias: go looking for something, then when you find it , assume it shouldn’t be there and that it is dangerous. Publish, apply for grant, go to exotic location on taxpayer funds to pretend to be doing science. Start over.

]]>
Comment on Claim: Air pollution linked to cardiovascular disease; air purifiers may lessen impact by Gene https://junkscience.com/2017/08/claim-air-pollution-linked-to-cardiovascular-disease-air-purifiers-may-lessen-impact/#comment-8317976315264122468 Fri, 18 Aug 2017 19:33:33 +0000 https://junkscience.com/?p=92263#comment-8317976315264122468 Hormone levels are hard to read when everything works as it should. If a hormone level is high enough for reliable detection, it means the pathway it regulates is crippled.

Circuits regulated by hormones typically have open-loop gains in the order of millions; that means even a single molecule of a hormone can have a measurable effect, with a near-zero chance of it being detected directly.

]]>
Comment on Claim: Air pollution linked to cardiovascular disease; air purifiers may lessen impact by Allen Brooks https://junkscience.com/2017/08/claim-air-pollution-linked-to-cardiovascular-disease-air-purifiers-may-lessen-impact/#comment-8317976315264122467 Fri, 18 Aug 2017 18:14:03 +0000 https://junkscience.com/?p=92263#comment-8317976315264122467 Air purifiers: Good for what ails ya. And if nothing ails ya, well it’s good for that too.

]]>
Comment on Smoke-choked Seattle NOT experiencing more asthma cases by brad tittle https://junkscience.com/2017/08/smoke-choked-seattle-not-experiencing-more-asthma-cases/#comment-8317976315264122466 Fri, 18 Aug 2017 17:16:35 +0000 https://junkscience.com/?p=92257#comment-8317976315264122466 @Carl

Sadly, I am one of the folks pushing for sarcasm tags. Without the [psst] part of your note, my sarcasm meter was dancing between yes and no.

@Goluscombe — Things are much better without excessive pollution. The death toll was not insignificant in England when coal was used unfiltered in stoves everywhere. They quite literally had killing fogs. We can say that pollution is bad based on this, but at the same time, we can’t freak out when something exists in our environment that we want to not be there just because.

Check the body bags. Most of them are empty.

]]>
Comment on Sorry WaPo… Peruvian tropical glaciers sublimating, not melting by chuck https://junkscience.com/2017/08/sorry-wapo-peruvian-tropical-glaciers-sublimating-not-melting/#comment-8317976315264122464 Thu, 17 Aug 2017 22:43:33 +0000 https://junkscience.com/?p=92236#comment-8317976315264122464 sounds a whole lot like the Mt. Kilimanjaro BS of a few years back. Gorebull warming was supposedly melting all the snow off the mountain. In fact it was cyclical lack of snow/precipitation and melt rates were quite normal. There just wasn’t enough new snow pack for awhile. You notice that quietly went away, much like the ozone hole issue.

]]>
Comment on Claim: Researchers discover potentially harmful nanoparticles produced through burning coal by chuck https://junkscience.com/2017/08/claim-researchers-discover-potentially-harmful-nanoparticles-produced-through-burning-coal/#comment-8317976315264122463 Thu, 17 Aug 2017 22:38:09 +0000 https://junkscience.com/?p=92228#comment-8317976315264122463 with the potential to be toxic to humans …
lung toxicity of these particles is not yet known

more “could”, “might”, “we believe”, etc. When they have some facts have them come back and present them.

]]>
Comment on Researcher claims EPA carbon monoxide rules based on fabricated data by chuck https://junkscience.com/2017/08/researcher-claims-epa-carbon-monoxide-rules-based-on-fabricated-data/#comment-8317976315264122462 Thu, 17 Aug 2017 22:33:13 +0000 https://junkscience.com/?p=92248#comment-8317976315264122462 Allen Brooks – ROFLMAO!

]]>
Comment on VIDEO FLASHBACK: Obama EPA chief ignorant of basic climate facts by chuck https://junkscience.com/2017/08/video-flashback-obama-epa-chief-ignorant-of-basic-climate-facts/#comment-8317976315264122461 Thu, 17 Aug 2017 22:12:40 +0000 https://junkscience.com/?p=92267#comment-8317976315264122461 As a trader in stocks and currencies I (and everyone else) have come up against the practical world of Chaos Theory. Everyone that is, except the warmists who guarantee me they can tell the Earth’s temperature 100 years from now. Yeah.. not so much really. Here’s the bad news for them right from the horse’s mouth (or maybe the other end).
———-
“The climate system is a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.” – IPCC TAR WG1, Working Group I: The Scientific Basis

]]>