Editorial, Investor’s Business Daily
August 30, 2011
Junk Science: The governor of a state under assault by the EPA takes on the patron saint of climate change over whether “warmers” or “deniers” benefit financially from the debate. Meanwhile, the nation loses. Continue reading IBD: Perry vs. Gore
“Seven proposed rules pending before the agency are poised to inflict more than $125 billion in costs on the U.S. economy annually, according to EPA’s own estimates… [and] all of the EPA’s claimed health benefits from CAA regulations are, at best, bureaucratic guesses,” says Washington Examiner senior editorial writer Conn Carroll. Read Carroll’s commentary.
Satellite views of the Midwestern United States show that ozone levels above 50 parts per billion (ppb) along the ground could reduce soybean yields by at least 10 percent, costing more than $1 billion in lost crop production, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) scientists. Continue reading Ozone hurts crop production?
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, a former advisor to cap-and-trade pusher Enron, claims Republicans are anti-science because they don’t believe in the manmade global warming hypothesis.
But isn’t it anti-science to expect scientists to support a hypothesis merely because some (or even many or most) do? When I was in college and graduate school, my professors proved laws, theorems etc. from first principles — not by simply asserting that a consensus of belief exists.
Also offensive is the notion that unless you are a paid climate researcher, your views on extant climate science (like those who signed the Petition Project) don’t count. But you don’t need to be Steven Spielberg to be a movie critic.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has laid on plans (see Memo below) to overturn much of the EPA’s economy- and job-killing agenda. But as good as the memo sounds, mere House votes against the EPA will not do the trick. The House needs to strangle the EPA in ongoing debt and budget negotiations. The House controls government purse strings and needs to use that leverage to stop the EPA, which is one of the biggest threats and obstacles to America’s recovery and prosperity. Continue reading House GOP outlines fall attack on EPA
Killing an eagle can put you in jail for a year and cost $5,000, under federal law. But killing hundreds of eagles in the name of saving the planet earns you taxpayer subsidies? Continue reading Wind mills more dangerous to eagles than DDT
From the Wall Street Journal editorial page: Continue reading WSJ: An EPA Moratorium