But USDA says EPA is full of manure.
“[USDA] criticism of EPA states that the reviewer is ‘…highly skeptical of [EPA conclusions] based on their testing methods, procedures, and interpretations of these recorded throughout the report. The report is filled with considerable errors and calculations and interpretations that “…cannot be scientifically defended to arrive at the stated conclusions’.” [Farm Futures]
“Farming is easy when your plow is a pencil and you’re 500 miles from the nearest cornfield.”
– Dwight Eisenhower
Oops, should be their description.
I do not know what NRCS is complaining about. There description of the EPA report makes it sound like any EPA that I have ever read.
One of my favorites occurred while EPA was studying the efficiency of boilers and industrial furnaces for destruction of hazardous substances. EPA found that lower the feed rates of hazardous substances was strongly associated with lower destruction efficiencies. EPA then actually proposed that the first order reaction rate varies with concentration and is lower at lower concentrations. (Really, they did.) It turned out that Occam was right, the samples were accumulating contamination between sampling and analysis.
Maybe we can conclude EPA is full of B.S.?