Enstrom calls on NAS to drop junk scientist Dominici from air quality committee

The National Academy of Sciences has convened (for money) at EPA’s “request” a committee of ‘researchers’ in a panel called, “Assessing Causality from a Multidisciplinary Evidence Base for National Ambient Air Quality Standards.” Despite what the NAS says, the purpose of this committee is to help the Biden EPA resurrect the PM2.5 junk science that the Obama EPA used to railroad the coal industry and that the Trump EPA abandoned. Enstrom’s complaint addresses the dishonest Francesca Dominici. But other committee members (really the entire committee) need to go as well, including Armistead G. Russell (EPA grantee crony, $23,319,799 in grants), Charles Driscoll (EPA grantee crony, $7,437,921 in grants) and Joel Kaufman (EPA grantee-crony. $55,411,682 in grants and illegal human experimenter). We’ve scene this charade before, when the EPA hired NAS to whitewash its illegal human experiments. Now the EPA is paying the NAS to prime the walls for EPA to paper over the Trump EPA’s throttling of the agency’s PM2.5 science fraud.

EPA Peer Review: The Best Rubberstamping Cronies Money Can Buy

Now that the Biden EPA has rolled back the conflict-of-interest standards imposed by the Trump EPA on the agency’s outside scientific peer review panels, it has gone back to its old practice of stocking its peer review boards with agency research grant-recipient cronies who can be counted on to rubber-stamp whatever EPA wants to do. The Biden EPA most recently announced the particulate matter (PM) subpanel for the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC). As per below, 17 of the 22 members are current and/or former EPA grantees. The amounts associated with them as principal investigators are shown. Note the largest grantee (Lianne Sheppard, recipient of $60,032,782 in EPA grants) is, naturally, the chairman. Sheppard is also the chairman of the main CASAC panel as well as a member of EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB), a separate outside review panel. The Biden EPA needs a reliable multi-purpose rubber-stamper and that is Sheppard, an activist who sued the Trump EPA because it instituted conflict of interest rules under which she was ineligible to rubber-stamp agency wishes. Stay tuned. More coming on this! And please support JunkScience.com!

Study: Doubling CO2 from present to 800 ppm has almost no warming effect

The effect of doubling CO2 from 400 ppm to 800 ppm plus feedbacks is 0.5°C, reports a new study using HITRAN data. This is only 0.04°C more than the warming from doubled CO2 from 200ppm to 400 ppm (0.46°C). Support JunkScience.com!

Update: Wildfires more than offset California’s expensive cap-and-trade emissions cuts

We reported last year that California’s wildfires were offsetting the emissions cuts associated with California’s expensive cap-and-trade system. Here’s the 2021 update. At what point will the federal and state government be charged for emissions due to their failure to management public lands so as to reduce acreage burned?

California Air Resources Board (CARB) CO2 emissions chart annotated to include wildfire emissions at a rate of 23 tons per acre burned. Note 2007 and 2019 emissions were so high they are literally “off the chart.”

Continue reading Update: Wildfires more than offset California’s expensive cap-and-trade emissions cuts

Epidemiology to take seriously: Natural immunity better than COVID vaccines

A new epidemiology study reports that natural immunity confers better protection against COVID than current vaccines. I’ve been publishing JunkScience.com for 25+ years and can’t think of a single epidemiology study I’ve seen that was worth anything. That has now changed. This study reports that vaccinated individuals were 13 times more likely to have a breakthrough infection than individuals with natural immunity. Assuming the results actually are what they are reported to be, that’s an impressive odds ratio, worthy of being taken seriously. The result also has obvious biologic plausibility. For comparison purposes, the usual epidemiology crap we’ve been debunking for decades generally have meaningless odds ratios on the order of 2.0 or below, often 1.1 and below and even on the order of 1.01 and below (where an odds ratio of 1.0 means no effect). Of course, the study results need to be replicated. But it’s lookin’ good so far.

Please support JunkScience.com!