Wait until President Trump finds out about this, Mick.

Wait until President Trump finds out about this, Mick.

There will be a public hearing in Washington DC on July 17. Comments due by August 17.

This is a new PM2/5/ozone analysis from Stan Young et al. It uses a different methodology from last year’s California study on the same California data. Same answer, though. And the data is available from the study authors — something the EPA-funded air pollution mafia refuses to share.

Continue reading New Study: Still no association between PM2.5, ozone and premature death
More junk from Francesca Dominici and the Harvard air scare mafia.

Continue reading NO… air ‘pollution’ NOT associated with hospitalization of elderly
Check out my line-by-line comments on her embarrassing essay in this week’s Nature.

Continue reading Fake ‘science historian’ Naomi Oreskes attacks EPA science transparency proposal
A memo prepared by the University of Washington’s Alison Cullen for the upcoming EPA Science Advisory Board meeting exposes the plot.

Continue reading Air Pollution Mafia Attempting to Sabotage EPA Science Transparency Rulemaking
Brilliant investigative work from Dr. Stan Young and colleagues.

Continue reading Statistical shenanigan behind air pollution studies revealed

The combination of the Washington Post printing an op-ed by a conservative economist supporting the Scott Pruitt-led EPA’s science transparency initiative, which then becomes an EPA media release… well, that just doesn’t happen every day!

Thirdhand smoke is dangerous… in your Uber car or in a classroom where someone smoked 30 years ago?
From the May 9, 1943 edition, the New York Times defuses a new claim that declining soil fertility is causing all sorts of human health problems by pointing out that chronic diseases like cancer, diabetes and heart disease are primarily diseases associated with aging — which is what wealthy and healthy populations in developed countries tend to do.



I’ve always suspected that Stanford University professor John Ioannidis was only posing as a science reformer. His commentary in PLoS against the EPA science transparency rulemaking validates that.
