A half century of junk science comes to
an end at the EPA with reform by the Trump administration

This reads like an article from The Onion or Babylon Bee. Unfortunately, it is neither and Mother Gaia (may a blessing be upon her /s) will be difficult to uproot due to the brainwashing of at least a generation in our schools. Expect to hear more of “hole in the ozone layer” and “ destruction of the rain forest” before these adjustments can be made. Has anyone calculated the effect of the latest Russian volcano eruption?

Ever wonder why the liberals were so quick to embrace the mania of separating and washing your trash (to be taken to the same dump), of putting up monstrosities to catch the wind (while killing birds and creating land fill that will never degrade into soil), or changing our light bulbs to offensively bright things that are dangerous when broken, to removing gas stoves for inferior electric stoves, to taking away our good showers and toilets, and trying to take all of our efficient cars and replacing them with fire hazards in our garage. 1) They love to boss people around! 2) They want to be able to have total control when they throw the switch and your new smart meter (that they installed on your house, if you let them) gives power to who they chose.

And Paul Ehrlich, like all self-professed enviro-nazis, was completely wrong with all of his predictions.

Rachel Carson was another person in the environmental wacko movement. I keep getting told by various sources that feral cats are wiping out songbirds and then I am told that climate change is wiping out songbirds and then its avian flu, etc. ad nauseum. I wish they (the greenies) would make up their minds. There's nothing green or caring about the Green Movement - it's all about control of us peons. Now if only President Trump or someone in his cabinet can shut down the huge windmill project off of Virginia Beach, VA.

And we still might have DDT to use if it wasn't for people like Rachal Carlson whose 1962 book "Silent Spring" was debunked at least 30 years ago, poster # 4. But the lies had already permeated society by the early 70s. Even though a judge ruled DDT was not a cause of cancer or an environmental wrecking ball, an environmental whacko stooge EPA administrator, William Ruckelshaus, banned it's use anyways. I really hope all the leftists in the big northeast cities are enjoying their bedbugs because of decisions like the above. Hopefully all the ill-advised energy production decisions which have been made in the last 20 or so years are not too much to overcome. Building coal and natural gas fired electric plants should be a high priority over the next several years.

This is what happens when trash talks. Formerly known as environmentalists, these people started conspiring back in the early seventies to lie about the environment. They openly discussed exaggerating problems as a way of drawing attention (and cash) to their causes. I can remember writing to them that 'crying wolf' could have regrettable consequences and even hurt the environment as people began discounting the warnings - but they knew better. At least it certainly went on far longer than I expected. But now, the chickens are coming home to roost.

Calling CO2 a pollutant was always pseudo-scientific FRAUD. Paying many corrupt "scientists" (not) to report again and again this same lie, does not make it true. At one time "all the best scientific minds" were absolutely certain that the sun orbited around the earth....I mean it's so obvious, you can SEE it orbit around every single day! And it was total BS, like carbon dioxide being harmful. Carbon dioxide is a benefit to all green plants which are a benefit to the planet and all life on it.

I don't believe the Ehrlich book had much of anything to do with the creation of the EPA. It was the 1969 Santa Barbara Oil spill that galvanized people to "act", to "do something". The funny thing, the spill was a result of the USGS allowing the oil company to circumvent procedures. And the article mentions the wave of college graduates but forgets to mention mostly due to the draft waivers that pushed hundreds of thousands into college to avoid the draft. It's interesting that none of the population forecasts from Ehrlich came true which is similar to the global warming crowd who've shouted from the roof tops of doom and gloom that has not materialized either. The objective of Democrats is to build government programs and thus their voting block, then get people hooked on whatever program for more to vote for the continuation. Regardless if the program actually helps or achieves any results always talk about making progress no matter how INFINITESIMAL. Just make it seem like some sort of progress is being achieved to continue to fool people. Now, Lee Zeldin needs to publish the failures of policy over the past 55 years for all to see.

scientific integrity and environmentalism, Hmmm? Can they coexist? Science is considered, calm, and careful. Environmentalism is emotional, frantic, and running around with its hair on fire. The original environmentalists were all about clean air, ground, and water. It was pretty easy to see pollution effects and what needed to be done about it. For the most part, we cleaned up the country. But with success, there wasn't as much left to do. Others with an anti capitalist agenda came up with something. Business created a lot of waste products that might be labeled pollution and they used large amounts of power that produced CO2. Suppose THAT was bad? So they declared it so. The problem is, CO2 is invisible, and with no odor. There is barely any in the air and barely any more at levels that are supposedly bad. OK, lets project, without proof but with frightening theories, the damage into the future. Now lets start a cottage industry employing LOTS of environmentalists to prove it. When you pay people to prove something and their cushy livelihood depends on it, do you think they will deny their employers such proof. Nah, you get what you pay for. And it's still all in the future so there is no accountability for their predictions being wrong. Where are you going to get scientists not corrupted by environmentalism? How will you keep the EPA getting out ahead of what is real and verifiable? One of the big things that has always bothered me is that an unelected agency established policies for the country that were draconian and very costly. Such decisions should be left to Congress, not government agencies and the liberal courts. It would be good for the Congress to put constraints on the EPA taking major actions without specific Congressional approval.

The good news is that in the 2024 New York Times/Siena and YouGov polls, climate change ranked 15th out of 18 national priorities (beating only global trade, drug addiction, and racial issues). Writing in The Liberal Patriot, columnist Guy Texeira reported that these two polls showed just 26 percent of voters would be willing to pay up to $20/month more on their utility bills to address climate change, and only 47 percent would be willing to pay $1.

"One of the big things that has always bothered me is that an unelected agency established policies for the country that were draconian and very costly" Indeed. Just a small thing I personally experienced. I was a board member of one our local charities In front of our building was a small creek that you could almost jump across. Brush would grow along the creek and a heavy rain would flood part of our building. To prevent it, we had to have the brush cleared periodically. To clear the brush, we had to get a permit from the EPA because, I guess, it was deemed some sort of waterway. It was a "waterway" only because a kid could float his toy boat in it. Don't tell anybody but we started clearing it out without a permit although I doubt that they really cared. They just thought that they had done their job by telling us that we needed a permit.