EPA up for the ax???

[skookerasbil]

Killing the EPA would go a long way towards creating jobs and growing the economy, while making a negligible difference in the quality of the environment.

The EPA budget could be cut by 90% and there would be no noticeable degradation in th environment.

indeed...........a complete waste of taxpayers $$$$$$$$

 

[8537]

It’s taken 40 or 50 years to cleanup our waterways and air. Without regulation and enforcement, fines, lawsuits, and inspections, the environment will return to the days before environmental laws. Big corporations are not going to continue to spend millions on equipment that protects our air and water or forego development of environmental sensitive land without enforcement. Their goal is profit, not protection of the environment.

Without EPA protection our precious wetlands would be only a small fraction of what they are today. Wetlands naturally filter and recharge the water that later comes out of our faucets. They act like giant sponges, slowing the flow of surface water and reducing the impact of flooding. Their protection is vital not just to man but to fish and wildlife.

By 1967 the great California Condor’s numbers had shrank to only 25 in the wild. The Whooping Crane numbers had been reduced to only 21 worldwide. Even the Bald Eagle, our national bird was on the verge of extinction. By banning of DDP, use of lead in buckshot, and rigid protection of nesting places, these birds are all making a comeback along hundreds of other creatures.

Economic woes come and go, but extinction is forever.

Yes, if we cut even one dollar from EPA's budget every big mean corporation will rush to dump their toxic shit all over school yards and stuff.

 

[8537]

Sure. For one, the EPA has prevented the detrimental effects of acid rain across the Northern Forests, protecting tree and fish species from the Adirondacks to northern Maine. In doing so, they've also protected the largest industries in the region.

The theory that so-called "acid rain" was causing any environmental damage is largely a myth.

Environmentalism: The Triumph of Politics | Acton Institute

Yet in 1987, epa research raised doubts about the destructiveness of acid rain. Then came the most complete study of Acid Rain ever conducted, the half billion dollar National Acid Precipitation Assessment Project (napap), which concluded that the allegedly horrific effects of Acid Rain were largely a myth. Among other things, the study found that lakes were, on average, no more acidic than before the industrial era; just 240 of 7000 Northeast lakes, most with little recreational value, were critically acidic, or “dead”; most of the acidic water was in Florida, where the rain is only one-third as acidic; there was only very limited damage to trees, far less than that evident elsewhere in the world where so2 emissions are minimal; half of the Adirondack lakes were acidified due to natural organic acids; and crops remained undamaged at acidic levels ten times present levels. In the end, napap's scientists figured that liming the few lakes that were acidic would solve the problem at a fraction of the cost of the Clean Air Act's Acid Rain provisions.

Holy shit!

That's unreal. You're seriously attempting to claim that sulfur dioxide emissions were not responsible for the destruction of fish and flora in the Northern Forests?

This tops even the bullshit spewed by Racis...er...Rabbi.

 

[The Rabbi]

Sure. For one, the EPA has prevented the detrimental effects of acid rain across the Northern Forests, protecting tree and fish species from the Adirondacks to northern Maine. In doing so, they've also protected the largest industries in the region.

The theory that so-called "acid rain" was causing any environmental damage is largely a myth.

Environmentalism: The Triumph of Politics | Acton Institute

Yet in 1987, epa research raised doubts about the destructiveness of acid rain. Then came the most complete study of Acid Rain ever conducted, the half billion dollar National Acid Precipitation Assessment Project (napap), which concluded that the allegedly horrific effects of Acid Rain were largely a myth. Among other things, the study found that lakes were, on average, no more acidic than before the industrial era; just 240 of 7000 Northeast lakes, most with little recreational value, were critically acidic, or “dead”; most of the acidic water was in Florida, where the rain is only one-third as acidic; there was only very limited damage to trees, far less than that evident elsewhere in the world where so2 emissions are minimal; half of the Adirondack lakes were acidified due to natural organic acids; and crops remained undamaged at acidic levels ten times present levels. In the end, napap's scientists figured that liming the few lakes that were acidic would solve the problem at a fraction of the cost of the Clean Air Act's Acid Rain provisions.

Holy shit!

That's unreal. You're seriously attempting to claim that sulfur dioxide emissions were not responsible for the destruction of fish and flora in the Northern Forests?

This tops even the bullshit spewed by Racis...er...Rabbi.

I'm sure you'll provide evidence.
Oh yeah. You don't need to. Your opinion is fact enough. Right?

 

[8537]

The theory that so-called "acid rain" was causing any environmental damage is largely a myth.

Environmentalism: The Triumph of Politics | Acton Institute

Holy shit!

That's unreal. You're seriously attempting to claim that sulfur dioxide emissions were not responsible for the destruction of fish and flora in the Northern Forests?

This tops even the bullshit spewed by Racis...er...Rabbi.

I'm sure you'll provide evidence.
Oh yeah. You don't need to. Your opinion is fact enough. Right?

I'm happy to provide evidence of any claim that is even the least bit debatable or controversial.

The story of the Northern Forests and how the Bush administration's cap and trade program saved them is not debatable. It's established fact.

 

[kiwiman127]

The theory that so-called "acid rain" was causing any environmental damage is largely a myth.

Environmentalism: The Triumph of Politics | Acton Institute

Holy shit!

That's unreal. You're seriously attempting to claim that sulfur dioxide emissions were not responsible for the destruction of fish and flora in the Northern Forests?

This tops even the bullshit spewed by Racis...er...Rabbi.

I'm sure you'll provide evidence.
Oh yeah. You don't need to. Your opinion is fact enough. Right?

Ahhh, the ignorance!

The Problem
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), along with nitrous oxides, are the two leading causes of acid rain. Acid rain refers to the process by which acids fall from the atmosphere. When SO2 is emitted into the atmosphere, it reacts with other chemicals to form sulfuric acid, which then returns to the earth in some form. The acids can then contaminate lakes and have harmful effects on animals that live near these lakes. High levels of acid in lakes and rivers can kill fish as well as make them unable to reproduce. It is believed that some lakes in Minnesota have lost all of their fish as a direct result of acid rain. Many plants and one-celled organisms near lakes with high acidity are killed as well. The death of fish, plants, and other living organisms near a lake can have a cascading effect on other wildlife that is not directly affected by the high levels of acid. Acid rain also has an effect on forests, causing trees to weaken and die much easier. Leaves and needles fall off for no reason, and forests grow much slower. While acid rain does not pose a direct threat to human health, sulfur dioxide does. Sulfur dioxide reacts to form sulfate particles which when breathed by people can cause asmtha and bronchitis. Finally, acid rain can decrease visibility and cause damage to paint and other materials. The EPA has a website which summarizes many of the problems associated with acid rain. Another site describes many of the same problems at a more basic level. The Sierra Club has a website that discusses the health problems that people face.
The Regulation of SO2 Emissions

As usual, the naysayers haven't done their homework, the talking points they get is all they need. If the ideology says one thing, the brain-washed extreme ideologues bit on it as though it must be true, without putting any effort at all in researching whether it's true or not.

 

[The Rabbi]

Holy shit!

That's unreal. You're seriously attempting to claim that sulfur dioxide emissions were not responsible for the destruction of fish and flora in the Northern Forests?

This tops even the bullshit spewed by Racis...er...Rabbi.

I'm sure you'll provide evidence.
Oh yeah. You don't need to. Your opinion is fact enough. Right?

I'm happy to provide evidence of any claim that is even the least bit debatable or controversial.

The story of the Northern Forests and how the Bush administration's cap and trade program saved them is not debatable. It's established fact.

So no, you will not or cannot provide evidence. Thanks.

 

[The Rabbi]

Holy shit!

That's unreal. You're seriously attempting to claim that sulfur dioxide emissions were not responsible for the destruction of fish and flora in the Northern Forests?

This tops even the bullshit spewed by Racis...er...Rabbi.

I'm sure you'll provide evidence.
Oh yeah. You don't need to. Your opinion is fact enough. Right?

Ahhh, the ignorance!

The Problem
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), along with nitrous oxides, are the two leading causes of acid rain. Acid rain refers to the process by which acids fall from the atmosphere. When SO2 is emitted into the atmosphere, it reacts with other chemicals to form sulfuric acid, which then returns to the earth in some form. The acids can then contaminate lakes and have harmful effects on animals that live near these lakes. High levels of acid in lakes and rivers can kill fish as well as make them unable to reproduce. It is believed that some lakes in Minnesota have lost all of their fish as a direct result of acid rain. Many plants and one-celled organisms near lakes with high acidity are killed as well. The death of fish, plants, and other living organisms near a lake can have a cascading effect on other wildlife that is not directly affected by the high levels of acid. Acid rain also has an effect on forests, causing trees to weaken and die much easier. Leaves and needles fall off for no reason, and forests grow much slower. While acid rain does not pose a direct threat to human health, sulfur dioxide does. Sulfur dioxide reacts to form sulfate particles which when breathed by people can cause asmtha and bronchitis. Finally, acid rain can decrease visibility and cause damage to paint and other materials. The EPA has a website which summarizes many of the problems associated with acid rain. Another site describes many of the same problems at a more basic level. The Sierra Club has a website that discusses the health problems that people face.
The Regulation of SO2 Emissions

As usual, the naysayers haven't done their homework, the talking points they get is all they need. If the ideology says one thing, the brain-washed extreme ideologues bit on it as though it must be true, without putting any effort at all in researching whether it's true or not.

So the EPA study that examined this very thing is something you plan to ignore. Right?
The Sierra Club. There's an unbiased source for you.

 

[Vanquish]

Yeah. Big Business will **** over the environment, but hey! Everyone will have jobs! Who ******* cares as long as there's money!!

 

[kiwiman127]

I'm sure you'll provide evidence.
Oh yeah. You don't need to. Your opinion is fact enough. Right?

Ahhh, the ignorance!

The Problem
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), along with nitrous oxides, are the two leading causes of acid rain. Acid rain refers to the process by which acids fall from the atmosphere. When SO2 is emitted into the atmosphere, it reacts with other chemicals to form sulfuric acid, which then returns to the earth in some form. The acids can then contaminate lakes and have harmful effects on animals that live near these lakes. High levels of acid in lakes and rivers can kill fish as well as make them unable to reproduce. It is believed that some lakes in Minnesota have lost all of their fish as a direct result of acid rain. Many plants and one-celled organisms near lakes with high acidity are killed as well. The death of fish, plants, and other living organisms near a lake can have a cascading effect on other wildlife that is not directly affected by the high levels of acid. Acid rain also has an effect on forests, causing trees to weaken and die much easier. Leaves and needles fall off for no reason, and forests grow much slower. While acid rain does not pose a direct threat to human health, sulfur dioxide does. Sulfur dioxide reacts to form sulfate particles which when breathed by people can cause asmtha and bronchitis. Finally, acid rain can decrease visibility and cause damage to paint and other materials. The EPA has a website which summarizes many of the problems associated with acid rain. Another site describes many of the same problems at a more basic level. The Sierra Club has a website that discusses the health problems that people face.
The Regulation of SO2 Emissions

As usual, the naysayers haven't done their homework, the talking points they get is all they need. If the ideology says one thing, the brain-washed extreme ideologues bit on it as though it must be true, without putting any effort at all in researching whether it's true or not.

So the EPA study that examined this very thing is something you plan to ignore. Right?
The Sierra Club. There's an unbiased source for you.

The piece is from the University of Colorado. If you went to the link, you'd have a clue. Do you enjoy being intellectually lazy?

 

[konradv]

The piece is from the University of Colorado. If you went to the link, you'd have a clue. Do you enjoy being intellectually lazy?

You're being too kind. I'd say "intellectually dishonest".

 

[8537]

The piece is from the University of Colorado. If you went to the link, you'd have a clue. Do you enjoy being intellectually lazy?

You're being too kind. I'd say "intellectually dishonest".

You're being too kind. I'd say "intellectually vapid, ignorant, rightwing racist who believes that "blacks can't lead"*"

*That's a direct quote

 

[The Rabbi]

Ahhh, the ignorance!

The Problem
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), along with nitrous oxides, are the two leading causes of acid rain. Acid rain refers to the process by which acids fall from the atmosphere. When SO2 is emitted into the atmosphere, it reacts with other chemicals to form sulfuric acid, which then returns to the earth in some form. The acids can then contaminate lakes and have harmful effects on animals that live near these lakes. High levels of acid in lakes and rivers can kill fish as well as make them unable to reproduce. It is believed that some lakes in Minnesota have lost all of their fish as a direct result of acid rain. Many plants and one-celled organisms near lakes with high acidity are killed as well. The death of fish, plants, and other living organisms near a lake can have a cascading effect on other wildlife that is not directly affected by the high levels of acid. Acid rain also has an effect on forests, causing trees to weaken and die much easier. Leaves and needles fall off for no reason, and forests grow much slower. While acid rain does not pose a direct threat to human health, sulfur dioxide does. Sulfur dioxide reacts to form sulfate particles which when breathed by people can cause asmtha and bronchitis. Finally, acid rain can decrease visibility and cause damage to paint and other materials. The EPA has a website which summarizes many of the problems associated with acid rain. Another site describes many of the same problems at a more basic level. The Sierra Club has a website that discusses the health problems that people face.
The Regulation of SO2 Emissions

As usual, the naysayers haven't done their homework, the talking points they get is all they need. If the ideology says one thing, the brain-washed extreme ideologues bit on it as though it must be true, without putting any effort at all in researching whether it's true or not.

So the EPA study that examined this very thing is something you plan to ignore. Right?
The Sierra Club. There's an unbiased source for you.

The piece is from the University of Colorado. If you went to the link, you'd have a clue. Do you enjoy being intellectually lazy?

Which references the Sierra Club website approvingly.
Are you done yet?

 

[The Rabbi]

The piece is from the University of Colorado. If you went to the link, you'd have a clue. Do you enjoy being intellectually lazy?

You're being too kind. I'd say "intellectually dishonest".

You're being too kind. I'd say "intellectually vapid, ignorant, rightwing racist who believes that "blacks can't lead"*"

*That's a direct quote

So the answer is no, you cannot or will not provide any evidence.
Thanks. Just so everyone else knows.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yeah. Big Business will **** over the environment, but hey! Everyone will have jobs! Who ******* cares as long as there's money!!

I'm sure you don't care since you're on unemployment, "counselor."
Wow, all we need here is Chris and Nutwinger and the thread becomes the Confederacy of Dunces.

 

[8537]

You're being too kind. I'd say "intellectually dishonest".

You're being too kind. I'd say "intellectually vapid, ignorant, rightwing racist who believes that "blacks can't lead"*"

*That's a direct quote

So the answer is no, you cannot or will not provide any evidence.
Thanks. Just so everyone else knows.

Evidence that you're an intellectually vapid rightwing racist? Your posts provide all the evidence necessary.

 

[BOBO]

EXCELLENT QUOTE! Never heard that one before but will not forget it!

 

[The Rabbi]

You're being too kind. I'd say "intellectually vapid, ignorant, rightwing racist who believes that "blacks can't lead"*"

*That's a direct quote

So the answer is no, you cannot or will not provide any evidence.
Thanks. Just so everyone else knows.

Evidence that you're an intellectually vapid rightwing racist? Your posts provide all the evidence necessary.

So you cannot or will not provide evidence for any view you have.

That pretty much makes you irrelevant. Like there was any question to begin with.

 

[kiwiman127]

So the EPA study that examined this very thing is something you plan to ignore. Right?
The Sierra Club. There's an unbiased source for you.

The piece is from the University of Colorado. If you went to the link, you'd have a clue. Do you enjoy being intellectually lazy?

Which references the Sierra Club website approvingly.
Are you done yet?

So I post evidence and you come back with absolutely hothing that disproves the fact that sulfur dioxide harms our wildlife, water and forest.

Let me add more proof:

ACID RAIN-Emissions Trends and Effects in the Eastern United States
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/rc00047.pdf

Acid Rain in Wisconsin
Acid rain in Wisconsin - WDNR

Protecting the Environment from Acid RainEnvironment Canada - Science and Technology - Research Into Action to Benefit Canadians

China Takes First Steps In the Fight Against Acid Rain
China Takes First Steps In the Fight Against Acid Rain by Christina Larson: Yale Environment 360

Acid Rain
Acid Rain

So Rabbi, instead of deflecting, why not come back with a solid and non-partisan professional expert rebuttal?

 

[The Rabbi]

The piece is from the University of Colorado. If you went to the link, you'd have a clue. Do you enjoy being intellectually lazy?

Which references the Sierra Club website approvingly.
Are you done yet?

So I post evidence and you come back with absolutely disproves the fact that sulfur dioxide harms our wildlife, water and forest.

Let me add more proof:

ACID RAIN-Emissions Trends and Effects in the Eastern United States
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/rc00047.pdf

Acid Rain in Wisconsin
Acid rain in Wisconsin - WDNR

Protecting the Environment from Acid RainEnvironment Canada - Science and Technology - Research Into Action to Benefit Canadians

China Takes First Steps In the Fight Against Acid Rain
China Takes First Steps In the Fight Against Acid Rain by Christina Larson: Yale Environment 360

Acid Rain
Acid Rain

So Rabbi, instead of deflecting, why not come back with a solid and non-partisan professional expert rebuttal?

You realize that just because a document contains the phrase "acid rain" that it is not proof. Right?
The GAO report (over 10 years old btw) simply measures sulphur emissions and others and then measures acid content in water bodies. Correlation does not equal causation.
Yet in the study cited previously by someone else there was no correlation between 'acid rain" levels and the health of water bodies.