EPA head dumbfounded by climate analysis.

So when the earth does not warm or storm as predicted... it is as puzzling as the rapture that never came.

How can anyone ignore the effects of chemicals on the atmosphere?

The real effects on this world might not be known until we are past the point of doing anything about it, the complexity and unknown attributes make it difficult to precisely say the damage and the time frame for the damage to compound and be irreversible.

It is like saying we understand the central nervous system and how to treat it...we are far off from knowing what the consequences are of the damage to our atmosphere.

What I can tell you is on a smaller scale we CAN determine the effects of pollution and degrading of the environment with regards to water and land. We can see what happens when pollution is added to water ways and lands..when the natural resources are depleted and wasted. 

So I am not sure how you guys can really say global warming and climate change is a myth and a hoax, it for sure is NOT. I also do not understand the short sided approach some here have to certain topics...that unless you are literally dying from the issue then it does not exist.

How can anyone say that less pollutions and chemicals into the atmosphere is a bad thing? Who cares if the costs are high, the costs of protecting the environment and our ecosystem cannot be measured, it is so valuable that you cannot place a price on it.

Are there crazies that go overboard? Sure there are...but to dismiss the concept and issue as a hoax and a myth is pretty stupid if you ask me.

Its like saying you dont see the value in going to a dermatologist to get a skin cancer check because you dont have cancer outwardly destroying your body!

The answer is quite simple.  Liberals have constantly underestimated the enormous strength and power of mother nature.

Libs cry that we must divert water or spend billions to save a toad... but species die out every single day.  That has been going on since life began on this earth.  Species die, and others fill the void.  There is no panic about any particular species, and there is no (needed) panic about so called global warming.

The earth has fluctuated in temps for millions of years, and every single fear tactic that has been spewed over decades have not come true.

If you like this religion, great go worship.  Just don't ask me to put an envelope in the plate being passed around.

Then explain how pollution and chemicals destroy land and water the way it does?

The answer is that the atmosphere is vast, so the tipping point is unknown but it doesnt mean climate change and global warming is a myth and fraud.

Its as I said, some of you guys wouldnt go see a dermatologist until you had stage 3 melanoma and be shocked that it happened. Taking a proactive approach to our environment seems to be a concept some of you guys have no concept of.

I think we just want to see actions reasonable to what long-term collected data suggests.

As previously discussed, the earth has ways of dealing with some pollutants with rain and the formation of Lyme deposits. 

I don't think volcanic activity is going to ramp down anytime soon either. 

The Good Lord did a great job in the design of these natural pollution clean up features.

Epa may do more harm than good at this point. We could debate that for a very long time.

That is quite true..it still happens in this country and even worse in places like India and China.

Here we are allowing something mega destructive and toxic so that we can let businesses exist that probably should not, mainly fracking.

Fracking is horrible, destructive and will end up being a serious issue for our water table and the health of millions...yet we dont have cancer yet so who cares...Whiting Petro owns politicians so under the guise of capitalism lets make money and frack!

bowls...my problem is with comments in the thread about myth and fraud...that is such a bunch of crap. Climate change and global warming is not a fraud or a myth, the evolution of our climate happens in spurts which like a chart will longer term show a trend..it might spurt for a moment and then revert away from the spike..but the trend as we will find out later down the road will already be in place and at that point we have no recourse.

I've lived in Arizona for over a decade and to me I notice higher temps and more historic highs being reached more often which is abnormal. I dont think the concept of chemicals depleting the atmosphere is without merit and I think the damage exists and will continue...and as I keep referencing, some people will not take action or understand until they are so severely damaged that there is no hope or way to reverse the action.

I will give you another example... When the oil rigs spewed millions of gallons of crude into the gulf a few years back, the environmentalists cried that the gulf would be destroyed for generations.  BP cleaned up what they could, spending a fortune.  the fact is they got a fraction of what was spilled.  The gulf is as pure as it was before that valve broke.  Mother nature taking care of these things like a champ.

Did you know that every day and every month there are "spills" of crude into the oceans all over the world?  It is a natural occurance as the crude below the sea beds bust loose into the sea water.  Millions of barrels each month, all over the world.

There are these micro-organisms that thrive on breaking down the crude, mother nature taking care of something that has been occuring far before any of us humans thought this was a "disaster"

I'm not at all of the thinking that pollution does not have its concequences.  When you have large amounts of pollution in a CONCENTRATED AREA you have a problem.  The issues I cite are global events of nature (species dying, crude in the ocean, and co2 in the atmosphere), and mother nature has been dealing with such issues just fine for millions of years.

It is simply narcissistic for any group of humans to think that WE have such a power over the force of mother nature.  But that is not the point, the entire green movement is driven by politics and those that wish to stifle capitalism.  

Then why did Obama's white has get labeled for using bad faith in releasing climate data? Did you bother to read the article?

Obviously, the data didn't back up the claims. If I'm not mistaken, that's the cart before the horse mentality.

I am glad you brought that example up.

What is the difference between chemical pollution and crude oil?

Do you know what the difference is and why your example is pretty much void?

Crude oil is a substance extracted from the earth, originating from the earth...so it SHOULD be able to be absorbed back into the earth easier than combusted chemicals and man made chemicals.

It would be like saying that compost from veggies are able to be broken down easier than styrofoam or plastic...well OF COURSE it would.

Why not say water spilled from a broken well is able to be absorbed back into the soil easier?

Crude oil is pure, organic and has little to no man made involvement.

One more thing...do you know the difference between fracking waste water and crude, that fracking waste water is toxic and extremely dangerous, but crude oil while still a challenge, it is much less environmentally dangerous?

Nobody disputes what happens when you pour toxic chemicals in the water. Look at parts of the rivers in China for examples of this.  Or other such things.   That is not what the thread is about. The thread is about why, despite the increasing amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere, the warming has been flat.  It has been predicted to be much more exaggerated than has happened thus far.  Nobody even disputes the fact that putting that much CO2 in the atmosphere is bad.  What is seen as the myth and hoax part is that it is causing 'man-made global warming'. It is not.  That is the myth part. It is a huge money making scam by people that are taking advantage of a current liberal mindset---maybe even a guilt complex, because of how well off we are compared to under-developed countries. People love to be stirred up and be in a frenzy over something and in a constant mood of fear. It doesn't have to be communism --- it can simply be the fear of man-made global warming. 

If you were to study it with an open mind, I think you would see how far off all of these computer models and things are.  Droughts are less severe, hurricanes are less frequent, tornadoes, etc.  All of these things that are supposed to be getting so much worse; they aren't. Of course, there are points in a trend where you can see deviations. But all of these things together simply point to 'man-made global warming' being wrong is all. 

You are correct that we should be environmentally conscious!  Of course that is true. No matter the issue, you should examine both sides with an open mind---and see both side's agendas. For example, DDT I don't think ever was proved to have caused a person to get sick. However, banning its use could be said to have 'killed' millions of people.  Sometimes animals (Eagles or even insects)  are not more important than people. Sometimes good intentions can simply be wrong. 

A lot of studies show times with inverse CO2 levels and temps.  

I also do not like the oil spill comparison. The warmer waters certainly helped. For example, the Alaskan spill is still showing effects --- because of the colder waters. But nobody disputes we should try at all costs to avoid oil spills!

For example, look at industrial revolution era in England with soot. Look at cities with smog problems like Mexico City or Beijing. Nobody will argue that the smog standards we put in place for cities like LA aren't good.  That is not the point. Those things have nothing to do with whether man is causing global temp fluctuations.  These guys that have the vested interest would have everyone believe the effect is enormous!  When in fact, it is minute at best. 

More polar bears than at any time.  Who is to say that for most areas of earth that a warming wouldn't be great.  More areas to grow crops and for animals to migrate to, etc. What if we could control the temps and we would keep it set at 58 or whatever it is now.  What if the optimal temperature would really be 65 in order for us and the plants and animals to get the most out of the earth's area?  Maybe the earth is trying to correct itself and warm to the core t temperature.  And we are wasting our time and slowing advancements just to try to delay the inevitable and optimal?  It is arrogant for us to assume this is the correct temp.  Especially without complete verifiable proof that we are messing the temps up. 

The example of skin issues is a little weak. Because we have complete and verifiable proof of millions of examples of when an issue is starting out and needs to be taken care of early!  We only have been studying the atmosphere for a short period this one time.  Extrapolation can only take you so far.  And it may lead you wrong if you feed the wrong assumptions into it. Whereas, with skin issues, we have experienced it and studied it millions of times and know for a fact what happens and what is good and bad for the body.  With the earth's temperature we do not know for a fact what is good or bad.