If we have to continue down a steep slope into an abyss of insolvency and socialism, at least we get to do it with Scott Pruitt atop the EPA. Check out the hysterical reaction even his most innocuous, indisputable remarks elicit from the warmist envirofascists at The Washington Post:
Scott Pruitt, the nation’s top environmental official, strongly rejected the established science of climate change on Thursday, outraging scientists, environmentalists, and even his immediate predecessor at the Environmental Protection Agency.
“Even” the tyrannical global warming Kool-Aid–pusher Gina McCarthy? I think they meant “especially” — to the immense satisfaction of freedom-loving Americans.
“I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see,” Pruitt, the newly installed EPA administrator, said on the CNBC program “Squawk Box.”
“But we don’t know that yet,” he continued. “We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis.”
Who could argue with that? WaPo could — with its hair on fire:
His comments represented a startling statement for an official so high in the U.S. government, putting him at odds not only with other countries around the globe but also with the official scientific findings of the agency he now leads.
That notoriously politicized agency has been under the direction of environmental extremists who have been using the global warming hoax as a pretext to attack not only the energy sector but capitalism in general.
Astonishingly, this WaPo piece — consisting of propaganda laced with outright lies like the words “little exists” in the following paragraph — was presented not on the editorial page, but as a news article.
Pruitt’s attempt to sow scientific doubt where little exists alarmed environmental advocates, scientists and former EPA officials, who fear he plans to use such views to attack Obama-era regulations aimed at reining in pollution from the burning of coal and other fossil fuels.
By “pollution,” they are mainly referring to carbon dioxide, which is not a pollutant but rather an essential nutrient that has been causing a greening of the planet (see here, here, and here). Over the course of centuries CO2 emissions may conceivably improve the weather, but this remains unproven theory.