You are so naïve. This is not directed at transparency. This is directed at gutting environmental laws by prohibiting the use of studies with confidential information embedded in them. It is transparent only in its effort to appease the polluting industry and increase the harm to the American public.
Now, who is being naive? Climatistas have been proven wrong in their predictions over and over and over again. The knowledgeable and honest climate scientists know that windmills and solar panels are a distraction and they will never make a dent in the problem of CO2 production. But as a society, we keep on running down that dead end.
This is only one example of the religious fervor of environmentalists who claim to “believe in science” and there are about a million more examples. Show me the science and let me decide if it is BS or not.
You claimed 3 times an altimeter measured temperature and not height. You failed to grasp bullet point examples in a study were directly related to the preceding paragraph. Not sure you’re the best person to decide if the science is sound or not.
Nice irrelevant comment to the point being made, since I would never be the only one reading the science, now would I, genius? What a dufus you are.
January 6, 2021 at 12:06 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
You said “let me decide if it is BS or not.” I simply explained why I don’t think you’re the best person to decide if the science is BS or not.
January 6, 2021 at 12:32 pm
Craig Winston Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
And did I say, Mr. NitPicker, that I would be the ONLY person reading the science? No. Only a fool would assume that would ever be the case.
Geez, you never give up, making yourself look like more of a fool with every comment.
And even if I got one thing wrong in my life – as does everyone except you apparently – it does NOT mean I am not capable of thinking accurately about other issues.
The Logic Fail on your part is revealing of a second rate mind.
January 6, 2021 at 12:44 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“And even if I got one thing wrong in my life … it does NOT mean I am not capable of thinking accurately about other issues.”
I agree 100%. You are absolutely right. The problem is you didn’t know thermometers measure temperature and altimeters measure height, then you try to claim you understand how the science on climate data is unreliable..
It’s like if I said 3 times that a car’s tachometer measured how fast my car was traveling on the highway then argued fuel economy calculations aren’t reliable … you probably wouldn’t believe I knew what I was talking about because I don’t even know what tool to use to get the right data in the first place.
January 6, 2021 at 1:13 pm
Craig Winston Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
And then you make THE SAME STUPID ARGUMENT AGAIN! Truly, you made me laugh. You seem stuck in stupid.
What schools did you go to? I want to make sure to warn everyone to stay away.
January 6, 2021 at 1:30 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
A personal attack instead of responding to the point I was making = you lost the argument. I presume you agree that someone who doesn’t know what tools are used to get the data in the first place is not the best person to determine if the data is BS or not. Good talk.
January 6, 2021 at 5:42 pm
Craig Winston Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Are you THAT dumb??!!?!??
You accuse ME of a personal attack when your first (and only) point was that I was not qualified to read science because I made a mistake one time in my life!
Yes, you are.
January 5, 2021 at 3:19 pm
curious says:
Like or Dislike:
7
5
Knowledgeable and honest climate scientists correctly call them “turbines,” not “windmills.”
it does not have to be secret. everything should be in the open. EVERYTHING. Then there’s no guessing. The secrets lead to all this arguing and distractions and divisions. What are they afraid of. Seems people think other people can’t make their own informed decisions. The truth hurts, but we need to know. I still want to know whether you think its about transparency or not. The government has lied to us many, many, many times.
A: “This rule would essentially bar the agency from using the most relevant medical studies [due to an inability to protect PII if those studies are used and are required to be fully transparent.”
You do think protecting PII is important, correct?
And so if a study determined that Climate Change was not real, but the study could not reveal the science behind that conclusion in order to protect PII, you would support that policy by a conservative administration that took that stance. . . as if.
Now, let’s see. This is aimed at greater transparency in government. Just let us see the science. Who would not want that? And why not? Hmmmm . . .
You are so naïve. This is not directed at transparency. This is directed at gutting environmental laws by prohibiting the use of studies with confidential information embedded in them. It is transparent only in its effort to appease the polluting industry and increase the harm to the American public.
Now, who is being naive? Climatistas have been proven wrong in their predictions over and over and over again. The knowledgeable and honest climate scientists know that windmills and solar panels are a distraction and they will never make a dent in the problem of CO2 production. But as a society, we keep on running down that dead end.
This is only one example of the religious fervor of environmentalists who claim to “believe in science” and there are about a million more examples. Show me the science and let me decide if it is BS or not.
You claimed 3 times an altimeter measured temperature and not height. You failed to grasp bullet point examples in a study were directly related to the preceding paragraph. Not sure you’re the best person to decide if the science is sound or not.
Nice irrelevant comment to the point being made, since I would never be the only one reading the science, now would I, genius? What a dufus you are.
You said “let me decide if it is BS or not.” I simply explained why I don’t think you’re the best person to decide if the science is BS or not.
And did I say, Mr. NitPicker, that I would be the ONLY person reading the science? No. Only a fool would assume that would ever be the case.
Geez, you never give up, making yourself look like more of a fool with every comment.
And even if I got one thing wrong in my life – as does everyone except you apparently – it does NOT mean I am not capable of thinking accurately about other issues.
The Logic Fail on your part is revealing of a second rate mind.
“And even if I got one thing wrong in my life … it does NOT mean I am not capable of thinking accurately about other issues.”
I agree 100%. You are absolutely right. The problem is you didn’t know thermometers measure temperature and altimeters measure height, then you try to claim you understand how the science on climate data is unreliable..
It’s like if I said 3 times that a car’s tachometer measured how fast my car was traveling on the highway then argued fuel economy calculations aren’t reliable … you probably wouldn’t believe I knew what I was talking about because I don’t even know what tool to use to get the right data in the first place.
And then you make THE SAME STUPID ARGUMENT AGAIN! Truly, you made me laugh. You seem stuck in stupid.
What schools did you go to? I want to make sure to warn everyone to stay away.
A personal attack instead of responding to the point I was making = you lost the argument. I presume you agree that someone who doesn’t know what tools are used to get the data in the first place is not the best person to determine if the data is BS or not. Good talk.
Are you THAT dumb??!!?!??
You accuse ME of a personal attack when your first (and only) point was that I was not qualified to read science because I made a mistake one time in my life!
Yes, you are.
Knowledgeable and honest climate scientists correctly call them “turbines,” not “windmills.”
CORRECT! Good for you! You get a sticker!
it does not have to be secret. everything should be in the open. EVERYTHING. Then there’s no guessing. The secrets lead to all this arguing and distractions and divisions. What are they afraid of. Seems people think other people can’t make their own informed decisions. The truth hurts, but we need to know. I still want to know whether you think its about transparency or not. The government has lied to us many, many, many times.
Q: “What are they afraid of”
A: “This rule would essentially bar the agency from using the most relevant medical studies [due to an inability to protect PII if those studies are used and are required to be fully transparent.”
You do think protecting PII is important, correct?
And so if a study determined that Climate Change was not real, but the study could not reveal the science behind that conclusion in order to protect PII, you would support that policy by a conservative administration that took that stance. . . as if.
Climate data has no PII so your analogy makes no sense.
Truly. You are one funny fool.
The article talked about “confidential medical and INDUSTRY data”.
It was not confined to PII. You made that up.