EPA still embraces faked UN Climate claims against US citizens

Where are Woodward and Bernstein to save us from corruption today? Answer: In their day, they worked to protect the people from corrupt government. Today they and their followers do the exact reverse: Protect a corrupt government from its entrapped people.

• At least 4 faked UN points are being used by the government via the EPA to attack US citizens: intensity of hurricanes, Himalaya melt, frequency of hurricanes due to human actions, tropical forests ruined.

"The Environmental Protection Agency made no bones about where it shopped for its science, proudly proclaiming that

• the IPCC had done such a good job that they did not need to do their (mandatory) independent assessment

of the risks posed to U.S. citizens from greenhouse gases, which they now propose to regulate. Now, however, they are not so proud of the IPCC... although their Endangerment Finding relies heavily on the IPCC and uses some of the IPCC's more questionable reporting.

Hat tip to Charlie Martin and Pajamas Media, from which I quote: "During the review of the Environmental Protection Agency budget in today’s Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing,

• both Senator Barbara Boxer — the chair of the committee — and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson distanced themselves from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (AR4)."

Both Boxer and Jackson appeared to be trying to distance the EPA from the IPCC report. Boxer said:

• In my opening statement, I didn’t quote one international scientist or IPCC report. … We are quoting
  
• the American scientific community here.

When Inhofe directly asked (EPA's) Jackson if she still considered the IPCC report the “gold standard,” she answered:

• "The primary focus of the endangerment finding was on climate threat
  
• risks in this country." (*)
  

Jackson also noted:

• "[The errors Inhofe had presented were] international events.

The information on the glaciers and other events doesn’t weaken … the evidence we considered [to make the Endangerment Finding on CO2.]"

• So, just how independent is the IPCC's (EPA) findings? Not very--

• the Technical Support Document averages almost two references to the IPCC on every page, and

both the Endangerment Finding and the Technical Support Document contain direct reference to IPCC findings that have been revealed to be suspect, due to inadequate sourcing or plain error.

From the EPA's Response to Public Comments, Volume 1:

• "In fact, these assessment reports look
  

• at the range of the scientific literature without “cherry-picking” and
  

it is EPA’s conclusion that by placing

• primary reliance on the major assessment reports, we have ensured that the determinations are based on reports that have considered and weighed all views." ...
  

Number of times the IPCC is mentioned in the Endangerment Finding itself:

• 49 (in a 52 page document)

Bonus Quote No. 1: The conclusion in the assessment literature that there is the potential for hurricanes to become more intense (and even some evidence that Atlantic hurricanes have already become more intense) reinforces the judgment that coastal communities are now endangered by human-induced climate change, and may face substantially greater risk in the future.

• Number of times the IPCC is mentioned in the Technical Support Document to the Endangerment Finding:
  

• 396 (in a 210 page document)

Bonus Quote No. 2: Glacier melt in the Himalayas is projected to increase flooding and rock avalanches from destabilized slopes and to affect water resources within the next two to three decades.

Bonus Quote No. 3: The power and frequency of Atlantic hurricanes have increased substantially in
recent decades.

Bonus Quote No. 4: By mid-century, increases in temperature and associated decreases in soil water are projected to lead to gradual replacement of tropical forest by savanna in eastern Amazonia."

• (Ed. The EPA is of course wrong in all 4 bonus quotes)

"Joined at the hip: The EPA Endangerment Finding uses the IPCC's questionable science," 2/25/10 by Thomas Fuller. via Climate Depot

• *Biggest screaming lie of the day--even the NY Times says that CO2 is globally mixed, that no matter where it originates it masses all over the globe.
  
• ie-It is never about one country.