MSM Screeching Headlines: EPA To End Rule That Saved Us

The Trump EPA under Secretary Lee Zeldin is about to end the endangerment finding. The New York Times dramatically phrased it this way: E.P.A. Is Said to Draft a Plan to End Its Ability to Fight Climate Change. Politico wrote: The administration’s approach, led by White House and Justice Department officials, would focus on a legal rather than a scientific rationale for repealing the so-called endangerment finding.

Politico called it the “Holy Grail,” but it was based on one study served up by Barack Obama.

CNN marched to the same tune. Trump admin will soon propose to kill EPA’s ability to make rules about climate pollution, sources say, according to the outlet.

That is not true. They can still make rules about pollution, but it would reign them in. They are out of control.

RegTechTimes wrote along the same lines. They headlined their article: The rule that saved us—now under attack: EPA draft sparks climate emergency fears.

All the articles are regurgitating the same propaganda. The EPA developed a proposal that would undo the government’s “endangerment finding”, a determination that pollutants from burning fossil fuels, such as carbon dioxide and methane, can be regulated under the Clean Air Act.  It gives the EPA and subsequently the administration endless power to tax and control. Read about it on this link.

Background

In March, Secretary Lee Zeldin said he will drive “a dagger through the heart of climate-change religion.”

Zeldin signaled that the EPA would consider upending its own endangerment finding, a 2009 legal decision that says greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane are warming the Earth and that warming presents a threat to public health and welfare.

The Obama and Biden Administrations have used the finding to bypass Congress to advance their anti-fossil fuel agenda.

“All of the climate protection rules, the rules to cut greenhouse gases from cars, trucks, power plants, from the oil and gas industry — all those rules are grounded in the finding,” said David Doniger, the senior strategist and attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council’s climate and energy department.

One study by hand-selected scientists is why we’ve had to go through this climate scam, wasting money and restricting our lives unnecessarily.

The WSJ Editorial Board wrote:

As a refresher, the Supreme Court ruled in Mass. v. EPA (2007) that greenhouse gases qualify as pollutants under the Clean Air Act. The EPA must regulate pollutants that can “reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” No surprise, the Obama Administration in 2009 determined that greenhouse gases do.

They also noted:

Most of the science cited in the Obama endangerment finding—e.g., climate change will harm U.S. agriculture and increase the size and frequency of wildfires—is debatable. The finding that U.S. CO2 emissions will directly harm Americans is even more tenuous.

Unlike pollutants explicitly covered by the Clean Air Act, CO2 emissions don’t affect local air quality. Their impact on global temperatures is intermediated by other factors like cloud cover. Curbing CO2 emissions in the U.S. will have scant impact on Americans, especially as India and China emit with abandon.

Justice Antonin Scalia noted as much in his Mass. v. EPA dissent: “Regulating the buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases in the upper reaches of the atmosphere . . . is not akin to regulating the concentration of some substance that is polluting the air.” Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito also dissented.

As they added, most of what the study found was debatable.

The Global Warming Scam

Global warming is now called climate change. That should have been a giveaway. They call it climate change so they can blame every weather event on climate change and pass more rules to control everything we do.

Here is one example:

Get a load of this.

Two years ago, The Guardian reported that Spain and Portugal were becoming too dry thanks to climate change. ️

Now, The Guardian says that Spain is too wet because of climate change. ️

The narrative changes with the weather.

No matter what the weather… pic.twitter.com/TNyN5rfYD9

— Chris Martz (@ChrisMartzWX) November 29, 2024

Climate change is a political term. There is nothing scientific about it.