News Article: EPA chief Scott Pruitt says CO2 is not a primary contributor to global warming

Bamaro · Mar 10, 2017

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt said Thursday he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming.

"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," he told CNBC's "Squawk Box."

"But we don't know that yet. ... We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis."

The statement contradicts the public stance of the agency Pruitt leads. The EPA's webpage on the causes of climate change states, "Carbon dioxide is the primary greenhouse gas that is contributing to recent climate change."

Pruitt's view is also at odds with the opinion of NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

"The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2.0 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere," NASA and NOAA said in January.
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/09/epa-chief-scott-pruitt.html

What a fool! This is what we have come to. The head of an agency (there are others) who is severely ignorant of the facts important to leading that agency.

92tide · Mar 10, 2017

Re: EPA chief Scott Pruitt says carbon dioxide is not a primary contributor to global

Bamaro said:
What a fool! This is what we have come to. The head of an agency (there are others) who is severely ignorant of the facts important to leading that agency.

why do you not want to make america great again

pcfixup · Mar 10, 2017

Re: EPA chief Scott Pruitt says carbon dioxide is not a primary contributor to global

The inevitable nuclear winter will take care of global warming

Tide1986 · Mar 10, 2017

Two clarifying points:

(1) He appears to be commenting on CO2 as it relates to human activity.

(2) Actually, CO2 is not the primary green house gas. Water vapor is the primary green house gas.

day-day · Mar 10, 2017

Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt said Thursday he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming.

"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," he told CNBC's "Squawk Box."

"But we don't know that yet. ... We need to continue the debate and continue the review and the analysis."

The statement contradicts the public stance of the agency Pruitt leads. The EPA's webpage on the causes of climate change states, "Carbon dioxide is the primary greenhouse gas that is contributing to recent climate change."

Pruitt's view is also at odds with the opinion of NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

"The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 2.0 degrees Fahrenheit (1.1 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere," NASA and NOAA said in January.

The first statement in the article was a little bit of a play on words which seems to be the norm. The question was asked regarding CO2 but the answer was given regarding the impact of human activity. These types of statements are frustrating because they are usually what make the headlines regardless of what someone actually says. (I'm mentioning this in general, not in defense of Pruitt.)

ETA: I did it again. I posted before seeing Tide1986's post because I had the thread open for awhile before getting to it...

Bamaro · Mar 10, 2017

day-day said:
The first statement in the article was a little bit of a play on words which seems to be the norm. The question was asked regarding CO2 but the answer was given regarding the impact of human activity. These types of statements are frustrating because they are usually what make the headlines regardless of what someone actually says. (I'm mentioning this in general, not in defense of Pruitt.)

ETA: I did it again. I posted before seeing Tide1986's post because I had the thread open for awhile before getting to it...

Are you saying that the increase in CO2 is not a result of human activity or that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas?:conf2:
For the record it is both.

Jon · Mar 10, 2017

Bamaro said:
Are you saying that the increase in CO2 is not a result of human activity or that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas?:conf2:
For the record it is both.

he is saying whatever the oil companies and the Koch Brothers are telling him to say. The guy is a shill and his emails prove it

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/us/politics/scott-pruitt-environmental-protection-agency.html

day-day · Mar 10, 2017

Bamaro said:
Are you saying that the increase in CO2 is not a result of human activity or that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas?:conf2:
....

Neither. I was saying the statement, "Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt said Thursday he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming." is an incorrect statement. Writers (news, thread posts, etc.) and reporters make these types of shortcut statements all the time. A person says one thing but the reporter makes a shortcut statement that will be taken out of context till the end of time.

Bamaro · Mar 10, 2017

day-day said:
Neither. I was saying the statement, "Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt said Thursday he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming." is an incorrect statement. Writers (news, thread posts, etc.) and reporters make these types of shortcut statements all the time. A person says one thing but the reporter makes a shortcut statement that will be taken out of context till the end of time.

I think you are parsing his statements that require no parsing. Where does he think the CO2 is coming from then. He is a denier that human activities are a major contributor to global warming. Anybody that ignorant has no business being in charge of the EPA.

Edit - he may not be that ignorant of the facts. It could be more related to ideology than knowledge.

day-day · Mar 10, 2017

Bamaro said:
I think you are parsing his statements that require no parsing. Where does he think the CO2 is coming from then. He is a denier that human activities are a major contributor to global warming. Anybody that ignorant has no business being in charge of the EPA.

I don't know where he thinks it is coming from but the statement should have been made that he does not believe human activity is the primary contributor and then people can run with that. There is no reason to report something incorrectly. I should have noted that I was getting off-topic instead of just saying I was mentioning this is general.

AUDub · Mar 10, 2017

Tide1986 said:
Two clarifying points:

(1) He appears to be commenting on CO2 as it relates to human activity.

(2) Actually, CO2 is not the primary green house gas. Water vapor is the primary green house gas.

1. And the additional CO2 is coming from us. We're releasing carbon that's been sequestered for millions, sometimes billions of years.

2. Water vapor's contribution is capped by temperature. The best way to have a significant effect on water vapor is to somehow raise temperatures. Water vapor is a feedback rather than a forcing like CO2. There are a lot of complexities here, but the gist of it is added CO2 remains in the atmosphere a long time, and contributes to a stronger greenhouse effect and higher temperatures. This tends to raise specific humidity, which increases water in the atmosphere as well, and that makes the greenhouse effect stronger again.

TideEngineer08 · Mar 10, 2017

AUDub said:
1. And the additional CO2 is coming from us. We're releasing carbon that's been sequestered for millions, sometimes billions of years.

2. Water vapor's contribution is capped by temperature. The best way to have a significant effect on water vapor is to somehow raise temperatures. Water vapor is a feedback rather than a forcing like CO2. There are a lot of complexities here, but the gist of it is added CO2 remains in the atmosphere a long time, and contributes to a stronger greenhouse effect and higher temperatures. This tends to raise specific humidity, which increases water in the atmosphere as well, and that makes the greenhouse effect stronger again.

I thought sequestration was a bad thing.

92tide · Mar 10, 2017

TideEngineer08 said:
I thought sequestration was a bad thing.

only when they do it to livestock

JBama_in_PCOLA · Mar 10, 2017

Interesting.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro[emoji208]

Bamaro · Mar 10, 2017

JBama_in_PCOLA said:
Interesting.

BamaInMo1 · Mar 10, 2017

Same Ol Same Ol: When my liberal is in office and makes stupid comments it's ok. He/she just mis-spoke. But let a conservative say something like this it gets taken out of context/mis-represented by the liberal media lynch mob and all is well.

Bamaro · Mar 11, 2017

BamaInMo1 said:
Same Ol Same Ol: When my liberal is in office and makes stupid comments it's ok. He/she just mis-spoke. But let a conservative say something like this it gets taken out of context/mis-represented by the liberal media lynch mob and all is well.

I really dont think anything got taken out of context. He has a history of being anti EPA and a GW denier.

Jon · Mar 11, 2017

Bamaro said:
I really dont think anything got taken out of context. He has a history of being anti EPA and a GW denier.

right? This isn't spelling potato wrong because someone handed him an incorrectly spelled card, this is saying the great potato blight didn't cause Irish immigration, its just wrong

92tide · Mar 11, 2017

Jon said:
right? This isn't spelling potato wrong because someone handed him an incorrectly spelled card, this is saying the great potato blight didn't cause Irish immigration, its just wrong

and as with all things, pointing out that he is wrong is blanket persecution of conservatives who think that being criticized is the equivalent of tyranny.

Bama Torch in Pcola · Mar 11, 2017

I'm not really passionate about this guy's stance on GW either way. I just hope he can keep from ruining Colorado rivers, as Obama's guy managed to do.

News Article: EPA chief Scott Pruitt says CO2 is not a primary contributor to global warming

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

Suspended

Suspended

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

TideFans Legend

All-American

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

TideFans Legend

Hall of Fame

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!