The EPA estimates new ozone regulations will prevent 330 missed school days and 750 premature deaths
Despite the fact that earlier this year we celebrated the 18th anniversary of no global warming the EPA is charging (I know I am not supposed to use that term because MSNBC has determined it is racist, but it fits and no it is not) full steam ahead with new ozone regulations.
The EPA is justifying this by making the following absurd and unprovable claim, which I alluded to in the title of this post:
“While there’s more uncertainty with the science at that level, I’m very mindful that my science advisers have indicated that it should be on the table,” she said on Wednesday.
McCarthy estimates that meeting a 70 ppb level would prevent 330 missed school days, 32,000 asthma attacks and 750 premature deaths per year. She said those benefits would increase with a 65 ppb standard.
Gina McCarthy admits the science is uncertain but yet she still makes this claim and she justifies it thusly:
“Our review of the ozone standards has been exhaustive, open and transparent. EPA has examined thousands of scientific studies including more than 1,000 new studies that have been published since EPA last revised the standards in 2008 and based on the law and based on thorough review of that science, based on the recommendations of the agency’s independent science advisers, based on the assessments of EPA scientists and technical experts, and also based on my judgment as the EPA administrator, I’m proposing to increase the standards to a range of 65 to 70 parts per billion to better protect Americans’ health,” McCarthy said.
She is basing it on government studies and also studies which the government has funded but of course we all know the government has an agenda, and as The Weather Channel founder John Coleman pointed out not all that long ago, the government is only going to give out grant money to studies which support the radical agenda.
Since the government only funds scientists who put out results “supporting the global warming hypothesis,” he claimed, “they don’t have any choice.”
“If you’re going to get the money, you’ve got to support their position. Therefore 97 percent of the scientific reports published support global warming. Why? Because those are the ones the government pays for and that’s where the money is.”
Doesn’t that give you a warm (pun fully intended) and fuzzy feeling…
America's Watchtower 
Reblogged this on Jessica A Bruno (waybeyondfedup).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you!
LikeLiked by 1 person
McCarthy is just as dangerous if not more than Obama. She can destroy our economy with a stroke of a pen with little recourse.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And it looks like she is hell-bent on doing it!
LikeLike
Just as those of us who lived through the Jimmy Carter ozone depletion years assumed the Ozone Layer crisis would eventually be brought back from the grave as are dead democrat voters each November. Nothing new here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nope, it was not expected. But if I am not mistaken the Ozone layer is created when light hits the atmosphere and it naturally occurring. The reason why there was a “hole” is because the pole was in its sixth months of darkness period so Ozone was not created. But now this article claims it is a pollutant, they still cannot get their story straight!
LikeLike