So i'm performing a mission around deforestation, and even As i is really thinking about generally if the "cut you forest, shrub two" procedure can be earning a living. As i is type suspicious considering as a result of everything that I had come to understand, once shrubs can be trimmed down, that top soil develops into wobbly, as a result may not which will decrease unique saplings to advance? Believe absolve to differ, and, with a little luck in addition from As i consideration. It'll moreover allow if you happen to could very well refer to origins whenever you can, so that i can achieve various even further groundwork.
You deniailists denigrate the source all the time. No? Well then, let's talk about James Hansen, Michael Mann, the IPCC, AND the EPA.
So....linlyons....anything that is found on a blog that is not approved by you, is not worthy of any level of credibility?
Using your 'standard'......you are saying also that the 'SkepticalScience' website has no credibility, since there is a link to it on the Wattsupwiththat' site.....which you do not 'spprove' of?????
The EPA needs an enema.
The EPA puts political agenda first, science second. They did this when they planned regulations on second hand smoke. They commissioned a study, and had the regulations ready to go when their study came back and found no problems with second hand smoke. They then redefined statistical significance to justify their political agenda.
No. It's another conspiracy theory about stuff that never happened that appeals to people who are too delusional to care what is real but latch on to such cases as a way to convince themselves that they are aware of a reality that everyone else is missing.
Ho hum! Just another day at the scam factory. The suckers will trust the government to save them from another calamity. The same government that said, "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor."
good lord kano, that's a blog.
Steve Milloy first profited saying that tobacco wasn't bad for you.
then jumped on global warming is good.
now, apparently it's, "the epa is lying to you."
it unfortunate that anyone reads what he posts.
no. junkscience is a clue.
http://junkscience.com/2014/11/28/another-epa-dirty-secret-agencys-hushed-up-human-experiments-debunk-ozone-health-claims/#more-65496
