Supposedly, the EPA follows the scientific consensus. But, of course, once the EPA has adopted an agenda, the chances they will change or reverse their policies because of mere scientists are pretty low. Like the CDC, the EPA effectively claims to be The Voice Of Science. They don’t just dictate to us what science demands, they also dictate policy and conclusions to scientists.
Right now, the EPA is moving to unilaterally mandate lower carbon emissions, despite the fact that the technology for following their orders is expensive and unproven.
The EPA released a proposal in September that would set emissions caps for new coal-fired power plants and would likely require the industry to use carbon-capture technology, which involves burying the carbon underground.
Critics of the proposed rule say the technology, which is still under development, is too expensive, not commercially available and poses safety risks.
The EPA’s mandate is based on a theory of global warming that is contrary to the facts, cannot be argued for on any evidence, and constantly making false predictions. To deal with this situation, The EPA seems for be following the Reddit.com model for handling debate. In other words, they are stifling and censoring divergent points of view.
Republican leaders on the House Science Committee are accusing the Environmental Protection Agency of disregarding science in its push to impose carbon dioxide limits on power plants.
Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, and 20 other Republican lawmakers sent a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy on Thursday, claiming the agency has “muzzled” members of its independent science advisory board.
The lawmakers claim the agency is ignoring dissenting voices on its science advisory board, which recommended a review of the science underpinning the newest power plant rule.
“We are concerned about the agency’s apparent disregard for the concerns of its science advisors,” the lawmakers wrote. “Science is a valuable tool to help policymakers navigate complex issues. However, when inconvenient facts are disregarded or when dissenting voices are muzzled, a frank discussion becomes impossible.”
The idea that the EPA is some kind of honest appraiser of current scientific consensus is simply a myth. They are captured by politics and they are a means for politicians to capture scientists—to decide which opinions matter and to reward the compliant while they muzzle the independent voices.
They don’t base their policy on scientific consensus. The EPA manufactures consensus to fit their preferred policies. It is not about truth. It is about power and wealth.