Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No one is fooled by a bogus EPA study. The EPA's studies aren't worth the paper they are written on. They have been caught over and over making bogus assumptions and grossly exagerating the numbers.Can you name one person whose death certificate says "killed by pollution?"Profits at the cost of pollution killing people or ruining their health?Only economic morons utter the lament "put profits before people." Profits serve people by channeling resources to where they are needed most. All you're saying is that consumers shouldn't get the products they want.More like they put profits ahead of people. Its just inherent to capitalism.
The latest example is hiding report showing formaldehyde causes cancer or other illness..
If I invest my retirement savings in corporate stocks, I don't want them to be profitable? This point makes the left's heads explode.
Profits only serve the wealthy. The 0.1 percent have the same wealth as the bottom 90 percent.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Read and learn.
But of course, you are too lazy and too much of a Trump goose-stepper to deal with reality and facts.
You are content believe verified lies, because you don't give a shit if someone lies to you, over and over again.
Yeah, you're gonna hafta post examples, along with proof that is demcrats doing it and not republican run industries withing the cities.Do you seriously think it's Democrats that are responsible for that?We don't like clean air that costs $1000/cubic ft and clean water that costs $1000/gal.
Dem's dare NOT even speak about clean water. Their filthy Dem run cities SPILL hundreds of millions of gallons of raw untreated sewage into public waterways. These spills are so toxic public beaches and swimming has to be banned. Traces of opioids are now showing up in shellfish.
Please.try to be serious.
Do I have to post the examples again? Dem run states, Dem run cities, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF GALLONS OF RAW UNTREATED SEWAGE spilled into public waterways, beaches closed, swimming banned the water was so fouled. Who's responsible? Dem's. Fix your filthy broken ass sewer systems you filthy polluting liberal scumbags.
Here ya go champ.
Adequate public notice of sewage spills into New York waterways lacking: study - NY Daily News
Raw sewage again spills into Merrimack River
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...th-of-san-francisco-reopen-after-sewage-spill
No one is fooled by a bogus EPA study. The EPA's studies aren't worth the paper they are written on. They have been caught over and over making bogus assumptions and grossly exagerating the numbers.Can you name one person whose death certificate says "killed by pollution?"Profits at the cost of pollution killing people or ruining their health?Only economic morons utter the lament "put profits before people." Profits serve people by channeling resources to where they are needed most. All you're saying is that consumers shouldn't get the products they want.
If I invest my retirement savings in corporate stocks, I don't want them to be profitable? This point makes the left's heads explode.
Profits only serve the wealthy. The 0.1 percent have the same wealth as the bottom 90 percent.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Read and learn.
But of course, you are too lazy and too much of a Trump goose-stepper to deal with reality and facts.
You are content believe verified lies, because you don't give a shit if someone lies to you, over and over again.
Produce an actual death cerficate that says "cause of death: air pollution."
One of the main sources of pollution listed in the last article are muninciple water and sewage treatment plants along with their distribution systems. In other words, local city governments are responsible. The first article is talking about CO2 emmisions - non pollution, in other words.Yeah, you're gonna hafta post examples, along with proof that is demcrats doing it and not republican run industries withing the cities.Do you seriously think it's Democrats that are responsible for that?Dem's dare NOT even speak about clean water. Their filthy Dem run cities SPILL hundreds of millions of gallons of raw untreated sewage into public waterways. These spills are so toxic public beaches and swimming has to be banned. Traces of opioids are now showing up in shellfish.
Please.try to be serious.
Do I have to post the examples again? Dem run states, Dem run cities, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF GALLONS OF RAW UNTREATED SEWAGE spilled into public waterways, beaches closed, swimming banned the water was so fouled. Who's responsible? Dem's. Fix your filthy broken ass sewer systems you filthy polluting liberal scumbags.
Here ya go champ.
Adequate public notice of sewage spills into New York waterways lacking: study - NY Daily News
Raw sewage again spills into Merrimack River
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...th-of-san-francisco-reopen-after-sewage-spill
Well, well, well!
Heavy Transportation Is Now The Biggest Polluter
Heavy Transportation Is Now The Biggest Polluter
and:
Toxic Water 100 Polluters Index: 2016 Report, Based on 2014 Data)
Geez, no cities listed!
And here is another interesting article for the geniuses who are directing all their ire and cities.
63 million Americans exposed to unsafe drinking water
63 million Americans exposed to unsafe drinking water
And of course with all the Trump-Pruitt deregulation, that 63 million is bound to climb.
Naturally, the Little Trumpster won't want to deal with reality, but I thought I'd give them a chance.
No one is fooled by a bogus EPA study. The EPA's studies aren't worth the paper they are written on. They have been caught over and over making bogus assumptions and grossly exagerating the numbers.Can you name one person whose death certificate says "killed by pollution?"Profits at the cost of pollution killing people or ruining their health?If I invest my retirement savings in corporate stocks, I don't want them to be profitable? This point makes the left's heads explode.
Profits only serve the wealthy. The 0.1 percent have the same wealth as the bottom 90 percent.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Read and learn.
But of course, you are too lazy and too much of a Trump goose-stepper to deal with reality and facts.
You are content believe verified lies, because you don't give a shit if someone lies to you, over and over again.
Produce an actual death cerficate that says "cause of death: air pollution."
So now MIT is a bunch of gullible fools?
You claiming that is unbelievable idiocy. Fuck man, I bet your IQ is barely over 100.
You consistently, show what a intellectual dwarf you really are.
Go ahead, keep it up,,,fool.
You are always good for a good laugh and a testimony of the intellect of the Little Trumpeters.
One more con man friend of trump gone Seems all of trumps pals are either crooks or pervertsScott Pruitt’s Replacement Is Even Worse
LOL! Oh my god I can't stop laughing.....this shit is hilarious!
He was neither. He became the target of snowflake hostility, so anything he did was treated like a major scandal. Obama officials did things a thousand times worse, but the fake media didn't care so it didn't report them.One more con man friend of trump gone Seems all of trumps pals are either crooks or pervertsScott Pruitt’s Replacement Is Even Worse
LOL! Oh my god I can't stop laughing.....this shit is hilarious!
No need to believe the studies. Just look at Cancer Alley Louisiana. Where cuts to EPA directly result in more deaths. Yet this is the sort of stuff republicans cheer.No one is fooled by a bogus EPA study. The EPA's studies aren't worth the paper they are written on. They have been caught over and over making bogus assumptions and grossly exagerating the numbers.Can you name one person whose death certificate says "killed by pollution?"Profits at the cost of pollution killing people or ruining their health?
Profits only serve the wealthy. The 0.1 percent have the same wealth as the bottom 90 percent.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Read and learn.
But of course, you are too lazy and too much of a Trump goose-stepper to deal with reality and facts.
You are content believe verified lies, because you don't give a shit if someone lies to you, over and over again.
Produce an actual death cerficate that says "cause of death: air pollution."
So now MIT is a bunch of gullible fools?
You claiming that is unbelievable idiocy. Fuck man, I bet your IQ is barely over 100.
You consistently, show what a intellectual dwarf you really are.
Go ahead, keep it up,,,fool.
You are always good for a good laugh and a testimony of the intellect of the Little Trumpeters.
No, the people who fall for this study are gullible fools. For one thing, it's based on a computer model, and we've all seen how accurate those are with the utter flop of all the global warming computer models. All EPA studies are based on the theory that if a large concentration of a substance is harmfull, then a small concentration is proportionally harmful. However, that theory has been demonstrated to be pure horseshit. Many substances have been shown to be utterly harmless in small concentrations even though they can be fatal in large concentrations. Take table salt, for instance. Take carbon dioxide, for instance. It has been shown that small doses of radiation are not only harmless but even beneficial.
The EPA generates these studies to justify its existence. If the current level of air pollution was harmless, then why spend all that money on the EPA.
Pruitt was doing the right thing by putting an end to the EPA's junk science. Here's an article about the junk science that the EPA employs:
Get rid of the LNT model for low-dose radiation protection, says Public Health Service radiation safety expert
As for my I.Q., I'll put mine up against yours any day of the week.
I know, it's fabulous.Scott Pruitt’s Replacement Is Even Worse
LOL! Oh my god I can't stop laughing.....this shit is hilarious!
No need to believe the studies. Just look at Cancer Alley Louisiana. Where cuts to EPA directly result in more deaths. Yet this is the sort of stuff republicans cheer.No one is fooled by a bogus EPA study. The EPA's studies aren't worth the paper they are written on. They have been caught over and over making bogus assumptions and grossly exagerating the numbers.Can you name one person whose death certificate says "killed by pollution?"
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Read and learn.
But of course, you are too lazy and too much of a Trump goose-stepper to deal with reality and facts.
You are content believe verified lies, because you don't give a shit if someone lies to you, over and over again.
Produce an actual death cerficate that says "cause of death: air pollution."
So now MIT is a bunch of gullible fools?
You claiming that is unbelievable idiocy. Fuck man, I bet your IQ is barely over 100.
You consistently, show what a intellectual dwarf you really are.
Go ahead, keep it up,,,fool.
You are always good for a good laugh and a testimony of the intellect of the Little Trumpeters.
No, the people who fall for this study are gullible fools. For one thing, it's based on a computer model, and we've all seen how accurate those are with the utter flop of all the global warming computer models. All EPA studies are based on the theory that if a large concentration of a substance is harmfull, then a small concentration is proportionally harmful. However, that theory has been demonstrated to be pure horseshit. Many substances have been shown to be utterly harmless in small concentrations even though they can be fatal in large concentrations. Take table salt, for instance. Take carbon dioxide, for instance. It has been shown that small doses of radiation are not only harmless but even beneficial.
The EPA generates these studies to justify its existence. If the current level of air pollution was harmless, then why spend all that money on the EPA.
Pruitt was doing the right thing by putting an end to the EPA's junk science. Here's an article about the junk science that the EPA employs:
Get rid of the LNT model for low-dose radiation protection, says Public Health Service radiation safety expert
As for my I.Q., I'll put mine up against yours any day of the week.
Nonsense. You are the one cheering it, because you think it justifies the existence of the epa.No need to believe the studies. Just look at Cancer Alley Louisiana. Where cuts to EPA directly result in more deaths. Yet this is the sort of stuff republicans cheer.No one is fooled by a bogus EPA study. The EPA's studies aren't worth the paper they are written on. They have been caught over and over making bogus assumptions and grossly exagerating the numbers.Can you name one person whose death certificate says "killed by pollution?"
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Read and learn.
But of course, you are too lazy and too much of a Trump goose-stepper to deal with reality and facts.
You are content believe verified lies, because you don't give a shit if someone lies to you, over and over again.
Produce an actual death cerficate that says "cause of death: air pollution."
So now MIT is a bunch of gullible fools?
You claiming that is unbelievable idiocy. Fuck man, I bet your IQ is barely over 100.
You consistently, show what a intellectual dwarf you really are.
Go ahead, keep it up,,,fool.
You are always good for a good laugh and a testimony of the intellect of the Little Trumpeters.
No, the people who fall for this study are gullible fools. For one thing, it's based on a computer model, and we've all seen how accurate those are with the utter flop of all the global warming computer models. All EPA studies are based on the theory that if a large concentration of a substance is harmfull, then a small concentration is proportionally harmful. However, that theory has been demonstrated to be pure horseshit. Many substances have been shown to be utterly harmless in small concentrations even though they can be fatal in large concentrations. Take table salt, for instance. Take carbon dioxide, for instance. It has been shown that small doses of radiation are not only harmless but even beneficial.
The EPA generates these studies to justify its existence. If the current level of air pollution was harmless, then why spend all that money on the EPA.
Pruitt was doing the right thing by putting an end to the EPA's junk science. Here's an article about the junk science that the EPA employs:
Get rid of the LNT model for low-dose radiation protection, says Public Health Service radiation safety expert
As for my I.Q., I'll put mine up against yours any day of the week.
a lot of environmental disasters are actually caused by left wing nuts
No need to believe the studies. Just look at Cancer Alley Louisiana. Where cuts to EPA directly result in more deaths. Yet this is the sort of stuff republicans cheer.No one is fooled by a bogus EPA study. The EPA's studies aren't worth the paper they are written on. They have been caught over and over making bogus assumptions and grossly exagerating the numbers.Can you name one person whose death certificate says "killed by pollution?"
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Read and learn.
But of course, you are too lazy and too much of a Trump goose-stepper to deal with reality and facts.
You are content believe verified lies, because you don't give a shit if someone lies to you, over and over again.
Produce an actual death cerficate that says "cause of death: air pollution."
So now MIT is a bunch of gullible fools?
You claiming that is unbelievable idiocy. Fuck man, I bet your IQ is barely over 100.
You consistently, show what a intellectual dwarf you really are.
Go ahead, keep it up,,,fool.
You are always good for a good laugh and a testimony of the intellect of the Little Trumpeters.
No, the people who fall for this study are gullible fools. For one thing, it's based on a computer model, and we've all seen how accurate those are with the utter flop of all the global warming computer models. All EPA studies are based on the theory that if a large concentration of a substance is harmfull, then a small concentration is proportionally harmful. However, that theory has been demonstrated to be pure horseshit. Many substances have been shown to be utterly harmless in small concentrations even though they can be fatal in large concentrations. Take table salt, for instance. Take carbon dioxide, for instance. It has been shown that small doses of radiation are not only harmless but even beneficial.
The EPA generates these studies to justify its existence. If the current level of air pollution was harmless, then why spend all that money on the EPA.
Pruitt was doing the right thing by putting an end to the EPA's junk science. Here's an article about the junk science that the EPA employs:
Get rid of the LNT model for low-dose radiation protection, says Public Health Service radiation safety expert
As for my I.Q., I'll put mine up against yours any day of the week.
Like all the agencies created to circumvent the Constitution in order to allow the feds to trample the protected human rights of American citizens (and others) you can't rust anything that comes from the epa. They are a propaganda machine used by politicians to shut down industry and destroy economies.No need to believe the studies. Just look at Cancer Alley Louisiana. Where cuts to EPA directly result in more deaths. Yet this is the sort of stuff republicans cheer.No one is fooled by a bogus EPA study. The EPA's studies aren't worth the paper they are written on. They have been caught over and over making bogus assumptions and grossly exagerating the numbers.Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S.
Read and learn.
But of course, you are too lazy and too much of a Trump goose-stepper to deal with reality and facts.
You are content believe verified lies, because you don't give a shit if someone lies to you, over and over again.
Produce an actual death cerficate that says "cause of death: air pollution."
So now MIT is a bunch of gullible fools?
You claiming that is unbelievable idiocy. Fuck man, I bet your IQ is barely over 100.
You consistently, show what a intellectual dwarf you really are.
Go ahead, keep it up,,,fool.
You are always good for a good laugh and a testimony of the intellect of the Little Trumpeters.
No, the people who fall for this study are gullible fools. For one thing, it's based on a computer model, and we've all seen how accurate those are with the utter flop of all the global warming computer models. All EPA studies are based on the theory that if a large concentration of a substance is harmfull, then a small concentration is proportionally harmful. However, that theory has been demonstrated to be pure horseshit. Many substances have been shown to be utterly harmless in small concentrations even though they can be fatal in large concentrations. Take table salt, for instance. Take carbon dioxide, for instance. It has been shown that small doses of radiation are not only harmless but even beneficial.
The EPA generates these studies to justify its existence. If the current level of air pollution was harmless, then why spend all that money on the EPA.
Pruitt was doing the right thing by putting an end to the EPA's junk science. Here's an article about the junk science that the EPA employs:
Get rid of the LNT model for low-dose radiation protection, says Public Health Service radiation safety expert
As for my I.Q., I'll put mine up against yours any day of the week.
We're discussing air pollution, numskull.
Are there isolated cases where the EPA can actually demonstrate a causal link? Yes, a few, but the overwhelming majority of the EPA's claims are utter bullshit, especially in the last couple decades.
A peer-reviewed study by Frederic T. Billings III, M.D., found that while Louisiana has a much higher-than-average lung cancer rate, the source is not the "Cancer Alley" parishes, but the other parishes of Louisiana, where above-average tobacco smoking rates are likely the cause of the vast majority of the cancers.[5]It looks like your "cancer alley" example could be bogus as well.
None of them have obviously ever watched, "Chasing Ice." It pretty much sums up what climate change is, and it's totally scary. they will still be denying it when cities like NYC and Miami are under water due to the ice caps melting.No, it's how we refer to climate denying nut-jobs like you."Climate denying nut-jobs" is how environmental wackos refer to rational people.Where did I say that? Clean out yer ears kid.You mean rational people have no place in the EPA?Climate denying nut-jobs have no place in the EPA.Scott Pruitt’s Replacement Is Even Worse
LOL! Oh my god I can't stop laughing.....this shit is hilarious!
"Chasing Ice."
None of them have obviously ever watched, "Chasing Ice." It pretty much sums up what climate change is, and it's totally scary. they will still be denying it when cities like NYC and Miami are under water due to the ice caps melting.No, it's how we refer to climate denying nut-jobs like you."Climate denying nut-jobs" is how environmental wackos refer to rational people.Where did I say that? Clean out yer ears kid.You mean rational people have no place in the EPA?Climate denying nut-jobs have no place in the EPA.
We can add that to the huge pile of failed AGW theories. 95% of all predictions made by the AGW wizards have turned out to be false.None of them have obviously ever watched, "Chasing Ice." It pretty much sums up what climate change is, and it's totally scary. they will still be denying it when cities like NYC and Miami are under water due to the ice caps melting.No, it's how we refer to climate denying nut-jobs like you."Climate denying nut-jobs" is how environmental wackos refer to rational people.Where did I say that? Clean out yer ears kid.You mean rational people have no place in the EPA?Climate denying nut-jobs have no place in the EPA.
