Richmond Tmes Dispatch: Letters to the Editor

Give Cuccinelli Credit For Resisting EPA
Editor, Times-Dispatch: Last December, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made a decision that global warming is caused by people, and recommended that the government enact laws to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately for American citizens, the EPA's decision relied on faulty and biased data, and its recommendation to ban greenhouse-gas emissions would further cripple our economy.

For these reasons, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is asking the EPA to reconsider its decision. The data used in the EPA's finding are biased, and exclude information that became public last November. That information showed that the government had been concealing data that did not support the theory of global warming.

Given these egregious circumstances, Cuccinelli has filed petitions in order to ensure that the EPA does not succeed in using factually inaccurate data to dictate the future of every American. If the government passes legislation using the EPA's report, it would severely burden every Virginian with blows to the agricultural industry, cost of living, and tax rates. Not only that, but it would establish a precedent of making faulty decisions using bad data. We cannot allow that to happen.

Citizens of Virginia support Cuccinelli's decision to challenge the EPA over its ruling. He is asking that the EPA start its research again, this time using unbiased data in a completely transparent process. As he has said, the public "deserves a scientific process that is reliable and transparent in accordance with traditional American standards and law." These are not unreasonable requests -- they are our rights. We are fortunate to have an attorney general who is willing to defend them.

Jane K. Eshagpoor.
Richmond.


**********************************************************************

Can't Be Disproved? Then It Isn't Science
Editor, Times-Dispatch: The debate over whether the recent cold temperatures disprove global warming reminds me of a joke told to me by one of my physics professors:

A physicist meets his colleague after spending the night in the laboratory. He tells the colleague that he has confirmed that Quantity A is greater than Quantity B. His colleague states that "A is greater than B" fits the theory quite well. The sleep-deprived physicist apologizes and replies that he meant to say that B is greater than A. To this, his colleague remarks that it fits the theory even better!

Rain or drought, heat or cold, snow or no snow, and hurricanes or the lack thereof all fit the theory of anthropogenic global warming quite well. The recent wave of colder temperatures fits the theory even better! There is simply no observation that can be made that refutes the theory.

A theory that proposes no tests for verification is outside the realm of science but is instead a matter of belief. It is an issue of faith rather than science.

Thomas J. Kunsitis.
Richmond.

**********************************************************************

Cuccinelli Fights For Transparency
Editor, Times-Dispatch: In response to your article, "Democrats Attack Cuccinelli's Stand on Climate": the state senators may want to do their homework. The attorney general is seeking a rehearing of the EPA's questionable data concerning gases linked to global warming, and rightfully so. "The EPA has functionally re-delegated its authority to review critical data to the U.N. IPCC," according to Cuccinelli. He has called for the EPA to restart its research without U.N. review.

A U.N. News Centre report from Nov. 29, 2006, describes the livestock sector's production of nitrous oxide, a gas that wields 296 times the global-warming potential of carbon dioxide. Now, which gas is the federal government attempting to regulate? CO2? Case in point for Cuccinelli.

Another point is a 2009 article by Declan McCullagh on
cbsnews.com stating that the EPA may have suppressed an internal report that was skeptical of claims about global warming. An EPA center director quashed a 98-page report that warned against making "hasty decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data." This report was quashed two weeks before the EPA submitted its pro-regulation recommendation to the White House.

Cuccinelli is defending our rights to transparency and accuracy in government, beginning with the EPA and its presentation of unbiased, reliable data on global warming.

Kelly C. Cichocki.
Midlothian.

**********************************************************************

Let's Get the Science Of Climate Right

Editor, Times-Dispatch: The global-warming crowd is acting like members of a farcical religion, complete with a priesthood threatening planetary doom to those who refuse to render sacrifice.

The sacrifice now demanded of Virginia is her economy, so I'm relieved that Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli is asking the priesthood for a little hard science before he binds that offering to the altar.

In December, the EPA issued a finding that global warming poses a threat to human life. In so doing, it opened the door to new regulations that could drop a staggering burden on Virginia's already limping economy.

The EPA based its finding on core data provided by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Not long after the EPA published its findings "Climategate" broke and we learned that the research undergirding global warming has been doctored and scientific dissent silenced.

What's more, the IPCC itself admitted to a "very small number of errors." Among the mistakes: a pronouncement that the Himalayan glaciers will disappear by 2035 is off by about 300 years, and the fear of North African crop production being cut in half by 2020 that has no basis in fact.

Cuccinelli -- trained as an engineer as well as an attorney -- has filed a petition requesting that the EPA restart the regulatory process and conduct its own research rather than rely on the IPCC's tainted data.

Rather than bashing Cuccinelli as regressive and anti-science, Virginians should give the attorney general credit for challenging the EPA and demanding objectively gathered data. In light of the sacrifice that new EPA regulations will require, his request seems more than reasonable. At least we now know we've got a little time to get this right. After all, the Himalayan Glaciers aren't going anywhere.

William C. Deutsch.
Chesterfield.

**********************************************************************

Challenging EPA Data Is Just Common Sense
Editor, Times-Dispatch: It has been established that data coming from scientists at the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and at East Anglia's Climate Research Unit have been manipulated, suppressed, and engineered to propagate the notion that climate change is real and is caused by human activity. East Anglia CRU's Phil Jones even admitted that after 15 years of research, they have failed to find any evidence of "statistically significant" global warming.

In spite of this, the Environmental Protection Agency persists in establishing new regulations and punitive taxation on carbon use based on this grossly flawed data and the hysterical alarmism of people like Al Gore. In light of the fact that the EPA is relying on fraudulent data, wouldn't it be wise to slow down and re-examine the facts, without prejudice, to determine whether climate change is real and is, in fact, caused by mankind?

I applaud Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's filing of a legal challenge against the EPA, requiring it to revalidate the data prior to issuing any new regulations or levying any new taxes. It's a common-sense approach.

The draconian measures being considered by the EPA will dramatically increase the cost of energy -- which will have a direct impact on consumers by increasing the cost of transportation, heating, and electrifying our homes, and will have a ripple effect on the cost of every good and service consumed.

Cuccinelli is simply asking that the science be re-evaluated and is open "to seeing where honest unbiased science leads us." Only after proper examination of the facts should measures be enacted, if at all. With an economy teetering on the brink of disaster, America doesn't need the EPA to push it over the cliff.


Jim Smyers.
Beaverdam.