Older Picture But Same “Greenhouse Gas” Effect
How “Greenhouse Gas” Works Properly and Not-so-Properly
The Trump administration will soon begin a review that will question the veracity of the climate change science used by President Barack Obama's administration as the basis for environmental regulations.
The EPA (history here) will launch public debates between scientists on climate research, known as red-team, blue-team exercises. This is the GOP’s challenge to long-standing scientific consensus on human-caused climate change (i.e., greenhouse gas emissions and from here a very interesting site).
Rightwing (mostly GOP-funded) advocates who have petitioned the EPA to reverse the “greenhouse gases” scientific finding underlying EPA regulations governing those emissions see this debate proposal to scrutinize mainstream climate science as a first step in that direction to in fact overturn “greenhouse gases” policy regulated by Obama that every GOPer on the planet hates and disputes as scientific fact and harsh dislike of “anything Obama.”
Environmental groups are confident that Pruitt will not be successful if he tries to undo the endangerment finding because they expect the courts will side with the scientific consensus that human beings cause climate change.
Pruitt and the EPA would need to build up a new case that shows carbon dioxide is innocuous and counter the volumes of scientific research that support the finding.
David Doniger, climate director for the Natural Resources Defense Council says point blank: “If EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt (one view LA Times) has any grasp of scientific and legal reality, he would realize that it's a fool's errand to reverse the endangerment determination, and this (he hopes) could be a way for him to keep the right-wing fringe groups occupied and also accomplish the goal of further confusing the public debate.”