Excuse Me?

Sometimes, as I read certain articles on the web, I just have to wonder if someone is either caffeine deficient or over stimulated.  The hints to the real problems are embedded within the article for anyone with two brain cells to rub together to see.  Yet they attempt to make us believe that the illogical is logical and we should take their word for it.

In this case it seems that Washington is desiring to take control of our water rights again and has decided that the best way to do that is to get their paid stooges, (scientists), to tell us a whopper!  Consider this article by CommonDreams.org:

EPA May Try to Use Clean Water Act to Regulate Carbon Dioxide

by Les Blumenthal

WASHINGTON – The Environmental Protection Agency is exploring whether to use the Clean Water Act to control greenhouse gas emissions, which are turning the oceans acidic at a rate that’s alarmed some scientists.

With climate change legislation stalled in Congress, the Clean Water Act would serve as a second front, as the Obama administration has sought to use the Clean Air Act to rein in emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases administratively.

Still pushing that global warming thing I see.  Give it up already!  They just can’t get over the fact that Citizens do not believe that a few government pet scientists with shaky reputations and fuzzy logic aren’t believable in the face of so many other scientists who directly oppose their agenda, (12 times as many scientists oppose the notion of global warming than believe in it).  Later on in the article we find out the real reason for the acidic nature of the oceans; nature!

Just how would legislation enacted now solve a problem that happened 1,000 years ago?  Yup, that’s also in the article.  Call me cynical, but I see the EPA’s “Clean Water Act” as nothing more than a power grab by the feds!  Read for yourself.

The water in the deep Pacific Ocean is already more acidic than shallower water is because it’s absorbed the carbon dioxide that’s produced as animals and plants decompose. Some of the deep water in the Pacific hasn’t been to the surface for 1,000 or more years.

< SNIPPED >

Scientists suspect that acidic water connected with upwelling killed several billion oyster, clam and mussel larvae that were being raised at the Whiskey Creek Shellfish Hatchery near Tillamook on the Oregon coast in the summer of 2008. The hatchery provides baby shellfish to growers up and down the West Coast.

In this day and age it isn’t enough to suspect something or someone. “I think,” or “I suspect,” is not a reason for something.  You need proof. Don’t come to us waving your hands in the air and shouting at us that the sky is falling, the sky is falling, unless you have some concrete proof that it is.  The Citizens of this country may have been half asleep for the past 60 years, but we are neither dumb or stupid.

The current upgrade to the Clean Water Act seems, and I use that word cautiously, to be dead.  It hasn’t had much action since June of 2009 but, ask us to trust these government idiots who claim they know what is best for all of us?  I think not.  We’ve already had far too much of their help!

Here is a nice picture from Wikipedia which shows what the current acidic levels in the world’s oceans are.  According to the Wikipedia article, the acid comes from people and air pollution.  That is much different from the claims the article above makes which claims it is due to plant and animal decay thousands of years ago.  What is clear to me is that it depends on who you ask.  Apparently, no one knows for sure what the cause is.  They are all just guessing.

Also, according to the Wikipedia article, the acid levels are falling.

Ocean acidification

Ocean acidification is the name given to the ongoing decrease in the pH of the Earth’s oceans, caused by their uptake of anthropogenic carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Between 1751 and 1994 surface ocean pH is estimated to have decreased from approximately 8.179 to 8.104 (a change of −0.075).

Since the industrial revolution began, it is estimated that surface ocean pH has dropped by slightly less than 0.1 units (on the logarithmic scale of pH; approximately a 25% increase in H+), and it is estimated that it will drop by a further 0.3 to 0.5 units by 2100 as the oceans absorb more anthropogenic CO2. These changes are predicted to continue rapidly as the oceans take up more anthropogenic CO2 from the atmosphere, the degree of change to ocean chemistry, for example ocean pH, will depend on the mitigation and emissions pathways society takes. Note that, although the ocean is acidifying, its pH is still greater than 7 (that of neutral water), so the ocean could also be described as becoming less basic.

That sure seems to contradict the new article from CommonDreams doesn’t it? I mean, when we have conflicting scientific information, doesn’t it make you wonder just who the fact finders are? This article from Wikipedia has at least as much scientific backing as those referred to by CommonDreams.

I have done some research into the 1976 Clean Water Act.  I cannot find anywhere in those statutes where the federal government was authorized to grab water and yet according to the EPA website the Supreme Court took this matter under advisement, (cough, cough), and decided that the EPA has jurisdiction over all the water of this country and those surrounding it.  Can you say Sold to the Highest Bidder??? Yup, the feds got their way again even though the EPA regularly pollutes our waters with Fluoride a toxic waste product and tells us it is good for us!!! Liars tend to be discounted after the lie is discovered. And yet, the FDA (fraud and death administration), continues to force this toxic substance into our lives.

Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Rapanos v. United States & Carabell v. United States (PDF) December 2, 2008

Those who live in Utah must be jumping for joy today.  The governor there has signed into law a bill that would use eminent domain to take back lands the federal government has grabbed.  Although I can’t say I like what they intend to do with that land, I applaud their gumption in taking back what should belong to that State.

Utah Eminent Domain Law: Governor Signs Bill Authorizing Eminent Domain To Take FEDERAL Land

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Fed up with federal ownership of more than half the land in Utah, Republican Gov. Gary Herbert on Saturday authorized the use of eminent domain to take some of the U.S. government’s most valuable parcels.

Herbert signed a pair of bills into law that supporters hope will trigger a flood of similar legislation throughout the West, where lawmakers contend that federal ownership restricts economic development in an energy-rich part of the country.

Now, as far as I can tell there are several vague references to the federal government owning lands within each State. So far, no attempts by these States to recover land grabbed by the feds has won a case. It really doesn’t look good for Utah, but again, I admire their try.  I did, however, find a fascinating report from the National Library for the Environment on the history of how the feds obtained rights within the States to land owned by that State.  You can find that HERE:

There were attempts made in Congress to change all this several times but none of the efforts ever went past committee and none were ever read to congress.

According to the published report, the authority for congress to do all this came from the Constitution.  But if it does, I can only find very vague references to that issue.  It states that Article 1 and Article 4 are the two sections within the Constitution which allow for the federal ownership and management of the land.  In reading Article 1 the only possible reference to land ownership came from this portion here:

Article 1 Section 8

Section 1.

All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Article IV

Section 3.

The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

In my mind, owning the lands within each State is not what this clause is about.  It is, however, enough for the supreme court to have made its decision on.  Considering that this is a federal court appointed by congress and the president, I can see there would be NO conflict of interest here… (I can’t seem to help being sarcastic when it comes to anything the federal government does…)

Original federal intent was to turn the land over to States or to private ownership.  But in 1934 the Taylor Grazing Act became law and the feds moved away from divesting themselves of land to direct ownership of that land.

The initial federal policy was generally to transfer ownership of many federal lands to private and state ownership. Congress enacted many laws granting lands and authorizing or directing sales or transfers, ultimately disposing of 1.1 billion acres. However, from the earliest times, Congress also provided for reserving land for federal purposes, and over time has reserved or withdrawn increasing area, such as for national parks, national forests, and wildlife refuges.

The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 was enacted to remedy the deterioration of the range on the remaining public lands. This was the first direct authority for federal management of these lands, and implicitly began the shift toward ending disposals and retaining lands in federal ownership. In 1976, Congress formally declared that national policy was generally to retain the remaining lands in federal ownership in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act.

OK, so one thing leads to another.  This is nothing new for me.  I find so many fascinating articles and documents on the web when I’m searching for information that pertains to the article I’m trying to write.  I’m sorry if others don’t find all this as interesting as I do, but my feeling is that you can’t know where you are if you don’t understand how you got there.  At least for me it is important that I understand all of what is happening and not just the surface stuff.

The EPA is as fraudulent as the FDA in my estimation.  Using conflicting science to gain its ends is just more of the same old government BS.  In one article we are told that the carbon monoxide levels are rising dramatically and on the other we’re told it is steadily falling.  So where is the truth?  How are we to trust any supposed scientific authority, let alone a government bureaucracy, when such divergent information available?  “I think” and “We suspect” are not proof of anything.

Some examples of why I don’t trust any federal agency are:

  1. Fluoride in drinking water and toothpaste. ( A toxic waste bi-product)
  2. Toxic sludge used to fertilize food crops.
  3. Global Warming (another scientific hoax)
  4. Cap and Trade, (like pollution here can be offset in another country!)
  5. Auto emissions (Ever notice how all the exhaust pipes face the sidewalks so people get a face full of it?)
  6. Clean Coal!
  7. GMO food stuffs (so safe cattle die from grazing gmo corn stalks)

I could go on and on about the federal agency screw-ups, but I’ll stop there.  You get the message though, it is all about power and money, not safety for the environment or people.  I just see EPA doing many more back-room deals to make it seem like they are actually doing something real when it is all bologna, smoke and mirrors.  Some place the truth lays open for view, but with agencies such as the EPA and the FDA we aren’t going to find it there.

Too often the government has caused extreme harm to Citizens through its abuse of power.  Take the nuclear testing program as an example.  They used the Citizenry, (down-winders), as well as military personnel to see how many a nuclear bomb would kill while assuring everyone it was safe.  Then they denied responsibility for years as cancer killed many more and the radiation poisoning continued to haunt the lands.

Our government has not earned the right of our trust after so many repeated abuses of it.  I feel the EPA is jealous of the income those at the FDA make and is seeking their own ways of increasing their pockets.  Either way, they should, at the very least, gain a scientific consensus from ALL scientists in this field of study.

Advertisements

~ by justmytruth on April 6, 2010.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: