Author Topic: EPA appointee says air is too clean  (Read 637 times)

Online Hydra009 (OP)

EPA appointee says air is too clean
« on: November 04, 2017, 09:18:29 PM »
http://www.newsweek.com/robert-phalen-epa-air-too-clean-700143
Quote
Robert Phalen, an air pollution researcher at the Irvine campus of the University of California, said in 2012 that children need to breathe irritants so that their bodies learn how to ward them off.

“Modern air,” he told the American Association for the Advancement of Science, “is a little too clean for optimum health.”


Also, learn to ward them off?  Ward off...air?!

This isn't an open question.  The science is clear - air pollution kills thousands of Americans each year.  Conversely, we could save 12,000 Americans' lives each year by cleaning up our energy sector.  But we won't because we have "leaders" who care more about oil executives and their money than American lives.

And it gets worse.  This appointee is part of Scott Pruitt's scheme to replace scientists (biased by that sweet, sweet gov grant money) with industry execs (presumably unbiased)

Forget Russia, the Trump administration's most damaging collusion against America is right here.

Offline Baruch

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #1 on: November 05, 2017, 01:12:40 AM »
In the future, all science is done by the guys that brought us unbiased tobacco research from RJR ;-(

See, when you go Lysenko, the scientific truth will be determined by a bullet to the head, not by a refereed journal.  For Marxists, everything is politics.  For Capitalists, everything is money.  They are both extinction events.
שלום

Offline aitm

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #2 on: November 05, 2017, 03:41:01 PM »
The government has no interest in extending or saving lives. They have squirreled away too much of social security for themselves.
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

Online Hydra009 (OP)

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #3 on: November 05, 2017, 04:44:49 PM »
The government has no interest in extending or saving lives.
Aside from basic ethics, there's self-interest.  Healthy citizens don't require as much healthcare.  Citizens who live longer pay more taxes.  Places with better air/water quality get more tourism dollars.  Any rational actor would pursue smart energy/environmental policy because it's a win-win for everyone except the worst polluters.

But those aren't the sort of people in charge right now.  Right now, we have an administration of denialists in bed with polluters.  And an army of sycophants cheering on policies that actively hurt them.

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #4 on: November 05, 2017, 04:46:18 PM »
Just as I think they can't get any stupider. How anyone can continue to defend Drumph and his staff is beyond me.
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky

Offline SGOS

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #5 on: November 06, 2017, 07:39:36 AM »
How anyone can continue to defend Drumph and his staff is beyond me.
He says it like it is.

Offline SGOS

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #6 on: November 06, 2017, 08:04:55 AM »
Forget Russia, the Trump administration's most damaging collusion against America is right here.
Back in the 60s, I read an article about trees causing pollution and brought it up to my ecology professor, who mumbled under his breath something about industry paid "scientists."  Although, the too clean air pitch does outdo the polluting trees in absurdity.

But I won't forget Russia.  The Trump Administration's collusion with Russia is disgusting, even if Republican constituents think it's just fine and dandy and really nothing to concern ourselves over.

Online Hydra009 (OP)

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #7 on: November 06, 2017, 11:23:38 AM »
Back in the 60s, I read an article about trees causing pollution and brought it up to my ecology professor, who mumbled under his breath something about industry paid "scientists."  Although, the too clean air pitch does outdo the polluting trees in absurdity.
You're talking about volatile organic compounds (VOCs), right?  They're also produced by human activity, including (drumroll please) fossil fuels.  And yeah, they can be bad for people, but it's not nearly as bad as clearcutting or ruining the ecosystems on which we depend to survive (climate change).  So, it's not much of an argument.

The air being "too clean" argument essentially tries to confuse/dupe the American public (who are easy marks for these sorts of slimeballs) by taking the observation that people living in too sterilze environments can have weaker immune systems as a result and replacing germs with pollution.  Obviously, it's a bullshit comparison because people don't "ward off" or otherwise adapt to pollution like they can to disease.  He's banking on people being too dumb to notice the swap or stupidly agreeing with it because it makes "intuitive" sense based on its superficial resemblance to the hygiene hypothesis.

He also doesn't expect you to take his argument back through time for a smell test and imagine whether or not our cavemen ancestors had it rough when it comes to air quality compared to our industrial age ancestors - who frequently held handkerchiefs to their mouths from all the smog.

Quote
But I won't forget Russia.  The Trump Administration's collusion with Russia is disgusting, even if Republican constituents think it's just fine and dandy and really nothing to concern ourselves over.
Of course.  I was being a bit hyperbolic in an attempt to stress the seriousness of this development, not to dismiss the Russia allegations.  Energy/environmental policy is seriously important - this isn't a save the cute bunnies sort of issue that conservatives tend to dismiss it as, American lives are hanging in the balance - and this administration has failed the American people big time.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 11:34:17 AM by Hydra009 »

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #8 on: November 06, 2017, 11:28:17 AM »
Just as I think they can't get any stupider. How anyone can continue to defend Drumph and his staff is beyond me.
Read a bit from Chilli's post.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Online Hydra009 (OP)

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #9 on: November 06, 2017, 01:30:29 PM »
Read a bit from Chilli's post.
What else would you expect from a guy who gets his news from Alex "fogman" Jones?  Of course a lot of the Trumpsters are still backing him - they've effectively walled themselves off from reality for years now and the 2016 election is partly a manifestation of that.  Everyone else - people who aren't delusional or mad - are simply going to have outvote them in the next election and force a return to sanity.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 01:32:18 PM by Hydra009 »

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #10 on: November 06, 2017, 03:21:52 PM »
Well, I've heard of having kids grow up in a non-sterile environment in order to "educate" their immune systems, but I'm not sure it works the same way with air pollution. It certainly doesn't seem to me that the air is "too clean" given how much pollution is spewed out every single day.

But what the hell do I know?
God Not Found
“Money supplants skill; it's possession allows us to become happily stupid.”
Bill McKibben, The Age of Missing Information

Offline Baruch

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #11 on: November 06, 2017, 07:50:54 PM »
Back in the 60s, I read an article about trees causing pollution and brought it up to my ecology professor, who mumbled under his breath something about industry paid "scientists."  Although, the too clean air pitch does outdo the polluting trees in absurdity.

But I won't forget Russia.  The Trump Administration's collusion with Russia is disgusting, even if Republican constituents think it's just fine and dandy and really nothing to concern ourselves over.

Obama collusion with Russia was just fine ;-)
שלום

Offline Baruch

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #12 on: November 06, 2017, 07:52:06 PM »
Aside from basic ethics, there's self-interest.  Healthy citizens don't require as much healthcare.  Citizens who live longer pay more taxes.  Places with better air/water quality get more tourism dollars.  Any rational actor would pursue smart energy/environmental policy because it's a win-win for everyone except the worst polluters.

But those aren't the sort of people in charge right now.  Right now, we have an administration of denialists in bed with polluters.  And an army of sycophants cheering on policies that actively hurt them.

They don't intend to provide you with healthcare.  And they don't need your taxes, they can print as much as they want. They don't tourist in Newark .. but in the Caymans.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 07:54:11 PM by Baruch »
שלום

Offline SGOS

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #13 on: November 06, 2017, 08:34:50 PM »
this isn't a save the cute bunnies sort of issue that conservatives tend to dismiss it as, American lives are hanging in the balance - and this administration has failed the American people big time.
It's hard to understand why people would believe the tripe that is being pedaled here.  It's complex psychology, but I think part of it is people who are of a party feel compelled to support the party.  So if something really stupid is done, they think or act like they believe it's some kind of cutting edge discovery (he/they tell it like it is). 

But I think far more powerful is the basic ignorance of people.  I hate to think people are that ignorant, but I think in reality they are.  By definition, the average IQ is 100.  That means that half of everyone is below 100.  I've been in a job where I have had access to IQ scores, and knew the people those scores belonged to very well.  Some people with lower than 100 are nice people, and some are hard working, but they all struggle with concepts that you and I could grasp with modest effort.

I can readily understand that people could be taught without too much effort that breathing dirty air with a high degree of toxins and particulates would build their immune systems.  There is kind of a paradoxical quality in the idea that is tempting.

Mankind on average just isn't that bright.  The advancements in knowledge and science come mostly from the highly gifted, but everyone wants to think they are part of a superior species and tend to put themselves on the same level as the ones that make the big discoveries.

Offline SGOS

Re: EPA appointee says air is too clean
« Reply #14 on: November 06, 2017, 08:48:37 PM »


Oddly, I just watched that old movie a couple nights ago.  Truman doesn't realize he's been on a reality TV program his entire life, and the anxiety and confusion of Truman trying to understand what's going on around him is causing him great anguish.  His wife has just cut him off by doing a product placement add for a Kitchen Handy Slicer.  I always get a kick out of that scene.