The EPA is challenged in the Supreme Court over greenhouse gas regulations

The EPA funded Wigley’s MAGICC model,
The MAGICC manual says that “considerable input has come from the EPA, in that “Versions 4.1 and 5.3 (and intermediate versions) were funded largely by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through Stratus Consulting Company.
Endangerment Findings Technical Support document says: “This document provides technical support for the endangerment analysis concerning greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that may be addressed under the Clean Air Act. The conclusions here and the information throughout this document are primarily drawn from the assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the U.S. Climate Change Science Program.”
“This document itself does not convey any judgment or conclusion regarding the question of whether GHGs may be reasonably anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, as THIS DECISION IS ULTIMATELY LEFT TO THE JUDGEMENT OF THE ADMINISTRATOR.”
“The EPA authors of the Endangerment Technical Support Document are mainly economists and environmental policy specialists, with qualifications like Masters in International Affairs or Public Policy and Management, although there are a couple of chemists, engineers and one meteorologist. Some are also IPCC authors and many are involved in the production of the proposed regulations…”
Reviewers included Gavin Schmidt, Tom Karl and Susan Solomon.
Read the rest here: “The United Nations States Environmental Protection Agency”
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/the_un_states_epa.html
You might also have a look here for more background on the EPA and the UN
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/lisa_p_jackson_epa_administrator_fulfilling_the_un_mission.html

Why do I get the feeling that the Dread Justice Roberts will rule that the EPA’s authority to regulate emissions from moving vehicles applies to stationary sources too? I can see him arguing that nothing is really stationary since the Earth rotates and is also revolving around the Sun. That’s a whole lot easier to argue than that the Obamacare mandate is a tax when the very legislators who passed it are on record saying it was not a tax. If the court can completely ignore legislative intent, it can do anything it wants.

Monroe @ur momisugly December 17, 2013 at 10:03 am

When the SCOTUS is PC we are all in DS.
PC I understand … DS? Deep .. uhmmm … Seas? 🙂
-17C high today in Ottawa – better than yesterday, but will be worse again this weekend. Waking up to -27C plus 11C wind-chill (it gets worse the lower you go) is challenging.

http://www.law360.com/articles/491448
“The case will center around the EPA’s expansion of its Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V permitting programs to include greenhouse gases from certain new and modified stationary sources triggered by the release of the tailpipe rule, which the D.C. Circuit upheld last year.
If the Supreme Court sides with the petitioners — led by the Utility Air Regulatory Group — it could invalidate EPA’s so-called timing and tailoring rules, which require major stationary sources to apply for GHG emissions permits once the motor vehicle standards become effective. The rules also lay out a timeline for sources to apply for permits based on the scale of their GHG emissions.
In that case, observers say the EPA could be forced to issue an independent endangerment finding for stationary sources, which could delay the agency’s efforts to regulate their GHG emissions.
But by denying petitions seeking to revisit the Massachusetts decision, observers say the high court has indicated that it’s only willing to address how the EPA regulates greenhouse gas emissions, not whether it can regulate them”
Even best case scenario means the EPA will still be regulating CO2 emissions, leaving authentic scientists and honorable people frustrated by how the catastrophically corrupted system works………but that doesn’t mean there is no hope.
Personally, I think that it gets harder and harder to distort, mislead and stall for the alarmists, waiting to be rescued by a resumption of the increasing global temperatures that seemed to support the case back in the 1980’s and 1990’s.
You might still be able to draw a 100 or 150 year global temperature uptrend line in 2020, using data that starts at those points but even the scientifically impaired, media and others brainwashed by the convincing propoganda will eventually see the fraudulence.
The truth can’t be suppressed forever and some of us are just earlier than others recognizing it. In this case, the truth has been so effectively disguised and the lies so convincingly told by entities that know how to employ powerful brainwashing techniques on a global scale that it’s taking much longer than any of us prefer.
Unfortunately, there has already been great harm done. The train has already left the station and it will take a train wreck before many of the passengers realize they were always on a track headed in the wrong direction.
In a generation, Al Gore will have been stripped of his Nobel Peace Prize but will never have to pay for his horrible crimes, unless you consider something that most of us cherish most…….our reputation.
In the last 5 years, Al Gore’s reputation has taken a nose dive and is accelerating lower. He still earns top dollar for speaking engagements and appearances with the alarmist crowd but he is quickly becoming the poster child for climate LIE-ence, the butt of jokes and some on his own side are trying to distance themselves from him.