Donate
Environment

Federal Court tells challengers to EPA carbon ruling, “This is how science works”

The World
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
I posted at some length last week on why I don’t respond to complaints from climate deniers, but what I’d say if I did. Well, yesterday a federal appeals court summed up my basic argument in two simple, direct sentences in upholding the EPA’s decision to regulate greenhouse gas pollution:

“This is how science works. EPA is not required to re-prove the existence of the atom every time it approaches a scientific question.”

Clearly, I couldn’t have said it better myself.

As for government agencies, so too for journalists–the basic understanding of climate change and the impact of increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is settled science. It doesn’t need to be re-explained, re-debated or questioned every time it comes up in our reporting.

Simple as that.

I posted at some length last week on why I don’t respond to complaints from climate deniers, but what I’d say if I did. Well, yesterday a federal appeals court summed up my basic argument in two simple, direct sentences in upholding the EPA’s decision to regulate greenhouse gas pollution:

“This is how science works. EPA is not required to re-prove the existence of the atom every time it approaches a scientific question.”

Clearly, I couldn’t have said it better myself.

As for government agencies, so too for journalists–the basic understanding of climate change and the impact of increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is settled science. It doesn’t need to be re-explained, re-debated or questioned every time it comes up in our reporting.

Simple as that.

Tell us about your experience accessing The World

We want to hear your feedback so we can keep improving our website, theworld.org. Please fill out this quick survey and let us know your thoughts (your answers will be anonymous). Thanks for your time!