You Can't Eat Money

[adrina]

source

Within hours of meeting with a mining company CEO, the new head of the US Environmental Protection Agency directed his staff to withdraw a plan to protect the watershed of Bristol Bay, Alaska, one of the most valuable wild salmon fisheries on Earth, according to interviews and government emails obtained by CNN.

In 2014, after three years of peer-reviewed study, the Obama administration's EPA invoked a rarely used provision of the Clean Water Act to try to protect Bristol Bay after finding that a mine "would result in complete loss of fish habitat due to elimination, dewatering, and fragmentation of streams, wetlands, and other aquatic resources" in some areas of the bay. "All of these losses would be irreversible," the agency said.

The area is regarded as one of the world's most important salmon fisheries, producing nearly half of the world's annual sockeye salmon catch. Its ecological resources also support 4,000-year-old indigenous cultures, as well as about 14,000 full- and part-time jobs, according to the EPA's 2014 report.

Pruitt's move to rescind the plan to protect the area, if finalized, would allow Pebble to submit plans to mine there, but does not guarantee that those plans would be approved.

Yeah yeah a process review. I have very little faith in the current EPA director to actually protect the environment.

Time to make a donation to NRDC.

 

[Super-Surprise]

You can eat pussy though!

 

[Saint Peter]

eat the rich

 

[Que]

eat the rich

the rich won't taste very good when they're dining on Soylent Green.

 

[Saint Peter]

They are fat and salty.

 

[adrina]

eat the rich

I prefer herbivores.

 

[Bert Notorius]

I prefer herbivores.

cows are
tasty herbivores.

salmon is
nasty,and,
not a herbivore.

 

[RedAllan]

eat the rich

Rich food is bad for my blood pressure.

 

[FakeNews]

source





Yeah yeah a process review. I have very little faith in the current EPA director to actually protect the environment.

Time to make a donation to NRDC.

"The meeting was an opportunity for Administrator Pruitt to let [Pebble Limited Partnership] know that they are simply being granted a fair opportunity to apply; he did not prejudge the outcome of the process, nor make any assurances about the final decision on the project," Liz Bowman, an EPA spokeswoman, said in a statement issued to CNN on Friday.

The agency took issue with the fact that the EPA under the Obama administration moved to veto mining in Bristol Bay before permit applications had been filed.

"EPA's review will be based on the whole record, all the science and an actual proposal from the company," Bowman said.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/22/politics/pebble-epa-bristol-bay-invs/index.html

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

"In 2014, after three years of peer-reviewed study, the Obama administration's EPA..."


Therein lies the real problem. If your "peers" are all radical environmentalists whose goal is to work towards Socialism/Fascism, then all findings will be biased, as was the Obama Administration.

This was a political action...

~*~ and ~*~

""The meeting was an opportunity for Administrator Pruitt to let [Pebble Limited Partnership] know that they are simply being granted a fair opportunity to apply; he did not prejudge the outcome of the process, nor make any assurances about the final decision on the project," Liz Bowman, an EPA spokeswoman, said in a statement issued to CNN on Friday.

"The agency took issue with the fact that the EPA under the Obama administration moved to veto mining in Bristol Bay before permit applications had been filed."



Much ado about nothing...

You have to read past the headline, the outrage and the fucking bias of CNN.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

"In 2014, after three years of peer-reviewed study, the Obama administration's EPA..."


Therein lies the real problem. If your "peers" are all radical environmentalists whose goal is to work towards Socialism/Fascism, then all findings will be biased, as was the Obama Administration.

https://media.giphy.com/media/3oz8xLd9DJq2l2VFtu/giphy.gif

 

[thehaircutgirl]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/22/politics/pebble-epa-bristol-bay-invs/index.html

your rebuttal to a cnn article is another cnn article while wearing a cnn is fake news profile picture is quite funny.

 

[Hypoxia]

I've seen sticks of gum printed as dollar bills so I guess you can chew money. Oh yeah, and those gold- or silver-foil chocolate coins at Hallowe'en -- like fish heads, eat them up, yum. Tobacco leaves have been used as currency. There's all sorts of edible money.

Yes, permit applications will be considered. Attach the appropriate bribe(s), please.

 

[BotanyBoy]

https://media.giphy.com/media/3oz8xLd9DJq2l2VFtu/giphy.gif

Someone didnt like that little reality check lol

 

[FakeNews]

your rebuttal to a cnn article is another cnn article while wearing a cnn is fake news profile picture is quite funny.

Did I reference an additional/different CNN article?

Or did I share additional information that was quoted in the OP's article to ensure a fair & balanced presentation?

 

[BoyNextDoor]

It should be clear that willfully polluting a food source for the planet is a dumb thing to do. How it is even debatable?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Someone didnt like that little reality check lol

Someone's feels masquerading as "facts" are always good for a lol lolz

 

[adrina]

It's more of the same: undo anything Obama has done regardless if it is good, practical or makes sense.

Hate rules the day.

Just as the defense of this is not surprising in the least by the known players.

Maybe they'll get the "scientists" the tobacco companies used to tell us that cigarettes weren't dangerous.

 

[raindancer]

Asseaters activate!

 

[Saint Peter]

nom nom nom

 

[raindancer]

Wasn't their a member named AssEater?

 

[Que]

It's more of the same: undo anything Obama has done regardless if it is good, practical or makes sense.

Hate rules the day.

Just as the defense of this is not surprising in the least by the known players.

Maybe they'll get the "scientists" the tobacco companies used to tell us that cigarettes weren't dangerous.

Sounds like a "dark, dark, hatred."

Excellent job keeping the script.

Couldn't possibly be any idealogical differences.

You should probably try to work the word unhinged into your talking points because that's the new "dark, dark, hatred."

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

The future promises a hole as deep as the Grand Canyon. An area of devastation and toxic pollution, bigger than Manhattan.

Just how do you think corners will be cut ?

You know the pattern- Fuck everything, now. Pay the lawyers and a fine later.

 

[DrDelirium]

It's more of the same: undo anything Obama has done regardless if it is good, practical or makes sense.

Hate rules the day.

Just as the defense of this is not surprising in the least by the known players.

Maybe they'll get the "scientists" the tobacco companies used to tell us that cigarettes weren't dangerous.

It's not about Obama or hate. It's about money and love. That is to say, the love of money.

You do realize that you're making a legitimate case for being skeptical of consensus science? The difference between the current scientific environment and that of the Healthy Tobacco era is that there is much more corporate control of research funding- directly, via universities, and via influence in government- now than there was then.
Science as a system of discovering things about the world is a wonderful thing, but it has never been free of politics, personal prejudices, and the constraints of false paradigms. The only time when there was no groupthink in the scientific community was when there was no scientific community. And only when scientist were able to fund their own research were they truly independent.

I am against poisoning salmon and their habitat, and I think that businesses should have to internalize all their costs- like the costs of environmental protection, clean up, or damage. Nevertheless, it's a fantasy that scientists are pure of heart, immune to the urge to protect their rice bowls, and without biases. It's also not the case that reality is defined by majority vote.

 

[adrina]

Sounds like a "dark, dark, hatred."

Excellent job keeping the script.

Couldn't possibly be any idealogical differences.

You should probably try to work the word unhinged into your talking points because that's the new "dark, dark, hatred."

Oh please. If you had half of an objective eye you'd know how full of it you are.

See the newest push to repeal the ACA. They scrapped real negotiations and progress for a POS bill that they have admitted to having it be about repealing Obamacare. Not fixing, not improving, just undoing what Obama has done. Period. Regardless of the damage it does.

This is absolutely no different.

The future promises a hole as deep as the Grand Canyon. An area of devastation and toxic pollution, bigger than Manhattan.

Just how do you think corners will be cut ?

You know the pattern- Fuck everything, now. Pay the lawyers and a fine later.

Pretty much.

It's not about Obama or hate. It's about money and love. That is to say, the love of money.

You do realize that you're making a legitimate case for being skeptical of consensus science? The difference between the current scientific environment and that of the Healthy Tobacco era is that there is much more corporate control of research funding- directly, via universities, and via influence in government- now than there was then.
Science as a system of discovering things about the world is a wonderful thing, but it has never been free of politics, personal prejudices, and the constraints of false paradigms. The only time when there was no groupthink in the scientific community was when there was no scientific community. And only when scientist were able to fund their own research were they truly independent.

I am against poisoning salmon and their habitat, and I think that businesses should have to internalize all their costs- like the costs of environmental protection, clean up, or damage. Nevertheless, it's a fantasy that scientists are pure of heart, immune to the urge to protect their rice bowls, and without biases. It's also not the case that reality is defined by majority vote.

Actually yes it is about Obama and their rabid hatred of all things Obama. They are so blinded by this hate they will shoot themselves and everyone else in the foot in their zealotry.

The science has already been done but they don't want to take that science. It's like the climate change deniers. They want to invent their own facts in order to push their agenda which is to make a quick profit even though it will cost the public and the world an incomprehensible amount of money to repair the damage they have caused. If it can even be repaired. Their philosophy is to make the quick buck and let somebody else fix the problem that they cause.