<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The EPA&#8217;s Science Problem</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-epas-science-problem</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 02:09:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: johnnywoods</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400773</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[johnnywoods]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2014 21:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400773</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The EPA should cut back to what it`s function was at the time of it`s creation along with corresponding personnel cuts.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The EPA should cut back to what it`s function was at the time of it`s creation along with corresponding personnel cuts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: buffalo2</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400636</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[buffalo2]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2014 18:28:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400636</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Defund the EPA. The &quot;science&quot; they use is not science but theologically based (man bad - nature good).]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Defund the EPA. The &#8220;science&#8221; they use is not science but theologically based (man bad &#8211; nature good).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jtrollla</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400209</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jtrollla]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 20:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It is more than that. The EPA is Obama&#039;s Agenda 21 enforcement arm. It&#039;s aim is to deindustrialize the first world (the US in particular), radically reduce the human population, and instantiate a one world government.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is more than that. The EPA is Obama&#8217;s Agenda 21 enforcement arm. It&#8217;s aim is to deindustrialize the first world (the US in particular), radically reduce the human population, and instantiate a one world government.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conniption Fitz</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400202</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Conniption Fitz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400202</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s political science and political/financial gain that rules the EPA.


Gibson Guitar is the first of many examples.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s political science and political/financial gain that rules the EPA.</p>
<p>Gibson Guitar is the first of many examples.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conniption Fitz</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400201</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Conniption Fitz]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 19:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400201</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Obama has turned every agency into a weapon against conservatives and a money machine for his cronies.


Despicable brazenly corrupt tyrants.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama has turned every agency into a weapon against conservatives and a money machine for his cronies.</p>
<p>Despicable brazenly corrupt tyrants.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tom Billings</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400142</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tom Billings]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 17:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400142</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;The peer review process is the foundation of science inquiry in our 
society, and is a trusted evaluation of scientific evidence around the 
world.&quot;

This elementary mistake by Rep. Honda, and many more science funders, is at the core of much bad science, and bad science funding. Publishing peer review is properly little more than the function of cutting down on the editor&#039;s slush pile, and improving how the ideas are presented in papers. The true gold standard is *replication*! But too few published experiments are replicated today, because that is costly, and brings no acclaim.

Funding peer review is a substitute for the judgement of funders, who know they don&#039;t know enough about a field to avoid embarrassment from experiments with negative data on the hypothesis. It results in &quot;stovepiping&quot; science disciplines and refuses too often funding to work, &quot;not in the main lines of research&quot; in a field. Of course, a breakthrough is often necessarily &quot;not in the main lines of research&quot; in a given field.


&quot;This legislation attempts to dictate how the scientific method is
 employed.&quot;


What is does is demand that the real, hard, long, scientific method be employed, not the scholasticism too many fields are being pulled backwards into by academia. In fact, bringing forth the raw data is the first step in making replication easier. It allows analysis of statistical handling of that data, and guides full replication by showing how to make replication experiments more accurate.


The scientific method is *not* about limiting knowledge of raw data, but spreading it, and the conclusions drawn from it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;The peer review process is the foundation of science inquiry in our<br />
society, and is a trusted evaluation of scientific evidence around the<br />
world.&#8221;</p>
<p>This elementary mistake by Rep. Honda, and many more science funders, is at the core of much bad science, and bad science funding. Publishing peer review is properly little more than the function of cutting down on the editor&#8217;s slush pile, and improving how the ideas are presented in papers. The true gold standard is *replication*! But too few published experiments are replicated today, because that is costly, and brings no acclaim.</p>
<p>Funding peer review is a substitute for the judgement of funders, who know they don&#8217;t know enough about a field to avoid embarrassment from experiments with negative data on the hypothesis. It results in &#8220;stovepiping&#8221; science disciplines and refuses too often funding to work, &#8220;not in the main lines of research&#8221; in a field. Of course, a breakthrough is often necessarily &#8220;not in the main lines of research&#8221; in a given field.</p>
<p>&#8220;This legislation attempts to dictate how the scientific method is<br />
 employed.&#8221;</p>
<p>What is does is demand that the real, hard, long, scientific method be employed, not the scholasticism too many fields are being pulled backwards into by academia. In fact, bringing forth the raw data is the first step in making replication easier. It allows analysis of statistical handling of that data, and guides full replication by showing how to make replication experiments more accurate.</p>
<p>The scientific method is *not* about limiting knowledge of raw data, but spreading it, and the conclusions drawn from it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wolfthatknowsall</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400093</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wolfthatknowsall]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 14:58:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400093</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The EPA doesn&#039;t have access to the raw data?  Then, they shouldn&#039;t base economy-killing regulations on that data, should they?

Congress, I am thankful and sure, doesn&#039;t have access to our nuclear weapons designs, you are right.  Would we want them to have such access?  Who knows but what that access would lead to designs finding their way to the internet?

It&#039;s a political issue, Jonathan.  It has nothing to do with hard science ... indeed, hard science tends to indicate that we are on the cusp of the next ice age ... those islands in the Pacific will get even more territory.  One side or the other will win the political &quot;debate&quot;.

Personally, I wish to disband the EPA, entirely.  Then, our economy might have a chance to recover.  However, for the immediate present, I would be happy if Algore would stay on the ground ... all that carbon he burns in his jets ...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The EPA doesn&#8217;t have access to the raw data?  Then, they shouldn&#8217;t base economy-killing regulations on that data, should they?</p>
<p>Congress, I am thankful and sure, doesn&#8217;t have access to our nuclear weapons designs, you are right.  Would we want them to have such access?  Who knows but what that access would lead to designs finding their way to the internet?</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a political issue, Jonathan.  It has nothing to do with hard science &#8230; indeed, hard science tends to indicate that we are on the cusp of the next ice age &#8230; those islands in the Pacific will get even more territory.  One side or the other will win the political &#8220;debate&#8221;.</p>
<p>Personally, I wish to disband the EPA, entirely.  Then, our economy might have a chance to recover.  However, for the immediate present, I would be happy if Algore would stay on the ground &#8230; all that carbon he burns in his jets &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SoCalMike</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400062</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SoCalMike]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400062</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Abolish this monstrosity.
You can&#039;t chain it down or reform it.
It has to go but the Rs don&#039;t have the stomach or spine.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Abolish this monstrosity.<br />
You can&#8217;t chain it down or reform it.<br />
It has to go but the Rs don&#8217;t have the stomach or spine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CaoMoo</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400057</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CaoMoo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400057</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sums up what the lady said pretty well]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sums up what the lady said pretty well</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CaoMoo</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400053</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CaoMoo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400053</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s a Human pyramid scheme :)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a Human pyramid scheme <img src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif" alt=":)" class="wp-smiley" /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CaoMoo</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5400054</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CaoMoo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 13:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5400054</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oh God that made me laugh hard]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh God that made me laugh hard</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: truebearing</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5399953</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truebearing]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 03:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5399953</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oh, I see how leftist science works. You don&#039;t have to present the actual evidence, you simply assert that it exists, somewhere.


You don&#039;t know a damn thing about science. Stop embarrassing yourself and your cause by trying to defend the indefensible.


You don&#039;t want particulate matter in the air? Then I guess you oppose pot smoking, incense, and volcanoes. Better ban moisture because that can lead to mold spores, and better ban pollen because it causes bad allergies. Oh, and you better ban dusty roads.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, I see how leftist science works. You don&#8217;t have to present the actual evidence, you simply assert that it exists, somewhere.</p>
<p>You don&#8217;t know a damn thing about science. Stop embarrassing yourself and your cause by trying to defend the indefensible.</p>
<p>You don&#8217;t want particulate matter in the air? Then I guess you oppose pot smoking, incense, and volcanoes. Better ban moisture because that can lead to mold spores, and better ban pollen because it causes bad allergies. Oh, and you better ban dusty roads.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: truebearing</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5399947</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truebearing]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 03:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5399947</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jonathon, my moronic little friend, the EPA had its chance to prove &quot;the science is settled,&quot; but admitted they not only couldn&#039;t but that they lied. Are you too stupid to comprehend that evidence?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jonathon, my moronic little friend, the EPA had its chance to prove &#8220;the science is settled,&#8221; but admitted they not only couldn&#8217;t but that they lied. Are you too stupid to comprehend that evidence?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: truebearing</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5399944</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[truebearing]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 03:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5399944</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s time to remove the EPA and reopen mental institutions so we have a place for them to go once out of their jobs. They aren&#039;t good for anything.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s time to remove the EPA and reopen mental institutions so we have a place for them to go once out of their jobs. They aren&#8217;t good for anything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George of the Jungle</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5399926</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[George of the Jungle]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 02:20:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5399926</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have a  simple question: would someone tell me whether and how the Constitution allows entities other than Congress to make and pass laws? In other words, why is the EPA not considered unConstitutional at the outset, meaning that its creation was against the law, and all subsequent rules and regulations issued by it are invalid?  To me, this type of agency represents a huge loophole in the duties and responsibilities of Congress, allowing them to be disingenuous, lazy liars who foist off their responsibilities onto someone else with minimal oversight and no punishment either for themselves or their out-of-control and ultimately corrupt agencies.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have a  simple question: would someone tell me whether and how the Constitution allows entities other than Congress to make and pass laws? In other words, why is the EPA not considered unConstitutional at the outset, meaning that its creation was against the law, and all subsequent rules and regulations issued by it are invalid?  To me, this type of agency represents a huge loophole in the duties and responsibilities of Congress, allowing them to be disingenuous, lazy liars who foist off their responsibilities onto someone else with minimal oversight and no punishment either for themselves or their out-of-control and ultimately corrupt agencies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: swemson</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5399873</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[swemson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 00:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5399873</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The EPA, in regulating CO2 emissions, is committing fraud, because they  know, just as every legitimate scientist knows, that CO2 is not a pollutant. The enviro-facists want us to equate CO2 with coal dust, which caused black lung syndrome in coal miners back in the 18th, 19th &amp; early 20th century. http://www.swemson.com/upl/coal.miner.jpg  But CO2 isn&#039;t even carbon. To call CO2 carbon is the same as calling H20 hydrogen.



I believe that this unconstitutional behavior by the EPA can be challenged successfully in the courts. I&#039;ve spoken to some folks who seem to feel the same way, who are attempting to put together such a challenge to be filed before the midterm elections. Anyone interested in this should contact them at:  climate.facts@hmamail.com


fs]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The EPA, in regulating CO2 emissions, is committing fraud, because they  know, just as every legitimate scientist knows, that CO2 is not a pollutant. The enviro-facists want us to equate CO2 with coal dust, which caused black lung syndrome in coal miners back in the 18th, 19th &amp; early 20th century. <a href="http://www.swemson.com/upl/coal.miner.jpg" rel="nofollow">http://www.swemson.com/upl/coal.miner.jpg</a>  But CO2 isn&#8217;t even carbon. To call CO2 carbon is the same as calling H20 hydrogen.</p>
<p>I believe that this unconstitutional behavior by the EPA can be challenged successfully in the courts. I&#8217;ve spoken to some folks who seem to feel the same way, who are attempting to put together such a challenge to be filed before the midterm elections. Anyone interested in this should contact them at:  <a href="mailto:climate.facts@hmamail.com">climate.facts@hmamail.com</a></p>
<p>fs</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5399871</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 00:31:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5399871</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Right, I just thought that I was paying $3.51 for the gas I bought this weekend. 

And at $100/barrel of oil, with approximately 40 gallons of gas from a barrel, the price for gas (with refining costs, profit, and taxes) surely works out to $1.50/gallon.  

Is this what they call &quot;conservative math&quot;?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Right, I just thought that I was paying $3.51 for the gas I bought this weekend. </p>
<p>And at $100/barrel of oil, with approximately 40 gallons of gas from a barrel, the price for gas (with refining costs, profit, and taxes) surely works out to $1.50/gallon.  </p>
<p>Is this what they call &#8220;conservative math&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5399869</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonathan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 00:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5399869</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Of course, nobody said that the data don&#039;t exist -- only that apparently EPA doesn&#039;t have direct access to all the raw data.  Big deal.  (I&#039;ll bet Congress doesn&#039;t have direct access to our nuclear weapons designs and codes, either.)

OK, go ahead and claim that &quot;Harvard and the ACS are just leftwing fraudster environmentalist groups.&quot;  Good luck with convincing anyone who isn&#039;t already a true believer.  

As I mentioned, the one real scientific paper -- because it is actually published -- mentioned in support of the thesis in this article --  in fact supports the hypothesis that particulates are associated with bad health outcomes (reduced longevity).  

A great reason for denouncing the EPA move to regulate particulates more stringently!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course, nobody said that the data don&#8217;t exist &#8212; only that apparently EPA doesn&#8217;t have direct access to all the raw data.  Big deal.  (I&#8217;ll bet Congress doesn&#8217;t have direct access to our nuclear weapons designs and codes, either.)</p>
<p>OK, go ahead and claim that &#8220;Harvard and the ACS are just leftwing fraudster environmentalist groups.&#8221;  Good luck with convincing anyone who isn&#8217;t already a true believer.  </p>
<p>As I mentioned, the one real scientific paper &#8212; because it is actually published &#8212; mentioned in support of the thesis in this article &#8212;  in fact supports the hypothesis that particulates are associated with bad health outcomes (reduced longevity).  </p>
<p>A great reason for denouncing the EPA move to regulate particulates more stringently!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: CowboyUp</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5399831</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[CowboyUp]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2014 22:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5399831</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;So I guess Harvard and the American Cancer Society are just leftwing fraudster environmentalit groups,&quot; -Jonathon.

Yep, I&#039;ve known that for decades.   Embarrassing is when the data, if it actually exists (and apparently it doesn&#039;t), that the EPA uses for making regulations that cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars, is a better kept secret than our nuclear weapons designs.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;So I guess Harvard and the American Cancer Society are just leftwing fraudster environmentalit groups,&#8221; -Jonathon.</p>
<p>Yep, I&#8217;ve known that for decades.   Embarrassing is when the data, if it actually exists (and apparently it doesn&#8217;t), that the EPA uses for making regulations that cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars, is a better kept secret than our nuclear weapons designs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob Hobart</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/arnold-ahlert/the-epas-science-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-5399829</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rob Hobart]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2014 22:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=223491#comment-5399829</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Deflection. Pathetic.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Deflection. Pathetic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 700/727 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-30 21:12:31 by W3 Total Cache -->