EPA = Mengele and courts are trying not to see it

4 Responses to EPA = Mengele and courts are trying not to see it

1. Sam says:

   October 15, 2012 at 5:42 pm

   PM 2.5 = Particulate Matter 2.5 Microns in diameter or less. particulate matter …what kind of matter? what compound or chemical are they talking about? i don’t get it.

   Reply
2. Matthew Pfeifer says:

   October 19, 2012 at 8:24 am

   Particulate Matter could be anything. It’s just “stuff in the air” of that size. Knowing this makes the interview rather painful to watch, even if there may be a point about experimentation on human subjects.

   The relevant wikipedia article seems fair, although once you get down to US EPA policy who knows if the stuff they’re taking credit for is right: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulate_matter

   I took an environmental engineering course in college (2005ish) as a part of my civil engineering curriculum, and we were taught the main categories of pollutants to control were SOx, NOx, and PM. Note the absence of CO2!

   I’ve followed your blog for awhile Mark, and I appreciate a lot of what you have to say. I’ve never generally been a commenter but this is something I knew (just barely) enough about to have something worth saying.

   Reply
   • mark says:

     October 19, 2012 at 4:12 pm

     OK, I had gone to his website (junkscience.com) and thought he looked legit…. but I may make this post disappear. Sorry.

     Reply
     • Matthew Pfeifer says:

       October 19, 2012 at 5:11 pm

       Well, they might be legit in general, and I can see how it would be easy to think PM is some particular thing that had a level of toxicity or whatever. So there might be a kind of shortcut-speak going on here for the benefit of us rubes. It depends on whether you already know the PM in question in a particular area or due to a particular industry has a characteristic spectrum of certain toxic particles. I guess I wouldn’t dismiss their whole program on this account.

       Reply