as that page shows that calling CO2 is accurate in the English language, and also under EPA guidelines.
Clearly your English needs some work, I can't tell WTF you're trying to say, here.
I see you've gone from quoting a propaganda site to a tyrannical armed bureaucracy that directly funds that propaganda, and many others. I don't think that's better.
The only thing about the Federal government worse than the IRS is the EPA.
As for EPA's determination of CO2 as a pollutant, the Office of Inspector General review their finding, and concluded that not only did they not follow basic scientific method in coming to their conclusions, but they didn't even follow their own guidelines (this from the report):
EPA’s TSD Peer Review Methodology
Did Not Meet OMB Requirements for
Highly Influential Scientific Assessments
EPA fulfilled the statutory requirements for notice and comment rulemakings
mandated in the Administrative Procedur
e Act and in Section 307 of the CAA,
and employed several of its processes de
signed to ensure data quality.
did not maintain a record of its respon
se and disposition of comments for the two
TSDs that accompanied the proposed and
final rules. Additionally, the panel’s
results and EPA’s response to the panel’s
results were not made available to the
public as is required for a peer review of
a highly influential sc
We also noted that this panel did not
fully meet the independence requirements
for reviews of highly influential scien
tific assessments because one of the
panelists was an EPA employee. The OMB
bulletin for peer review states that
“scientists employed by the sponsoring ag
ency are not permitted to serve as
reviewers for highly influential scien
tific assessments.” See appendix A,
question 5, for a more detailed discus
sion of the expert panel process.
no supporting analytical inform
ation was available to show how EPA
made its determination prior to dissem
inating the information. EPA’s guidance
for assessing the quality of externally
generated information does not provide
procedures or steps for assessing outs
ide data or requirements for documenting