SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Thousands of snow geese have been killed by the toxic waters of the Berkeley Pit, a flooded former copper mine in Butte, Montana that is one of the most poisonous and acidic bodies of water in the United States.
Unusually warm weather led the flock--tens of thousands of geese--to migrate south from Canada to the American Southwest later than usual, and they ran into a snow storm in Montana. The only open water in the area on which they could land was that contained in the Berkeley Pit.
The geese landed in the pit, whose water is contaminated with arsenic, cadmium, cobalt, copper, iron, and zinc, in late November. The heavy metal contamination has resulted in water so acidic that the organisms able to survive within the pit are the objects of scientific study.[1] Thousands of birds did not survive after touching down on the red-tinged toxic waste.
[...] Montana Resources, the mining company [who jointly manages the pit with the Atlantic Richfield Company], will face fines if the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finds that its efforts to keep the birds away from the mine were not in compliance with regulatory standards.
[1] Abstract with link to full-text PDF.
In related news, Common Dreams reports Scott Pruitt is an Unacceptable Choice to Run EPA
"Scott Pruitt is the wrong choice to run the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA plays an absolutely vital role in enforcing long-standing policies that protect the health and safety of Americans, based on the best available science. Pruitt has a clear record of hostility to the EPA's mission, and he is a completely inappropriate choice to lead it", [said Ken Kimmell, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists.]
USA Today reports Scott Pruitt, Trump's Pick to Head the EPA, has Sued the EPA
"Having Scott Pruitt in charge of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is like putting an arsonist in charge of fighting fires", said Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club. "He is a climate science denier who, as Attorney General for the state of Oklahoma, regularly conspired with the fossil fuel industry to attack EPA regulations."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @10:18PM
Its funny how you take complaints about basic competence of government officials and conflicts of interest and somehow spin it into a partisan debate. If anyone is the special little snowflake who's feelz are easily hurt its YOU jmorris. Even the slightest bit of criticism such as
"Scott Pruitt is the wrong choice to run the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA plays an absolutely vital role in enforcing long-standing policies that protect the health and safety of Americans, based on the best available science. Pruitt has a clear record of hostility to the EPA's mission, and he is a completely inappropriate choice to lead it", [said Ken Kimmell, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists.]
has you saying stupid partisan shit like it is some personal attack. More and more it is clear the angry conservative folks throw around insults that better match themselves.
In case you care to object, please explain to me the mature reactions of conservatives when Obama first took office and how it was so much better than the people complaining about Trump now.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by jmorris on Friday December 09 2016, @10:35PM
Obama to GOP: 'I won' [politico.com] Please explain why our "swift one word answer" to every Democrat objection and attempt to get in the way with procedural tricks should not also be "No."
You guys are probably so dimwitted / cocooned you really can't see the problem with that text you quoted. It is the premise that rankles, that one side's partisan policy positions are "best available science" and somehow "long-standing policies" must never be realigned when Republicans win elections but Obama was free to "fundamentally transform" the country to wild applause. Well to again quote President Obama, "Elections have consequences."
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @10:46PM
> that one side's partisan policy positions are "best available science"
It wouldn't be partisan if the other side wasn't so intent on denying the science.
Kind of like that time when the church insisted that the sun actually circled the earth.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Friday December 09 2016, @10:55PM
Oh go fuck yourself. The science is clear, and your side doesn't have the moral, ethical, intellectual, or spiritual high ground in ANYTHING. Damn fucking right we can get upset when a complete fucking ignorant tool is chosen to lead an organization that he HATES. You point out that you get to destroy it, because you "won".
What the fuck did you win you stupid fucking shit? The right to shove your anti-science down our throats?
Fuck you. Every reasonable intelligent person understands we need regulations, and we need to fight hard to clean up our environment NOW. You argue against it, and the ONLY reason you do is because of your arrogance, callousness, and that your PAYCHECK is speaking to you.
You've won nothing, and you're too fucking stupid to see that. What did you win again? Thousands of geese continuing to die? Do you think the world is so big it can continually survive things like that?
I hope you die on fire, then spend an eternity it.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by digitalaudiorock on Friday December 09 2016, @11:44PM
...hopefully with the ghosts of thousands of snow geese pecking at his nuts. Seriously though, j really is about the biggest fucking asshole on this forum.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Saturday December 10 2016, @04:44PM
People like jmorris, ethanol fueled, and buzzard think they are strong independent folk but are very bit as fucked in the head as I am. So they take some cross arm stance while talking down to people just so they don't have to down more drugs/booze to feel slightly better about themselves. They feel bad and want others to feel bad too. That's why they voted Trump. They are so fucking blind with rage and butt hurt that they want to see the country burn so everyone can enjoy the same shit life they have.
I get it, I almost wanted to vote trump too as a big fuck everyone. I hate people, I want to hurt people. But I do what I can to try and better myself because what other option do I have? Suicide? Fuck that. They're angry. I get it. But for fucks sake, they need to wake up. Be the adults they want to be instead of pretending to be. Go out for a walk or something. Turn your TV off and stop reading the news. Clear your head of the anger.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 10 2016, @12:42AM
Bravo, I could not have worded that any better.
I'm sure J believes that's how the world's gonna end anyway very soon, tomorrow hopefully. Been waiting for it for a couple of centuries now...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 10 2016, @08:57AM
I hope you die on fire, then spend an eternity it.
Wording best posted by.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 10 2016, @02:07AM
Brilliant work there, genius. The Obama EPA lets thousands of animals die to pollution, but half the article is about why the person who is going to replace him next year is bad.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Saturday December 10 2016, @04:49AM
Citation please. I love how people bring up Obama as a rebuttal, as if I'm a full fledged Democrat that loves that treasonous betraying sob.
So, what? The entire article should have been filled with explanations of how all the Democratic administrations suck and Obama ruined the EPA? What do want? An article glowing and full of hope now that this asshole is going to arrive? Are you seriously saying he wants to save the animals, and protect our environment?
The reason why most the article about him is bad, is because his a toxic motherfucker to environmentalism and has been a staunch opponent of everything they do. The guy wanting to destroy them is now being handed power over them, and he openly doesn't believe that the environment and animals are in danger anyways.
We have every right to be extraordinarily concerned.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 09 2016, @11:10PM
I know you are but what am I???
You argue like a child. I never said Obama was good, and (I know I'm AC) I have often commented on how terrible he has been for the US. That's all you've got in response to this? "Your guy did it toooooo" when he's not even my guy... Its the most evasive defensive insecure bullshit method of avoiding a real discussion. If you have a significant other (who knows?? maybe you're a self-loathing homosexual that scores society points by being pro-douche) I'm sure they have some serious resentment from how you handle problems and would like you for once in your life to discuss a problem directly. Not evade, not shift blame, not immediately backtracking, but dealing with the fucking point.
And the point here is that Scott Pruitt is a terrible choice for the EPA. Obama bailed on his promises and left us worse off, now "your guy" is doing the same thing and you're too busy "winning" that you can't see the shit about to fall on your face! Stop getting mad at the messengers, start getting mad at the broken promises!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 10 2016, @04:09AM
Ssssssh, they're experiencing buyer's remorse.