The air pollution and dumbfuckitude series. Collect the entire set.

A few outstanding issues and clarifications here and it's time to move on. If you want to start at the beginning, feel free to read the preceding four parts:

Part 1: Air pollution and how stupid is Weasel Boy?
Part 2: Air pollution and Weasel Boy's dumbfuckitude.
Part 3: Air pollution and ongoing dumbfuckitude.
Part 4: Tying up those loose ends. And dumbfuckitude.

(I should first apologize for the somewhat disjointed writing in the above posts as I bobbed, weaved, ducked, parried, thrusted, feinted left, backtracked, retracted and clarified as I really was writing all of that in real time, tracking down the facts as I went. Very Joycian, stream-of-consciousness of me, I'm sure you understand.)

So ... what's left to deal with? First, let's make sure you understand what started this whole fiasco -- the original Yahoo article, which contained the hideously misleading snippet:

Between 1995 and 2002, Canada cut its air pollution by 1.8 per cent while the United States achieved a cut of 45 per cent, says the report by Environmental Defence and the Canadian Environmental Law Association.

As we have already established, part of that claim was simply rubbish as the report eventually referenced dealt solely with Canadian pollution data. Neither of those two groups said anything about American data and, based on my phone conversation with one of their members, it seems I wasn't the first one contacting them, trying to make sense of this.

Next, I should apologize for not recognizing the Canadian groups Environmental Defence and the Canadian Environmental Law Association. Since it seemed (based on the Yahoo article) that they were playing fast and loose with the data, I made some snarky comments in their direction when, in fact, they were innocent victims of a badly-written article. So ... mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Having said that, however, I'm still a bit put off by Environmental Defence's Rick Smith, if the following is indeed true:

"In many ways George Bush's America is doing a much better job cleaning up its pollution than our own country," Rick Smith of Environmental Defence told a news conference.

If he really and truly said that, he's a bit of a dick, not only because the time frame in question covered the Clinton years more than the Bush years, but because he clearly didn't even take the time to check the data to find out how bogus it was. But I'm not going to spend a lot more time pursuing this angle.

Finally, I'm still a bit unclear on the discrepancy in the amount of air pollution reduction between Canada and the U.S. here. According to Environmental Defence's Jennifer Foulds:

The CEC numbers are:

(1) National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) Facilities (Canada) VS Toxic Release Inventory Facilities (TRI) (U.S.)

NPRI facilities are lagging behind TRI facilities in reducing air emissions

• From 1995 to 2002 NPRI facilities reported a decrease of 2% in air emissions vs. TRI facilities that reported a decrease of 45% (based on CEC’s Taking Stock core chemicals that match NPRI and TRI pollutants and reporting facilities over time).

• Taking Stock also shows that the same trend holds true for a more recent time period. From 1998- 2002 NPRI facilities increased their air emissions by 8% compared to a decrease of 21% for TRI facilities

which would seem to suggest that those two values aren't quite comparing the same thing so if someone wants to clarify that, that would be just delightful. In any event, if you read the whole table, you'll notice that there are numerous other categories where Canada is kicking the U.S.'s ass anyway. So there.

And, finally, this guy is still a dick but let's see if he finally decides to correct his bullshit or whether, like the mealy-mouthed Christian that he is, he continues to bear false witness. My money's on the false witness thing.