Leftists live in a black-and-white world when it comes to understanding who or what is responsible for climate change. With the fervor of religious zealots, these climate alarmists demand that their foundational proposition of “truth” be accepted without question or caveat, and they justify this dogmatism by appealing to the faulty logic of “consensus equals truth.”

Such was the case when Vermont Socialist Bernie Sanders grilled Donald Trump’s EPA nominee, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, during that latter’s confirmation hearings. Sanders, referencing the thoroughly debunked statistic that “97% of scientists” believe mankind is the primary cause of climate change, asked, “Do you believe that climate change is caused by the emission, by carbon emissions, by human activity?” Pruitt answered, “Science tells us that the climate is changing and that human activity in some manner impacts that change.” Not good enough for Sanders. No, he wanted Pruitt’s ironclad assurance that man is the primary cause of climate change; any skepticism or deviation from that premise would be disqualifying.

Sanders thus perfectly demonstrates why Washington has become so polarized. He’s utterly intolerant of healthy skepticism and opposing viewpoints; either you’re fully onboard, or you’re anti-science. Pruitt’s response was measured and logical: “The ability to measure with precision the degree and extent of that impact and what to do about it are subject to continued debate and dialog, and well it should be.” You know, like science.

Furthermore, Pruitt was nominated to lead the EPA, not Greenpeace. For far too long, environmental zealots with little regard for Americans’ constitutionally protected rights and freedoms have sought to use the EPA as the regulatory bludgeon for their leftist agenda. Sound scientific inquiry is thus rejected, while dubious projection models and climate alarmism feed the narrative for ever greater government regulation.

Pruitt, who is clearly wary of fraudulent claims and “scientific” consensus, is just the man to rein in the EPA. We’d prefer its abolishment, but we’ll take what we can get.