Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wayners who wrote (685587)	6/14/2005 11:34:24 AM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Feeling the Heat President Bush has been running from the issue of global warming for four years, but the walls are closing in. Scientists throughout the world are telling him that the rise in atmospheric temperature justifies aggressive action. Arnold Schwarzenegger and other prominent Republicans are telling him to get off the dime. His corporate allies are deserting him. And the Senate is inching closer to endorsing a mandatory cap on greenhouse gas emissions. A result is that Mr. Bush seems increasingly isolated and his rhetoric of denial increasingly irrational. Last week, a whistleblower asserted that a senior White House official, formerly an oil lobbyist, had changed scientific reports to minimize the climate problem. The official, Philip Cooney, resigned last Friday, although the White House insisted that the embarrassing disclosures had nothing to do with his departure. Whatever the truth, this was hardly the first time Bush officials cooked the books for political ends. It was just this kind of nonsense that persuaded an exasperated Christie Whitman to return to private life. Out in the real world, hardly anyone denies the importance of the issue anymore. Just over a week ago, Mr. Schwarzenegger pledged to slow, stop and ultimately reverse California's greenhouse gas emissions by requiring big improvements in automobile efficiency and pushing for energy sources other than fossil fuels. "The debate is over," the governor said. "We know the science, we see the threat, and we know the time for action is now." As if on cue, the National Academy of Sciences and 10 of its counterparts around the world declared that the science of global warming is clear enough to warrant prompt reductions in greenhouse gases. Mainstream scientists have long accepted the link between warming and human activity. What made this statement exceptional was its tone and its timing, coming a month before Mr. Bush and other leaders from the Group of 8 industrialized nations are to meet in Gleneagles, Scotland, where Prime Minister Tony Blair will put climate change near the top of the agenda. As things stand now, Mr. Bush will be going to that meeting empty-handed, despite Mr. Blair's efforts last week to make him take the issue more seriously. Perhaps the Senate can give him something positive to point to, although it will have to act fast. Three different global warming proposals requiring mandatory controls on carbon dioxide, the main global warming gas, could surface as amendments during the forthcoming debate on the energy bill, scheduled to begin in earnest this week. One of these, the McCain-Lieberman bill, received a surprising 43 votes in October 2003. That was before the rest of the world began moving toward mandatory controls and before American power companies began to slowly accept that such controls were not only inevitable but also necessary to spur the development of more efficient ways of producing energy. The results could be better this time. There is speculation that a less ambitious but also less costly bill sponsored by Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico, and modeled after proposals from the bipartisan National Commission on Energy Policy, could win a filibuster-proof 60 votes. That may be a long shot. But what is clear is that the warming issue is gaining traction at home and abroad, inspired partly by Mr. Bush's incorrigible stubbornness. nytimes.com

To: Wayners who wrote (685587)	6/14/2005 11:37:04 AM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

In the real world, only a few right wing extremists deny the reality of global warming.

To: Wayners who wrote (685587)	6/14/2005 11:55:23 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Wayne... I took no position on the relative merits of the case arguing for global warming. I merely pointed out one GLARINGLY IDIOTIC comment made by 'John Stewart, chairman of Transport 2000, a pressure group'. (And if you were to ask me for my personal position on the 'global warming debate' I'd answer that it doesn't even rank very near the top of my list of 'our most serious environmental problems'... but then I'm not living on a low-lying Pacific island.) PS --- Your mention of CO2 ignores something: CO2 is not at all the only atmospheric gas that can promote warmer temperatures... and it is not even the one that can increase them the most, pound for pound in the air. For example, methane (CH4, commonly flared from oil wells and coal deposits around the world, leaking from trash dumps, a by-product of 'corporate farming' technologies such as massive feed lots, etc.) holds heat in the atmosphere four or five times more on a pound-for-pound basis then carbon dioxide does. Other gases as well....