-Caveat Lector- Here we go again with the scare mongering! I say so what? In the past, the scientists tell us that the ice age ended on its without any evil free enterprise industry around, what caused that global warming? Does it take into account the 11 year sunspot cycle, which by the way the sun is at it's peak of solar activity this year? I say this report will be used by the eco-terrorists to scare you into giving up your civil liberties of all kinds of things stasrting by giving up your car, your freedom of choice when comes to where you will live, how much electricity will will be allowed to use. And of course the eco-terrorists will be the ones giving out the orders! And one last point, if warm weather is so terrible, why do most people who move because of climate choose warmer weather to move to?? visit my web site at http://www.voicenet.com/~wbacon My ICQ# is 79071904 for a precise list of the powers of the Federal Government linkto: http://www.voicenet.com/~wbacon/Enumerated.html ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 22:45:06 -0400 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: SNET: Panel Tells Bush Global Warming Is Getting Worse -> SNETNEWS Mailing List I sure hope Bush does not fall for this baloney. On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 23:54:52 -0700 Steve Wingate <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > -> SNETNEWS Mailing List > > Thursday June 07 08:31 AM EDT > > Panel Tells Bush Global Warming Is Getting Worse > > By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE with ANDREW C. REVKIN The New York > Times > > In a conclusion that may change President Bush (news - web sites)'s > environmental policy, a panel of scientists said that global warming > was a > real problem and getting worse. > > WASHINGTON, June 6 A panel of top American scientists declared today > > that global warming was a real problem and was getting worse, a > conclusion that may lead President Bush to change his stand on the > issue > as he heads next week to Europe, where the United States is seen as > a > major source of the air pollution held responsible for climate > change. > > In a much-anticipated report from the National Academy of Sciences > (news > - web sites), 11 leading atmospheric scientists, including previous > skeptics > about global warming, reaffirmed the mainstream scientific view that > the > earth's atmosphere was getting warmer and that human activity was > largely > responsible. > > "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in earth's atmosphere as a result > of > human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface > ocean > temperatures to rise," the report said. "Temperatures are, in fact, > rising." > > The report was requested by the White House last month in > anticipation of > an international meeting on global warming in Bonn in July but > arrived just > before President Bush leaves next week for Europe, a trip that > includes > talks on global warming with leaders of the 15 European Union (news > - web > sites) countries in Goteborg, Sweden. > > European leaders expressed outrage in March when Mr. Bush rejected > the > global warming pact known as the Kyoto Protocol (news - web sites), > an > international treaty negotiated in Kyoto, Japan, in 1997, and the > subject has > been building as an important test of the administration's foreign > policy. > > In the White House's first official acknowledgment of the academy's > conclusions, Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites), Mr. Bush's > national > security adviser, told reporters today, "This is a president who > takes > extremely seriously what we do know about climate change, which is > essentially that there is warming taking place." > > Mr. Bush and many in his cabinet, who discussed the subject at > length on > Tuesday, have been trying to hammer out a proposal on limiting the > pollutants that cause global warming. > > "A cabinet-level working group is still working on what it wishes to > say to > the president before we go to Europe," Ms. Rice said. > > She said Mr. Bush would talk with the allies "a little bit about > what we've > learned thus far." > > Without being specific, Ms. Rice said Mr. Bush was being guided by > certain principles in formulating a proposal. > > "One would want to be certain that developing countries were > accounted > for in some way, that technology and science really ought to be > important > parts of this answer, that we cannot do something that damages the > American economy or other economies because growth is also > important," > she said. > > In response to critics who have suggested that Mr. Bush is ignoring > an > issue of mounting international concern, Ms. Rice portrayed the > group as > feverishly committed to educating itself and coming up with a > proposal. > > "It has been a matter of bringing up to speed some of the highest- > ranking > people in this government," she said. "I would dare say dare > challenge you > to find a situation in which you've had so many high-ranking people > sitting > there week after week after week, understanding the challenge that > we face > in global climate change, everybody from the vice president, the > secretary > of state, the secretary of interior, secretary of agriculture. It > has been quite > something to see all of these people grappling with the issue." > > Administration officials have said privately that the White House > could have > handled the matter with greater tact, and Ms. Rice conceded as much > today. > > "The president had made clear when he was a candidate that he did > not > believe the Kyoto Protocol addressed the problem of climate change > in a > way that the United States could support," she said. "In retrospect, > perhaps > the fact that we understood that we had already said this was not > immediately observable to everybody, and it might have been better > to let > people know again, in advance, including our allies, that we were > not going > to support the protocol." > > This was unusually blunt talk from a White House that until now has > fastidiously avoided the phrase "global warming" and repeatedly > expressed doubts about the clarity of the science underlying the > theory that > emissions from smokestacks and tailpipes were heating the atmosphere > in > ways that posed a threat. > > In an indication of the headwind that Mr. Bush is sailing into next > week in > Europe, the journal Science, published by an American scientific > organization, recently carried an open letter signed by 16 > prestigious > scientific panels in countries around the world calling for "prompt > action" to > reduce the gases like carbon dioxide that trap heat like in a > greenhouse. > > The increase in temperatures, the editorial said, "will be > accompanied by > rising sea levels, more intense precipitation events in some > countries and > increased risk of drought in others and adverse effects on > agriculture, > health and water balance." > > It continued, "We urge everyone individuals, businesses and > governments > to take prompt action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases." > > Many international business executives have been pressuring the > administration to move more aggressively on the issue. And so has a > powerful band of Mr. Bush's closest advisers, including Secretary of > State > Colin L. Powell, Ms. Rice, Treasury Secretary Paul H. O'Neill, and > Christie > Whitman, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency > (news - > web sites). > > Today's report reflects the increasing certainty of the scientific > community > here and abroad that the warming of the last 50 years is probably > because > of the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. The panel said the > > degree of confidence in this conclusion was "higher today than it > was 10 or > even 5 years ago." > > Still, it said, large uncertainties limit predictions of the extent > and > consequences good and bad of future warming. But it affirmed the > scientific consensus that human- caused climate warming could well > be a > dominant environmental problem throughout the new century, depending > on > how fast the gases accumulate in coming decades. > > "Human-induced warming and associated sea level rises are expected > to > continue through the 21st century," it said. > > And it said that "national policy decisions made now and in the > longer-term > future will influence the extent of any damage suffered by > vulnerable human > populations and ecosystems later in this century." > > The report thus all but eliminates one reason the administration has > been > using to forestall any action on global warming. > > And it deals a strong card to Democrats on Capitol Hill who have > long > sought more aggressive action on global warming. Senator John Kerry, > > Democrat of Massachusetts and a leading advocate of action said of > the > report, "It confirms in stark terms the reality that many of us had > accepted a > considerable amount of time ago and refutes an effort by the White > House > to seek some sort of escape hatch from that reality." > > Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska and a longtime critic of > the > Kyoto Protocol, instead highlighted the uncertainty mentioned in the > report > and drew the opposite conclusion of Mr. Kerry. > > "This report is certainly not a prescription for the drastic > measures required > under the Kyoto Protocol," Mr. Hagel said in a statement. > > Nonetheless, in a nod toward the unanimity of the scientific > community, he > added: "This report does provide us with enough evidence to move > forward > in a responsible, reasonable and achievable way to reduce greenhouse > > gas emissions. It provides us with a basis to move forward with an > alternative to the Kyoto Protocol." > > Environmentalists hailed the report as a significant step in the > long effort to > force the United States to curtail greenhouse gases. Phil Clapp, > president > of the National Environmental Trust, said, "The president can no > longer > wiggle out of aggressive action by arguing that the science is > inconclusive." > > > Mr. Clapp also suggested that the report called into question Mr. > Bush's > proposed energy plan, which seeks to step up production of coal, oil > and > gas-fired power plants. > > "This makes the president's energy plan look completely > irresponsible," he > said. > > Mr. Clapp said environmental groups had estimated that if the energy > plan > was fully put into effect, it would increase the pollution that > causes global > warming by 35 percent over the next decade. > > The report was written by 11 atmospheric scientists who are members > of > the National Academy of Sciences. The authors included Dr. Richard > S. > Lindzen, a meteorologist at the Massachusetts Institute of > Technology > (news - web sites), who for years has expressed skepticism about > some of > the more dire predictions of other climate scientists about the > significance > of human-caused warming. > > The report was requested on May 11 in a letter to Dr. Bruce Alberts, > the > president of the National Academy of Sciences, from John M. > Bridgeland, > deputy assistant to the president for domestic policy, and Gary > Edson, > deputy assistant to the president for international economic > affairs. > > A statement from the academy today said, "The White House requested > this fast-track review of the state of climate science in > preparation for > international discussions on global warming scheduled to take place > in the > coming weeks." > > Initially, the White House asked two questions of the academy: What > are > the greatest strengths and weaknesses in the science pointing to > human- > caused warming? And, are there significant differences between the > full > scientific analysis completed recently by the Intergovernmental > Panel on > Climate Change, sponsored by the United Nations (news - web sites), > and > the final executive summary? > > There have been three assessments of global warming by the > international > panel since 1990, and each has drawn a more conclusive picture than > the > last of the link between human activities and the prospects for > significant > harm to agriculture, ecosystems and coastlines. > > But conservatives in Congress notably Senators Hagel and Larry E. > Craig, > Republican of Idaho and groups representing industries whose > business > depends on fossil fuels have long criticized the findings of the > international > panel as biased, pointing particularly to differences between the > voluminous chapters on complicated scientific points and briskly > worded > summaries that tend to influence policy. > > The panel, led by Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone, the chancellor of the > University of > California at Irvine, met initially in California and spent the next > weeks > intensively sifting the existing science. > > The report does provide some ammunition for critics in its > description of > the conclusion of the international climate group. It concluded, for > example, > that the international panel had a tendency in its executive summary > to > understate caveats and focus on the harsher possible consequences of > > climate warming. But over all, the panel described the international > work as > "admirable" and robustly supported its conclusions. > > In a telephone interview today, Dr. Cicerone said he hoped the > report, by > spelling out the scientific basis for various predictions, would > dispel some > unwarranted skepticism about aspects of the warming problem. > > One climate scientist who critiqued a draft of the new report for > the > academy said no one in the administration should be surprised at the > firm > nature of the result. > > "They asked a string of questions that might have been appropriate > in > 1990," the scientist said. > > "Hello?" he said. "Where've you been the last decade?" > > > ANOMALOUS IMAGES AND UFO FILES > http://www.anomalous-images.com > > -> To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj. -> To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ==^================================================================ EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?b1ddDh.b2FmzU Or send an email To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================ <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
