...it's an entirely different thing to try to change the evidence in your favor. If this prooves to be true, this is certainly another impeachable offence that will somehow slide by without any consequence for Bush...the things this guy and his admin get away with without the public batting an eye is astonishing....

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/....ap/index.html

 

ROFL MAO!~

 

...

 

I don't think anyone is denying climate change. The denial is whether human impact is affecting the climate or if it is natural. Is it worth billions upon billions of dollars and lord knows the ripple affect on the world economy, to act on speculation. The planet has been in a warming trend since the ice age. , long before any human in a hummer ever existed. There have been major step taken to control the service life of aging industrial equipment. Example: the BAAQMD reduces NOx and CO limits that power generation units can produce each year. This causes power producers to decommission older units and purchase newer, cleaner, more efficient units. This is a good thing. Sure there is big money and big oil involved, the petroleum industry will always be around, they are just not going anywhere. Maybe we can stop funding medical research, immunizations, and an AIDS free Africa, to pay for cleaner greener energy. This has two positives, less people the petroleum industry needs to support, and fresher air. I don't think I will ever attribute my measly little existence to the end of the world. That's just not a burden I'm willing to accept or be responsible for.

 

I read about the "cover up". It made me :rotfl:

 

First off, there are certainly people who are still calling global warming a hoax. Secondly, there is NO dispute within the scientific community that humans are drastically altering the rates at which climate change is taking place. The only people who claim that humans are not impacting climate change are either paid by someone who will gain an advantage if people think what's happening is natural, or they are meta-scientists who are acting on feelings and hunches rather than the collected body of data. The admin knows this, so they hide and alter the data to show that there may be a dispute about it, to fuel arguments like the one you posted.

The truth is that humans are causing huge impacts, the gov't has the power and ability to implement actions which would reduce the impact, but they are unwilling to because it would mean upseting their friends. They are trading the security of the environment in the long run for the security of a few people's cash and some votes in the present.

Not to mention that they likely are interfering with and misrepresenting gov't funded research and lying to the American people again...both of which would normally be dealt with by impeachment.