Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Re: Are the "wrong"(s) that Waxman "udders" homogenized? Does Norm Crosby know you've stolen his act? | |
|
Author: Oropan |
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 05:13:22 12/14/07 Fri In reply to: Mo' Green 's message, "Are the "wrong"(s) that Waxman "udders" homogenized? Does Norm Crosby know you've stolen his act?" on 11:47:48 12/13/07 Thu If you can present one FACT that proves MANMADE global warming, I'd like to here it. >A socialist, really? What business has Waxman said he >wants to expropriate? What "alter" do I worship at >again? Now mind you, I do alter my opinions, based on >the facts. You should try it some time. Maybe if you >became literate it would help. > >>I never believe a wrong that Waxman ever writes or >>udders. He is a committed socialist and eveything is >>partician with him. And I doubt that the Bush admin. >>has control of all these scientists from all over the >>World that dispute manmade global warming. I guess >>that hard for people like you that worship at the >>alter of global warming to understand. There is no >>scientific facts to prove manmade global >>warming....only the wishes of those that want to >>believe it for their own goofy religious beliefs. Yes, >>nutty environmentism is a religion. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>For the past 16 months, the House Oversight and >>>Government Reform Committee has been investigating >>>allegations of political interference with government >>>climate change science under the Bush Administration. >>>During the course of this investigation, the >Committee >>>obtained over 27,000 pages of documents from the >White >>>House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the >>>Commerce Department, held two investigative hearings, >>>and deposed or interviewed key officials. Much of the >>>information made available to the Committee has never >>>been publicly disclosed. >>> >>>This report presents the findings of the Committee’s >>>investigation. The evidence before the Committee >leads >>>to one inescapable conclusion: the Bush >Administration >>>has engaged in a systematic effort to manipulate >>>climate change science and mislead policymakers and >>>the public about the dangers of global warming. >>> >>>In 1998, the American Petroleum Institute developed >an >>>internal “Communications Action Plan” that stated: >>>“Victory will be achieved when … average citizens >>>‘understand’ uncertainties in climate science … [and] >>>recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the >>>‘conventional wisdom.’” The Bush Administration has >>>acted as if the oil industry’s communications plan >>>were its mission statement. White House officials and >>>political appointees in the agencies censored >>>congressional testimony on the causes and impacts of >>>global warming, controlled media access to government >>>climate scientists, and edited federal scientific >>>reports to inject unwarranted uncertainty into >>>discussions of climate change and to minimize the >>>threat to the environment and the economy. >>> >>>The White House Censored Climate Change Scientists >>>The White House exerted unusual control over the >>>public statements of federal scientists on climate >>>change issues. It was standard practice for media >>>requests to speak with federal scientists on climate >>>change matters to be sent to CEQ for White House >>>approval. By controlling which government scientists >>>could respond to media inquiries, the White House >>>suppressed dissemination of scientific views that >>>could conflict with Administration policies. The >White >>>House also edited congressional testimony regarding >>>the science of climate change. >>> >>>Former CEQ Chief of Staff Philip Cooney told the >>>Committee: “Our communications people would render a >>>view as to whether someone should give an interview >or >>>not and who it should be.” According to Kent Laborde, >>>a career public affairs officer at the National >>>Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, media >requests >>>related to climate change issues were handled >>>differently from other requests because “I would have >>>to route media inquires through CEQ.” This practice >>>was particularly evident after Hurricane Katrina. Mr. >>>Laborde was asked, “Did the White House and the >>>Department of Commerce not want scientists who >>>believed that climate change was increasing hurricane >>>activity talking with the press?” He responded: >“There >>>was a consistent approach that might have indicated >>>that.” >>> >>>White House officials and agency political appointees >>>also altered congressional testimony regarding the >>>science of climate change. The changes to the recent >>>climate change testimony of Dr. Julie Gerberding, the >>>Director of the Centers for Disease Control and >>>Prevention, have received considerable attention. A >>>year earlier, when Dr. Thomas Karl, the Director of >>>National Climatic Data Center, appeared before the >>>House Oversight Committee, his testimony was also >>>heavily edited by both White House officials and >>>political appointees at the Commerce Department. He >>>was not allowed to say in his written testimony that >>>“modern climate change is dominated by human >>>influences,” that “we are venturing into the unknown >>>territory with changes in climate,” or that “it is >>>very likely (>95 percent probability) that humans are >>>largely responsible for many of the observed changes >>>in climate.” His assertion that global warming “is >>>playing” a role in increased hurricane intensity >>>became “may play.” >>> >>>The White House Extensively Edited Climate Change >>>Reports >>>There was a systematic White House effort to minimize >>>the significance of climate change by editing climate >>>change reports. CEQ Chief of Staff Phil Cooney and >>>other CEQ officials made at least 294 edits to the >>>Administration’s Strategic Plan of the Climate Change >>>Science Program to exaggerate or emphasize scientific >>>uncertainties or to deemphasize or diminish the >>>importance of the human role in global warming. >>> >>>The White House insisted on edits to EPA’s draft >>>Report on the Environment that were so extreme that >>>the EPA Administrator opted to eliminate the climate >>>change section of the report. One such edit was the >>>inclusion of a reference to a discredited, >>>industry-funded paper. In a memo to the Vice >>>President’s office, Mr. Cooney explained: “We plan to >>>begin to refer to this study in Administration >>>communications on the science of global climate >>>change” because it “contradicts a dogmatic view held >>>by many in the climate science community that the >past >>>century was the warmest in the past millennium and >>>signals of human induced ‘global warming.’” >>> >>>In the case of EPA’s Air Trends Report, CEQ went >>>beyond editing and simply vetoed the entire climate >>>change section of the report. >>> >>>Other White House Actions >>>The White House played a major role in crafting the >>>August 2003 EPA legal opinion disavowing authority to >>>regulate greenhouse gases. CEQ Chairman James >>>Connaughton personally edited the draft legal >opinion. >>>When an EPA draft quoted the National Academy of >>>Science conclusion that “the changes observed over >the >>>last several decades are likely mostly due to human >>>activities,” CEQ objected because “the above quotes >>>are unnecessary and extremely harmful to the legal >>>case being made.” The first line of another internal >>>CEQ document transmitting comments on the draft EPA >>>legal opinion reads: “Vulnerability: science.” The >>>final opinion incorporating the White House edits was >>>rejected by the Supreme Court in April 2007 in >>>Massachusetts v. EPA. >>> >>>The White House also edited a 2002 op-ed by EPA >>>Administrator Christine Todd Whitman to ensure that >it >>>followed the White House line on climate change. >>>Despite objections from EPA, CEQ insisted on >repeating >>>an unsupported assertion that millions of American >>>jobs would be lost if the Kyoto Protocol were >>>ratified. >>> >>> >>>href="http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1653">h >t >>t >>>p://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1653 [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |