Skip to comments.
Bush Administration to Study Global Warming
Cato Daily Dispatch ^
| July 24, 2003
Posted on 07/24/2003 12:56:20 PM PDT by bruinbirdman
"The Bush administration will announce today final details of a 10-year plan to study global climate change to determine whether greenhouse gases and other human-generated pollutants have contributed to an unnatural warming of Earth's atmosphere," reports The Washington Post.
"The new initiatives marked the latest effort by President Bush to take the high ground in the climate change debate. Environmentalists roundly criticized him less than three months after taking office in 2001, when he dismissed the Kyoto agreement on global warming, saying it exempted developing countries and would harm the U.S. economy. Bush's critics say the preponderance of scientific opinion holds that emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping industrial and tailpipe gases are responsible for a trend that has the potential to alter global climate in profound and perhaps catastrophic ways."
In "Brave New Climate," Patrick Michaels, Cato Institute senior fellow in environmental studies, writes: "I sincerely doubt that a panel of the most esteemed ecologists would argue that we should bring planetary temperature down. Perhaps the most logical temperature would be the average since the last big ice age, 11,000 years ago, about a degree warmer than today. The flowering of human civilization and its co-evolution with Earth's biota are the hallmark of the post-ice age regime. Consequently, it's a pretty good argument that the mean temperature during this period is a salubrious one."
"One could hone it a bit more," he writes. "The actual dawn of civilization occurred in a period climatologists used to call the 'climatic optimum' (before the current era of 'climatic hysteria') when the mean surface temperature was 1-2ºC warmer than today."
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: environment; globalwarming
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
More study, more bucks down a rathole.
To: bruinbirdman
Are there any sheep we can tax for the money?
To: bruinbirdman
I don't know anything about meteorology, but does it really take ten years to study it? Don't we have sophisticated computers these days to simulate most of the scenarios.
3
posted on
07/24/2003 1:05:38 PM PDT
by
Satadru
To: bruinbirdman
With Bush's recent penchant for sucking up to liberals on domestic policy, I am not very happy about this new study.
I fear his administration will get behind some Chicken-Little environmental whacko initiatives to "take the environmental issue away from the Democrats."
More triangulation.
4
posted on
07/24/2003 1:06:48 PM PDT
by
Maceman
To: bruinbirdman; AAABEST; Ace2U; Alamo-Girl; Alas; amom; AndreaZingg; Anonymous2; ApesForEvolution; ...
Rights, farms, environment ping.
Let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
5
posted on
07/24/2003 1:06:54 PM PDT
by
farmfriend
( Isaiah 55:10,11)
To: bruinbirdman
And now he's pandering to the Nader crowd? It never ends.
6
posted on
07/24/2003 1:09:01 PM PDT
by
Cagey
To: bruinbirdman
I would rather have a Bush administration study than a UN study, which has been the case up to this point.
Plus, a 10 year study is good. Global warming (if true which I doubt it is) would require huge policy changes. It requires a long, intensive study.
7
posted on
07/24/2003 1:10:43 PM PDT
by
what's up
To: Satadru
Don't we have sophisticated computers these days to simulate most of the scenarios. Yes. They're right about 50% of the time projecting only four days out. Forty years? Fuggeddaboutit.
8
posted on
07/24/2003 1:11:06 PM PDT
by
balrog666
(I'm not wearing any pants! Film at 11.)
To: bruinbirdman
I just hope that Dr. S. Fred Singer heads this up. And if he is not the head, I hope he is an important part of it.
9
posted on
07/24/2003 1:11:15 PM PDT
by
Phantom Lord
(Distributor of Pain, Your Loss Becomes My Gain)
To: bruinbirdman
to determine whether greenhouse gases and other human-generated pollutants have contributed to an unnatural warming of Earth's atmosphere Who cares if human or not? That's not important, shouldn't even be a consideration. What's important is what temperature will give optimum plant growth, rain fall, and save human lives, and what technologies can we use to get there?
10
posted on
07/24/2003 1:11:19 PM PDT
by
Reeses
To: bruinbirdman
11
posted on
07/24/2003 1:12:00 PM PDT
by
Phantom Lord
(Distributor of Pain, Your Loss Becomes My Gain)
To: Reeses
What's important is what temperature will give optimum plant growth, rain fall, and save human lives, and what technologies can we use to get there?Please. If you don't mind, I'd rather not let government get into the business of trying to control the weather once it has the technological capability.
12
posted on
07/24/2003 1:15:49 PM PDT
by
Maceman
To: bruinbirdman
SPOTREP
To: Maceman
"I fear his administration will get behind some Chicken-Little environmental whacko initiatives to 'take the environmental issue away from the Democrats.' More triangulation.
Soon to be the new logo for party affliation as in: President Bush(RD)
14
posted on
07/24/2003 1:17:27 PM PDT
by
F16Fighter
(Ann Coulter for Attorney General... Joe Scarborough for VP...Tom Tancredo as Homeland Security Chief)
To: bruinbirdman
Ha, ha, ha! Study it to death for 10 years (thereby removing it as a political issue). Wonder if Bush will "study" any other irritating dem policy issues.
15
posted on
07/24/2003 1:20:05 PM PDT
by
ntnychik
To: farmfriend
BTTT!!!!!!!
16
posted on
07/24/2003 1:26:31 PM PDT
by
E.G.C.
To: ntnychik
"Study it to death for 10 years (thereby removing it as a political issue). " I like your rationale.
"We have that whole question under study, let's wait for the results."
Answer to every whacko question about global warming and associated topics.
Of course, the next question is, "Isn't it too important to wait?" To which the answer is, "We have that whole question under study, let's wait for the results."
yitbos
17
posted on
07/24/2003 1:27:26 PM PDT
by
bruinbirdman
(Joe McCarthy was right)
To: bruinbirdman
This effectively stalls the argument for 10 years until a time when it will either be totally discredited or will have lost its politically-chic status. Not a bad thing at all.
Michael
To: Maceman
The reason for the study:
Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, right, accompanied by Commerce Secretary Donald Evans meets reporters at the Commerce Department in Washington Thursday, July 24, 2003 where they discussed a multi-agency strategic plan to answer some of the most complex questions around the climate variability and change issues. The chief goal of the new 10-year plan and $130 million to study global warming is learning more about natural causes of climate change, drawing criticism from environmentalists who say reducing industrial carbon emissions is the real problem.(AP Photo/Stephen J. Boitano)
To: bruinbirdman
A rectal thermometer placed in France can provide valuable preliminary data. The Solar System is just passing through a warm part of the Aether. No problem.
20
posted on
07/24/2003 1:38:50 PM PDT
by
Consort
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson