Man made global warming is real.

[shorebird]

Gasohol (a gasoline and ethanol blend) is currently being produced...and used. I know that Wawa uses the stuff, and I bet that Sheetz does, too. It's probably around more than you realize.

It probably is produced a lot more than I know. I stop at a Wawa at least twice a week and I've never seen it. Maybe it's not as prevelent in my area.

[Seabiscuit36]

Its making rounds Shore, Here in pper MD and newark,DE its nearly at every station.  The gas stations have to go thru a conversion period of about 3 days to a week of scrubbing the old tanks clean to get ready for E85. 

[Diomedes]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/30/congress.climate.ap/index.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Democratic chairman of a House panel examining the government's response to climate change said Tuesday there is evidence that senior Bush administration officials sought repeatedly "to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming."

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California, said he and the top Republican on his oversight committee, Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia, have sought documents from the administration on climate policy, but repeatedly been rebuffed.

"The committee isn't trying to obtain state secrets or documents that could affect our immediate national security," said Waxman, opening the hearing. "We are simply seeking answers to whether the White House's political staff is inappropriately censoring impartial government scientists."

"We know that the White House possesses documents that contain evidence of an attempt by senior administration officials to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming and minimize the potential danger," Waxman said.

Administration officials were not scheduled to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. In the past the White House has said it has only sought to inject balance into reports on climate change. Present Bush has acknowledged concerns about global warming, but strongly opposes mandatory caps of greenhouse gas emissions, arguing that approach would be too costly.

Waxman said his committee had not received documents it requested from the White House and other agencies, and that a handful of papers received on the eve of the hearing "add nothing to our inquiry."

Two private advocacy groups, meanwhile, presented to the panel a survey of government climate scientists showing that many of them say they have been subjected to political pressure aimed at downplaying the threat of global warming.

Survey: Scientists pressured to downplay threat

The groups presented a survey that shows two in five of the 279 climate scientists who responded to a questionnaire complained that some of their scientific papers had been edited in a way that changed their meaning. Nearly half of the 279 said in response to another question that at some point they had been told to delete reference to "global warming" or "climate change" from a report.

The questionnaire was sent by the Union of Concerned Scientists, a private advocacy group. The report also was based on "firsthand experiences" described in interviews with the Government Accountability Project, which helps government whistleblowers, lawmakers were told.

At the same time, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-California, sought to gauge her colleague's sentiment on climate change. She opened a meeting where senators were to express their views on global warming in advance of a broader set of hearings on the issue.

Among those scheduled to make comments were two presidential hopefuls -- Sens. John McCain, R-Arizona, and Barack Obama, D-Illinois. Both lawmakers favor mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, something opposed by President Bush, who argues such requirements would threaten economic growth.

U.N. climate change report expected soon

The intense interest about climate change comes as some 500 climate scientists gather in Paris this week to put the final touches on a United Nations report on how warming, as a result of a growing concentration of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere, is likely to affect sea levels.

They agree sea levels will rise, but not on how much. Whatever the report says when it comes out at week's end, it is likely to influence the climate debate in Congress.

At the Waxman hearing, the two advocacy groups said their research -- based on the questionnaires, interviews and documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act -- revealed "evidence of widespread interference in climate science in federal agencies."

The groups report described largely anonymous claims by scientists that their findings at times at been misrepresented, that they had been pressured to change findings and had been restricted on what they were allowed to say publicly.

The survey involved scientists across the government from NASA and the Environmental Protection Agency to the department's of Agriculture, Energy, Commerce, Defense and Interior. In all the government employees more than 2,000 scientists who spend at least some of their time on climate issues, the report said.

[shorebird]

"The committee isn't trying to obtain state secrets or documents that could affect our immediate national security," said Waxman, opening the hearing. "We are simply seeking answers to whether the White House's political staff is inappropriately censoring impartial government scientists."

"We know that the White House possesses documents that contain evidence of an attempt by senior administration officials to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming and minimize the potential danger," Waxman said.

Thats no suprise to me. Bush wants us to not even think twice about how much fuel we use. He's padding his pockets big time. Gas prices have never been higher under any president than they were this summer. Then, after they make billions of dollars, they drop the price until it goes from over $3.00 a gallon to 2.06. No product, except seafood, has such a diverse price from month to month. Gas prices go up with demand. It borders on Communisum.

[Event Horizon]

Let us examine this statement by Waxman:

"We know that the White House possesses documents that contain evidence of an attempt by senior administration officials to mislead the public by injecting doubt into the science of global warming and minimize the potential danger," Waxman said.

Blasphemy! Renting of clothes and gnashing of teeth.

How dare anyone doubt the law of human caused global warming? Wait, it is a law, isn't it? A scientific law? Like the law of thermodynamics or the law of gravity? That well tested? Hardly!

Yet, to listen to Waxman, doubt is somehow evil, unacceptable, damnable trespass of sacred ground. WTF are we dealing with here, a religion? Questions in "science" are no longer permitted? Waxman is not protecting science. He is defending dogma.

[rjs246]

Comets come from Earth!11111!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111111111111111111111111111111111111!

[Rome]

Renting of clothes...

[PhillyPhanInDC]

Cerevant just got pwned by his own (new) Prime Minister:

Harper's letter dismisses Kyoto as 'socialist scheme'
Last Updated: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 | 10:15 PM ET
CBC News

Prime Minister Stephen Harper once called the Kyoto accord a "socialist scheme" designed to suck money out of rich countries, according to a letter leaked Tuesday by the Liberals.

The letter, posted on the federal Liberal party website, was apparently written by Harper in 2002, when he was leader of the now-defunct Canadian Alliance party.

He was writing to party supporters, asking for money as he prepared to fight then-prime minister Jean Chrétien on the proposed Kyoto accord.

"We're gearing up now for the biggest struggle our party has faced since you entrusted me with the leadership," Harper's letter says.

"I'm talking about the 'battle of Kyoto' — our campaign to block the job-killing, economy-destroying Kyoto accord."

The accord is an international environmental pact that sets targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Canada officially ratified the accord Dec. 17, 2002, under Chrétien's Liberal government. Harper's Conservative government, which took power January 2006, has since been accused of ignoring the accord.

Harper's letter goes on to outline why he's against the agreement.

Accord based on 'contradictory' data: Harper

He writes that it's based on "tentative and contradictory scientific evidence" and it focuses on carbon dioxide, which is "essential to life."

He says Kyoto requires that Canada make significant cuts in emissions, while countries like Russia, India and China face less of a burden.

Under Kyoto, Canada was required to reduce emissions by six per cent by 2012, while economies in transition, like Russia, were allowed to choose different base years.

"Kyoto is essentially a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations," Harper's letter reads.

He said the accord would cripple the oil and gas industries, which are essential to Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia.

He wrote in the letter that he would do everything he could to stop Chrétien from passing the Kyoto agreement.

"We will do everything we can to stop him there, but he might get it passed with the help of the socialists in the NDP and the separatists in the BQ [Bloc Québécois]."

The Prime Minister's Office refused to comment about the letter on the record.

In recent weeks, Harper has spoken strongly about the environment, saying he will dramatically revamp his minority government's much-criticized clean air act.

His comments come as public-opinion polls indicate the environment has become the number one issue among Canadians.

Liberal MP Mark Holland told the Canadian Press on Tuesday that the leaked letter shows that Harper isn't actually committed to climate change.

"Now, suddenly, because he has seen the polls and realized the political opportunism of going green, the prime minister has launched a new campaign — that of trying to convince Canadians that he actually cares about the environment," Holland said.

"But no one is buying it."

The Kyoto Protocol went into effect Feb. 16, 2005, with 141 countries signing on, including every major industrialized country, except the United States, Australia and Monaco.

Parts of it will start to sound very familiar as election time nears.

[Cerevant]

Cerevant just got pwned by his own (new) Prime Minister:

I'm a US citizen - he is not my anything.  I'm just along for the ride.  The consensus up here is that Harper is just a Bush puppet anyway.

Still, is it lost on you that this revelation is being viewed as a scandal?

The Kyoto Protocol went into effect Feb. 16, 2005, with 141 countries signing on, including every major industrialized country, except the United States, Australia and Monaco.

Say what you will, but at least Canada is trying.

[PhillyPhanInDC]

Cerevant just got pwned by his own (new) Prime Minister:

I'm a US citizen - he is not my anything.  I'm just along for the ride.  The consensus up here is that Harper is just a Bush puppet anyway.

Still, is it lost on you that this revelation is being viewed as a scandal?

The Kyoto Protocol went into effect Feb. 16, 2005, with 141 countries signing on, including every major industrialized country, except the United States, Australia and Monaco.

Say what you will, but at least Canada is trying.

I was just messing with you. Wait around though, from what I hear SunMo is giving out hugs today.

[SunMo]

who needs one?

[Tomahawk]

Your mom's box

[methdeez]

From NY times:

Scientists Criticize White House Stance on Climate Change Findings

By CORNELIA DEAN
Under its new Democratic chairman, Representative Henry A. Waxman of California, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform took on the Bush administration's handling of climate change science yesterday, and even the Republicans on the panel had little good to say about the administration's actions.

The subject of the hearing was accusations of administration interference with the work of government climate scientists. Almost to a person, Republicans on the panel introduced themselves by proclaiming their agreement that the earth's climate was warming and that the principal culprit was greenhouse gases generated by people and their machinery.

And when witnesses spoke in defense of the administration, it was often to say only that there were still some scientists who doubted that climate view or that the administration's approach was not unique.

"Cherry-picking" science to suit policy or political goals is at least as old as the Eisenhower administration, said Roger Pielke Jr., a professor in the Environmental Studies Program at the University of Colorado. The committee itself is guilty of it, he added, pointing to a news release linking rising ocean temperatures to bigger and more frequent coastal storms, something about which there is still debate.

But the other witnesses spoke about how the administration had delayed, altered or watered down the findings of government scientists, the kind of thing they said they had not experienced in the Clinton administration.

Drew Shindell, a NASA scientist who said he was speaking as an individual, not for his agency, described research he and his colleagues did on ozone depletion and greenhouse gases over Antarctica.

Dr. Shindell said the findings helped explain recent cooling on the continent, a phenomenon cited by climate dissidents as challenging the mainstream view. And, he said, the findings suggested Antarctica might warm rapidly in the future, melting ice and sharply raising sea levels. By the time the administration had signed off on the work, he said, its importance had been played down and references to "rapid warming" had been deleted.

Another witness, Rick Piltz, said he resigned in protest in 2005 from his job with the federal Climate Change Science Program when he became convinced that the administration's goal was to "impede" the understanding of climate science among the public and even the Congress.

Part of his job, Mr. Piltz said, was to compile periodic assessments of government climate research for the Congress. "This report has essentially been made to vanish by the Bush administration," he said.

The fourth witness was Francesca Grifo, who directs the scientific integrity program of the Union of Concerned Scientists, a private group that researches environmental, arms control and other issues.

Dr. Grifo's testimony drew largely from a report produced by the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Government Accountability Project, a private group that defends whistle-blowers. The report, made public yesterday, is based on a Union of Concerned Scientists survey of federal climate scientists and interviews and document searches by the Government Accountability Project. It says it is common for scientists to be pressured to eliminate references to climate change, for their work to be changed to misrepresent their findings, and for climate-related materials to disappear from Web sites.

Almost 60 percent of the scientists who responded to the survey said they had personally experienced such an incident in the last five years, the report says, and those who said their work was most closely related to climate change experienced the most interference. (Information about the report is available at www.ucsusa.org.)

Representative Darrell Issa, Republican of California, noted that a majority of scientists queried had not responded to the survey. Dr. Grifo said she attributed that to the "chilling effect" of administration actions. Anyway, she said, scores of scientists reported problems. "That number should be zero," she said.

Skewed science?
Intimidated scientists? Must be aliberal conspiracy to protect big-business profts...

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

liberal conspiracy to protect big-business

does not compute

[Diomedes]

unlike 'democrat conspiracy to protect big business,' which happens whenever they happen to be in power