Did the White House water-down the global climate change report?

Question

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071024/ap_on_go_ot/global_warming_health

Perhaps the water could be put to better use in southern California!!

Answer 1

Yes they did.
And since Retro cop, didn't read past the headline, maybe he can try this link and read the headline and the first sentence for the sake of brevity:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071023/ap_on_re_us/global_warming_health

Oh, and it's so interesting hearing some people first say that global warming was a myth and that it can not be proven. Once it was proven, now it's not MANmade. Yeah maybe the soarning CO2 levelsaren't in exact correlation to industrialization as scientifically proven. Maybe it's those fruitflies who've suddenly begun heavy breathing.

Answer 2

nicely, it relatively is a confusing ecosystem available. There are greater advantageous than a dozen think of tanks whose scientists are on the payroll of the oil companies, producing scores of bogus white papers and study that help allowing massive oil to proceed alongside it relatively is merry way, massive coal too, for that count. the main recent IPCC report became into authored via greater advantageous than 600 scientists from world huge and peer-reviewed via 2,500 greater. the possibilities that they could be off via greater advantageous than 3 or 4 % are just about non-existent. That report is approximately as definitive as technological information could nicely be. international warming is real, we are inflicting it, and we are able to shelter it. yet saying for a 2nd your subject spread out, i do no longer think of that excuses us from doing what's robust for the ecosystem. All you may do is learn the content of the emissions from a coal-potential plant, and you comprehend that it won't be able to be good for human beings, plans, animals, climate or the rest for that count. Our community application is featuring yet another coal-burning potential plant. in the event that they build it, the emissions of radioactive isotopes into the ambience (sure, burning coal releases invisibile radioactive waste into the air) could be greater advantageous in line with annum than the entire launch of three Mile Island. even though it relatively is invisible, and it relatively is coal no longer nuclear, so we don't pay interest. nicely, it's time to start paying interest. we are able to argue and get differing medical perspectives that say the effect is relatively extensive or incredibly small and as long as there is an effect the degree would not incredibly count. There are clean and ethical thoughts. we could desire to prepare turning out to be to be clean and ethical.

Answer 3

The UN released that report not the White House. In case you hadn't noticed, the US isn't on the best of terms with the UN.

Answer 4

Actually, they urinated on it before passing back to the press...

This is how information flows from the White House - unfortunately, it is a pale and feable trickle...

Answer 5

IF we arfe to beliebve this unbelievable corrupt administration then the furor below would be right
HOWEVER
since before any election put these crooks in office the lies and deception of the american public was in the making!!!

Answer 6

"I don't believe in Global Warming". - Dr John Hagee in response to a question by Glenn Beck on CNN.
I Cr 13;8a----------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOsYSwNrlBo

Answer 7

Of course, I never expect anything alse from the Bush junta.

Answer 8

You mean global whining and they didn't water it down. It's not that important because the warming is not man-made.


http://www.truewordtoday.blogspot.com/

Answer 9

Just when you think you fully comprehend the depths to which this government is willing to sink, Mad King George surprises you again.

Answer 10

I think the official word from the CDC is ...eviscerated.