Seattle Times: "The truth about global warming"

Time to pull this back up onto page one! 

Splitter, apparently Exxon now agrees with your final sentence, per comments to the press by their spokesperson:

Cohen told the Wall Street Journal that while questions remain about the degree to which fossil fuels are contributing to warming, the computer modelling on what the future may hold “has gotten better.”

And, he said, “we know enough now — or, society knows enough now — that the risk is serious and action should be taken.”


Also in the article is news that Exxon has stopped funding the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which is a wonderful source of quotes for those wishing to find someone, anyone, who will suggest that we not worry and certainly don't mess with the status quo.

"Make companies reduce emissions, CEOs tell Bush"

RALEIGH, N.C. — Leaders of 10 major corporations called on Congress and the Bush administration on Monday to tackle global warming by setting mandatory caps on the emission of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

The executives urged prompt federal approval of mandatory caps to slow, stop and reverse the buildup of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the shortest time possible.

"The science of climate warming is clear," said Jim Rogers, chairman and chief executive officer of Charlotte, N.C.-based Duke Energy, one of the companies. "We know enough to act now. We must act now. ... It must be mandatory so there is no doubt about our commitment to concrete action."

[...]

At a news conference, the executives said mandatory reductions could be imposed without economic harm and would lead to economic opportunities if implemented across the entire economy — from power plants to the transportation industry — and with provisions to mitigate costs.

[emphasis added by me]

Interesting article in the Seattle Times today:

"How one number touched off big climate-change fight at UW"

It's about disagreement among U.W. scientists about how much the annual snowpack in the Cascades has shrunk in the past 50 years. The number 50% has been thrown around a lot, but everybody now agrees that the reduction hasn't been that much. Cliff Mass is quoted with the lowest estimate, a drop of 10-15%. Philip Mote says 35%.

The paper presents the disagreement as a "big fight" but also notes that Cliff Mass is not a global warming skeptic. As I posted in a different thread , Mass was quoted in the Seattle Times saying:

"I'd be shocked if there is viable skiing at Snoqualmie Pass in 20 to 30 years," [Cliff] Mass said, "I think it is going to be history."

An Inconvenient Truth..............

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831

An Inconvenient Truth..............

video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831

I wish to point out that the above link is not the movie An Inconvenient Truth, but instead a British documentary called "The Great Global Warming Swindle". The documentary attempts to argue global warming isn't caused by man. The movie has, as one would expect, professional-quality effects, music, and editing, but, once I looked past the gloss, I found the evidence presented in the first 15 minutes weak and underwhelming.

You can find a group to disagree with anything. If you give them enough money and a camera, any group can make their arguments seem more valid and substantial than it really is.

I wish to point out that the above link is not the movie An Inconvenient Truth, as you represented Jack, but instead a British documentary called "The Great Global Warming Swindle". The documentary attempts to argue global warming isn't caused by man. The movie has, as one would expect, professional-quality effects, music, and editing, but, once I looked past the gloss, I found the evidence presented in the first 15 minutes weak and underwhelming.

You can find a group to disagree with anything. If you give them enough money and a camera, any group can make their arguments seem more valid and substantial than it really is.

Jeff, I never attempted to present the link as Al Gore's movie, but more of a comment for those who push Al Gore's message. If you would actually watch the entire video you would find the facts in this documentary are of substantially more substance then Al's movie and it includes many facts that Al left out of his movie (for obvious reasons).
The GW Swindle documentary is far from having any sort of fancy music, effects, and/or editing tricks. Its pretty plain on effects if you as me, just interviews with scientists/professors and such.