Dangerous Dave
New member
(Well- as usual boys and girls, there's two sides to every story... and if I see or hear just one more global warming commercial, I swear I'm gonna twist off! Guess it all depends upon which flavor kool-aid one perfers, but it always pays to know who's screwing you and why. I'm wondering how many Inuit Guides are going to be out of work. So much for conspiracy therories
From Tyler Morning Telegaph & AFA online. By Jim Brown 5/19/2008.
Marc Morano, a prominet global-warming skeptic on Capital Hill, believes the decision of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to list the polar bear as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act is "based on what may, might, could happen in 2040."
The Bush Administration claims the artic habitat of the polar bear is melting due to global warming, so the bear must be listed as a threatened species. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said the decision was "forced" by science and the Endangered Species Act, which he called "inflexable."
Morano, Minority Communications Director for the Senate Enviroment and Public Works Committee, says it is the first time in the (history of the) Endangered Species Act for an animal in plentiful supply to be listed.
"Essentially, the polar bear's numbers are up five times from 40 or 50 years ago. The entire listing is based on unproven computer model scenarios. Notice I didn't say 'forecast' because even the UN climate models now admit that these climate models are not predictions or forecasts; they're merely scenarios," he explains. "So they're basing it on these computer models, which top forecasting experts-one of them being Dr. Scott Armstrong from the University of Pennsylvania- (have) said... violate the basic methodology used and the basic principals of forecasting," Morano contends.
Because of pressure from enviromental groups, Moreno says, the habitat of endangered species now encludes the atmosphere of the earth.
"In other words, rising CO2 theroretically equals a warmer world, theroretically equals less ice in the artic, (and) theroretically equals harm to polar bears (and) harm to their habitat," he says, summarizing those groups' rationale. "So that means, under twisted logic and creative fiat -which the Federal Government is famous for- you could (someday) have... people in Flordia running a lawn mower, people in Texas doing an outdoor barbeque, or people in California running their heater or air conditioner;... facing restrictions based on their CO2 emissions because it might go too high in the atmostphere and then raise the global temperture and harm the polar bear," Morano concludes.
Morano says the polar bear listing was spurred on by lawsuits, lobbying, and public relations campaigns from enviromental groups.
From Tyler Morning Telegaph & AFA online. By Jim Brown 5/19/2008.
Marc Morano, a prominet global-warming skeptic on Capital Hill, believes the decision of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to list the polar bear as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act is "based on what may, might, could happen in 2040."
The Bush Administration claims the artic habitat of the polar bear is melting due to global warming, so the bear must be listed as a threatened species. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said the decision was "forced" by science and the Endangered Species Act, which he called "inflexable."
Morano, Minority Communications Director for the Senate Enviroment and Public Works Committee, says it is the first time in the (history of the) Endangered Species Act for an animal in plentiful supply to be listed.
"Essentially, the polar bear's numbers are up five times from 40 or 50 years ago. The entire listing is based on unproven computer model scenarios. Notice I didn't say 'forecast' because even the UN climate models now admit that these climate models are not predictions or forecasts; they're merely scenarios," he explains. "So they're basing it on these computer models, which top forecasting experts-one of them being Dr. Scott Armstrong from the University of Pennsylvania- (have) said... violate the basic methodology used and the basic principals of forecasting," Morano contends.
Because of pressure from enviromental groups, Moreno says, the habitat of endangered species now encludes the atmosphere of the earth.
"In other words, rising CO2 theroretically equals a warmer world, theroretically equals less ice in the artic, (and) theroretically equals harm to polar bears (and) harm to their habitat," he says, summarizing those groups' rationale. "So that means, under twisted logic and creative fiat -which the Federal Government is famous for- you could (someday) have... people in Flordia running a lawn mower, people in Texas doing an outdoor barbeque, or people in California running their heater or air conditioner;... facing restrictions based on their CO2 emissions because it might go too high in the atmostphere and then raise the global temperture and harm the polar bear," Morano concludes.
Morano says the polar bear listing was spurred on by lawsuits, lobbying, and public relations campaigns from enviromental groups.
