ENN: "Critics who have dismissed the recent report commissioned by the Pentagon, An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security, should instead view it as a clarion call. Small risks which can result in catastrophic consequences - even if they cannot be precisely quantified - should not be ignored. Neither should the government use it as excuse to postpone effective action. Peter Schwartz, one of the authors of the provocative report, encouraged the Department of Defense to "imagine the unthinkable" by exploring the consequences of abrupt climate change for US National security. As he told us at a symposium at the World Resources Institute, his report has largely been buried in the Pentagon bureaucracy.

Dennis O'Brien writes: "The world's oceans not only have fewer fish these days, but CO2 pollution threatens the survival of shellfish, coral and other hard-bodied sea animals. 'The chemistry of seawater is changing in dramatic ways and it's having a significant impact on organisms that live in the water,' said Richard Feely, a scientist with NOAA. Meanwhile, another group of international scientists called for overhauling management of the world's fisheries, citing declining fish populations. Taken together, the reports in today's issue of the journal Science paint a bleak picture of the oceans' ability to sustain current levels of aquatic life. Numerous studies have documented how rising CO2 levels - largely from the burning of fossil fuels - are affecting climate, human health and vegetation. But scientists are just beginning to understand their effect on the seas."

One of our editors is a science abstractor who says that in the course of a typical month, she estimates that over 100 new research articles on global warming appear in science journals (real science journals, not corporate "sounds-like science" journals). Virtually all these articles support the conclusion that Earth's climate is warming and human activity is contributing to the trend. Yet corporate front groups and the Bush administration (the nation's biggest corporate front group) continue to try to disseminate junk science "reports" and "facts"- funded heavily by oil and coal producers - that global warming, if it does exist, isn't affected at all by human activity and thus there's no need for pesky pollution controls. Here is a GREAT one-stop resource for people who care about the TRUTH, from the Union for Concerned Scienitsts (a group that includes many Nobelists).

Dr. David Suzuki writes, "Lately, it seems the public has been burdened with yet another round of anti-global-warming conspiracy tales. I'm not the only one who's sick of this nonsense. Donald Kennedy, the editor-in chief of the world's largest science journal, recently wrote in an editorial: 'We're in the middle of a large, uncontrolled experiment on the only planet we have.' And he concluded: 'Our climate future is important and needs more attention than it's getting. To help gain that attention and dispel any lingering myths, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the business-oriented Conference Board recently held a public forum on climate change. The two-day Washington, D.C., event included a panel of climate experts and Nobel laureates who discussed the current state of climate science and ways to help the public understand the urgency of the situation."

US News Wire: "Eighty-one percent of Americans polled said that they support the targets of the legislation, commonly known as the McCain-Lieberman legislation or the Climate Stewardship Act, which calls for large companies to reduce their emissions to year 2000 levels by 2010 and to 1990 levels by 2020. When told it has been estimated that this would increase costs to the average American household by about $15 a month, 67 percent still said they would support it. If a candidate would support the legislation, 52 percent said this would increase their likelihood of voting for him or her, while just 14 percent said that it would decrease the likelihood (no effect: 32 percent). These are some of the findings of a new PIPA-Knowledge Networks poll of 753 Americans nationwide conducted June 8-14 (margin of error plus or minus 3.6 percent)."

For years, rightwingers have been touting John Christy's now near-ancient (in the science world) atmospheric studies that "prove" global warming isn't occurring. The fact that rightwingers have clung to this single study (out of the many hundreds that have been done since using more advanced techniques) speaks volumes as to the pathetic sparsity of actual scientific (done by real researchers) evidence these junk science junkies have. The Christy study relies on lower atmosphere measurements that have since been revealed as skewed and sketchy at best. Now a new study points out that Christy never adjusted his data for the temperature-changing influence of a cooling stratosphere. Greenhouse gases cause a drop in stratospheric temperatures, which, of course, would be reflected in the layer below (troposphere), despite the warming of Earth's surface. That Christy never made this adjustment himself is outrageous. But then, he loves his new position as tin god to rightwing blogsters.

Cheryl Seal wrote in Democrats.com in 2001:"One of many corporate propaganda sites, 'Global Warming Information' offers nifty ideas for teaching kids about global warming and CO2: Take them to a greenhouse and show them the flowers. Or let them know how much fun a warmer, high-CO2 earth would be by telling them 'it will be like living in the age of dinosaurs with lots of CO2 making lush vegetation!'( Hey! Why not just put a bag over your kid's head for about an hour--they'll experience plenty of CO2 that way!) On the Global Info. Page, we find a vague 'research' article entitled 'Texas Paper on Greenhouse Gases,' which 'proves' that global warming is a myth. However, the author of this marshmallow is Glenn R. Schleede, president of Energy Market and Policy Analysis, Inc. and former VP of New England Energy, Inc., which drills for oil and gas. His highest degree is in 'advanced management."

CBS: "About 1,000 miles away in the tiny Inuit village of Resolute Bay, Canada, life may be in for a big change. Some climatologists believe that when these kindergarteners reach middle age, in just 50 years, the normally ice-choked bay will be part of a summer-long ice-free Northwest passage. 'It cuts thousands and thousands of miles off the sea route between Europe and the Orient, and would be irresistible to commerce,' says Dennis Conlon, with the Office of Naval Research. Conlon says an open Northwest passage makes America open to new threats. 'We'd have to counter terrorism, we'd have to protect assets, we'd have to perform search and rescue. Every function the Navy performs, we'd have to perform in the Arctic.' It's no longer a matter of speculation -- the Arctic is changing. And if the climate change is prolonged, it will have a global impact. The question on the table is whether man can or will do anything about it."

The Independent/UK reports, "Levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have jumped abruptly, raising fears that global warming may be accelerating out of control. Measurements by US government scientists show that concentrations of the gas, the main cause of the climate exchange, rose by a record amount over the past 12 months. It is the third successive year in which they have increased sharply, marking an unprecedented triennial surge. Scientists are at a loss to explain why the rapid rise has taken place, but fear that it could show the first signs that global warming is feeding on itself, with rising temperatures causing increases in carbon dioxide, which then go on to drive the thermometer even higher. That would be a deeply alarming development, suggesting that this self-reinforcing heating could spiral upwards beyond the reach of any attempts to combat it."

"The purpose of the Pentagon report is to imagine the unthinkable. A scenario is created that while not most likely is plausible and presents a threat to the national security."

"Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters... A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world. The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists, and which has suppressed the report."

Fortune: "The threat that has riveted [the Pentagon's] attention is this: Global warming, rather than causing gradual, centuries-spanning change, may be pushing the climate to a tipping point. Growing evidence suggests the ocean-atmosphere system that controls the world's climate can lurch from one state to another in less than a decade - like a canoe that's gradually tilted until suddenly it flips over. Scientists don't know how close the system is to a critical threshold. But abrupt climate change may well occur in the not-too-distant future. If it does, the need to rapidly adapt may overwhelm many societies - thereby upsetting the geopolitical balance of power... It would cause massive droughts, turning farmland to dust bowls and forests to ashes. Picture last fall's California wildfires as a regular thing. Or imagine similar disasters destabilizing nuclear powers such as Pakistan or Russia -- it's easy to see why the Pentagon has become interested in abrupt climate change."

"Tony Blair's chief scientist has launched a withering attack on Bush for failing to tackle climate change, which he says is more serious than terrorism," reports the UK Independent. "Sir David King, the Government's chief scientific adviser, says America, the world's greatest polluter, must take the threat of global warming more seriously. 'In my view, climate change is the most severe problem that we are facing today, more serious even than the threat of terrorism. Bush's strategy relies largely on market-based incentives and voluntary action. But the market cannot decide that mitigation is necessary, nor can it establish the basic international framework in which all actors can take their place.'" Results of a major study warn that more than a million species will become extinct as a result of global warming over the next 50 years.

"The [SUV] deduction, up to $25,000 until May, was raised to $100,000 as a part of Bush's recent 'economic stimulus package.' This 300% increase passed despite widespread criticism that the loophole clearly encourages the purchase of unnecessary gas-guzzling SUVs like the rugged Lincoln Navigator and that trusty workhorse, the Mercedes ML-55. The results have become apparent across the nation, as accountants and auto-dealers alike push SUVs as a way to cut taxes... Before the increase, the loophole's existence was no secret. Senator Barbara Boxer had already introduced the 'SUV Business Tax Loophole Closure Act,' and critics from columnist Arianna Huffington to Taxpayers for Common Sense had been publicizing it for at least two years. The government's own Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that well over $1 billion would be saved over 10 years by closing the loophole -- so why does it still exist? According to Huffington, the rationale is simple; just follow the money."

Leonardo DiCaprio, The Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation, Global Green USA and Tree Media Group have worked together to create this very important environmental message. Demand the separation of oil and state!

"Global warming could submerge three of India's biggest cities beneath the sea by 2020 unless the crisis was brought under control, an Indian scientist warned today. 'If the warming continues, there will be about half to one metre increase in sea level by 2020 and cities like Bombay, Calcutta and Madras will be completely submerged,' said Rajiv Nigam, a scientist with the Geological Oceanography Division in the western Indian state of Goa. He said a one-metre rise in sea level could cause five trillion rupees ($147.24 billion) worth of damage to property in Goa alone... He also predicted that global warming could cause frequent cyclones along coastal areas and affect the annual monsoon rain, which is crucial for India's farm-dependent economy."

"In an apparent about-face, Russia signaled it might yet salvage the U.N.'s Kyoto protocol on curbing global warming -- a pact that will collapse without Moscow's backing. 'There are no decisions about ratification apart from the fact that we are moving toward ratification,' said Mukhamed Tsikhanov, deputy economy minister responsible for Kyoto. Michael Williams, a United Nations spokesman for climate change, welcomed the remark. 'We are pleased to hear today's comments. We are confident that they (Russians) will ratify the protocol at some point,' he told Reuters from a climate change conference in Milan. On Tuesday Andrei Illarionov, a top Kremlin economic adviser, said Russia would not approve the pact in its current form. Kyoto has been ratified by 120 nations but has been weakened by a U.S. pullout."

The evidence of serious global warming keeps amassing. Hundreds and hundreds of peer-reviewed papers by thousands of scientists. The ice caps are melting, with huge chunks (such as the Rhode Island-sized Larsen B ice shelf) crashing into the sea. But what has the National Weather Service under Bush been instructed to tell the public? Global warming is not a problem. This researcher in Minnesota was concerned enough to contact Indymedia to alert the public. Let's hope more courageous researchers step forward!

Even though hundreds of researchers around the world have produced compelling peer-reviewed evidence that the planet is warming, the anti-environmental "skeptics" (read scientifically ignorant) have ignored this huge body of evidence in favor of the work of a single researcher: rightwingnut idol John Christy. Put Christy's name into google with "global warming" and you'll pull up a huge file. Now researchers at the U. Maryland and NOAA reveal that Christy's work is not only wrong - it is probably fraudulent. Seems Christy ignored key "details," like weather-induced instrument noise and the natural variations in temperature seasonally and diurnally. Christy's lame reponse: "I think it's a paper that should not have been published." So why was theirs in "Science" and yours shows up at the Cato Institute and "American Enterprise Institute? Just asking! See also http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/doi/10.1126/science.1087910

"An Antarctic ice shelf the size of Scotland is rapidly disintegrating due to warmer seas, according to the second study in two days to show a dramatic thinning of polar ice. Scientists believe that the Larsen ice shelf on the Antarctic Peninsula may disappear altogether within 70 years, and even earlier if warming trends continue. Its loss may trigger a catastrophic release of ice on the peninsula's mainland, causing global sea levels to rise up to 1m. Researchers led by Andrew Shepherd, a glaciologist from Cambridge University, found that the Larsen ice shelf has thinned by as much as 18m in the past decade and that this can now be explained only by a warmer ocean. The study came a day after another study revealed that the sea ice in the Arctic is also melting rapidly because of rising temperatures, threatening the only natural habitat of the polar bear." Incredibly enough, the Bush "experts" continue to push the "global warming is a myth" lie.

"California intends to sue the U.S. EPA over the Bush administration's recent decision that the agency doesn't have the authority to regulate emissions of the greenhouse gases that cause climate change, Gov. Gray Davis (D) announced on Friday. Nine other states, including Illinois, New York, and Washington, are expected to join the suit, which argues that the EPA should have the power to regulate carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases under the federal Clean Air Act. Last year, California passed the nation's first law aimed at reining in CO2 emissions from cars, and clean-air advocates worry that the administration's decision could undermine that law. 'If the United States is ever going to regulate greenhouse gases, it will start with a victory in this lawsuit,' said David Bookbinder of the Sierra Club, which is backing the suit."

"David Appell has a copy of the internal 'Issue Paper' in which the EPA outlined its options for responding to the White House... At the time the memo was written, the White House had made 'major edits' and then indicated that 'no further changes may be made.' Here are the options the EPA considered: 'OPTION 1: Accept CEQ [Council on Environmental Quality] and OMB [Office of Management and Budget] edits; OPTION 2: Remove climate change section from the ROE; OPTION 3: Do not accept 'no further changes' and try to reach compromise.... [This option] may antagonize the White House more than the other two options.... It is likely not feasible to negotiate agreeable text.' This, I think, displays the Bush White House at its most typical. Genuine problems simply don't matter to them. The only thing that counts is advancing their political agenda, and anything that doesn't fit that agenda is vigorously brushed under the carpet and ignored." You HAVE to read this incredible memo!

"The largest ice shelf in the Arctic, a solid feature for 3,000 years, has broken up, scientists in the United States and Canada said on Monday. They said the Ward Hunt Ice Shelf, on the north coast of Ellesmere Island in Canada's Nunavut territory, broke into two main parts, themselves cut through with fissures. A freshwater lake drained into the sea, the researchers reported. Large ice islands also calved off from the shelf and some are large enough to be dangerous to shipping and to drilling platforms in the Beaufort Sea. Local warming of the climate is to blame, they said -- adding that they did not have the evidence needed to link the melting ice to the steady, planet-wide climate change known as global warming... Records indicate an increase of four-tenths of a degree centigrade every 10 years since 1967. The average July temperature has been 1.3 degrees Celsius or 34 degrees F -- just above the freezing point -- since 1967."

"This year's world grain harvest is falling short of consumption by 93 million tons, dropping world grain stocks to the lowest level in 30 years. As rising temperatures and falling water tables hamstring farmers' efforts to expand production, prices of wheat and rice are turning upward. For the first time, the grain harvest has fallen short of consumption four years in a row.... Agricultural leaders are now looking to next year's crop with fingers crossed. If 2004 brings another large shortfall comparable to this year or last year, there could be chaos in world grain markets by this time next year as more than 100 grain-importing countries scramble for scarce exportable supplies. Higher temperatures are thwarting farmers' efforts to expand food production. The earth's average temperature has been rising since the late 1970s, with the three warmest years on record coming in the last five years. As temperatures continue to rise, crop yields start to fall."

Nicholas Kristof writes, "It's hard to be complacent about climate change when you're in an area that normally is home to animals like polar bears and wolverines, but is now attracting robins. A robin even built its nest in town this year (there is no word in the local Inupiat Eskimo language for robins). And last year a (presumably shivering) porcupine arrived.... The warming ocean is also bringing salmon, three kinds now, to waters here. The Eskimos say there were almost no salmon a generation ago. 'The weather is different, really different,' said 92-year-old Nora Agiak, speaking in the Inupiat language.... 'We're not getting as many icebergs as we used to. Maybe the world moved because it's getting warmer.' Alaska has warmed by 8 degrees, on average, in the winter, over the last 3 decades, according to meteorological records. The U.S. Arctic Research Commission says that today's Arctic temperatures are the highest in the last 400 years, and perhaps much longer."

The Independent (UK) reports: "The Amazon river could dry up and its lush vegetation turn into a dustbowl within 50 years because of global warming, British scientists warned yesterday. The stark vision for the Amazon rainforest would result from a shift in rainfall patterns caused by changes in ocean currents in the Pacific, according to Dr Mat Collins, a senior research fellow at the Meteorological Office in Reading. 'In our model, 50 years from now the Amazon dries up and dies,' he told the British Association at the University of Salford yesterday. He added: 'There would be a reinforcing effect because, as the rainforest dried up, the carbon that is presently locked in its vegetation would be released into the atmosphere.' The chances of such a calamity are presently estimated only at between 10% and 20%.... Deforestation of the Amazon leapt by 40% in the year to August 2002, after falling or remaining steady for the previous eight years."

AP reports: "Attorneys general in two New England states suggested Monday that the White House is behind a lawsuit that seeks to invalidate a federal report on global warming. Maine Attorney General G. Steven Rowe and Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, both Democrats, also asked U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft for an investigation. Rowe and Blumenthal said they want to know whether White House officials working at the Council on Environmental Quality solicited a lawsuit filed by a conservative Washington think tank to discredit a 2000 report that documents the dangers of global warming. The lawsuit was filed last week by the Competitive Enterprise Institute against the White House Office on Science and Technology."

"The intense heat wave that has baked much of Europe for weeks, fueling deadly forest fires, causing drought and damaging crops, has convinced many people that global warming is a reality. While experts caution that you cannot read too much into a single hot summer or natural disaster, Europe does seem to be experiencing extreme weather with growing frequency. Less than a year ago, scores of people were dying as floods swamped Germany, Russia, Austria and the Czech Republic. This year, the problem is extremely hot weather and drought... threatening lives and livelihoods in many parts of Europe. 'We've not seen such an extended period of dry weather and sunny days since records began (in about 1870),' said... a meteorologist at the German weather service, referring to Europe as a whole. 'What's remarkable is that these extremes of weather are happening at such short intervals which suggests the climate is unbalanced'."

UK Independent writes, "George Bush is targeting the international treaty to save the ozone layer which protects all life on earth from deadly radiation, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. New US demands - tabled at a little-noticed meeting in Montreal earlier this month - threaten to unravel one of the greatest environmental success stories of the past few decades, causing millions of deaths from cancer. The news comes at a particularly embarrassing time for the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, who pressed the President in their talks in Washington last week to stop his attempts to sabotage the Kyoto Protocol which sets out to control global warming: one of the few international issues on which they differ. Now, instead of heeding Mr Blair, Mr Bush is undermining the ozone treaty as well, by seeking to perpetuate the use of the most ozone-destructive chemical still employed in developed countries, otherwise soon to be phased out" - namely methyl bromide.

NY Times reports, "EPA is preparing to publish a draft report next week on the state of the environment, but after editing by the White House, a long section describing risks from rising global temperatures has been whittled to a few noncommittal paragraphs... The editing eliminated references to many studies concluding that warming is at least partly caused by rising concentrations of smokestack and tail-pipe emissions and could threaten health and ecosystems... Mrs. Whitman said that she was 'perfectly comfortable' with the edited version... [But] 'Political staff are becoming increasingly bold in forcing agency officials to endorse junk science,' said Jeremy Symons, a climate policy expert at the National Wildlife Federation. 'This is like the White House directing the secretary of labor to alter unemployment data to paint a rosy economic picture.'... The changes were mainly made by the Council on Environmental Quality" under orders from OMB. Impeach Bush Now!

UK Guardian reports, "The US Republican party is changing tactics on the environment, avoiding 'frightening' phrases such as global warming, after a confidential party memo warned that it is the domestic issue on which George Bush is most vulnerable. The memo, by the leading Republican consultant Frank Luntz, concedes the party has 'lost the environmental communications battle' and urges its politicians to encourage the public in the view that there is no scientific consensus on the dangers of greenhouse gases... 'Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. 'Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate.' The phrase 'global warming' should be abandoned in favour of 'climate change', Mr Luntz says." Defeat ALL Republicans!

"It's only rock 'n roll - with a message - as veteran rockers the Rolling Stones turned a free concert into an effort to raise awareness about global warming. 'You know something, we're all here ... for a very good cause, and you should all feel good about yourselves,' lead singer Mick Jagger said on stage at the Staples Center on Thursday. The event was organized by the Natural Resources Defense Council. President Clinton introduced the Stones with a speech about the dangers of global warming, telling the audience it is up to average citizens to 'stop the planet from burning up.' 'The reason this concert is important is that the old energy economy that's cheating us as a planet is very well organized, highly centralized, rich as can be and very well politically connected,' Clinton said. 'And the new energy future is decentralized, entrepreneurial and needs people like you to say, 'Give me a clean car, give me solar shingles to put on my roof ... Give me a clean future.''"

Bush "is considering seeking scores of exemptions for industries that want to keep using an ozone-depleting pesticide that is to be banned by 2005 under an international treaty. Environmental campaigners say the result would be years of further delay in undoing damage to the ozone layer from decades of emissions of the pesticide, methyl bromide, and other similar compounds. Experts said that the exemptions from the ban would undermine the Montreal Protocol, a 15-year-old pact protecting the ozone layer and widely perceived as the most effective environmental treaty ever negotiated... More than 50 applications for 'critical-use exemptions' have been submitted to the EPA, by agricultural groups and businesses as varied as chrysanthemum and strawberry growers, flour millers, universities, and golf-course groomers. If granted, American use of the pesticide could rise sharply in 2005, exceeding levels now allowed under the treaty and federal law." Impeach Bush Now!

Detroit News reports, "Bush's economic stimulus plan could triple the size of a little-known tax loophole that some small business owners are using to finance purchases of large SUVs. One of Bush's proposed tax cuts would raise from $25,000 to $75,000 the amount small business owners -- including doctors, lawyers and financial advisers -- can write off when buying an SUV for business purposes. Since the SUV loophole was first reported by The Detroit News last month, several consumer groups and lawmakers have raised concerns about the fairness of the provision. The debate signals more trouble for a popular vehicle segment crucial to Detroit automakers, whose profits have been sustained largely because of the SUV boom over the last decade... The IRS allows much more generous tax treatment for trucks, which the IRS defines as any vehicle with a gross weight of 6,000 pounds or more, regardless of whether it is used to haul goods or a single person." Just Say No to Global Warming SUV's!

The Dec. 15 Nature Magazine reports that satellite-based microwave surveys show that Arctic sea ice, which usually covers around 6.5 million square kilometres in the summer, fell to around 5.5 million square kilometres this year. These are the largest decreases ever seen.. Climate models suggest that the disruption is linked to ozone thinning and increased carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. "There's certainly cause for concern," says climatologist Mark Serreze. "The trend of disappearing sea ice is one example of the environmental damage that can be linked to carbon dioxide emissions," says Jennifer Morgan, director of the World Wide Fund for Nature's Climate Change Programme. "Leaders must act now to implement energy-efficiency measures and increase the use of renewable energy sources before it's too late." Too bad our leader's name is Bush.

Robert Redford, the actor and director, began his involvement with solar power issues in the mid-1970s and is a supporter of the San Francisco-based Vote Solar organization and its agenda. He wrote an op ed for the LA Times: "The Bush White House talks tough on military matters in the Middle East while remaining virtually silent about the long-term problem posed by U.S. dependence on fossil fuels. Failing to rein in our dependence on imported oil gives leverage to undemocratic and unstable regimes. Wasteful consumption of fossil fuels creates political liabilities overseas, air pollution at home and global warming. The rate at which the United States burns fossil fuels has made our country a leading contributor to global warming. The Bush administration's energy policy to date -- a military garrison in the Middle East and drilling for more oil in the Arctic and other fragile habitats -- is costly, dangerous and self- defeating." You go, Robert!

Everyone thought that one of the few bright spots in the Bush energy scheme was its emphasis on combined heat and power (CHP) systems that recycle waste heat. In the original vision for CHP systems, developed under Clinton, these plants would use a variety of alternative fuels, such as fuel cells, in addition to natural gas. Coal was never even mentioned. Now, under Bush, the CHP scheme is being translated into largely gas-fired combined cycle plants, with a new plan for coal fired versions in the wings. The upshot: a continued dependence on fossil fuel and an increase in greenhouse gas emissions, with yet more phony "scientific studies" touting the "myth" of global warming.

This just in from "Nature" Mag: "Mankind could lock the world into an irreversible greenhouse effect, banishing future ice ages, warn two Belgian scientists. Global warming caused by emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases could tip the Earth into a completely new climate state in which cycles of freezing and thawing are switched off. The notion that we're due another ice age is still peddled as a reason not to worry about global warming. The ice-age cycle is caused by slow, periodic changes in the shape and position of the Earth's orbit around the Sun. This time around, those changes are less pronounced than they were during the Eemian. On such grounds alone, scientists have predicted since the 1980s that the present interglacial period might last up to 70,000 years. On top of that, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere today is already almost one-third more than during any recent interglacial. Over the next two centuries, it could rise to double the present-day value."

"It is already too late for the United States to lead the world in the fight against global warming. President [sic] Bush saw to that last year, when he abandoned his promise to make power plants reduce the amount of carbon dioxide they send into the air. [This month Bush] gave up all pretense of moving forward in the effort to clean up the oldest and dirtiest power plants. First he denigrated the climate action report released by his own administration... Then his administration announced possibly the biggest rollback of the Clean Air Act in history... The administration's climate action report projects that American emissions of carbon dioxide will rise by 43 percent by 2020. Yet its climate policy does little or nothing to control or reduce this increase. This is a problem with a solution... What has been missing is the political will either to tell the owners to install this technology or to create a market to encourage that investment."

Bob Herbert writes, "What is missing in most conversations in the U.S. about global warming is a sense of urgency... Ten years is too long to wait to do something real about this problem. Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, a professor of geosciences and international affairs at Princeton who is an expert on climate change, has studied the imminent threat that planetary warming poses to the world's coral reefs. These are ecosystems so abundant in animal and plant life that they are sometimes called the rain forests of the oceans... Closing our eyes and pumping another decade's worth of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at the current very dangerous rate would not seem to be a very bright idea. The gases remain in the atmosphere for centuries, and in some cases millenniums, which means the damage cannot quickly be undone. What a miserable legacy for this generation to leave to its children and grandchildren."

What on earth does Christie Whitman do all day - look after her husband's investments in polluting companies? She admitted that she didn't review that controversial report on global warming (remember, the one Ari Fleischer admitted that Bush lied about reading) until she read about it in the newspaper. The report concluded that human activities are contributing to global warming, but Bush refuses to do anything about it. Frank O'Donnell, executive director of the Clean Air Trust, said, "It does really raise a question about who is looking out for protecting the environment for the federal government if she is not aware of these things." Obviously, Bush and crew consider concern about the environment as nothing more than an impediment to getting the work of their big industry donors done. And Whitman's EPA is a farce.

Shrub may have his head in the sand and claim there's nothing we can do about global warming, but Dems in the California Assembly don't agree. Within the next few weeks, California Assembly members will be voting on the first bill in the country to regulate CO2 emissions from one of the largest contributors to global warming - passenger vehicles. If passed, the bill would set a precedent for other states to follow. Send a message to Governor Gray Davis and let him know that citizens all across the country support California's efforts to prove Shrub wrong!

David Lazarus points out another danger of ignoring the problem of global warming: it could be catastrophic to the American economy. Businesses are starting to realize that the potentially disastrous effects of climate change - rising seas, wildfires, and crop losses, for example - just ain't that good for the bottom line. But they want strong leadership from the White House on this issue, and they're not getting it from oil-company-pandering Bush. As Bob Massie, executive director of the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies, said, "The definition of leadership is facing a difficult situation and doing something positive. That's exactly what we're not seeing from the Bush White House."

Writes Brian Balta: "I have to hand it to the Republican Party. I never really thought it was possible to pull off something like they did, but somehow it happened. This one just blew me away. I almost don’t know what to say. Either the Republican Party is just the luckiest bunch of idiots I’ve ever seen, or they managed to pull off an under-handed scheme that would make the best Bond villains jealous. What am I referring to? Monday, the New York Times reported that the Bush Administration had completely reversed its beliefs on Global Warming. Instead of stoutly defending the belief that it isn’t happening, the Administration changed to say that the world was in fact getting hotter due to human activities, but it was now so far along that there was nothing we could do to stop it. Consequently, since it is too late, there will be no policy change associated with this complete shift in beliefs."

Molly Ivins writes, "The Bush administration has decided that global warming is indeed taking place and they are planning to do exactly nothing about it... They will not even do anything to slow it down or soften its impact... 'Adapt to the inevitable changes'? The changes are not inevitable... To keep right on doing what is already causing disastrous consequences is either insane or profoundly stupid... We can cut greenhouse gases; we can even do it dramatically. We are not helpless. We are, however, currently governed by an administration of oil executives and people whose main guiding principle seems to be opposing anything Bill Clinton favored. This is both pathetic and ridiculous... To fail to take action in the face of a recognized threat is not only incredibly stupid, but also legally actionable. Misfeasance, malfeasance and nonfeasance can all be alleged, reckless, irresponsible conduct, failure of duty ... a litany of charges." Like we say -- Impeach Bush NOW!

Bill McKibben, author of The End of Nature, weighs in on Bush's climate change report - the one where the administration admits the earth is going to pot, thanks to our contributions to global warming, but implies hell will freeze over before Bush does anything about it. "It's as if a drunk had finally hit bottom... accepted the fact that he was an alcoholic and that it was destroying his life - and then said that his plan was to drink three bottles a night from now on instead of two, and see if maybe he could find an artificial kidney." The alcoholic metaphor is certainly appropriate when refering to Shrub. But it's too bad he's taking us all along for the ride on his big fossil-fuel guzzling bender. As McKibben notes, "Bush clearly doesn't care about the long run...[by the time the U.S. takes another look at the Kyoto Protocol in 2012], he'll be back on the ranch, having successfully secured another eight years of business as usual for the interests that brought him to power."

For 20 years, Republicans have adamantly denied the existence of global warming - because the primary culprit is the burning of oil, gas and coal, the industries that own the GOP. But suddenly, Bush admits that global warming is taking place. "But while the report says the US will be substantially changed in the next few decades - 'very likely' seeing the disruption of snow-fed water supplies, more stifling heat waves and the permanent disappearance of Rocky Mountain meadows and coastal marshes, for example - it does not propose any major shift in the administration's policy on greenhouse gases. It recommends ADAPTING TO INEVITABLE CHANGES. It does not recommend making rapid reductions in greenhouse gases to limit warming, the approach favored by many environmental groups and countries that have accepted the Kyoto Protocol, a climate treaty written in the Clinton administration that was rejected by Mr. Bush." Bush wants to do NOTHING on global warming, just like 911. Impeach Bush Now!

Perhaps the most definitive proof that Bush's election campaign was pure "tell 'em anything now, do whatever you want later," is his complete reversal of his campaign pledge to reduce greenhouse emissions. Jane Hughes Turnbull of the National Coal Council was so disgusted by Bush's reneging on his pledge that she quit three days later, stating "The recent reversal in policy is profoundly short-sighted, an obvious and expedient response to industry - I should say to misperceived industry interests." Bush's preference for the coal industry - the energy source that spews the most sulfur, CO2 and other pollutants - over all other energy industries at a time when glaring evidence of global warming mounts, threatens the very survival of humanity.

Bush lives in his own little universe, where there is no such thing as a free press, or an honest government, or global warming. This week, as photos of the disintegrating Antarctic shelves and stories of a critically warming Arctic appear in the news, and top Bush advisor Harlan Watson admitted "There is no doubt that humans have obviously influenced the climate," Bush declared his intention to ignore the Kyoto treaty for 10 MORE years. Meanwhile, he continues to push for the right of corporations to spew MORE greenhouse gases into the air and for the EPA to allow corporations to withhold environmental info as "secrets." This isn't an administration, it's a demolition team!

Reuters reports, "Dying forests, expanding deserts and rising sea levels would wreak havoc to human and animal lives sooner than anticipated as global warming was accelerating, said Geoff Jenkins, head of the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction and Research. 'It looks like it will be warmer by the end of the century than what we have predicted,' he told Reuters in an interview. Jenkins said recent revisions showed much greater output of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide than earlier estimated... A 2001 United Nations' report on climate change forecast that global temperatures will rise two to five degrees Celsius by the end of the century. But recent data suggest temperatures could rise even higher as a worst case scenario shows four times as much emitted CO2 in the atmosphere from today's levels which Jenkins said is significantly higher than previously expected." Meanwhile, Bush continues to block US participation in the Kyoto protocol. Impeach Bush Now!

Moveon.org writes, "We've got to save GM from its worst enemy -- its own short-sightedness. While foreign companies are competing aggressively to offer us the fuel-efficient cars of the future, GM instead spends millions lobbying against higher fuel efficiency standards. It's up to us to demand that GM do the right thing - our economy, our national security, and our environment depend on it. Please join us in pledging: 'I will seriously consider buying a General Motors vehicle ONLY if: - GM offers a fuel-efficient line of vehicles; - GM supports meaningful increases in fuel efficiency standards; - GM supports efforts to reduce carbon pollution and global warming.' When you pledge, we'll automatically enroll you in a drawing for a new Honda Civic Hybrid, conducted by our friends at the Patriot's Energy Pledge campaign. The free hybrid will be awarded July 4th in Washington, DC."

Charles Clover writes in the London Telegraph, "The first three months of this year were the warmest globally since records began in 1860 and probably for 1,000 years, scientists said yesterday. Dr Geoff Jenkins, director of the Meteorological Office's Hadley Center, said the record on land and sea was consistent with computer predictions of the effects of man-made global warming. The three months were about 0.71C warmer than the average for 1961 to 1990, itself the warmest period for 1,000 years according to ice-core analysis, he added. The record warm period was the more remarkable because there was no sign of the cyclical El Nino in the tropics, which has attended the succession of record warmest years in the past decade." Why isn't this headline news???

It's bad enough that Shrub let oil companies write his energy policy. Now he's letting them pick and choose his scientific panel appointments - specifically, sabotaging the reelection of Clinton pick Robert T. Watson, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in favor of someone friendly to the energy companies' heat-now, cook-later stance on global warming. Watson is highly regarded in the scientific community, but that doesn't matter to Bu$h - he turns his back on real science if it doesn't support his pro-corporate, anti-environmentalist agenda!

"The Bush administration has made a mantra of the claim that mandatory greenhouse gas reductions would be prohibitively expensive, costing millions of jobs, cutting into gross domestic product, and harming U.S. competitiveness. The 'fatal flaw' of Bush's argument (to borrow a favorite administration phrase about Kyoto) is that his estimates are based on theoretical economic models that don't fully capture how environmental policy affects technological change. As a graduate of Harvard Business School, which pioneered the 'case study' method of examining real-world corporate experiences, Bush should know better. In fact, I have a case study for him to read. It's about a leading global energy company that is proving the President wrong. Speaking at Stanford Business School... BP chief executive John Browne announced that his company had met its self-imposed target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions -- nearly eight years ahead of schedule, and at no net cost to the company."

We knew the mainstream networks would scramble to spin the news of the warming-induced collapse of the Larsen B iceshelf in Antarctica to keep the Bush agenda afloat (like the Titanic-sized iceberg it is). We thought for sure FOX would win the spin contest, but no! The Slippery Slope award for the Larsen B report goes to (drum roll!) CBS. They managed to pump up a minor study (based on tree rings, no less) into a case that the current warming trend is just like one occurring 1,000 years ago. Of course, they don't explain why the ice shelf survived 12,000 years of such "natural trends" - including the one described. Nor does the CBS "report" present the contrary findings of some 2,000 or so other studies in recent years. Nor, is the question raised that even if there IS some natural warming concurrent to that induced by greenhouse gases, why that makes it OK to keep fueling the blaze! State propaganda at its oily best!

Mikhail Gorbachev, speaking at an environmental symposium for Global Green USA, criticized Bush's refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocol. Gorbachev's concern for the widespread environmental destruction in the former Soviet Union inspired him to found Green Cross International, the parent organization of Global Green, USA. Gorbachev stressed that stabilizing the environment will help stabilize the world. About Bush's lame excuses for not cooperating, he said: "Every country has its own interests. But national interest can't be imposed on others." You Go, Gorby!

The scientists who predicted that the massive Larsen B ice shelf in Antarctica was doomed to collapse were called "alarmists," "doomsday wackos" and "environmental extremists" by their more conservative colleagues. Well, guess who get's the last laugh - or sob - now? In just a few weeks, the Larsen B (which is 650 feet thick and 1,255 miles in area) has shattered sending 500 million billion (that's NOT a typo) tons of ice into the sea. We don't want to be ALARMIST, but the real impact of this event may be yet to come. If the land bound ice sheets behind the Larsen B now begin to slide more rapidly into the sea, the sea level could start to rise. So lets see how the "Greening Earth Society" and the other anti-Kyoto rightwing front groups spin this one!

The Northeast has just had the warmest winter in history, with flowers blooming a full month ahead of normal. But the most important vote on global warming took place on 3-13-02, when the Senate rejected an amendment by John Kerry (D-MA) and John McCain (R-AZ) to raise fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks. "Federal gasoline-use standards have not changed since 1985. The average mileage of vehicles sold in the United States, now about 24 miles per gallon, has been falling for years, largely because of the increasing popularity of sport utility vehicles. They use more fuel and are subject to less stringent standards than cars." 31 Democrats, 6 Republicans, and 1 Independent voted to increase fuel efficiency; 43 Republicans and 19 Democrats killed the amendment. Opponents told flat-out lies: "Senator Christopher S. Bond [R-MO] said stiffer mileage requirements would make golf carts the dominant means of transportation." What will we tell our grandchildren?

An article in the Globalist exposes the sham of Bush's "clear skies" initiative. Bush thinks that changing the phrase "clean air" to "clear skies" will mask the fact that his plan not only significantly weakens the Clean Air Act but, contrary to the fake emission reduction numbers he's pushing, actually INCREASES U.S. emissions by over 20% from the 1990 levels the Kyoto Protocol set out to reduce. Who does he think he's fooling? Meanwhile, European Union ministers voted on Monday to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, and at least 25 to 30 industrialized countries are likely to ratify the protocol within this year. The Globalist points out that Bush would rather play around with fuzzy math and word substitution to try to fool environmentalists instead of following the EU's lead and actually DOING something about global warming!

Jeremy Rifkin writes, "We live in a world that has become so desensitised by watching calamities unfold on global television - both natural and human-induced - that it takes something really spectacular even to get our attention. And it usually has to be visually dramatic to register, much less elicit a deep emotional response - such as the tragic events of September 11. [The National Academy of Sciences says] the global warming trend projected over the course of the next 100 years could, all of a sudden and without warning, dramatically accelerate in just a handful of years - forcing a qualitative new climatic regime which could undermine ecosystems and human settlements throughout the world, leaving little or no time for plants, animals and humans to adjust... If the projections and warnings in this study turn out to be prophetic, no other catastrophic event in all of recorded history will have had as damaging an impact on the future of human civilization and the life of the planet."

"To the unwary, yesterday's pledge by the Bush administration to reduce 'greenhouse gas intensity' by 18 percent may have sounded like a pledge to reduce greenhouse gases, the emissions (mainly carbon dioxide, released by burning fossil fuels) that cause global warming. In fact, that's the way it was reported in some news articles. But the extra word makes all the difference. In fact, the administration proposed to achieve almost nothing; consistent with that goal, it also announced specific policies that are trivial in scope and will have virtually no effect. What is this thing called greenhouse gas intensity? It is the volume of greenhouse gas emissions divided by gross domestic product. The administration says that it will reduce this ratio by 18 percent over the next decade. But since most forecasts call for G.D.P. to expand 30 percent or more over the same period, this is actually a proposal to allow a substantial increase in emissions." So writes NY Times columnist Paul Krugman.

"Over 2,500 economists signed the 'Economists' Statement on Climate Change,' a report that proved there are FAIR market-based solutions to the problem of global warming - unlike the selective fat cat giveaways being touted by Bush. Studies sponsored by Redefining Progress and other organizations offer detailed and workable plans - all ignored by this administration. One Redefining Progress study examined the effect on 498 industries of using revenue from greenhouse gas emission charges to reduce payroll taxes and/or corporate taxes on capital income, such as retained earnings and dividends. The study found that 73-80% of industries, employing 78-92% of workers, would benefit from such environmental tax shifting plans."

In case nobody told G.W., 2001 was (according to latest NASA figures) the second warmest year on record - the WARMEST, infact, if you take into account the natural extra boost in temps El Nino gave 1998. But get ready for a long-term sauna, because G.W. has scrapped the best thinking of hundreds of the world's finest scientists and dumped Kyoto. In its place he offers a bogus joke concocted by a few fossil fuel industry toadies who call themselves global warming experts - that is, if you cross their palms with enough silver. World Resource Institute says the Bush scheme will NOT, as claimed, reduce emissions by 18% of the next decade. Instead, it will raise emission loads by 14% - that's a discrepancy (as in LIE) of 32%. But that's the kind of phony padding you need to keep your greenhouse gas-spewing buddies happy...while we slowly suffocate and fry.

Just days after the "state of the union" address by resident Bush, where the focus was on military buildup, readying the nation for more war and ignoring the serious environmental issues we face, the European Parliament voted OVERWHELMINGLY (540-4) to pass the Kyoto protocol. Just last week, the UK and Germany announced their plans for the development of wind and solar power projects to decrease their dependence upon foreign oil and reduce emissions. Under Cheney-Bush-Enron, we are still focusing on Nuclear, Oil drilling and tax credits to the big energy companies. America - let's get with the program!

The fossil fuel industry in the U.S., aided, abetted, and showered with largesse by the Bush administration, whines on a daily basis that they "can't afford" to implement the kind of technology that would make a meaningful cut in air pollution. At the same time, Bush and his gang of freemarketeers love to play the martyr bit, claiming U.S. corporations shouldn't have to shoulder the mighty load of mitigating greenhouse gases alone when those naughty Third Worlders just won't do their share. But, while Bush helps the coal barons scale back any regulations, China, despite having a few billion mouths to feed, is moving ahead with plans to invest 120 billion to reduce pollution from coal burning plants.

"To the United States Senate: I hereby pledge my support of the Kyoto Protocol, a Treaty agreed to by 178 nations to reduce the emissions that contribute to the greenhouse effect and global warming. The United States is the world's largest polluter. Yet in Bonn, Germany, the U.S. was the only major industrialized nation to reject the Kyoto Protocol... As a citizen of the United States, I voice my strong opposition to Mr. Bush's decision, and hereby stand with the majority of Americans, who voted for and want our nation to endorse and comply with the Kyoto Treaty. We the people intend to endorse and comply with the Treaty, with or without the so-called leader of the free world." Sign the petition!

This week, while Bush played at photo ops (like his 15-minute "donation" of "labor" on a Habitat for Humanity home), John McCain and Joe Lieberman presented a united front on the Senate floor and called for a comprehensive cap on America's greenhouse gas emissions. "Given the fact that the United States produces approximately 25 percent of the total greenhouse gases emissions, the United States has a responsibility to cut its emissions of greenhouse gases," McCain said. The two senators outlined a plan that calls for a system of mandatory caps and optional pollution credits. Bush has offered no commitment and no real plan for reducing greenhouse emissions. We suggest that putting duct tape on Trent Lott's mouth and closing Tom Delay's boiler room operation would go a long way towards curbing hot air.

"The Kyoto Protocol was a triumph in vision and endeavor, a vital investment in the future of humanity. The Convention commits us all to respond to the threat of global warming through precaution and not recklessness; through multilateralism and not unilateralism; through responsible global citizenship and not narrow self-interest; through leadership and not obstructionism. The Kyoto Protocol, built from the principles of the Convention, has rightly become the determinative test as to which countries are prepared to honor their commitments under the Convention, in the eyes of the parties and observers gathered here, and in the eyes of an expectant world." This is from a statement by Hon. Tuala Sale Tagaloa, on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States.

Bush tried his best to kill the Kyoto Protocol, but in the end the rest of the world refused to go along. To reach a compromise acceptable to Japan, enforcement provisions were weakened and forest absorptions will be counted. But as Greenpeace notes, nuclear power will NOT be promoted, and environmentalists will still push polluting nations to focus on reducing fossil fuel emissions. The next goal for global activists is to win ratification by 25 more countries (30 have already ratified) by September 2002.

"The Earth will become a much hotter place over the next century, according to researchers who predict in a study published on Friday there is a 90 percent chance the planet's average temperatures will rise 3 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100. Researchers at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, used a computer model to predict probable long-term increases in the Earth's temperature if no actions are taken to curb the emissions of gases and pollutants that many scientists blame for global warming. The researchers said the planet has warmed up by about 1 degrees over the last century. But they say it is likely to heat up by about 1 or 2 degrees as early as 2030. By 2100, the most likely increase would be in the range of 4 to 7 degrees, while there is a 90 percent chance global average temperatures will rise 3 to 9 degrees, they said." OK George and Dick, which part of 90% don't you understand?

Because Bush refuses to budge from his evil stance on Kyoto, the more progressive EU is being forced to accept a gray zone somewhere in between good and total evil that, say scientists, will not sufficiently slow global warming. As the world's largest producer of greenhouse gases, the US is Earth's biggest environmental villain. Yet Bush wants everyone else to carry our burden, as if we somehow had earned the right to fiddle as Earth burns. He wants the right to plant a few trees and call that a meaningful effort - even as he lets loggers build new roads into our national forests! Meanwhile protestors in the streets of Bonn are parading effigies of Uncle Sam as the grim reaper. We couldn't agree more - except this ghoul should wear a Bush mask.

Dr Klaus Toepfer, director of the UN Environment Program says that developing countries at the climate conference in Bonn are being largely ignored by richer, more powerful nations. Toepfer is not impressed by the US demands for "compromise," nor by Bush's phony insistence on "more science." Said Toepfer: "If I had addressed the conference, I'd have told the delegates it is not a matter of whether we can agree, but that we MUST. You can come to meetings like this intent on proving that you're 100% right or you can come with a will to compromise and integrate other people's viewpoints." Toepfer added: "Complete information is a divine attribute. If you're just asking for better information and not acting, then you're misusing science."

The world this week has been waiting to hear from Mr. Bush a new US policy initiative on global warming. But Bush's statement contained nothing of the kind. It was big on words like "fundamental principles", "science-based" "encourage research breakthroughs", "leverage resources", "partnerships" and the like -- in other words, just empty spin.

A premier telecommunications company (long distance service provider), Working Assets is well known for its social and environmental activism. Now Working Assets has launched a creative protest of Bush's destructive energy plan. The company has launched the first Global Warming Sweepstakes at www.ActForChange.com. With instructions from the website, anyone who e-mails not just the Bush administration -- but also its corporate allies and the Senate -- to demand concrete action to combat global warming -- will be entered in a contest to win one of over 500 prizes. The grand prize is a Honda Insight, a hybrid gasoline-electric car. Other prizes include Novara bicycles and 500 energy-saving lightbulbs. Working Assets is doing its bit: its efforts helped generate more than 132,000 e-mails, faxes, and phone calls protesting the ANWR drilling plan.

No climate change plan at all would be preferable to the insulting joke Shrub is now trying to foist off on the public. The new "plan" calls for the cash-starved NASA to conduct research that has already been conducted. It also proposes that the Nature Conservancy see if they can help him figure out a way to avoid reducing CO2 emissions by storing it all in South America in "managed" forests. Moreover, Bush wants to pay his best friends in the oil industry to work up plans for reducing the cost of cutting CO2 emitted from fossil fuel plants. And then he wants to gather a collection of hand-picked (i.e. conservative and on the take) scientists to - we're not making this up - study the study released by the Nadtional Academy of Scientists. Nowhere in the plan is there any call to actually reduce CO2 or implement new technologies ALREADY available.

Shrub has refused to allow Earth's number one polluter and guzzler of resources, namely the US, participate in a global clean up because he doesn't think enough was demanded of poor countries in the Kyoto Protocol. Yet, poor as they are, these Third World nations have been doing above and beyond their share to help take care of our home planet and reduce greenhouse gases. So what does Shrub do? He now wants to cut the aid we've been giving to help these countries in their anti-global warming efforts. We feel the $41 million he wants to trim would be MUCH better spent in a Third World country than here at home by Bush - who will probably just find a way to turn it over to the oil industry. His excuse is that he thinks clean up in these countries should be left up to private industry. Yean, right! We've all seen how well that works. So we feel we have underestimated Shrub. He isn't just stupid and selfish. He really IS truly evil.

One of the lowest points in U.S. history will be Bush's failure to sign the Kyoto protocol. Lower yet is his excuse: he wants poor countries to shoulder more of the burden. Considering the fact that most pollution in many third world nations- factories, cars, etc., came from the U.S. (after, of course, we destroyed their self-sustaining native cultures), and the fact that we cause far more than our fair share of the world's pollution, this excuse is beyond pathetic. Dr. Nancy Kete of the World Resource Institute, who co-authored a report on this issue, sums it up: "Climate protection requires the leadership of a few countries that bear historical responsibility for the problem and that have considerable capability to act - that means first and foremost the U.S." The report reveals that developing countries have actually done more to curb their carbon emissions than most developed nations, who promise much and deliver only new "studies."

This week, tired of waiting for Shrub to wake up, a coalition of community leaders representing over 100 million Americans and at least $300 billion in annual revenues, convened the Citizens Summit on Climate Change. Participating organizations included the Union of Concerned Scientists, the U.S. Catholic Conference, the Business Council for Sustainable Energy, the National Religious Partnership for the Environment, Honeywell and Maytag. At the Summit, 12 state petitions signed by over 800 scientists (the real kind) were sent to Capitol Hill, calling for stronger leadership and policies on global warming. The state with the highest number of scientist signers? Florida!

"A report from a working group of European industry, non-governmental organizations and European Union member countries shows that the European Union’s greenhouse gas reduction target under the Kyoto Protocol can easily be achieved with cost effective measures to reduce emissions. The group, known as the European Climate Change Programme (ECCP), analyzed more than 40 measures. Its report concludes that the potential of cost effective options is twice the size of the European Union's required emission reduction. The 15 European Union countries are collectively committed to an eight percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by the five year period from 2008 to 2012." For shame, Bush!

"Bush's last-minute attempt to put together a lame initiative on global warming was embarrassing. Now he's back to voluntary pollution control, which we have tried in Texas - and it does not work worth a blue-bellied damn... When Bush was elected governor, Texas had 850 plants with grandfather exemptions to the state's clean air act - they had been grandfathered 23 years earlier, and no one had done anything about them. These plants produce 36 percent of the state's total air pollution, and Texas' air is worse than any other state's... Bush supported a voluntary plan hatched by two dozen of the biggest polluters in the state (also major Bush contributors)... The results after two years: Of the 850 grandfathered polluters, 28 had gone so far as to come up with a plan to reduce their pollution in the future, and three had actually done something. This kind of genius scheme is not going to save us from global warming. Neither is National Missile Defense." So writes Molly Ivins.

In a stunning defeat for Bush, the European Union announced it "will stick to the Kyoto Protocol and go for a ratification process." Europeans are furious at Bush for opposing Kyoto, since the US produces 25% of the world's greenhouse gases. The Kyoto Protocol does not go into effect until countries producing 55% of the world's greenhouse gases ratify it. Without the US, Japan would have to participate to reach 55%, but Japan is following the lead of the US. Bush humiliated himself by declaring that "Africa is a nation." And while discussing expansion of NATO and the EU, he said there ought to be "more countries" in Europe.

For decades, the tobacco industry fought regulation on the theory that the link between smoking and cancer had not been proven. Now Bush is using the same argument to oppose efforts to stop global warming. With the future of our planet at stake, we must take action before we achieve absolute scientific certainty.

Like any truly stupid person, Bush assumes everyone else is just as stupid as he is. So he thinks no one will notice as he's smirking through the Everglade grasses that he's working overtime to trash the environment...Or that as he's yucking it up with Tony Blair for the cameras in Europe next week we won't notice that the only alternative to Kyoto he offers is a big blabber of his own hot air. "You'll see some outlines...giving a sense of where we are coming from," says a Bush official, but "you're not going to see some finely detailed plan on this stage." Translated this means "We ain't plannin' to do a damn thing, suckers!"

Here's a petition from England: "President [sic] Bush has ditched the only international treaty to stop global warming. As far as Bush is concerned, US corporations have the right to pollute the entire planet. People and the environment don't matter. So who's paying Bush? One corporation stands out from the rest. Esso (known as ExxonMobil in the States) donated more dollars to get Bush into the White House than any other oil company. Esso don't want clean energy from wind, wave and solar power to replace oil, coal and gas. Fuelling America's oil addiction means big profits for Esso. Esso and Bush think they can get away with polluting our world. They think they are too big for the rest of us to stop them. They're wrong. Esso choose to wreck the climate. You can choose not to buy Esso's products. Boycott Esso now." Sign the petition!

Three British celebrities - Bianca Jagger, the pop star Annie Lennox and Anita Rodrick, founder of the Body Shop - have teamed up with three activist groups - Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and People & Planet - to boycott Esso in England. This boycott is spreading worldwide, and even was plugged by Tom Friedman in the NY Times. "What Mr. Bush did in trashing Kyoto was to leave serious environmental activists with nowhere else to turn but the market. The smart ones get it. You will be hearing from them soon — at a gas station near you."

It's bad enough that Bush embarrasses us through his stupid gaffes and obvious ignorance. But it doesn't help that his handlers, such as Cheney and Gale 'Ice Roads' Norton, dream up such absurd proposals. "George Bush suffered a blow yesterday when his 'alternative strategy' to beat climate change by planting forests in north America and elsewhere was shown to be of little help. Two research programmes suggest that the belief that planting trees would remove large quantities of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and so slow down global warming is unfounded. Both show the increased take-up of carbon dioxide to be short-lived...The EU refused to accept [Bush's] claim and the talks collapsed. The research carried out in a North Carolina pine forest vindicates its stance and leaves Mr. Bush without a credible policy when the next climate talks begin in July."

The Eskimo village of Shishmaref, just below the Arctic Circle may soon be swept by rising water from melting ice. The sea is now just 30 feet away from village tanks that hold 85,000 gallons of gasoline and stove oil. Not many years ago, the water was at least 300 feet from the tanks. Yet Republican Senator Ted Stevens refuses to believe global warming is the cause. Instead, he blames a "natural shifting of ocean heat north into the Arctic." Since when did he become a climate expert? Stevens just doesn't want to admit that Shishmaref is mirroring the future - or to contemplate what will happen to any oil operation in ANWR and its millions of gallons of oil if the water starts to rise there. No, Stevens and his fellow GOPers would rather think about nice dry cash. By the way, the Anchorage Daily News scrubbed this story off their web page - kudos to news service Nandotimes for keeping it up!