[lotuseclat79]

Hi Gabriel,

Here's an article that may be related to your link in msg #915:
Scientists Want to Solve Puzzle of Excess Water Vapor Near Cirrus Clouds
Article here.

A number of researchers in recent years have reported perplexing findings of water vapor at concentrations as much as twice what they should be in and around cirrus clouds high in the atmosphere, a finding that could alter some conclusions about climate change.

-- Tom

[LANMaster]

[bassetman]

The Supreme Court Oral Argument in the Global Warming Case Reveals What's Wrong with the Standing Doctrine
By MICHAEL C. DORF
----
Monday, Dec. 04, 2006

Last week, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Massachusetts v. EPA, which presents the question of whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) violated the Clean Air Act by failing to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases by motor vehicles in the United States.

The stakes could not be higher. A recent British study estimated the likely economic costs from global warming to be on the scale of those of the Great Depression or the First or Second World War. Yet U.S. auto emissions account for only about six percent of human-generated greenhouse gases escaping into the atmosphere, so that even a radical reduction--say, by half--would have no effect on 97 percent of human-generated greenhouse gases. Thus, the Bush Administration has argued, regulation by the EPA without international coordination, will simply impose domestic costs without substantial benefits.

Who makes the better case? Don't count on the Supreme Court to provide an answer. Roughly half of last week's oral argument focused not on whether the EPA violated its legal duty in failing to promulgate regulations, but instead on whether Massachusetts and other states have legal standing to seek judicial review of the EPA's inaction,. A decision dismissing the case on standing grounds is a real possibility.

A better result would be to revise the standing doctrine itself. As this case well illustrates, it imposes unnecessary obstacles to judicial resolution of very important legal questions.

What the Case is About

Section 202 of the federal Clean Air Act provides that the EPA

shall by regulation prescribe (and from time to time revise) … standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in [its] judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.

...http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20061204.html

[sy2]

Cow 'emissions' more damaging to planet than CO2 from cars

Meet the world's top destroyer of the environment. It is not the car, or the plane,or even George Bush: it is the cow.

A United Nations report has identified the world's rapidly growing herds of cattle as the greatest threat to the climate, forests and wildlife. And they are blamed for a host of other environmental crimes, from acid rain to the introduction of alien species, from producing deserts to creating dead zones in the oceans, from poisoning rivers and drinking water to destroying coral reefs.

The 400-page report by the Food and Agricultural Organisation, entitled Livestock's Long Shadow, also surveys the damage done by sheep, chickens, pigs and goats. But in almost every case, the world's 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together .

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2062484.ece

[iltos]

Originally Posted by sy2

Cow 'emissions' more damaging to planet than CO2 from cars

a volcano by a different name?

[sy2]

LuckyStrike apparently started a thread about this article already, located here: Political Agenda Driven Pseudo-Science.

A little discussion going on so far if others care to jump in.

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by sy2

Cow 'emissions' more damaging to planet than CO2 from cars

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2062484.ece

I'm doing my part ...... I'M EATING THE COWS!

[Ciberblade]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

I'm doing my part ...... I'M EATING THE COWS!

Right there with ya

[Blackmirror]

I am doing my part by recycling.. OMG its so confusing when my boys put the wrong rubbish in the wrong bin

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

I'm doing my part ...... I'M EATING THE COWS!

[lizard]

Originally Posted by Blackmirror

I am doing my part by recycling.. OMG its so confusing when my boys put the wrong rubbish in the wrong bin

Hi Blackmirror!
Is it more confusing when they put the wrong rubbish in the wrong bin, or when they put the right rubbish in the wrong bin?


...just kiddin

[LuckyStrike]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

I'm doing my part ...... I'M EATING THE COWS!

I have a couple of ribeyes thawing right now. So the PETA people are part of the global warming problem?

[Ciberblade]

Originally Posted by LuckyStrike

I have a couple of ribeyes thawing right now. So the PETA people are part of the global warming problem?

People for the Eating of Tasty Animals?

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by LuckyStrike

I have a couple of ribeyes thawing right now. So the PETA people are part of the global warming problem?

They are definitely aligned with the global warming extremists, like Democrat, Albert Gore.

[Gabriel]

Lan...you don't believe global warming is happening?