brought to you by www.energyboom.com
 
“An imperative read for a successful future.”
~LEONARDO DICAPRIO  
 
Clearing the PR Pollution that Clouds Climate Science

Desmog Video

You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.


 



Us Supreme Court

Bush fiddles with global warming in State of the Union finale

It’s tempting, but most certainly optimistic, to view President Bush’s 2008 State of the Union as his last gasp at blocking progress on global warming. He will, after all, be gone from office before the year is out and it’s tempting to think he hasn’t sufficient time to further damage efforts to reign in climate change.

But there’s no time to lose. And continued obstructionism by the Bush Administration doesn’t just highlight its continuing failure to grasp the urgency of the problem, it also ensures far greater difficulties for its successors, who will have to arrest the problem at home while pressing other major polluters like China and India to act.


Read more: Bush fiddles with global warming in State of the Union finale

What's next?

Bush Ignores Supreme Court, continues legacy of carbon denial and confusion

With Bush brushing off yesterday's landmark global warming decision by the Supreme Court we continue to recrod for posterity what will no doubt be a legacy of foot-dragging and global warming denial by the Bush administration.

We have seen reports of political interference in global warming science spanning most of Bush's tenure as president.


Read more: Bush Ignores Supreme Court, continues legacy of carbon denial and confusion

What's next?

Bush to Supreme Court: "Thanks, but no thanks!"

A day after the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government had the authority to regulate heat-trapping gases, President Bush said he thought that the measures he had taken so far were sufficient. Mr. Bush made it clear in remarks on Tuesday that he thought his proposal to increase automobile fuel efficiency was sufficient for the moment; he gave no indication he would ask the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate emissions of heat-trapping gases.

Read more: Bush to Supreme Court: "Thanks, but no thanks!"

What's next?

Supreme Court decision: we oppose, but support emissions cuts?!

With the Supreme Court ruling today on greenhouse gas emission regulations, readers have been asking us who were the parties opposing the ruling.

Not surprisingly, the list includes many third-party groups representing major auto manufacturers, heavy industry, oil and gas and electrical production. We thought it would be interesting to see where each of these organizations stood on the issues of environment and global warming. And interesting it was, for example, one of the opponents of new carbon emissions regulations is the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, yet their website states that, "members of the Alliance believe that it is prudent to reduce emissions, including carbon dioxide..."


Read more: Supreme Court decision: we oppose, but support emissions cuts?!

What's next?

Supreme Court to Bush: "Oh Yes You Can!"

The Supreme Court has ordered the federal government to take a fresh look at regulating carbon dioxide emissions from cars, a rebuke to Bush administration policy on global warming.

In a 5-4 decision, the court said the Clean Air Act gives the Environmental Protection Agency the authority to regulate the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from cars.

Massachusetts Attorney General, Martha Coakley, states: "Despite acknowledging that global warming poses serious dangers to our environment and health, the Bush Administration has done little or nothing to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. As a result of today’s landmark ruling, EPA can no longer hide behind the fiction that it lacks any regulatory authority to address the problem of global warming."

Read more: Supreme Court to Bush: "Oh Yes You Can!"

What's next?

Supreme Court scientific circus act

As the Supreme Court global warming case enters its second full day, the circus act on the administrative side of the floor continues. Today, Deputy Solicitor General Gregory Garre, first admitting that he had limited knowledge of climate science, proceeds to state that there is a "likely connection" between greenhouse gases and global warming but that "it cannot unequivocally established."

Read more: Supreme Court scientific circus act

What's next?
Syndicate content

About the climate cover-up

About the climate cover-up

Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy.

There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.

Although all public relations professionals are bound by a duty to not knowingly mislead the public, some have executed comprehensive campaigns of misinformation on behalf of industry clients on issues ranging from tobacco and asbestos to seat belts.

Lately, these fringe players have turned their efforts to creating confusion about climate change. This PR campaign could not be accomplished without the compliance of media as well as the assent and participation of leaders in government and business.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Like what you read here? Get our top five stories in your inbox every week. » here's a preview
Enter your email and subscribe now!



DeSmog Tip Jar

DeSmog Tip Jar

Flickr Photos

Flickr Photos
Hoggan, Robertson, HarcourtJames Hoggan - ColourClimate Cover-Up Book CoverJames Hoggan - Black and White

Member of the Progressive Bloggers Network

MEMBER OF THE PROGRESSIVE BLOGGERS NETWORK

Progressive Bloggers