Sarah Palin's bus tour a hazard to motorists

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 21:53:50 -0400, in misc.transport.road
"Ala" > wrote in
> :
>
>"N8N" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>>The funny thing is, it seems that in a schadenfreudey sort of way, the
>>people complaining about driving transgressions in a neighborhood are
>>often the ones subsequently complaining about being cited for those
>>same offenses once the targeted enforcement for which they clamored is
>>actually instituted.
>
>>That makes me smile.
>
>http://www.roanoke.com/editorials/commentary/wb/290521
>EPA broke own rules on carbon
>Did anyone complain of the co2
>
>Ken Cuccinelli
>
>Cuccinelli is the attorney general of Virginia.
>
>In the Roanoke Times editorial "Virginia sues the feds again" (June 13), I
>am labeled "anti-science" for standing up against the Environmental
>Protection Agency and its decision to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant
>that is dangerous to humans.
>
>First, this dangerous "pollutant" is something that you and I exhale every
>few seconds. Second, the EPA's ruling gave the agency immense power to
>regulate human activities that involve CO2 emissions, yet it relied on data
>that has been called into question, even by proponents of the theory of
>manmade global warming. Third, the EPA may have broken U.S. law in an
>attempt to expedite this economy-altering decision.
>
>The EPA relied primarily on data from a global warming report from the
>United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Several incidents
>since the ruling have brought the reliability of that data into question,
>including emails leaked in the 2009 Climategate scandal which showed that
>some of the world's prominent climatologists may have manipulated data to
>overstate the effects of carbon dioxide on the environment.
>
>Since the revelations from Climategate became public, some scientists
>involved in the IPCC report have had to readdress their research. Even
>renowned climate researcher Judith Curry of Georgia Tech recently said that
>there is no question that data in the report was misleading and that "it is
>obvious that there has been deletion of adverse data" that would work
>against the theory of rapid global warming in the last century.
>
>To illustrate the questionable benefit of such broad regulations crafted
>from suspect data, look at the EPA's proposed regulations to limit
>greenhouse gas emissions for cars and light trucks. The agency says these
>CO2-limiting, global-warming reducing rules would add about $950 to the
>price of every new vehicle. But buried deep in the report, the EPA's own
>models showed that for that extra $950, over the next 90 years, those
>regulations would only reduce temperature increases by less than two
>one-hundredths of a degree Celsius!

Cooch clearly is ignorant of science.