Hummm states is the only one that has the right to police or regulate immissions . the federal gov only has the right to regulate commerce and Mail .all the rest is up to the state!

Highs in the mid 30's through Easter Weekend in Michigan. Please God, speed up Global Warming, I can't stand this! My SUV is running in the parking lot right now as I work.

As a former home builder, I can tell you that working outside in New England during the winter is brutal! We would have to burn scraps of wood in 50 gallon metal drums to help stay warm. Well, Massachusettes and it's ever increasing laws has banned all of this activity because of emissions. Like stopping us cold workers from burning scraps of wood to stay warm is going to save the earth. Ridiculous!

I feel bad for all of you that think that we can do much of anything about warming. The earth is gonna do whatever it has been doing, since forever. Warm, cold, warm, cold, the earth has been all of this before. I'm all for planting trees, but changing light bulbs isn't going to do diddly squat! Waste your money foolishly if you want, but don't force me to buy into this political garbage. Honestly, I think warming is a good thing. Better than freezing. Alot of medicines and life come from areas of the world where it is warm and humid, not from where it is cold and icy. What is the earths actual average temperature anyway I wonder, hmmm?

Human activity is hardly responsible for global warming. It has been warmer before and we had nothing to do with it then. Shouldn't this raise a question mark in your head? If you don't believe this then tell me exactly how much are we contributing to GW? How much have the sea levels risen in the past 150 years of industrialization? I seriously doubt Al Gores projected 20 foot ocean level rise. What a joke. Even the UN report said ocean levels MAY rise only 18 inches. Keep scaring us Al. OK, got to go clear my driveway from yet another snowstorm. Bring on the warm!

28 degrees yesterday, low 30s today(if we're lucky), 29 high again tomorrow...no 40s(LOWER 40s) until MONDAY(was going to be Sunday) and it's supposed to be low 50s here this time of year. I see ocean temps all winter all over the Pacific in shades of darkish blue(meaning colder than average), yet people panic because of some runoff of a few glaciers on the coast of Antarctica(where one might expect a little runoff, being the COAST & all)? If anything we already have been seeing the effect of the runoff of the cold Antarctic glaciers in the form of colder ocean temps, cooling the globe(at least over here) and thus, I don't know, maybe SLOWING the Antarctic melt(forming NEW glaciers elsewhere)???? CYCLES anyone???

LOL....I KNEW we'd see these type of comments from the skeptics. You guys are so predictable it's not even funny. Whenever it's cold in your back yard, you'll comment on it as if this somehow disproves the fact that global warming is occuring. This is done with every single cold shot we get. Where were you all when Chicago set record highs two days in a row recently? Or the fact that the Southeast had one of its warmest Marchs ever?

Most of the country with the exception of the interior northeast was very warm during March, yet you didn't see people who agree with the scientific consensus regarding AGW start alluding to the warm spells as evidence AGW was occuring. I think this is another fundamental difference you see with the skeptics. We understand that the weather today or tomorrow does not prove or disprove AGW. However, skeptics can not seem to understand this concept, most likely because they have very little understanding of the science and statistics in general.

Oh, Anonymous! Once again the same argument to the skeptics' position! "It's cold over here"... and??? It's warm where I live... and it's been warm in Europe, Asia and parts of Africa this Winter. Oh, but GW is not happening because it's 28 in Michigan.... wow... I didn't take that into account...

From a legal perspective, the fact that the Court granted a state legal standing is a huge departure from the Constitutional jurisprudence that has been followed by the Court for decades. What is equally disturbing is that the Court used a presupposition, i.e. that carbon dioxide is a pollutant and needs to be regulated, not to mention its opinion on AGW, to depart from its prior holdings on the issue of whether a state has legal standing before the highest court of the land. Equally disturbing are the separation of powers issues.

While those who feel that the end may have justified the means, consider that this decision opened pandoras box and who knows the repurussions it may have for future regulatory decisions. Again, this decision did not tell the EPA that it has to regulate carbon dioxide, but in the future an aggreived state may challenge a valid regulatory decision and bring it before the Court. Ultimately, the vaildity of the concept of AGW could be brought before the Court. That indeed would be a dark day notwithstanding the Court's decision for an issue of scientific debate would brought into a realm where the facts do not always speak for themselves. Am I being paranoid? Maybe, maybe not...time will tell.

I disagree with Laura's read on the insignificance of this decision. The SCOTUS has transformed CO2 from a harmless, life-giving, naturally-occurring gas into a "pollutant" subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. Their decision dealt with auto emissions of CO2 but is anyone naive enough to believe that efforts to regulate CO2 will end there? Here is an intersting article from American Thinker that is worth reading:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/04/scotus_emits_scare_pollution.html

Hmmmm....highs in the 60's in South Texas this weekend. Where exactly is Global Warming?

Mark,

You: However, skeptics cannot seem to understand this concept, most likely because they have very little understanding of the science and statistics in general.

Reply: Yup, we all have below average IQ's and know nothing about science. Talk about generalization. Even scientists who disagree with Al Gore and his apocolyptic conclusions don't understand the science and statistics, right? Tell me Mark, I have yet to recieve an answer from you. Exactly how much are we contributing to global warming? How much have the ocean levels risen in the past 150 years of industrialization? It has been warm before. Why? Does the earth not change on it's own? I'm waiting for your response.

Mark & Emiliano, in taking the first sentence of my post(which I typed in jest) completely out of context to try & sound intelligent, you conveniently ignored the rest of my post where I mentioned this:

"I see ocean temps all winter all over the Pacific in shades of darkish blue(meaning colder than average), yet people panic because of some runoff of a few glaciers on the coast of Antarctica(where one might expect a little runoff, being the COAST & all)? If anything we already have been seeing the effect of the runoff of the cold Antarctic glaciers in the form of colder ocean temps, cooling the globe(at least over here) and thus, I don't know, maybe SLOWING the Antarctic melt(forming NEW glaciers elsewhere)???? CYCLES anyone???"

How is that any different from AGW sycophants like yourselves basing your "certainty" on the very recent(last 30 years) rise in the global temp(which followed a 30 year or so cooling)? Who's to say the current cooling of the Pacific won't tip the global temp trend equally COOLER for the next 30 years? Or will you just discount that if it's still "warm in Europe & parts of Africa"?

I don't know where exactly GW is Rose... I think it's everywhere, because it's GLOBAL Warming.

Anyways, a high in the 60's in Texas says nothing. But current temps is something that both sides (skeptics and "liberals") use to support their ideas... I wouldn't be surprised to find someone saying "IT'S 100 IN TEXAS"... because that may happen in Summer. A week of hot or cold weather says nothing.

Anonymous,

How are these cooler Pacific waters cooling the globe? In case you didn't know, the winter of 2006-7 was the warmest winter on record globally.

Here's something no one ever mentions.....since AGW is now without a doubt unquestionable, unchanging fact according to the esteemed consensus scientists working for Global Big Brother(who have NOOOOOOOO interest in taking away my rights, my freedoms or my livelihood), if the Big Bad United States Of America is such the overwhelmingly main contributor of Big Bad CO2, then how come the majority of the global warming isn't taking place AT THE SOURCE of the global warming, Evil America, rather than other parts of the world??????? Why wouldn't it effect FIRST AND FOREMOST THE US since we are the almost sole contributors according to everyone??????

Mark:

The fact is that every time it gets warm the Main stream media get all whooped up over GW. Every time a hurricane gets within 100 mi of the US they get all whooped up over GW. Every time anything happens they get all whooped up over GW.

Sadly, many people are either under or mis informed and buy into the stuff.

"I see ocean temps all winter all over the Pacific in shades of darkish blue(meaning colder than average)"...

Really? And what about the El Nino event? That means SST (Sea Surface Temperatures) are ABOVE normal. I must say, thought, El Nino seems to be fading now, but it was at its peak in December. So... where are the darkish blue shades?

Emiliano

If it's GLOBAL warming, and the fact it's been COLDER THAN ******** in most of the US for the most part since mid January has NOTHING to do with it, fine........let AFRICA pay for THEIR CO2 since they are obviously the cause of THEIR MAN MADE warming(likewise ASIA, EUROPE and EVERYWHERE ELSE you say it's warmer, thus it's THEIR problem obviously(last I checked there were PEOPLE in those countries, thus AGW FOR THEM TOO).................this has NOTHING to do with ANYTHING except take as much money as humanly possible from "Big Bad Evil America". I'd laugh at loud at this insanity if it wasn't threatening to take my already meager & uncertain livelihood away. Funny how the poor & lower middle class(the MAJORITY OF AMERICA) gets conveniently lost in this heartless politicking & bullying by the left elite in this country & the "world community"(UN & a few ******** over there who want MONEY MONEY MONEY from the US)........

Emiliano,

You couldn't be more right, "a week of hot or cold weather does not prove anything." Yep, you nailed it. It is because it is a natural cycle. It has nothing to do with human activity. I am going to keep living my life as I normally do. You can see all of these tactics that the alarmists try to do to reduce their made up "carbon footprint" and nothing changes. It's because humans cannot effect global cycles. If you want to worry about something, worry about something real like global terrorism. Maybe global warming alarmists should turn their attention to that.

"then how come the majority of the global warming isn't taking place AT THE SOURCE of the global warming, Evil America, rather than other parts of the world??????? Why wouldn't it effect FIRST AND FOREMOST THE US since we are the almost sole contributors according to everyone??????"

Oh.My.Gosh. Skeptics, do you want to claim this guy as your own? Wow. One of the most ridiculous arguments I've heard...and I've heard a LOT of ridiculous arguments from AGW deniers. This is even more proof that there is a serious lack of understanding about science in general -- not just AGW science -- from the skeptical community.

"I must say, thought, El Nino seems to be fading now, but it was at its peak in December. So... where are the darkish blue shades?"

Dominant in the Pacific since the El Nino faded in December/January. It's been all over the blogs here.

Mark:"Oh.My.Gosh. Skeptics, do you want to claim this guy as your own? Wow. One of the most ridiculous arguments I've heard...and I've heard a LOT of ridiculous arguments from AGW deniers. This is even more proof that there is a serious lack of understanding about science in general -- not just AGW science -- from the skeptical community."

Did I ever SAY I was a scientist?????? How about simply explaining WHERE & HOW my argument is "one of the most ridiculous", or don't you have anything to dish out except insults??? The only thing I see you're able to understand is how to be an insufferable jerk. I'm done; no need to worry about me claiming anything for anyone(I never wanted that; just to state my own damn point of view). Months of being labeled "holocaust denier", "ignorant", "right wing nut", "religious kook" & other childlike unnecessary garbage by the likes of you(which Hannon seems to take ABSOLUTE GLEE in allowing in her comments to show her pathetic yet almost expected bias while ostensibly telling us specifically to refrain from politics & personal insults) has moved me beyond the desire to communicate civilly in these discussions, and I'm not going to apologize for that. I simply quit.

Anonymous - No glee here, I guarantee you that. And as for my bias, I've been accused of bias by both sides. That must mean I'm in the middle.

Anonymous, check www.noaa.gov to see SST in December... I suppose you're not that right.

"Anonymous, check www.noaa.gov to see SST in December"

Emiliano, I said SINCE the El Nino was beginning to fade during that time(and it WAS, hence why it eventually got very cold at the end of January(ask the meteorologists here, and tell me THEY'RE wrong)) it became dominant cool shades, which were becoming pretty visible on the NOAA maps even as far as early fall as I recall(I bookmarked NOAA, I read it every day)). Even during the "El Nino" I recall comparisons between this past 1 & the 1 in 1997-98 which showed marked cooling in this past 1 by comparison(the Pacific as a whole was MUCH warmer in the 97/98 winter than it has been in the other EL Ninos since in fact). My point is Pacific cooling can't be merely brushed off as a local climate event given it's sheer size on the planet, so maybe it's possible this is the beginning of another 30-year global cooling just like from the 1940s to the 70s, so maybe our sea levels won't rise after all, and maybe even in the longer term (the next 100 years) the earth will go back 1C cooler(or to where it was 100 years ago or even earlier), we don't know, but I think we're doing everything we can and will be able to do as more technology, innovations & cost-affordable new cleaner technologies continue to become mass available in the (hopefully) very near future....in the mean time we don't have to jump to all sorts of hysteria & intrusive government regulations that will only hurt the poor or lower middle(those I'm looking out for, people like me(regular people, not corporate demagogues or special interests backed by corporations, the Fed Reserve or whoever)). That's all I have to say. I said in my last post I'm done here, and I don't have to answer to you or anyone....

Anonymous,

Don't waste your breath. In 10 years when the oceans don't boil and our country is economically crushed due to these kinds of people, the AGW crowd will be patting themselves on the back for "saving" the world.