Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

analysis

Book Tour Shows Palin
Hitting a Nerve

'Going Rogue' phenomenon may foreshadow something bigger

Nov 22, 09 2:46 PM CST
Matt Taibbi

Palin: Our First WWE Politician

Pick an asshole, any asshole, and she'll rock the house

Nov 22, 09 10:44 AM CST
ROLLICKING RHODE ISLAND

Zip It on
Communion
Ban: Bishop
to Kennedy

Tobin thinks Patrick's spiritual matters should be left private

8 hours, 14 minutes ago
Once-Profitable Services
Are Killing Local Budgets

Utilities, transport, even gambling, are now $3.5B drains

9 hours, 44 minutes ago
Debt-Happy US Faces Payback Time as Rates Rise

Cost of debt to skyrocket $500B in next 10 years

14 hours, 7 minutes ago
editorial

NYT to Blankfein:
Your 'Apology'
Is Bull

Editorial board schools Goldman CEO in true meaning of 'sorry'

Nov 22, 09 4:53 PM CST
the big plan

Beck Will Host Conventions
to Educate America

He's shifting toward political organizer, plans big DC rally

Nov 21, 09 5:06 PM CST
First State Dinner to
Reveal Obama A-Listers

Mad scramble for invitations

19 hours, 53 minutes ago
Ethics Panel Charges Sanford With 37 Violations

Civil committee slams SC gov for travel expenses

7 hours, 11 minutes ago
Jim DeMint Becomes Hill's Top Tea Partier

South Carolina senator throws weight behind conservative insurgents

13 hours, 48 minutes ago
Palin Pulls in Big Bucks
—for Democrats

'Going Rogue' boosts Dem fundraising to new high

Nov 21, 09 6:50 AM CST
who let the paranoids out?

46 Years After Kennedy, the Virus of Hate Is Back

Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert panders to dangerous paranoids

Nov 21, 09 9:08 AM CST
Congress' New
Whipping Boy:
The Fed

Bernanke & Co. run into populist ire over Wall St bailouts, unemployment

12 hours, 42 minutes ago

|NEXT STORY »

OPINION

Krugman: Get Ready for Climate Lies

Curbing emissions won't actually cost much

By Kevin Spak| Posted Sep 25, 09 7:54 AM CDT|

(Newser) – If you liked the health care debate, you’re going to love the upcoming battle over climate change, says Paul Krugman. The House has already passed a decent bill, but the Senate battle will bring out “the usual suspects.” Some will keep insisting that global warming isn’t real. “But that argument is wearing thin—as thin as the Arctic pack ice,” which you can now drive ships through.

So instead, most opponents will argue that reducing emissions would cost too much. But those claims “are as bogus, in their own way, as climate denial.” The House bill would cost the average family just $160 a year by 2020, or 0.2% of income, according to CBO estimates. Opponents keep spouting more dire estimates, but they’re not based on competing findings. They’re based on lies. “The truth is that it’s relatively easy being green.”

[Images (2)]

[Quotes (2)]

Participants at an Energy Citizens rally in Anchorage, Alaska, to protest climate change legislation passed by the House and under consideration in the Senate, Aug. 31, 2009. (AP Photo/Al Grillo, file)

Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman delivers a speech at the Seoul Global Financial Conference in Seoul, South Korea, Tuesday, May 19, 2009. (AP Photo/ Hankuk Economic newspaper, HO)

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

The claim that climate legislation will kill the economy deserves the same disdain as the claim that global warming is a hoax. - Paul Krugman

The campaign against saving the planet rests mainly
on lies. - Paul Krugman

« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow

11.23.09

Books Are Bad for You

11.20.09

The Health-Care Wars Have Just Begun

56 comments

VIEWING:

Doctor_Zaius
Sep 25, 09 7:56 AM CDT

Queue up Newsers know-nothing climate change deniers. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

Doctor_Zaius
Sep 25, 09 9:02 AM CDT

Ask and ye shall receive

IN RESPONSE:

dontlikeyou
Sep 25, 09 9:48 AM CDT

Krugman, the world has been hearing the lies about global warming for years now. Before, it was global cooling. Now the socialists who want to tax us in the name of the "common good" comrades are calling it "climate change" as if that is somehow going to make us run around in a panic. Liberals have no creedance except with other liberals. You are preaching to the choir and the congregation is looking at you like a complete moron.

-6

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Sep 25, 09 9:52 AM CDT

How pious of you Zaius. How about Alan Carlin, the NASA scientist who doesn't by into man's contribution to climate change or the thousands of other scientists who have said in a petition that they don't ascribe to man made global warming. Are these people "know nothings" too?

-1

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Sep 25, 09 9:53 AM CDT

"buy" into for all the grammar nazi's out there.

-2

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Sep 25, 09 10:00 AM CDT

http://www.oism.org/pproject/

IN RESPONSE:

Doctor_Zaius
Sep 25, 09 10:07 AM CDT

You mean the petition that wasn’t limited to scientists who were experts in the field of climate change? The petition that was made available to anyone who “claimed” to have a B.S. Degree or higher? The petition where no evidence was ever produced that the signatories and their credentials were checked? The petition which contained many falsified names that wouldn’t pass an Acorn voter registration check? Do you mean the petition that claimed to show a consensus or strong majority of scientific doubt on global climate change without ever disclosing the number of scientists who failed to respond or disagreed with the petition? That petition? No never heard of it.

IN RESPONSE:

Doctor_Zaius
Sep 25, 09 10:10 AM CDT

And for every Alan Carlin there are 1000 scientists with just as good of credentials that disagree with him.

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Sep 25, 09 10:23 AM CDT

references to your accusations please. There are plenty of university scientists who don't buy into it. On short notice I found this site that lists a few: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming. So here are maybe a total of proven scientists who don't buy into global warming. My question still Zaius is are they "know nothings" too. I don't care if you have more scientists or less, the point is twofold: 1. There is no scientific consensus and 2. Just because one side may have more voices, doesn't make the opposition less valild.

IN RESPONSE:

Fondue
Sep 25, 09 10:24 AM CDT

I heard the petition was a fake.

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Sep 25, 09 10:26 AM CDT

Individuals in this section conclude that the observed warming is more likely attributable to natural causes than to human activities. * Khabibullo Abdusamatov, mathematician and astronomer at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences: "Global warming results not from the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but from an unusually high level of solar radiation and a lengthy - almost throughout the last century - growth in its intensity...Ascribing 'greenhouse' effect properties to the Earth's atmosphere is not scientifically substantiated...Heated greenhouse gases, which become lighter as a result of expansion, ascend to the atmosphere only to give the absorbed heat away."[13][14][15] * Sallie Baliunas, astronomer, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics: "[T]he recent warming trend in the surface temperature record cannot be caused by the increase of human-made greenhouse gases in the air."[16] * George V. Chilingar, Professor of Civil and Petroleum Engineering at the University of Southern California: "The authors identify and describe the following global forces of nature driving the Earth’s climate: (1) solar radiation ..., (2) outgassing as a major supplier of gases to the World Ocean and the atmosphere, and, possibly, (3) microbial activities ... . The writers provide quantitative estimates of the scope and extent of their corresponding effects on the Earth’s climate [and] show that the human-induced climatic changes are negligible."[17] * Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa: "That portion of the scientific community that attributes climate warming to CO2 relies on the hypothesis that increasing CO2, which is in fact a minor greenhouse gas, triggers a much larger water vapour response to warm the atmosphere. This mechanism has never been tested scientifically beyond the mathematical models that predict extensive warming, and are confounded by the complexity of cloud formation - which has a cooling effect. ... We know that [the sun] was responsible for climate change in the past, and so is clearly going to play the lead role in present and future climate change. And interestingly... solar activity has recently begun a downward cycle."[18] * David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester: "The observed pattern of warming, comparing surface and atmospheric temperature trends, does not show the characteristic fingerprint associated with greenhouse warming. The inescapable conclusion is that the human contribution is not significant and that observed increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases make only a negligible contribution to climate warming."[19] * Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University: "global warming since 1900 could well have happened without any effect of CO2. If the cycles continue as in the past, the current...

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Sep 25, 09 10:27 AM CDT

Listed a few "know nothings" above.

IN RESPONSE:

paul123
Sep 25, 09 10:29 AM CDT

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

IN RESPONSE:

Fondue
Sep 25, 09 10:37 AM CDT

Let me be more clear, I heard it was faked.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

Fondue
Sep 25, 09 10:40 AM CDT

Also, that is a list of scientist who do not deny the existence of climate change. I was referring to the petition.

IN RESPONSE:

JaneMP
Sep 25, 09 12:24 PM CDT

Paul--I'll give you Alan Carlin but will off set that with these who believe global warming is a great problem and worsened by human activity: James J. McCarthy, Thomas Eisner, James A. Fay, Richard L. Garwin, Kurt Gottfried, Anne R. Kapuskinsk, Edward L. Miles and more than I want to type now.

IN RESPONSE:

Aelius28
Sep 26, 09 6:59 PM CDT

In response to the second replier, dontlikeyou, it was never global cooling "before". Global cooling never had significant scientific support, it was more a media sensation. Secondly, nobody is talking about taxing anyone except maybe corporations for carbon emissions, and that's just one of the proposed methods for reducing carbon emissions. And finally, you pretty much destroyed any credibility or authenticity you may have had when you talked about socialists. United States liberals are overall so centrist that they don't even breach the left hemisphere of the political spectrum. The political spectrum in America is shifted to the right so far that even America's "left" is still technically "right". The American "right" is WAY right, but nobody even comes close to socialism as it's known in Europe. And so what if it did? I'm sure you enjoy someone picking up your trash every week, I'm sure you enjoy police, firemen, ambulances, and I'm sure mom and dad enjoy Medicare which is *gasp* socialism. You're an idiot.

| 0 minutes ago

Adapt-Overcome
Sep 25, 09 7:59 AM CDT

It's just another distraction for the Party of No Solutions. Nothing more or should I say, more of the same. Reply

-4

| 0 minutes ago

Citrixguy
Sep 25, 09 8:01 AM CDT

Hey Krugman, we have been having lies for years...all from al gore and his CGI polar bears Reply

| 0 minutes ago

Citrixguy
Sep 25, 09 8:02 AM CDT

Let's face it boys and girls...Global warming is a new religion. In the 80's it was global cooling, the coming of the great ice age. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

hybrid
Sep 25, 09 8:04 AM CDT

coolest year since the 20s, damn those hydo-carbons Reply

IN RESPONSE:

Citrixguy
Sep 25, 09 8:08 AM CDT

coolest year since the 20s...that's a sign of global warming, just like everything else

IN RESPONSE:

dax
Sep 25, 09 8:53 AM CDT

The conclusions expressed in the above two statements demonstrate just how little these posters understand the climate mechanism that can produce cooler temperatures in some areas while the earth and its oceans grow warmer as the result of increased CO2 levels.

IN RESPONSE:

dax
Sep 25, 09 8:56 AM CDT

Or....they understand, but will "burn down the house" to justify their preconceptions about the distribution of political power.

| 0 minutes ago

jagerhans
Sep 25, 09 8:14 AM CDT

why squandering money over expensive countermeasures to fight climate mess when the environmental armagheddon will come for free ? also, who needs clean air to breathe and good water to drink ? yes, always those f*ing annoying socialist fags Reply

-2

IN RESPONSE:

dontlikeyou
Sep 25, 09 9:51 AM CDT

Socialists are not fags, jagerhans, they are criminals, wishing to reach in the pocket of another to spend money on things that they lie about. It is a crime supported by the state. In America, we used to call it the "Mafia". Now it is called the "democrat party".

-7

IN RESPONSE:

aprilfool
Sep 25, 09 9:59 AM CDT

@don'tlikeyou: what about the billions of $$$ we've spent (and are spending) on the Iraq war, and the thousands of soldiers and civilians who have lost their lives-- all based upon republican lies?

IN RESPONSE:

polytricks
Sep 25, 09 10:58 AM CDT

@aprilfool: One set of wrong actions certainly do not deserve another. This isn't a game where both parties get a fair turn to screw things up. Fine, we'll go to war, but in return, we need strict environmental regulations. How callous.

IN RESPONSE:

polytricks
Sep 25, 09 11:00 AM CDT

@aprilfool: And you can't in good conscience paint both wars as Republican-only, now. The Dems have had since 2007 to get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan. That was one of the things President Obama was elected to do...the peace candidates are now the war candidates themselves.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

aprilfool
Sep 25, 09 11:54 AM CDT

@polytricks: Your reading far too much into my comment and making some enormous leaps of logic in the process. I'm not arguing that two wrongs make a right, nor do I think both parties should get a chance to "screw things up." My comment was pointed directly at "dontlikeyou" and his/her ridiculous assertions in his/her comment. I want our troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq ASAP, but now that we're there, I feel we have a responsibility to stabilize the mess we're in the midst of before jumping ship. That would be totally irresponsible.

IN RESPONSE:

jagerhans
Sep 25, 09 1:45 PM CDT

dontlike, criminal is war, criminal are Bush&Cheney, not hospitals schools and welfare and this has nothing to do with socialism , however just to make things clear i am an active militant communist and my post was all sarcasm .

-1

| 0 minutes ago

blp1013
Sep 25, 09 8:28 AM CDT

there is no global warming - the climate has been cooling for several years p that is why Obama is calling it "Climate Change" now. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

Fondue
Sep 25, 09 8:39 AM CDT

Hey I know! Let the free market fix it. It'll be great. Water will cost 4x it does today and will have to buy compressed air just to go outside. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

Fondue
Sep 25, 09 8:42 AM CDT

LOL *we'll* not will

IN RESPONSE:

godawgs
Sep 25, 09 9:07 AM CDT

do you think that if we don't get china and India on board with the climate change our measures our going to have that much affect?

IN RESPONSE:

Fondue
Sep 25, 09 9:20 AM CDT

Lead by example or make them do it first. Which is better? I agree with you though, we need China and India on board.

IN RESPONSE:

godawgs
Sep 25, 09 9:32 AM CDT

@fondue I don't know, i think that we should really get them on board and started doing it first, because I think that the US will be more apt to green then China. I also think that even if we give them a head start we can catch up technology wise.

-2

IN RESPONSE:

dontlikeyou
Sep 25, 09 9:53 AM CDT

Silliness. If you wish to contribute to the environment liberals, then stop flying in Airplanes, stop driving your cars and donate your extra money to the government.... stop taking it from your fellow countrymen in the name of your fantasies!!!

IN RESPONSE:

polytricks
Sep 25, 09 10:56 AM CDT

@godawds: Who are we to say no to the industrialization of China and India? A better life for their citizens and more jobs is what lies ahead...but limiting resources when we had no such limitations during our development is a bit hypocritical, right?

IN RESPONSE:

godawgs
Sep 25, 09 11:17 AM CDT

@poly our industrialization was taking place before there was knowledge that we have now. I can see the point of being hypocritical but we have more knowledge now then we did then as well. So I don't think that we are stopping them from industrializing more and trying to get a better life for their people, by insuring that it doesn't cause massive world shortages in the future.

IN RESPONSE:

IndependentThinker
Sep 25, 09 11:42 AM CDT

Chain is quickly becoming the leader in green power and technology, India on the other hand is quickly becoming the leader in pollutions. But why care about them when we still have a lot to do here?

IN RESPONSE:

Fondue
Sep 25, 09 10:35 AM CDT

Actually Webqueen, he is in fact speaking for the American People. A very large majority in fact. He may not be speaking for you and your friends, but he certainly is speaking for more than just himself and Gore. And do tell us about the daily lies. I haven't heard one. So prove your accusation. He's been in office for 248 days, so you need to provide 248 lies with undeniable proof.

IN RESPONSE:

JaneMP
Sep 25, 09 12:21 PM CDT

Webqueen, President Obama is your president, too, as much as you hate to admit this. We live in a democracy. He was elected by a majority. That's the way the USA works. We follow the Constitution. As much as I disliked W's policies (as much as you dislike our present president's) he was president. As Americans, we should all respect the office.

IN RESPONSE:

Fondue
Sep 25, 09 5:52 PM CDT

Webqueen, I figured as much. You don't know of a single lie. Too numerous to mention? Yet you mentioned them first. You are pathetic at this. Shut it up if you can't back it up.

IN RESPONSE:

Aelius28
Sep 26, 09 7:06 PM CDT

And yet, Webqueen, you cannot provide even ONE lie. Furthermore, do you really expect any President to speak for everyone? Do you expect any President to even speak for 3/4 of people? It won't happen, that's the nature of politics, one party wins and the other party changes its positions enough so as to garner support of the other half. You'll never find approval ratings in the 80s, and rarely ever in the 70s. It's laughably anecdotal to suggest that because you and your other high-school educated conservative buddies who can't tell Communism and Fascism apart happen to agree to disapprove of Obama that it is somehow indicative of WIDESPREAD disapproval. No, you and your toothless slack-jawed muppets with shit for brains speak only for yourselves.

| 0 minutes ago

WallyEFunk
Sep 25, 09 10:29 AM CDT

This is a standard government trick. make it sound real bad. asking for lots,then settle for less. And Yes ,start in Ur own back yard, before looking into Ur neigbours. But maybe charge duties to item from country's with poor evironmnetal practices, to help pay for America's changes. putting pressure for them to make changes. Nothing gets PPl to change faster then money out of their pockets. Reply

-1

IN RESPONSE:

LogicAppeal
Sep 25, 09 2:52 PM CDT

It is an enticing concept, but only punishes regular people who wanted those goods they can't get or for which they have to pay more. Further, given that we are in a deep recession, look into the protectionism of Smoot Hawley and the Great Depression into which it clamped us. Very dangerous, even if well intentioned.

IN RESPONSE:

WallyEFunk
Sep 25, 09 6:11 PM CDT

So its back to, if it add cost don't do it? Well then get rid of EPA .Do what China's India does with getting raw material, and removal of manufaturing process waste. There has to be a cost.

| 0 minutes ago

polytricks
Sep 25, 09 10:52 AM CDT

I thought this was over? The researcher whose publication from which the entire global warming movement spawned (and Al Gore's graph in his Inconvenient Truth presentations) was determined as fake. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

polytricks
Sep 25, 09 10:53 AM CDT

And very tactful of Krugman. His health care op-eds didn't quite have the effect he wanted on the health care debate, so he's getting a head start on the global warming debate by taking the higher ground. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

Silverbow7
Sep 25, 09 3:07 PM CDT

Warm or cold, I just want clean air to breathe. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

freethemall
Sep 26, 09 12:25 AM CDT

As I said before, I'll say again, all this global warming denying noise, very much resembles the noise of those who for years denied that nicotine is a addicting carcinogenic substance. Reply

IN RESPONSE:

Fromthemiddle
Sep 26, 09 1:09 PM CDT

Actually nicotine is not carcinogenic.

IN RESPONSE:

freethemall
Sep 26, 09 2:39 PM CDT

I stand corrected. Nicotine is the substance that causes cigarettes to be addictive. Other substances in the cigarette are carcinogenic. This may be the first time I have ever been mistaken about anything. Nah.

-1

IN RESPONSE:

Aelius28
Sep 26, 09 7:08 PM CDT

It actually reminds me more of earlier decades when the public widely believed that if pot is legal Mexicans will come to your house, rape your sister and eat your babies. "no it iz truu! i sawed a profeshunal man in a lab coat sai it!!!"

| 0 minutes ago

radnip
Sep 28, 09 12:31 AM CDT

Interesting how business is always yelling about legislation killing them, but the biggest business murderers are themselves, as they're the ones always defrauding each other, cheating each other, and coming up with fake valuations for each other. Today I can't decide whether I'm laughing at those business people, who get well-paid to learn nothing about running their businesses, or crying for the stupid workers who don't realize who's really ripping them off. Reply

| 0 minutes ago

View all 56 comments »

climate change • cap and trade • Paul Krugman • Waxman-Markey

from our news partners

Body of 'Housewives' Ex Will Be Exhumed
(5 hours, 40 minutes ago)
Fiery and Fabulous: Hollywood's Most Riveting Redheads
(6 hours, 6 minutes ago)
Was Lambert's AMA Romp Too Much?
(8 hours, 35 minutes ago)
The Age Old Question: When Should Stars Stop Partying?
(8 hours, 47 minutes ago)

This may be the worst police sketch in the history...
(6 minutes ago)
War crimes should be disallowed in video games, just like...
(28 minutes ago)
School board won't allow students to wear anti-Islam t-shirts. ACLU...
(1 hour, 5 minutes ago)
Rich town will install cameras to photograph every license plate...
(1 hour, 23 minutes ago)

First Trailer For Baumbach's Greenberg
(3 hours, 58 minutes ago)
Sony Recruits Conan Writers To Pen Uncharted
(5 hours, 31 minutes ago)
New Poster For The Road Advertises Rolling Stone
(5 hours, 46 minutes ago)
Poster For District 13: Ultimatum
(6 hours, 40 minutes ago)

Associated Press

Key scientist says leak of stolen climate change e-mails could be aimed at...
(12 hours, 57 minutes ago)
Scientist: Leak of climate e-mails appalling
(Nov 22, 09 7:27 PM CST)
Turmoil from climate change poses security risks
(Oct 29, 09 12:10 AM CDT)
Turmoil from climate change poses security risks
(Oct 28, 09 8:09 PM CDT)

What is Newser?

Face it: there's too much news. At Newser, we choose the most important stories from hundreds of US and international sources and reduce them to a headline, picture, and two paragraphs. And we do it 24/7—you can come back morning, noon, night (and in between) for something new that matters. Read less, know more.

Learn more »

x

Krugman: Get Ready for Climate Lies

Curbing emissions won't actually cost much

[Images (2)]

[Quotes (2)]

Climate Skeptics:
Hacked Emails
Prove We're Right

Scientist talks about adding a 'trick' to graph

MORE ABOUT:
climate change • global warming • email • scientists • skeptics • hacking

AIG Bailout Squandered Our Money, Trust

Geithner & Co. were afraid to ask Wall Street for concessions

MORE ABOUT:
AIG • Paul Krugman • bailout • Troubled Asset Relief Program • Wall Street bailout • Timothy Geithner • TARP

Carbon-Tax Foes Must Think the End Is Nigh

How else to explain them being OK with the exploding population?

MORE ABOUT:
climate change • environment • cap and trade • Thomas Friedman • petrodollar • overpopulation • climate change legislation • carbon taxes • population growth

climate change • cap and trade • Paul Krugman • Waxman-Markey

MOST POPULAR STORIES

[ By Views ]

[ By Comments ]

from our news partners

Associated Press

About

Help

Tools

Site Maps

What is Newser?

x

Krugman: Get Ready for Climate Lies

Curbing emissions won't actually cost much

[Images (2)]

[Quotes (2)]

Related Newser Stories

Climate Skeptics: Hacked Emails Prove We're Right

Scientist talks about adding a 'trick' to graph

MORE ABOUT: climate change • global warming • email • scientists • skeptics • hacking

Paul Krugman

AIG Bailout Squandered Our Money, Trust

Geithner & Co. were afraid to ask Wall Street for concessions

MORE ABOUT: AIG • Paul Krugman • bailout • Troubled Asset Relief Program • Wall Street bailout • Timothy Geithner • TARP

Thomas Friedman

Carbon-Tax Foes Must Think the End Is Nigh

How else to explain them being OK with the exploding population?

MORE ABOUT: climate change • environment • cap and trade • Thomas Friedman • petrodollar • overpopulation • climate change legislation • carbon taxes • population growth

climate change • cap and trade • Paul Krugman • Waxman-Markey

MOST POPULAR STORIES

[ By Views ]

[ By Comments ]

from our news partners

Associated Press

About

Help

Tools

Site Maps

What is Newser?

Climate Skeptics:
Hacked Emails
Prove We're Right

MORE ABOUT:
climate change • global warming • email • scientists • skeptics • hacking

MORE ABOUT:
AIG • Paul Krugman • bailout • Troubled Asset Relief Program • Wall Street bailout • Timothy Geithner • TARP

MORE ABOUT:
climate change • environment • cap and trade • Thomas Friedman • petrodollar • overpopulation • climate change legislation • carbon taxes • population growth