Check out the final word on the global warming issue. Go to the NY
Times and search for Philip A. Cooney in the search function. Here's an
excerpt verbatim from over the weekend:



-Begin NY Times Article-


Bush's Environmental Editor
"Philip A. Cooney's job in the Bush administration is akin to the food
taster of a bygone age. Instead of taking the first bite of the royal
pudding to make suree it's safe to eat, Cooney is the first to see
scientific reports relating to climate change before they are released
to the public. He then edits the text to his political bosses' liking,
even if that means twisting the truth, which this administration seems
to view as poisonous. Typical was how Cooney marked up a draft
report-obtained by the NY Times-that was supposed to help Americans
understand what their government is doing about global warming. Where
the draft stated a clear role for the Climate Change Research Initiative
"to facilitate ful use of scientific information in policy and decision
making," Cooney injected uncertainty. Under his rewrite, the final
report reads that the CCRI's role is also to "to reduce the significant
remaining uncertainties associated with human-induced climate change."
Who said anything about uncertainties about global warming? Not the
broad scientific community. Not our allies such as Britain, whose
leaders have been trying to convince us to take the problem seriously.
Cooney's qualifications for drawing such conclusions are suspect. Before
becoming Chief of Staff to the White House Council on Environmental
Quality, he was a lawyer without scientific training and a lobbyist for
the American Petroleum Institute. As a producer of the main culprit in
climate change -fossil fuel- the petroleum industry has an entirely
different take on global warming. Maybe that explains why Cooney can
turn a definitive statement about the threat from raid melting of the
polar ice caps into this seemingly benign gobbledygook: "Warming could
also lead to changes in the water cycle in polar regions." This isn't
the first time the Bush administration has played loose with the truth
or allowed a special interest group to influence outcomes that were
based on science/. A group of renowned American scientists has
criticized the administration for stacking advisory groups with
unqualified or conflicted experts, censoring reports by goverment
scientists and failing to seek independent scientific advice. In the
hands of a revisionist like Cooney, that could turn into high praise."
-end of article-