Amazingly enough - once upon a time everyone got around on horse back. THEN amazingly enough cars came in and replaced horses. Didn't need the government to interfere then - why do we need it now? When the next innovation comes along - it will replace what came before and it will do so without government force. If you need the government to force the change - then it's not really time for the change then is it?
Oil, coal, and energy are already positioning themselves for the next big round of bailouts in 2010. It won't happen. They'll blame the Dems, throw a ton of money at the midterms, maybe win back some seats, possibly a majority, but all that money would be better spent on R&D. They'll lose market share to smaller upstarts and fall behind on new tech development when they could and should be at the forefront.
Corrupt and unethical? Kinda like the guy who owns a carbon cap and trading firm pushing for carbon cap and trade regulations by the government? The government giving out money at all is corrupt and unethical.
I don't even get where you're coming from...
I point out that OP and Drudge are tying to imply that a certain study proves or disproves something that it doesn't. What's you're deal? Blogs and pundits disputing Al Gore and global warming end up pushing the GOP and conservative thinkers toward some pretty corrupt and unethical business practices. This doesn't help reinvent the party or further the cause.
OH and as for how much the oceans are going to go up - the answer is a few centimeters at most - NOT the 6 feet that AL Gore and the extreme alarmists claim. Anyone who knows anything about history knows that.
BTW - how did you disprove the fact that cyclonic activity is at a 30 year low? I seem to have missed that . . . .