The following are the contents of an email to the EPA contact person about the recent EPA ruling:
"...these high levels are very likely the cause of the increase in average temperatures and other changes in our climate."
Re: EPA News Release
The operative phrase in the above quote from the referenced EPA news release is "are very likely" which is a far cry from "is certainly".
The gases mentioned in the news release exist in trace amounts compared to argon, another greenhouse gas that is a natural component of the earth's atmosphere, casting doubt on the the role of those gases as the sole (or even significant) cause of global warming.
In the EPA studies, how much consideration was given to other causes of warming; e.g., cyclical solar activity?
Also, given the consequences of warming listed in the news release, how much consideration was given to the fact that cold kills more people than warmth? That the (warm) tropical zones of the planet are richer in flora and fauna than the (cold) polar zones? That the warming has stalled over the last decade despite ever increasing human activity?
And, finally, how much consideration was given to the idea that the consequences of warming listed in the news release are conjecture as opposed to demonstrable fact?
Alright, people. Now is the time to act. Get to it! Contact the EPA and your Representative.
Update: Comments open up after the proposed regulation (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0171) is published in the Federal Register; probably on Monday, April 20, 2009. A summary of the proposed regulation may be found here. Instructions for composing comments can be found here. Comments may be submitted by email or by using the Web interface at Regulations.gov.