A news article from AP, or so I think, but the entire article could have been simply lifted from the PR literature published by the Democratic supporters of the climate bill (H.R. 2454) that passed the House today.
Questions and answers about the US climate bill (6/26/09 AP via Yahoo Finance) written by Dina Cappiello and Eric Carvin
You can read the article by following the above link. I particularly like the last Q&A that these writers created:
Q: Why is it so important to tackle global warming anyway?
A: Left untended, scientists say, global warming will cause sea levels to rise, increase storms and worsen air pollution. For these reasons, the Environmental Protection Agency recently concluded that six greenhouse gases pose dangers to human health and welfare. And politically, without U.S. action, developing countries like China probably will not agree to mandatory pollution limits.
Not all "scientists" say that, and certainly not all of them link all of global warming to human causes. China probably will not agree, without U.S. action? My humble guess is that China probably will not agree, with or without U.S. action. (Not only that, they will probably stop buying U.S. Treasuries to punish the U.S. for trying to impose limits on them.)
I love their very descriptive consequences of global warming: sea will rise, more storms will hit us... Sky will fall, stars will go dim, mountains will crumble, cow will jump over the moon, and little dog will laugh to see such sight..
In the meantime, we'd better hope it is indeed global warming, not global cooling, as some scientists do think (see my post from 6/23/09).