warming shwarming  the real threat!  Here is the real thing:

"Main article: Overfishing

Research into population trends of various species of seafood is pointing to a global collapse of seafood species by 2048 [1]. Such a collapse would occur due to pollution and overfishing, threatening oceanic ecosystems, according to some researchers."

I don't want to spend any more time arguing about some fool like Algoric the Plunderer's theory.

Ding,

Let's assume that was done in this case. A member of the press might then write an article either before the speech, or shortly after it is given to get it out on the wires. However, this article was written a month after the speech occurred. As such, there is no excuse for misquotes. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Bupkis. Get it?  ns

If the WP does cover it, the article will no doubt credit the new Dem Congress.

You'll say it better someday Johnbo, and it will go something like, " Sorry, Noel, I was wrong."

[  The increase in the earth's surface temperature during the past 150 years is far less than the best climate models predicted.

Based on models, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicted in 1990 that if no further action were taken to curb greenhouse gas emissions, we could expect an increase in temperature between 4.5 degrees and 6.0 degrees Celsius by 2050. In 1996 a new IPCC prediction was for an increase of 0.8 degrees to 3.5 degrees Celsius by 2100 - less than half the warming in twice the time. A U.S. government survey of the global climate model literature conducted predicted even less warming - between 0.5 degrees and 2.0 degrees Celsius by 2100. 

 With every new report the range of warming falls, which implies that the early models on which the most catastrophic claims were based were crude predictors of global climate change.

As the models improve they show less and less warming - which is in line with actual temperature data - and a reduced likelihood of harmful environmental events. Yet even the improved climate models are flawed. When the models' past and present temperature estimates are compared to actual past and present temperature measurements, the models are off by more than a degree. If the models cannot describe past or present temperatures correctly, why should we base public policy decisions on their predictions of future temperatures?

Environmentalists have argued that the slight surface warming of just over 1 degree Fahrenheit the earth has experienced since the mid-1800s must be the result of human activities, since natural temperature changes this substantial occur over hundreds or even thousands of years. But a study published in the October 2, 1998, issue of Science showed that around 12,500 years ago global temperature rose by more than 20 degrees Fahrenheit in approximately 50 years. This natural change was more than 10 times the "catastrophic" warming environmentalists claim humans are causing - and it occurred in half the time. The finding confirms that global climate can change dramatically within a very short period and can do so absent human influence.

Environmentalists also have argued that since the United States is the largest emitter of CO2, the greenhouse gas of primary concern, it should take the lead in reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. Unfortunately for their argument, it turns out that the U.S. is in fact a leading "air filter." According to an October 16, 1998, article in Science, North America removes more carbon (about 2 billion tons) from the atmosphere than it emits (1.5 billion tons) each year. One reason is the tremendous regrowth in the eastern U.S. of forests that act as carbon sinks, removing CO2 from the atmosphere.

Even more damaging to the environmentalists' argument is the fact that most of the warming over the last century occurred before 1940 - preceding the vast majority of human-caused carbon dioxide emissions worldwide. Global warming alarmists have been unable to explain this mismatch between warming theory and scientific data.

Two scientific papers published in March of this year may explain the mismatch quite well. In the March 11 issue of Nature, scientists report that contrary to the belief that both CO2 and global temperature have remained fairly constant during the last 11,000 years, global temperature has remained relatively stable (± 1 1/2 degrees Fahrenheit from the average), but CO2 levels have varied greatly.

In a March 12, 1999, paper in Science, a team of researchers concluded that when the earth shifts from glacial to warm periods, as it does every 100,000 years or so, temperature rise consistently precedes increased CO2 levels by between 400 and 1,000 years. This finding is at odds with global warming theory and the idea that increased levels of CO2 force climate temperatures upward, but it does correspond with reality. The earth came out of a "Little Ice Age" during the middle of the last century. During that time global temperature was about 1 degree cooler than at present. If the current research is correct, one could surmise that the temperature increase at the end of the Little Ice Age has, like previous warming, preceded an entirely natural increase in CO2. While human activities have probably contributed to the current CO2 increase, the link between that increase and warmer temperatures becomes more uncertain with each new scientific discovery.