Changes

Line 368: Line 368:     
:::: In all fairness, any source that is going to try to prove a point will be one sided.  The links for cosmic rays and the solar influence are also one sided.  The important thing to do would be to show ''all'' the links and ''all'' the data and let people draw conclusions from that rather than just having a site that supports one side of the controversy and represses the other. --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 20:10, 19 June 2008 (EDT
 
:::: In all fairness, any source that is going to try to prove a point will be one sided.  The links for cosmic rays and the solar influence are also one sided.  The important thing to do would be to show ''all'' the links and ''all'' the data and let people draw conclusions from that rather than just having a site that supports one side of the controversy and represses the other. --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 20:10, 19 June 2008 (EDT
 +
 +
== Obama's carbon cap a "far-reaching, giant tax"? ==
 +
 +
Jpatt, please try not to completely break sentences by re-inserting your edits. Also, I need a reliable source that says that Obama's suggested carbon cap is a tax. A source that calls said tax far-reaching and giant would be even better. I have looked, and the closest thing I could find when I made my edits was that the carbon cap would accomplish the same a tax would, but that most definitely doesn't mean that it ''is'' a tax. --[[User:DirkB|DirkB]] 17:58, 29 August 2008 (EDT)
150

edits