This article in the Wall Street Journal got my gall because it is indicative of how arguments on major environmental issues are framed in the corporate-driven press. Most would probably agree that Cap and Trade has failed as a way to both keep the economy healthy and deal with Climate Change.
But, this article has taken the political failure and the failure of Cap and Trade to address true measures to reduce anthropogenic created greenhouse gases and sneaked in a dismissive assumption that because of these failures the whole argument and science-back facts of Climate Change have failed to. (note the word “speculative”: “All over the globe, politicians of different ideological stripes are reconsidering the costs of slashing greenhouse gases to combat the speculative problem of global warming.”)
In the real world, the vast majority of scientists (not politicians, journalists, or corporations) do not see Climate Change as “speculative”. Most scientists believe there is overwhelming evidence that Climate change is occurring and doing so quickly. No mention in this article about the science of Climate Change, just the politics, which given the political and economic climate no one really wants to address—except those who are about to be traumatized by the effects of Climate Change.
Tom Switzer: World Rethinks Climate Legislation - WSJ.com Costly cap-and-trade system isn't the political winner it once was. (April 30, 2010) Business News & Financial News - The Wall Street Journal - WSJ.com