Defiant Chamber Chief Says ‘Bring ‘Em On’ - Green Inc. Blog - NYTimes.com

He said that the chamber was sorry for the “Scopes monkey trial” analogy raised by a chamber representative this summer in conversations with the media — in which the representative, William Kovacs, vowed to put climate change regulation on trial, similar to the 1920s showdown between creationists and evolutionists.

However, the Chamber would still like a full, public hearing on the science behind the proposed endangerment finding of the Environmental Protection Agency, by which the agency aims to regulate carbon dioxide emissions as it does other forms of pollution.

“We don’t have regrets about our position and we’re not going to change it,” Mr. Donohue said.

That position, as Mr. Donohue said in his opening remarks, is: “We, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, support strong action on climate change.”

Why would you support "strong" action while also questioning the science?

92% of Americans support solar power development, study says | Los Angeles Times

Only 3% already use the sun for energy.
...
And yet only 12% of those polled could say that they were extremely informed about solar power while 74% said they wished they knew more about solar power options.

The study, conducted from Aug. 31 to Sept. 8, was commissioned by German photovoltaic company Schott Solar and the Solar Energy Industries Assn.

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Reid scoffs at size-of-bill complaints

Funny, but while I recall people using the length of the bill as an argument, that argument went to the fact that Reid and Pelosi attempted to shove it through Congress before anyone could read it. Pelosi succeeded with Waxman-Markey and both did with Porkulus, with predictably disastrous results.

Lorne Gunter: The hockey stick myth - Full Comment

Mr. McIntyre has now discovered that Prof. Briffa kept reducing the number of trees from which he used results, so that after 1990, his calculations were based on just 10 trees from the whole of his sample of scores of trees. And after 1995, they were based on just five. This Prof. Briffa justifies on the need to standardize findings to make them comparable. He may be right.

But when Mr. McIntyre plugged more of Prof. Briffa’s data into the calculations, the hockey stick broke again. The 20th century was not particularly warm.