i think the epa conducted faulty almost burtless endangerment protocol -- almost superfluous endangermentprotocol. it is laughable. the group within the epa is supposed to serve as something of a watchdog and fact checker. his executive summary, he says there are 89 reasons that it falls on its face. if anyone of these reasons is right, he was not allowed to put that in the record. he was told to shut up and stop working on it. that is not proper procedure. i was here when the clean air act amendments were passed in the early 1990's. we were very clear in that legislation that we were regulating certain criteria pollutants'. we talked about co2 and decided that was not something that should be covered by the clean air act. it is not designed to. the limits in the clean air act did not apply to co2. co2 is odorless, colorless tasteless. it is not a threat to human health in terms of being exposed to it. we created as we talk back and forth. -- we create it as we got back and forth. as you go beyond that, on a net basis there is ample evidence that warming generically however it is called,