Global warming and politics

Why did Conservatives deny Global Warming?  Did something happened? The Bush administration was skeptical by refusing to sign an international agreement to reduce global warming. Environmentalists, argued that the phenomenon does exist for example the average temperature have climbed 1.4 degree Fahrenheit (0.8 degree Celsius) around the world since 1880. The Arctic is feeling the effects the most. What is its definition/nature? The Bush administration defined global warming as naturally occurring, while environmentalists base their definition on industry-related causes. What is the Quality? Here the two parties in the issue must demonstrate where the evidence for the dangers of global warming comes from? Who stands to gain if the dangers are accepted as real and present and eventually who stands to lose. What action should be taken/Policy? For the Conservatives, nothing need to be done since global warming is a naturally phenomenon, it will correct itself in time. If, on the other hand, global warming is a clear and present threat to the quality of the atmosphere as the facts showed or environmentalist argued, then the Administration would recommend legislations to regulate global warming. The regulation could impose companies to reduce their Carbone Monoxide, and others policies to protect our environment from mass pollution.