The example that the President cited in your quote above was of our efforts to **reduce** some pollution that actually increased global warming.
A clever person might catch on that GWB slammed the Green movement by citing that example.
Doesn't alter the larger point Bush was making, which is that human activity, according to him, was contributing to the alleged problem of climate change. How else would a "clever" person interpret this part?:
The policy challenge is to act in a serious and sensible way, given the limits of our knowledge. While scientific uncertainties remain, we can begin now to address the factors that contribute to climate change.There are only two ways to stabilize concentration of greenhouse gases. One is to avoid emitting them in the first place; the other is to try to capture them after they're created. And there are problems with both approaches. We're making great progress through technology, but have not yet developed cost-effective ways to capture carbon emissions at their source; although there is some promising work that is being done.
An honest read of the speech, and perhaps even checking the link to see what else was said, would include a discussion of greenhouse gases, especially CO2, that trap heat, and thus warm the earth; as well as two major pollutants that have an impact on warming: black soot and tropospheric ozone.
And to pull out the fact that increased sulphur emission would cause cooling, or that maybe we shouldn't be reducing sulphur emissions, well, I dunno, maybe we shouldn't be reducing sulphur emissions. Is President Bush advocating increasing sulphur emissions? That sure would reduce the cost of diesel production, as well as coal stack scrubbing.
What's that? Sulphur emissions cause acid rain? Oh bother, I guess that could be a detrimental impact on climate too.
Did you check out The Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate?