What do you think of the U. S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works minority report on AGW?

Question

400 well respected scientists have weighed in on this debate, giving their opinion to our governing bodies. Some are winners of the Nobel Peace Prize, others are reformed believers. No doubt, the left will continue with their slander and contend that these individuals have been bought off by right winged groups. Consider though, who has been doing the lying. It was claimed by the left that the debate was over and only a handful of scientists, approximately a dozen remained critical of the man- made global warming hypothesis. If you haven't read it, I strongly encourage you to do so. It can be found easily by going to the committee's web site. It is a lengthy document, filled with individual opinions clearly outling the nature of this issue. I hope you will take the time to read at least a portion of the report and give me some feedback. Thanks.

Answer 1

I challenge you to show the Inhofe 400 and their qualifications.

Well, here is the statement form the 50,000 members of the American Geophysical Union.

Another link to the Geological Society of America and it's 21,500 members.

The National Academy of Sciences membership consists of approximately 2,100 members and 350 foreign associates, each of whom is affiliated with one of 31 disciplinary Sections. Their position statement is linked.

You're correct, the Inhofe document is filled with much opinion. The science organizations I've listed is filled with science. Big difference! You still want to run your Inhofe 400?

Answer 2

Just more nonsense from a Senator who gets most of his political contributions from big oil.

One of the 400 "distinguished scientists" is solely based on a letter to the editor of a newspaper from a chemist, citing long disproven arguments.  Dozens are from people with absolutely no background in climatology.

The fact that the "report" (which is actually not a report from the committee, but simply a press release from the Senator's political staff) dredges c**p like this up is a sign of how desperate the global warming deniers have become.

This website analyzes who the "400 distinguished scientists" actually were.

http://www.thedailygreen.com/environment...

MANY actually don't dispute the basic fact of man made global warming, just some small detail.

The fact that the 50,000 member strong American Geophysical Union just strengthened its' policy position that man made global warming is proven fact, is far more significant.

EDIT - birdog - I've read it.  Check out my reference.  The fact is that MOST of Inhofe's phony "report" is c**p.  There aren't 400 "skeptics" listed here.  He counted any small disagreement with some detail as disagreement with the fact of man made global warming.  As I said, desperation.

I agree you shouldn't trust my opinion.  But I'll see you the chemist's letter to the editor and raise you Stephen Hawking.  Most all prominent scientists agree that global warming is mostly man made.  The truly qualified "skeptics" are a tiny minority.  You should no more believe them, than believe my personal opinion.

Answer 3

I just love how some folks insist that 'Man-did-it' Global Warming is a "proven fact".  Such claims are LIES.... plain and simple.  Not even that Al Gore character will state that.  AGW is theory..... NOT Fact!

If we are to honestly discuss Climate Change (aka Global Warming)..... we need to do so ...... honestly.  For example, a previous poster was less than honest when he claimed that Sen. Inhofe received most of his polical contributions from big oil.  That claim is patently false!  The Senator actually receives less than 1/4 of his total from the energy industry.....that includes the electric utility industry.  When an individual posts such (to put it nicely) ..... flawed information, it casts serious doubts on the credibility of that individual.

Answer 4

I think it's a sham.  An objective analysis of the 400 members supports my position.

You did ask.

Answer 5

I think I don't really care what a chemist or botanist or geographer or mathematician or petroleum geologist thinks about climate science.

If you do, you should answer my question linked below.

Answer 6

hey birdog, i've a question.

why do you want global warming to not be true?

really, i don't understand.

keep in mind that most industrialized countries say it's a problem.

the US is pretty much alone in it's denial.

even Bush says it's real, and the only question is what to do about it.

so why do you doubt?

do you work in the coal or oil industries?

are you afraid that gasoline will become more expensive?

do you think that the Nobel Prize committee is part of the "conspiracy" that advocates AGW?

really, i've asked this question several times, and haven't seen an answer.

BB,  <<When an individual posts such ... flawed information, it casts serious doubts on the credibility of that individual.>>

that's true.

what i really hate is when someone tries to support my side of the argument with stupid statements.

it makes me look stupid as well.

(as if i needed help. :)

however:  <<AGW is theory..... NOT Fact!>>

yeah, just like evolution is a theory.

and gravity is a theory.

or not.

birdog,  so i looked for the report.

and which senators signed it.

one.  ONE.  only one single senator was willing to sign his name.

you could, if you chose, think that there might be some significance to that.

but you probably don't.

so, where's he from?  Oklahoma.  and what do they do in oklahoma?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma

<<A major producer of natural gas, oil and food, Oklahoma relies on an economic base of aviation, energy ...>>

it would seem that he wants to get reelected.

there are other coal and oil producing states that have senators.

did you wonder or ask why they didn't join him?

consider whether it would be beneficial to them getting reelected.

and you can be sure that they do want to get another term.

it just ain't so.

but, back to my question.

why, in the face of even oil man BUSH saying that AGW is real and true, do you doubt?

why?

<<Many skeptics have proposed that a warmer climate might be benificial to life on earth.>>

that's the deniers plan.

"it's not happening."

"if it is, it's a normal cycle."

"it couldn't possibly be us.  we're too small to have an impact on the entire planet."

"if it's not normal, then it's the sun -- see mars and pluto are warming too."

"if it's not the sun (the sun is, in fact, cooling) then we really need to understand the problem completely before we do anything."

"if we do understand, and it is real, then it'll be good for us.  more CO2 and warmer means more farmland and more food."

"if it's really a problem, it'll be way to expensive for us to fix."

"we can't address it until every other country in the world does also.  it'll put us at a competitive disadvantage."

yes i've heard them all.  it's the energy industry plan.  "don't do anything to disrupt our profits.  we don't care what excuse anyone uses, just don't mess with our profits."

<< What's your story? Why do you so desire to believe that AGW is a fact?>>

it sure would be best if it was not true.

but it is.

that's what the science says.

that's what the IPCC says.

that's what the Nobel Prize committee says.

that's what every industrialized nation except the US says.

many quote the 400 scientists that question.

what about the tens of thousands of other scientists that say it's a real problem.

does their opinion not matter?

are they stupid?

i'd like it not to be true.  but it is.

<<It was claimed by the left that the debate was over and only a handful of scientists, approximately a dozen remained critical of the man- made global warming hypothesis.>>

where'd you get this?  it's not true and you know it.

<<Consider though, who has been doing the lying.>>