House "Science" Committee's First Action: Hold a Hearing for Deniers

[wtmusic]

Koch-puppet Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) believes the enemy is not climate change but the "the idea of human-made global warming."

"Coming off of the hottest year in U.S. history and 333 months of higher-than-average global temperatures, Rep. Lamar Smith’s (R-TX) first move as the new chair of the House Science and Technology Committee includes a hearing on climate science, according to Dallas News.

For Smith, who criticized “the idea of human-made global warming,” the hearing will be an opportunity to give a platform to the committee’s climate zombies:

I believe climate change is due to a combination of factors, including natural cycles, sun spots, and human activity. But scientists still don’t know for certain how much each of these factors contributes to the overall climate change that the Earth is experiencing. It is the role of the Science Committee to create a forum for discussion so Congress and the American people can hear from experts and draw reasoned conclusions. During this process, we should focus on the facts rather than on a partisan agenda.

Smith has blasted the media as “lap dogs” for not devoting enough airtime to climate deniers and implored networks to not “hide the facts.” Unsurprisingly, he has taken $500,000 from oil and gas over his political career and $10,000 from Koch industries last year."

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/01/18/1440001/house-science-chairs-first-action-is-to-hold-a-climate-denier-hearing/

[DetlefK]

1. So, he wants the Fairness Doctrine back?

[exboyfil]

2. Paul Broun is still on the committee

His presence alone means they have no credibility. The Democrats are not listed.

The jerk Palazzo who voted against Sandy aid is also on the committee.

[exboyfil]

3. Here is part of the problem

Occupations of 112 Congree Members:

http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/R41647.pdf




1 physicist, 1 chemist, 6 engineers, and 1 microbiologist (all in the House)

Out of 535 members, only 9 with technical occupations? You could include doctors but many of them are wack jobs:

2 medical doctors in the Senate, plus 1 veterinarian and 1 ophthalmologist; 15
medical doctors in the House (including one delegate), plus 2 dentists, 1
veterinarian, 1 ophthalmologist, and 1 psychiatrist

[longship]

4. Sunspots? Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha!!!

Sunspot Cycle Ending with Whimper

Plus, the cycle goes up and down in an 11 year cycle which does not correlate with global temperature changes.

[Nederland]

8. Yes, sunspots

The number of sunspots tracks Total Solar Irradiance fairly well. If you think that TSI doesn't impact global temperature you are clueless. The reason that global temperature changes do not correlate with the 11 year sunspot cycle is because TSI is not the only forcing. There are numerous forcings, many of which interact on each other, and pulling out the impact of a single one is almost impossible.

BTW, global temperature changes don't correlate with CO2 increases either...

[longship]

9. Calm down, Francis.

Calling somebody clueless might not endear you to them. Why you have to use such invective here, I have no idea?

What I meant to say, and didn't was that the rising global temperatures are not explained, at all, by sunspots.

And by the way, increased atmospheric CO2 does correlate with increased global temperatures, whether anybody thinks it does or not.

Thank you for your response anyway.

[Nederland]

11. The correlation is only true for short time periods

If you look at a graph of temperatures and CO2 over the last 10000 years, you will see there is no correlation. We have seen swings of 3.0C without any change in CO2 levels.

[wtmusic]

10. TSI fluctuations corresponding to the sunspot cycle don't significantly impact global temperature.

It fluctuates by about .1%.

"We suspect that sunspots do not affect global warming and there is no evidence that they do. The Maunder Minimum ( in sunspot activity ) does coincides with the middle and coldest part of the Little Ice Age ( see Wikipedia on LIA ). But we know that the solar output during sunspot active regions vs sunspot inactive times is a difference of less than one tenth of one percent. This is statistically insignificant and scientists do not consider it a cause for the Little Ice Age.

Warming and cooling cycles are related to temperature variations on planets, but only in relation to the specific gas concentrations on those planets. Venus, Earth and Mars vary in many similar aspects, but not at the same time frame. This implies that the sun, which they all have in common, is not a primary factor for temperature variations. "

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_sunspots_affect_global_warming

There is overwhelming evidence of a correlation between atmospheric CO2 and global temperature.

http://agwobserver.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/papers-on-co2-temperature-correlation/

[Angry Dragon]

5. 'we should focus on the facts' ......... republicans hate facts

[exboyfil]

6. Only three Democratic members

out of 17 have even some technical education beyond High School:

The ranking minority member (Eddie Johnson) has a Nursing B.S.

J.P. Kennedy III studied Management Science and Industrial Engineering at Stanford (I don't know what he got his degree in - did he take the Physics, Chemistry, and Mechanics courses required of most IEs)

Ami Bera is a medical doctor with an undergraduate Biological Sciences degree

Can't we get a PhD level scientist on this committee? Or even one with a M.S. in Science or Engineering? Hearings are golden opportunities to beard the lion in his den and show the world what idiots these guys are.

[wtmusic]

7. Good point

Not sure, but it seems that because these committee memberships are requested by members themselves, Republicans have been going after the Science committee for this very reason.