Congressman Rohrabacher’s speech on climate issues

Congressman Rohrabacher’s speech on climate issues” (2011-12-17). Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher stands up and recites the current extended list of stupid denialist arguments (“ice caps on Mars”, “CO2 is not a pollutant”, “systematic oppression”, “global elites” hate “meat eaters”, etc.). He holds in his hand a list of fifty communists… scratch that… an editorial from Investor’s Business Daily to prove it.

This is now “a matter of public record” for the approving Anthony Watts, thus ending Global Warming once and for all, again.

Rohrabacher for President! He’ll read whatever we shove under his nose!

4 thoughts on “Congressman Rohrabacher’s speech on climate issues

  1. Representative Rohrabacher (R CA),
    … who by his own words doesn’t know the difference between carbohydrates, hydrocarbons or CO2.

    He claims that trees are causing global warming.

    In a House hearing on climate change, Rohrabacher grilled Jerry Mahlman, Chariman of NASA’s Mission to Planet Earth Scientific Advisory Committee and director of NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory. He was dismissive of what Mahlman said. Then skeptic Pat Michaels spoke. Rohrabacher praised him for his contribution and basically gave him a free ride.

    Mahlman had the disadvantage of talking in unemotional, factual scientific terms, which Rohrabacher seemed to care less about.

    Real scientists tend to understate conclusions and speak in terms of probabilities of outcomes, which to the untrained ear, make it sound like they are unsure of the science. This is all people like Rohrabacher need to hear.
    Confirmation that:
    “AGW is UNPROVEN!!!!!!!!!!……….”

    these Congressmen listen with their minds already made up. They never deviate from the script. Rohrabacher, who has no grasp of science whatsoever, showed nothing but contempt for the testimony of Mahlman, and Watson, valuing his own ignorant opinion over theirs.

    [Robert Watson – lead author 1995 IPCC report on climate change impacts:
    Senior scientist of White House Office of Science and Technology
    Elected Chairman of IPCC by unanimous vote in 1996.]

    Robert Watson headed the IPCC until the Bush adminisration used their influence to have him removed because he was convinced of AGW. They had him replaced by Pauchari, who was agnostic, but now is also convinced. So now the deniers attack him.

    • In which our “expert” once again fails to see that “replication” in science should be independent replication, not taking someone’s data and code, and running it. They do not need the CRU code (it is, notably, explained in the literature) to replicate HADCRUT. BEST has shown that…(oh, oops, that’s right, Watts already rejected that result, too).

  2. Is this the very same Congressman who asked Todd Stern this insane question:

    “Is there some thought being given to subsidizing the clearing of rainforests in order for some countries to eliminate that production of greenhouse gases? … Or would people be supportive of cutting down older trees in order to plant younger trees as a means to prevent this disaster from happening?”

    On his own web page has this even bigger furphy anti-science rebuttal direct from the horse’s mouth:

    “Once again those with a global agenda have created a straw man by misrepresenting the position of their critics. I do not believe that CO2 is a cause of global warming, nor have I ever advocated the reduction of CO2 through the clearing of rainforests or cutting down older trees to prevent global warming. But that is how my question to a witness during my subcommittee hearing on May 25th is being reported. I simply asked the witness, Dr. Todd Stern, who is a supporter of a global climate treaty that would dramatically hurt the standard of living for millions of human beings, if he was considering a policy that would address naturally emitted carbon dioxide, which makes up over 90% of emissions.

    To suggest that I’m advocating such a radical approach instead of simply questioning the policy is a total misrepresentation of my position.”

    Meanwhile, back in the real world, where the entire population of the planet Earth actually live:

    “Published today in the journal Nature Climate Change, the new analysis by the Global Carbon Project shows fossil fuel emissions increased by 5.9 per cent in 2010 and by 49 per cent since 1990 – the reference year for the Kyoto protocol.

    On average, fossil fuel emissions have risen by 3.1 per cent each year between 2000 and 2010 – three times the rate of increase during the 1990s. They are projected to continue to increase by 3.1 per cent in 2011.

    Total emissions – which combine fossil fuel combustion, cement production, deforestation and other land use emissions – reached 10 billion tonnes of carbon in 2010 for the first time. Half of the emissions remained in the atmosphere, where CO2 concentration reached 389.6 parts per million. The remaining emissions were taken up by the ocean and land reservoirs, in approximately equal proportions.”

    Say, I can’t seem to remember in the past fifty years hearing, seeing or reading about every dormant volcano or known VEI 7/8/9 super volcanoes, erupting anywhere on the surface or even underwater on this planet called Earth?

    Oh well, super face palm!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s