AMERICA REACTS TO SPEECH DEBUNKING MEDIA GLOBAL WARMING ALARMISM

---

September 28, 2006

SENATOR JAMES INHOFE, CHAIRMAN, SENATE ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE SENATE FLOOR SPEECH DELIVERED THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2006

Contact: Marc Morano (202) 224-5762 ( marc_morano@epw.senate.gov ) Matt Dempsey ( matthew_dempsey@epw.senate.gov ) (202) 224-9797

Click Here To Watch or Read Full Speech from Monday Debunking Global Warming Hysteria ( http://epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759 )

This past Monday, I took to this floor for the eighth time to discuss global warming. My speech focused on the myths surrounding global warming and how our national news media has embarrassed itself with a 100-year documented legacy of coverage on what turned out to be trendy climate science theories.

Over the last century, the media has flip-flopped between global cooling and warming scares. At the turn of the 20th century, the media peddled an upcoming ice age -- and they said the world was coming to an end. Then in the 1930s, the alarm was raised about disaster from global warming -- and they said the world was coming to an end. Then in the 70’s, an alarm for another ice age was raised -- and they said the world was coming to an end. And now, today we are back to fears of catastrophic global warming -- and again they are saying the world is coming to an end.

Today I would like to share the fascinating events that have unfolded since my floor speech on Monday.

CNN CRITICIZES MY SPEECH

This morning, CNN ran a segment criticizing my speech on global warming and attempted to refute the scientific evidence I presented to counter climate fears.

First off, CNN reporter Miles O’Brien inaccurately claimed I was “too busy” to appear on his program this week to discuss my 50 minute floor speech on global warming. But they were told I simply was not available on Tuesday or Wednesday.

I did appear on another CNN program today -- Thursday -- which I hope everyone will watch. The segment airs tonight on CNN’s Glenn Beck Show on Headline News at 7pm and repeats at 9pm and midnight Eastern.

Second, CNN’s O’Brien falsely claimed that I was all “alone on Capitol Hill” when it comes to questioning global warming.

Mr. O’Brien is obviously not aware that the U.S. Senate has overwhelmingly rejected Kyoto style carbon caps when it voted down the McCain-Lieberman climate bill 60-28 last year – an even larger margin than its rejection in 2003.

Third, CNN’s O’Brien, claimed that my speech earlier contained errors regarding climate science. O’Brien said my claim that the Antarctic was actually cooling and gaining ice was incorrect. But both the journals Science and Nature have published studies recently finding – on balance – Antarctica is both cooling and gaining ice.

CNN’s O’Brien also criticized me for saying polar bears are thriving in the Arctic. But he ignored that the person I was quoting is intimately familiar with the health of polar bear populations. Let me repeat what biologist Dr. Mitchell Taylor from the Arctic government of Nunavut, a territory of Canada, said recently:

“Of the 13 populations of polar bears in Canada, 11 are stable or increasing in number. They are not going extinct, or even appear to be affected at present.”

CNN’s O’Brien also ignores the fact that in the Arctic, temperatures were warmer in the 1930’s than today.

O’Brien also claimed that the “Hockey Stick” temperature graph was supported by most climate scientists despite the fact that the National Academy of Sciences and many independent experts have made it clear that the Hockey Stick’s claim that the 1990’s was the hottest decade of the last 1000 years was unsupportable.

So it seems my speech struck a nerve with the mainstream media. Their only response was to cherry pick the science in a failed attempt to refute me.

It seems that it is business as usual for many of them. Sadly, it looks like my challenge to the media to be objective and balanced has fallen on deaf ears.

SPEECH BYPASSED THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA

Despite the traditional media’s failed attempt to dismiss the science I presented to counter global warming alarmism, the American people bypassed the tired old traditional media by watching CSPAN or clicking on the Drudge Report and reading the speech online.

From the flood of overwhelming positive feedback I received, I can tell you the American people responded enthusiastically to my message.

The central theme was not only one of thanks, but expressing frustration with the major media outlets because they knew in their guts that what they have been hearing in the news was false and misleading.

Here is a brief sampling:

Janet of Saugus, Massachusetts: “Thank you Senator Inhofe. Finally someone with the guts to stand up and call it what it is -- a sham. I think you have taken over Toby Keith's place as my favorite Oklahoman!!”

Al of Clinton, Connecticut writes: “It's about time someone with a loud microphone spoke up on the global warming scam. You have courage - if only this message could get into the schools where kids are being brow-beaten with the fear message almost daily.”

Kevin of Jacksonville, Florida writes: “I’m so glad that we have leaders like you who are willing to stand up against the onslaught of liberal media, Hollywood and the foolish elected officials on this topic. Please keep up the fight!”

Steven of Phoenix, Arizona writes: “As a scientist, I am extremely pleased to see that there is at least one member of congress who recognizes the global warming hysteria for what it is. I am extremely impressed by the Senator's summary and wish he was running for President.”

Craig of Grand Rapids, Michigan writes: “As a meteorologist I strongly agree with everything you said.”

My speech ignited an internet firestorm. So much so, that my speech became the subject of a heated media controversy in New Zealand. Halfway across the globe, a top official from the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition challenged New Zealand’s television station to balance what he termed “alarmist doom-casting” and criticized them for failing to report the views of scientists in their own country that I cited here in America.

( http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0609/S00306.htm )

As the controversy in New Zealand shows, global warming hysteria has captured more than just the American media.

The reaction to my speech keeps coming in: Just this morning, The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review newspaper wrote an editorial calling my speech “an unusual display of reason” on the Senate floor.

I do have to give credit to another publication, Congressional Quarterly, or CQ for short. On Tuesday, CQ’s Toni Johnson took the issues I raised seriously and followed up with phone calls to scientist-turned global warming pop star James Hansen’s office. CQ wanted to ask Hansen about his quarter of a million dollar grant from the left-wing Heinz Foundation, whose money originated from the Heinz family ketchup fortune.

As I have pointed out, many in the media dwell on any industry support given to so-called climate skeptics, but the same media completely fail to note Hansen’s huge grant from the partisan Heinz Foundation. It seems the media makes a distinction between ketchup money and oil money.

But Hansen was unavailable to respond to CQ's questions about the 'Ketchup Money’ grant, which is highly unusual for a man who finds his way into the media on an almost daily basis. Mr. Hansen is always available when he is peddling his increasingly dire predictions of climate doom.

ABC NEWS PROMOTES CLIMATE HYSTERIA

I have been engaged in this debate for several years and believe there is a growing backlash of Americans rejecting what they see as climate scare tactics. And as a result, global warming alarmists are becoming increasingly desperate.

Perhaps that explains why the very next day after I spoke on the floor, ABC News’s Bill Blakemore on Good Morning America prominently featured James Hansen touting future scary climate scenarios that could / might / possibly happen. ABC’s “modest” title for the segment was “Will the Earth Become Too Hot? Are Our Children in Danger?”

The segment used all the well worn tactics from the alarmist guidebook -- warning of heat waves, wildfires, droughts, melting glaciers, mass extinctions unless mankind put itself on a starvation energy diet and taxed emissions.

But that’s no surprise – Blakemore was already on the record declaring “After extensive searches, ABC News has found no such [scientific] debate” about manmade catastrophic global warming.

( http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=2374968 )

You have to be a pretty poor investigator to believe that. Why would 60 prominent scientists this last spring have written Canadian Prime Minister Harper that “If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.” ( http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=3711460e-bd5a-475d-a6be-4db87559d605 )

On Tuesday’s program, the ABC News anchor referred to Blakemore as “passionate” about global warming. “Passionate” is one word to describe that kind of reporting, but words like objectivity or balance are not.

I believe it’s these kinds of stories which explain why the American public is growing increasingly skeptical of the hype. Despite the enormous 2006 media campaign to instill fear into the public, the number of people who believe that weather naturally changes -- is increasing.

A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll in August found that most Americans do not attribute the cause of recent severe weather events to global warming, and the portion of Americans who believe that climate change is due to natural variability has increased over 50% in the last five years.

Given the diminishing importance of the mainstream media, I expect that trend to continue.

I hope my other colleagues will join me on the floor and start speaking out to debunk hysteria surrounding global warming. This issue is too important to our generation and future generations to allow distortions and media propaganda to derail the economic health of our nation.    (source)

Stix

“Hot & Cold Media Spin: A Challenge To Journalists Who Cover Global Warming”

---

HOT & COLD MEDIA SPIN CYCLE: A CHALLENGE TO JOURNALISTS WHO COVER GLOBAL WARMING

SENATOR JAMES INHOFE CHAIRMAN, SENATE ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

Contact: Marc Morano (marc_morano@epw.senate.gov) Matt Dempsey (matthew_dempsey@epw.senate.gov)

Click here for highlights of the speech

SENATE FLOOR SPEECH DELIVERED MONDAY SEPTEMBER 25, 2006

I am going to speak today about the most media-hyped environmental issue of all time, global warming. I have spoken more about global warming than any other politician in Washington today. My speech will be a bit different from the previous seven floor speeches, as I focus not only on the science, but on the media’s coverage of climate change.

Global Warming -- just that term evokes many members in this chamber, the media, Hollywood elites and our pop culture to nod their heads and fret about an impending climate disaster. As the senator who has spent more time educating about the actual facts about global warming, I want to address some of the recent media coverage of global warming and Hollywood’s involvement in the issue. And of course I will also discuss former Vice President Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth.”

Since 1895, the media has alternated between global cooling and warming scares during four separate and sometimes overlapping time periods. From 1895 until the 1930’s the media pedaled a coming ice age.

From the late 1920’s until the 1960’s they warned of global warming. From the 1950’s until the 1970’s they warned us again of a coming ice age. This makes modern global warming the fourth estate’s fourth attempt to promote opposing climate change fears during the last 100 years. Recently, advocates of alarmism have grown increasingly desperate to try to convince the public that global warming is the greatest moral issue of our generation. Just last week, the vice president of London’s Royal Society sent a chilling letter to the media encouraging them to stifle the voices of scientists skeptical of climate alarmism.

During the past year, the American people have been served up an unprecedented parade of environmental alarmism by the media and entertainment industry, which link every possible weather event to global warming. The year 2006 saw many major organs of the media dismiss any pretense of balance and objectivity on climate change coverage and instead crossed squarely into global warming advocacy.

SUMMARY OF LATEST DEVELOPMENTS OF MANMADE GLOBAL WARMING HOCKEY STICK

First, I would like to summarize some of the recent developments in the controversy over whether or not humans have created a climate catastrophe. One of the key aspects that the United Nations, environmental groups and the media have promoted as the “smoking gun” of proof of catastrophic global warming is the so-called ‘hockey stick’ temperature graph by climate scientist Michael Mann and his colleagues.

This graph purported to show that temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere remained relatively stable over 900 years, then spiked upward in the 20th century presumably due to human activity. Mann, who also co-publishes a global warming propaganda blog reportedly set up with the help of an environmental group, had his “Hockey Stick” come under severe scrutiny.

The “hockey stick” was completely and thoroughly broken once and for all in 2006. Several years ago, two Canadian researchers tore apart the statistical foundation for the hockey stick. In 2006, both the National Academy of Sciences and an independent researcher further refuted the foundation of the “hockey stick.” http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257697

The National Academy of Sciences report reaffirmed the existence of the Medieval Warm Period from about 900 AD to 1300 AD and the Little Ice Age from about 1500 to 1850. Both of these periods occurred long before the invention of the SUV or human industrial activity could have possibly impacted the Earth’s climate. In fact, scientists believe the Earth was warmer than today during the Medieval Warm Period, when the Vikings grew crops in Greenland.

Climate alarmists have been attempting to erase the inconvenient Medieval Warm Period from the Earth’s climate history for at least a decade. David Deming, an assistant professor at the University of Oklahoma’s College of Geosciences, can testify first hand about this effort. Dr. Deming was welcomed into the close-knit group of global warming believers after he published a paper in 1995 that noted some warming in the 20th century. Deming says he was subsequently contacted by a prominent global warming alarmist and told point blank “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” When the “Hockey Stick” first appeared in 1998, it did just that.

read the whole thing here.

Stix

Another inteersting article about Global Warming.

Global warming?

By Mark Jaffe Denver Post Staff Writer

The words "global warming" provoke a sharp retort from Colorado State University meteorology professor emeritus William Gray: "It's a big scam." And the name of climate researcher Kevin Trenberth elicits a sputtered "opportunist." At the National Center for Atmospheric Research, where Trenberth works, Gray's name prompts dismay. "Bill Gray is completely unreasonable," Trenberth says. "He has a mind block on this." Only 55 miles separate NCAR's headquarters, nestled in the Front Range foothills, from CSU in Fort Collins. But when it comes to climate change, the gap is as big as any in the scientific community. At Boulder-based NCAR, researchers project a world with warmer temperatures, fiercer storms and higher seas. From CSU, Gray and Roger Pielke Sr., another climate professor emeritus, question the data used to make those projections and their application to regional climate change. Science by its nature is disputatious - with every idea challenged, tested and retested. It's always been that way. In the 18th century, Sir Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz sparred over claims to the discovery of calculus. About 140 years later, Charles Darwin's theory of evolution was challenged - based on the science of the day - by Harvard University professor Louis Agassiz and the British Museum's Sir Richard Owen. Now the battle is over global warming, or more accurately over myriad details - like temperature readings and the thickness of sea ice - upon which the larger idea is based. On one hand, the fight is a natural part of the scientific process. But it also creates dissonance and uncertainty. "Some of this noise won't stop until some of these scientists are dead," said James Hansen, head of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City, and among the first to sound the alarm over climate change. While science is comfortable with uncertainty, policymakers are not, and that is what has turned this scientific debate into front-page headlines. "I think there is a debate about whether it's caused by mankind or whether it's caused naturally," President Bush said in a July interview. To be sure, Gray and Pielke are in a scientific minority. Still, their challenges remain part of the fractious scientific process. "Science needs skeptics," said NCAR researcher Warren Washington. read the rest here. Stix

Who said: Bush "failed in his war against Al-Qaeda."

IS it:

Pelosi?

Murtha?

Burbun?

Carter?

Dean?

answer:

Bush 'failed in war against Al-Qaeda': Al-Zawahiri
Sep 29 3:19 PM US/Eastern

Ayman Al-Zawahiri, the Al-Qaeda number two, in a video posted on the Internet reportedly called US President George W Bush a liar who had "failed in his war against Al-Qaeda."

The Qatar-based Arabic-language satellite station Al-Jazeera said that in the video, "Zawahiri called Bush a liar and said he had failed in his war against Al-Qaeda."

On Thursday, Islamist websites on the Internet had said there would be a new video message posted by Zawahiri entitled " Bush, the pope, Darfur and the Crusades."  (source)

It's nice to know that Al Queda is getting the Democratic talking points.

The Jawa Report has some of the translation

Stix

It loks like George Soros has left the political arena.  I guess he got tired of loosing all his money on a lost cause.

ANTI-W. $OROS: I QUIT POLITICS

By MAGGIE HABERMAN

September 29, 2006 -- Billionaire liberal financier George Soros, who spent millions of his fortune trying to oust President Bush in 2004, yesterday said he hopes to stay out of politics from now on.

"In the future, I'd very much like to get disengaged from politics," Soros said at a Council on Foreign Relations meeting on the Upper East Side. "I'm interested in policy and not in politics."   (source)

Stix

Squirrels Go On Attack At South Bay Park

POSTED: 8:49 am PDT September 27, 2006

UPDATED: 8:57 pm PDT September 28, 2006

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. -- An aggressive squirrel pounced on a 4-year-old boy in an attack last week in Cuesta Park in Mountain View, Calif.

The attack happened as the boy's mother unwrapped a muffin during a picnic.

The boy had to get rabies shot after the attack. He is still getting the shots.

The attack is not the first one reported at the park. Mountain View Community Services Director David Muela said that as many as six people have been bitten or scratched by squirrels since May, and that the attacks have become more ferocious in the last month.

read the rest here.

The DUmmies are all in a tissy about how the elections are going to be stolen again.  They are going to take to the streets and have a "revolution".  The BDS has infected thier minds and can not fathom the fact that more people voted for Bush in the last election and that he actually won the votes in Florida in 2000.  The closer you get to the election to more fun it going to be at the DUmmie FUnnies.

"What happens if 2006 elections are stolen again?"]

In yet another sign that the ABSOLUTE confidence of the DUmmies in election victory of just a few weeks ago has evaporated is this THREAD titled, "What happens if 2006 elections are stolen again?" In fact, it now seems as if the DUmmies are absolutely confident that they will be losing the elections this November. That's what happens when you believe the absolutely MEANINGLESS midsummer polls. Most people are either vacationing or are in a vacation mood. Their thoughts are on matters much more relaxed than politics. So if a pollster breaks the relaxed mood with annoying questions about policy and politics, many normal victims will attempt to brush off the intruder with answers designed mainly to cut short the interview so as to quickly return to the summertime reverie. Now that the polls are closer to reflecting reality, the DUmmies perceive a shift away from them which has caused panic in the Leftwing ranks. The talk has gone from victory to REVOLUTION in the streets. So let us now watch the DUmmies promulgating their post-election revolution from their keyboards in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, noting significantly increased activity from the red ants in his DUmmie Ant farm as the election approaches, is in the [brackets]:

What happens if 2006 elections are stolen again?

[What do you mean "if"?]

What is a person to do? I took the whole week off, because I will hit the streets. But, I'm not so sure what people will do-after all these elections have been tainted for 6 years at least.

[I would have loved to have been there when you asked your boss for that "vacation" time: "I would like to take a week off after the election because I want to riot in the streets to bring down the system if the election is stolen from us."]

I predict a revolution. It's our duty as patriotic Americans.

[Even mandatory...if you are a DUmmie.]

i welcome a revolution, sadly though I predict, nothing will happen. the grumbling will get a little louder, the republicans will keep their stolen offices. america will continue its fall into fascism.

[You are correct. NOTHING will happen because the DUmmies will find that pile of empty pizza cartons blocking their basement doorways too great of a barrier to be breached.]

The outrage will fade away, and the country will sink further into tyranny.

[Karl Rove has already ensured smooth pizza delivery post-election in order to prevent any revolution.]

As a patriotic American, what are you doing in the "revolution"? Be as precise as possible because I don't want to lump you with the rest of the keyboard jockeys that bluster and growl and then sit in front of their monitors complaining that the "sheeple" haven't taken the streets.

[A keyboard jockey supplied with a steady stream of pizzas is highly unlikely to take to the streets. Their biggest activity will be to shake red peppers on the pepperonis floating on a sea of cheese and tomato.]

Just Yesterday. I was saying I don't know how I will get out of bed 11/8 if that happens. It seems to me that it is more imperative than ever that we win by landslides. Won't it be harder to steal an election that is a landslide?

[No. The Diebold machines are set with a variable factor. No matter what the count for the Democrats, Republicans will always remain a constant two points ahead of them. So go back to bed and STAY there.]

read the rest here.

 

Crossposted at Stix BLog

Stix