59 that rate, when looking at that, 1/10 of 1% and 80% of the co-2 in the atmosphere is not traced to human activity. there has been over the years times when co-2 was going up. now we're being told, the rise in co-2 is causing the atmosphere to warm. but we have times when co-2 was going up, but it didn't seem to affect the climate of the planet. for example, manmade co-2, if it causes warming, why is it that co-2, mankind was using much more co-2 in the 1940 owe's, 1950's and 1960's, yet as the co-2 was rising, there was a cooling going on in the climate? ok. so let's hear about the science about co-2?

why is everyone afraid to look at the specific science? if co-2 causes warming, why were there dramatic times of co-2 increase that the earth got cooler? i had one person suggest that the pollution in the atmosphere completely overwhelmed the quote, greenhouse effect during that particular time period. if that's true, what we have to say is, the clean air act of 1970 is directly responsible for manmade global warming. does anyone believe that? no. and again, anyone telling a joke or trying to maim humor is always reported as if i'm being serious and whether that person is being serious or not. . >> recent study shows that 80% of america's weather stations, the monitoring who have been

collecting the information that's being passed onto us by the manmade global warming advocates that 80% of these stations have been compromised and are faulty in the information that they're providing. the numbers have been skewed. they are suspect because the monitors have been placed in locations that do not meet the national weather service basic standards. in other words, the equipment is being compromised, the figures coming out of the equipment cannot be relied upon. and our system, with its 80% of the monitors that do not meet the standards has been harolded as -- standards, has been harolded as the best in the world. so think about that. what's going on in the rest of the world when we're talking about here, we're talking about a one-degree rise in temperature

from the depths of the mini ice age and yet now we have these monitors that even today, even by today's standards are substandard. and that's by today's standards, not back in the 1860's or in other parts of the world. so what's that -- how's that for a scientific challenge? if the data is being based on monitors that don't meet scientific standards either today or in the past, how can we pass laws with taxes and controls on our people if the so-called problem is based on bogus or absolutely unscientifically obtained numbers? and even with the current methods of collecting data, we have been warned time an again of dire predictions. so, the numbers themselves are suspect but those people have been warning us about those numbers over the last 20 years have been spreading incredible

alarm. i mean, that is exemplified by vice president gore and others. the temperatures we were told over and over again were going to climb and they were going to continue to climb and then it would reach a tipping point and then the temperatures would really jump up. well, wake up. let's talk reality here again, let's talk science, let's quit trying to say case closed. let's not give speeches but never take any questions. let's quit saying that all the scientists agree when there are scientists all over the world disagreeing. they were wrong. when they said that there was going to be a continued climate in the temperature they were 180 degrees wrong, much less having reached a tipping point which then jumped the temperature of the world by even a larger amount. it is not -- it has not gotten

warmer for over a decade and it looks like it's even getting -- it's still getting cooler. now that is totally contradictory to the predictions of the alarmists and those media people around the world who push that idea. totally contradictory to what was aggressively told us, to what was foisted off on the american people and people throughout the world. they were totally, 180 -- they were totally 100 degrees wrong. let's -- 180 degrees wrong. let's talk about the science here. come talk to us about why if your major prediction was that the earth was going to continue getting warmer because of the co-2 that comes out of the engines that we use and the coal and the oil and the natural gas, if that was what you were saying and that you were very aggressive in your advocacy of this, now that it hasn't happened, come and talk to us. don't dismiss us.

don't try to pass a piece of legislation here based on the alarms that went off 15 years ago that have been proven not to be true. ok. so that's another scientifically based challenge, again, not just ignored but i would say that this is the arrogance behind never answering these type of science charges remains evident. please don't ignore it anymore. please, let's respect each other and let's get away from this basic idea that you can just shut off debate. but let's pay attention to what the debate was like before if there was any debate. there was just a one-sided debate because people weren't able to get any government grants, so you had a one-sided drum beat going on and, but those people were aggressive in that manmade global warming was

being caused by co-2 and we've got to control human beings for this. well, by the way, they don't even use the words global warming anymore. think about that. we have a situation that people who were just aggressively talking and putting down anybody who disagreed with them about manmade global warming, now they use the word climate change. now if i am proven wrong in a point, like if i will be proven wrong in any point in this speech, i will apologize and i will change my position. i won't try to change my wording so it sounds like i was never wrong in the first place. these people were wrong. remember it, every time they said climate change, remember that that is an admonition that they didn't know what they were talking about before. manmade global warming. their dishonesty is underscored every time they use the phrase

climate change. now no matter if it gets warmer or if it gets cooler, they can tell us that that backs up their theories and we should do what they say because now whether it's warmer or cooler, they've been proven right because they were saying and they were predicting nothing. well, they believe they should have the power to tax and control us even though the preponderance of evidence shows that the cycles that we're talking about were not global warming cycles created by human activity or even a cooling cycle created by human activity, but instead something that's based on solar activity. let me note this, the gang that told us that human activity was causing the planet to warm and to dramatically heat up, now as i say they're using the word climate change, which as i say is an admission of something. but what is it an admission of?

they said global warming, now they say climate change. it is basically an admonition that yes, for 10 years the world has been getting cooler -- cooler. so, if human activity through co-2 was making it warmer, then maybe it is a good thing that human beings will mitigate the cooling cycle because now they say -- now they're sort of admitting we're in a cooler cycle because global, what, climate change, and not warming, so if they said that our activities were going to make it warmer and now they've admitted they were wrong because they're using a different word and it's actually getting cooler, then with the human activity that they were complaining about before that was making it warmer, well, logically then shouldn't al gore and these other people be advocating more fossil fuel use? anybody who advocates global warming before -- advocated global warming before and now

says climate change is admitting that it's cooler now, that maybe we are in a cooler trend. well, if they believe that human activity made things warmer, maybe they should be advocating that we use more fossil fuel to mitigate the problem of a declining temperature of the plannest. so all of -- planet. so all of al gore's mumbo jumbo is deceptive and the contention that all of the prominent scientists that agreed with him was not true, wasn't true then and it's especially not true now and i'd like to add, and i will add at this point to the record, mr. speaker, mr. chairman, a long list of prominent scientists who oppose the manmade global warming theory. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. rohrabacher: the temperature predictions have been wrong. the manmade co-2 premise is wrong and we now find out that the monitors used to collect the data that were placed next to the air conditioning exhaust vents in parking lots and on top of buildings near to heat

sources which of course made all of their data unreliable, we now know that was done wrong. we also know the methodology of using computer models has been questionable from the very beginning. all we know, garbage in and garbage out. but let's take a look at the computer models that we have been told are the basis for all of these predictions, many of whom now know we're wrong. no one was permitted to hear the questions and no one was permitted to know and ask follow-up questions and what about the information that was fed into the computer? we weren't actually being able to find out exactly what the basis of and what was going in to those computer models. that was kept from us as well. the projections then, but we dough know that the projections have been wrong -- do know that

the projections have been wrong. we know there's been an attempt to stifen, shut up debate. people have been called names, grants have been denied and personal attacks have been evident. all of this has been wrong. so let's review the scientific challenges of manmade global warming, of the manmade global warming theory, which, of course, now they have even given up because they now note that it's getting cooler because -- which is contrary to all their predictions because now they use the word climate change. i have issued a challenge to any of my colleagues to debate me on this issue but of course no one seems to have come forward but yet these very same people who refuse to debate the science will vote for draconian legislation that will implement the recommendations of global warming alarmists even though these people have not stepped forward to debate, they'll vote for the program that these alarmists have been advocating.

now, i'm afraid that we should have some confrontation of ideas here and an honest discussion and this issue has not been honestly discussed in terms of the science. the base line comparison i just noted started in a 500-year decline, it was based at the bottom of a 5--year -- 500-year decline in temperature. science was flawed by monitoring systems that do not meet minimum acceptable standards. past climate cycles were frequent, even before the emergence of mankind. cycles like the reright toing of polar ice caps that we were shown all the time to touch our hearts so we won't think but we'll feel, those solar ice caps and the retreat of the solar ice caps are very similar to the cycles on other planets, especially the planet mars, for example. suggesting that solar activity, rather than human activity, is the culprit. increasing levels of co-2 did not cause warming back in the

1940's, the 1950's and even the 1970's when there was large increases of co-2 yet we're told now that the co-2 was causing the world to get warmer but yet more co-2 has even been produced and for 10 years we haven't had a warming. now that manmade global warming has been driven into the public consciousness, the alarmists have the leverage right here in washington. i can talk all night long but no one's going to confront the science on this, as rotten as the science it -- is. so right here where there's a price to pay when the american people have been lied to in a big way. if the truth will make you free, lies will enslave you. there's a price to pay, like, for example, the millions of children dying in third world countries of malaria. all because we wanted to prevent the use of d.d.t. why did we want to stop d.d.t.?

because bird egg shells were thinning out. we believe, because of d.d.t. and thus millions of children in the third world have lost their lives to malaria because birds were more important to those who made policy than the millions of children in the third world who were going to die as a result. . trerm there is a price to pay for listening to irrational alarmists. and there is a bill to be voted on called the clean energy and security act of 2009, i call it the destroy american jobs and use came bells act. it is a bill, of course, that is based on the theories of the manmade global warming alarmists that have demonstrated that is totally flawed and wrong science

and science that people refuse to get up and defend. this bill, of course, comes at exactly the wrong time. and its negative consequences will be ever more severe in economic hard times as we are suffering right now than it would be if we were in times of prosperity. even if it was true that manmade use of co-2 was causing a warming -- global warming, it wouldn't be the time to try to implement it when we are going into a recession and depression. maybe we are like the third-world children in the minds of the people who are going to vote for this horrible legislation. maybe the birds are more important than the suffering of our own people. maybe it's more important to possible tur yourself as a friend of the planet than it is to try to take care of the people of this country and try to alleviate their suffering.

let's be clear. our unemployment is at 9.4% and expected to rise in the double digits. there are unsubstantiated boasts coming about jobs that are going to be saved through the stimulus act, but that doesn't help the 345,000 americans who lost their jobs just last month and doesn't put food on their table. our projected federal deficit this year is going to reach $1.8 trillion, almost $2 trillion, which our children are going to have to pay for. we are go to go have to service that debt when the interest rate goes up and will destroy our discretionary money. we will auction off, $104 billion of debt, with $11 billion in interest. that is $11 billion that we're going to pay and that's just

thrown away. wait until the interest rates go up. this $11 billion won't save anybody's jobs, pave any roads or provide health care, it will be used to continue our massive level of deficit spending. and yet, excessive taxation and regulation mandates are now being proposed in washington to deal with manmade global warming, which is a total fraud, as i have demonstrated, and which they admit because they are unwilling to debate the basic facts of global warming. the scientific facts that i have over and over again, myself and others have over and over presented, but instead, we are called names and belittled by this ar can't group that they want to tax, regulate and control us and they always have. here and now, we have -- we are asked to pass this economy-killing bill in the name

of stopping manmade global warming. what's in the bill? i don't vnt to go in total detail here, but chairman waxman was asked about a certain section of the bill, and he said, and this is in committee, why are you asking me? i don't know everything that's in my bill. i would suggest if you're writing a bill that will have such profound repurchase cushions for decades to come, that is an unacceptable answer. we know that there are many dangers that are going to be unleashed by this legislation. and it's an economy-killing piece of legislation. but it would reduce -- its aim supposedly is to reduce co-2 emissions. co-2, 80% of it in the atmosphere is traced not to human activity. it is a miniscule part of the

atmosphere. yet, the goal -- this draconian legislation, this oppressive anti--economy legislation is to reduce emissions to around 80% of the current world level by 2020. from there, it would be gradually reduced further. so in order to do this, the federal government would issue permits that companies would use in exchange for the right of emitting co-2. let's make this very clear. co-2 does not harm human beings. co-2 -- we pump it into the greenhouses to make tomatoes grow better. co-2, i'm all in favor of controlling pollution, pollution of the water, the air, the ground. co-2 is not a pollutant that hurts human beings, but that's what we are being asked to focus on. and that's what this legislation

that will destroy the jobs of the american people focuses on. well, one wonders who will decide who will receive the vouchers that are going to be given out. apparently 85% of the vouchers for the next few years will be just given out by the government and those vouchers will be used to give permits to people who want to do business that produces co-2. who's going to get those? this is an invitation for corruption, an invitation for crups. we don't know where the money went from the tarp bill, where we spent hundreds of billions of dollars. so let's remember that this bill will have a dramatic impact on our economy and the american family. it will be over $1,600 of new taxes per american family by this legislation and all the jobs will then go to india and to china. that's what we're doing.

we are taxing our people, regulating our business and encouraging our businessmen to go to china and to india. it will droy -- destroy millions of jobs by 2012. electricity rates will go up by 90% above the inflation rate, in occur additional debt for every man, woman and child in america because of this legislation and gas prices will rise over 50%. natural gas prices well over 50%. and this goes and who will be helped by this? the chinese and the indians. that's what we're go to go get out of this legislation. what did you expect, from legislation that was designed to meet a phony problem, manmade global warming, which i just demonstrated, doesn't exist. so why is this happening?

why are we on the verge of passing legislation? why are people advocating manmade global warming? this has all come about because there are people in our country and throughout the world who want to control the american people. they have wanted to do this forever. they have -- they wanted to change our lifestyles whether we like it or not. but this is a democracy, and they had to scare us and skew the argument and beat down anybody who wanted to offer alternative arguments in order to get us to this point of passing legislation that will dramatically control our people and control industry and put us under a burden of taxation and regulation that will destroy the meaning of opportunity in america in the years to come. now, do they want to do this? they want to build a whol new world based on control based on people like themselves and

that's where the real threat comes in. this is not just the idea of centralizing power in the federal government, which in and of itself is contrary to what america is supposed to be all about. we are supposed to let state and local governments control things. but this is a centralization of power into the hands of global government. you hear global answers, global this and global that. what that means is international organizations, like the united nations, which is filled with corrupt, corrupt governments and representatives from corrupt governments, filled from representatives who are gangsters who murder their own people. we should not be transferring power globally. that's the worst possible scenario. but this, too, like the manmade global warming theory is their dream, the dream of a planet

being planned out by been off lent people as if people are naturally more competent and more benevolent. what can we expect? as this moves along, this is the first major step, this bill that will be coming up this week, the cap and trade bill, based on fraudulent science, this will be the first step towards what? towards centralizing money and power in the federal government. the next step is centralizing that power globally, all in the name of stopping this horrible threat that's hanging over our heads, manmade global warming. they don't use that anymore again. remember, every time the word

climate change is used is an admission that the people who advocated manmade global warming were wrong all along. so i would suggest that this is the time for the patriots to stand up to the globalists. this is the time for us to say we don't want this legislation. it will be harmful to our families and sentalize power, money and resources in the federal government. it will destroy our economy at a time when people need jobs and a stronger economy. it will actually help the chinese and the indians more than us, all in the same benevolent, motivated activity, which is the similar to the end of the use of d.d.t., which caused millions of children in the third world to die. i don't care if people are benevolenf. what's important is whether they

are rational and right. and i have pointed out where the science is wrong. and i would suggest that the theory that government, big government controlling our lives is the way to solve our problems is also wrong. and it will lead to us not to more prosperity and not to more liberty, but a diminishing of the liberty and prosperity of our people. again, wake up, america. it's time for the patriots to act. we still have time to turn this around. we have seen $4 trillion being given out -- $4 trillion of private liability put on our shoults as public debt in this last year. this is a tremendous centralization of power. we will not give up our freedom. we are not powerless. this is still a democracy. people need to call their member of congress. they need to call their senator and say manmade global warming

was a hoax. it was not something that we should be basing a centralization of wealth and power in the federal government. and certainly, something we shouldn't be getting involved in in order to enrich the power of the united nations and other international bodies. i would invite my fellow americans to get involved in the system. if one does not get involved in the system, we will not go the right way. and i will say, in our country's history, it has always been the intervention of the american people at the right moment that kept us on the right track. it wasn't allowing special interests, like is so evident in this cap and trade legislation that will be voted on later on this week, to let them right the legislation, let them control what sounds like a benevolent

sounding legislation which will wreak havoc. they want to control us and change our lifestyle. don't let them control us and take away our democratic rights. with that said, i offer the rest of my statement for the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. rohrabacher: and unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. rohrabacher: anything else you want me to say. the speaker pro tempore: fro what purpose the the gentlewoman from from maine rise? ms. pingree: i send two privileged reports from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 572, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 2747 to authorize the bill h.r. 2747 to authorize prapingses for the department of