191
191
Dec 9, 2009
12/09
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 191
favorite 0
quote 0
secondly, the climategate scandal is expanding. there have been two professors who have been placed on administrative leave as a result of this. the un should take it upon itself to step backwards and not make any concrete recommendations until we get to the bottom of the climategate scandal and why the professor's use the mails ended up being put up on the internet said what they said. this could be a conspiracy basically to shutout any contrary scientific opinion. as the chairman of the science committee from 1997 to 2001, one of the things i vigorously protected was extensive peer review of science that was funded by the government. and peer review means debate the issue, the people who don't take the politically correct position during the peer review are not punished by being ostracized, denied publication of their views. the climategate scandal indicates this is going on. i call it scientific fascism. we should not be making decisions that will cost the american ratepayer billions or trillions of dollars in natural gas bills.
secondly, the climategate scandal is expanding. there have been two professors who have been placed on administrative leave as a result of this. the un should take it upon itself to step backwards and not make any concrete recommendations until we get to the bottom of the climategate scandal and why the professor's use the mails ended up being put up on the internet said what they said. this could be a conspiracy basically to shutout any contrary scientific opinion. as the chairman of the...
210
210
Dec 8, 2009
12/09
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 210
favorite 0
quote 0
buried the dissenting report just like the climategate warmers did. the e.p.a. bureaucrats said their report wasn't helping their agenda and they threatened the scientist so he would keep thinks mouth shut. the question is, why can't the public see the dissenting view from other scientists? isn't that what science is all about? the reason, it appears to me, that careers are at stake along with millions upon billions of dollars. in the 1970's, "time" and "newsweek" proclaimed global cooling and the world was going to freeze but when climates began to warm, scientists changed that name to global warming instead of global cooling. have we noticed that the planet has begun to cool again? it even snowed last week in houston. it never snows in houston. a snow in houston is about as frequent as a hurricane in iowa. but the warmers again have changed the name of that catastrophe and now no longer global warming but climate change. that is a safe bet because the climate does change every day. and why would they do this? what's the motivation for them to cook the books on
buried the dissenting report just like the climategate warmers did. the e.p.a. bureaucrats said their report wasn't helping their agenda and they threatened the scientist so he would keep thinks mouth shut. the question is, why can't the public see the dissenting view from other scientists? isn't that what science is all about? the reason, it appears to me, that careers are at stake along with millions upon billions of dollars. in the 1970's, "time" and "newsweek" proclaimed...
250
250
Dec 9, 2009
12/09
by
CSPAN2
tv
eye 250
favorite 0
quote 2
of the widening academic scandal known as climategate and the absence of a national consensus on climate change legislation, and because of the uncertain prospects for cap and trade legislation in the senate, the administration concluded they had to do something. to bolster on the world change the president had to enforce something that he negotiated at copenhagen. airmass edge to the president is it is inappropriate for him to engage in international negotiations in the midst of this recession, in the midst of this academic schedule and the absence of national consensus on this issue and that is the connection. .. >> it's a question of balance, and i think as you watch other sides talk about rising and falling validity in the ocean, we know it has to be maintained within a range but we don't have the hubris to think we could call it endangerment and somehow start solving or d. solving the ocean. that may answer your question a limit on on why it is a political statement as it was released. thank you. >> the demand for hunger assistance has risen by 26 percent over the last year. accordi
of the widening academic scandal known as climategate and the absence of a national consensus on climate change legislation, and because of the uncertain prospects for cap and trade legislation in the senate, the administration concluded they had to do something. to bolster on the world change the president had to enforce something that he negotiated at copenhagen. airmass edge to the president is it is inappropriate for him to engage in international negotiations in the midst of this...