Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says the debate whether humans are changing the climate is over. Sen. John McCain, an Arizona Republican, says the science linking human activity to global warming is overwhelming. President Bush recently called global warming "a serious problem." He said there is still uncertainty over how much of the warming is natural and how much man-made, but he added that it was time to "get beyond the debate" and deploy new technologies to curb greenhouse gases.
But in the U.S. Senate, one prominent lawmaker isn't buying it. Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., has argued repeatedly that the idea that humans are warming the climate is a hoax. In a speech on the Senate floor last month, he declared that the "greatest climate threat we face may be coming from alarmist computer models. We're going through a warming period. No one's denying that," Inhofe said on CNN last week. "The question is, is it due to man-made gases? And it's not." Inhofe, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has emerged in recent years as America's most outspoken skeptic of global warming. He's not the only lawmaker to raise questions about climate change, but he's the most forceful in questioning the science and opposing legislation to limit greenhouse gases.
To his critics, Inhofe's views make him a charter member of the Flat Earth Society. They say his assertions are contradicted by ice core samples and other evidence showing a link between the increased burning of fossil fuels, growing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and rising temperatures. Some scientists share Inhofe's skepticism, but the majority of climate researchers have rejected his views.
Even some of his Republican colleagues in Congress say Inhofe's views on global warming are wrong. "The evidence, in my view, is more compelling than ever," McCain said in an interview,
professing a "respectful disagreement" with his GOP colleague on the issue.Ed. - emphasis added.
EDIT
No, Senator Presidential-Sweat-Sponge, you don't profess "respectful disagreement" with someone who argues that demonic possession causes disease, who hits the clothesline pole in his backyard with a baseball bat to repair cracks in his basement floor or believes that the sun goes around the earth. You tell them to shut the fuck up or else walk away quickly. So what makes this grounds for "respectful disagreement"? Oh, I'm sorry, I'll give you a minute to take George W. Bush's little dick out of your mouth before you answer.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/10/11/MNGEJLMT8A1.DTL
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
