Apparently Mike Rogers has added scientist to his long and growing list of expertise and subject matter expert.
In a story in the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus on the special slide show on Al Gore’s Academy Award nominated movie "Inconvenient Truth" making an appearance in Republican-Livingston County on March 10 in Brighton, Rogers said pollution is bad, but the 400 scientists from 113 nations who say humans are causing global warming do not know what they are talking about. If pollution is bad, then how is it bad, Professor Rogers?
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change just released an authoritative and disturbingly scientific report in Paris a few weeks ago that said global warming is “very likely” caused by mankind and that climate change will continue for centuries even if heat-trapping gases are reduced. It was the strongest language ever used by the panel. The document was a collaboration of hundreds of scientists and government officials, and it was approved by 113 nations, including the United States.
Evidence is mounting every day, and more and more scientists are coming to the conclusion that humans are causing climate change. The words “very likely" means they agree that there is a 90 percent chance that global warming is caused by humans. The report issued in 2001, said global warming was "likely" caused by human activity. What will it take to convince Mike Rogers; the disappearance the Alpine glaciers?
Just a few days after the IPCC report came out, 45 nations answered France's call for a new environmental body to slow inevitable global warming and protect the planet. However, the world's heavyweight polluter, the United States, and booming nations on the same path as the U.S. — China and India - declined. Even though the U.S. agrees humans are causing global warming, they do not want to do anything to address it.
To show you the level of misinformation, lies and the political pressure that is trying to force scientists to alter their findings that global warming is occurring the article offers up one fountain of right wing propaganda: Dan Wholihan, who runs the Republican Michigander blog. Anyone who has ever read this guy’s misinformation knows he would not believe man landed on the moon if a Republican told him it never happened. He says Gore “…has an agenda and he wants to implement his agenda.” Of course he does, and so do the millions of other concerned people all across the world that care about the planet and do not want to see it disappear or be fouled.
Gore personally trained some 1,000 presenters last year in Nashville who are traveling across the country with copies of his 330-slide climate slide show customized to the state the presentation is held in. The unpaid volunteers are setting up projectors in living rooms, church sanctuaries and VFW halls to show the presentation.
Dr. Kathryn Savoie, environmental program director with the Dearborn-based Arab Community Center for Economic and Social Services (ACCESS), will present the slide show at 2 p.m. March 10 at the Brighton Education Center, 125 S. Church St., located just a couple of blocks south of downtown Brighton and about a quarter mile from the I-96 Spencer Road Exit.
2 comments:
Interesting. A few weeks ago, CQ Politics took a poll of members of Congress to gauge each party's belief in the existence of global warming.
http://syndication.nationaljournal.com/images/203Insiderspoll_NJlogo.pdf
The results were starting (but not surprising): 95% of democrats believe in manmade global warming, whereas 83% of republicans do not believe the science behind global warming.
I sent an email to Mike Rogers (who participated in the poll) to see how he voted on February 7, and shock of all shocks... never got a response.
So, I can't say I'm surprised that he doesn't believe in global warming. When you look at the list of his campaign contributors, and see all the money he's received from heavy-hitters in the energy industry, it's not surprising that he's "skeptical" about the science behind global warming.
It's even worse than you imagine. From the Press & Argus' article...
"The U.N. is probably not the best scientific body," said Rogers. "It's driven, unfortunately, by politics, a lot of what they do. You can find science on both sides."
The ability to find support on both sides of the argument is evident in the interpretation of a 2005 document from the U.S. Geological Survey, which Rogers quotes as saying, "it is not known whether the (Antarctic) ice sheet is growing or shrinking."
A) The IPCC report was the product of the global climate science community, and wasn't written by politicians (your biggest hint is in the title of that report "Summary for Policy Makers").
B) The 2005 survey of Antarctic ice said no such thing. In fact, the original author made a very public plea that his research, which he said supported global warming, was deliberately taken out of context by skeptics (probably the only exposure Rogers has to this was last year's roundly mocked report in the National Review, where the errors were given legs). His report found two things ... 1) That ice on the coasts is shrinking, which we know (the giant breakups of the ice shelves always draws huge headlines), and 2) that the interior is seeing more precipitation, which makes sense if you understand that snow and ice cease to fall below a certain temperature (the moisture remains locked up in the clouds) and only falls when it gets warm. Thus, the fact that the interior of the Antarctic is seeing more precipitation is evidence that it is warming.
So, for Mike Rogers to repeat these things is evidence that he not only doesn't understand the science of global warming or even what constitutes good science, but that he's not even trying real hard to educate himself.
Post a Comment