LaMalfa's Comments

Sunday 16 September 2012 at 08:51 am. Used tags: , , , , ,

This is a very intereting article on global warming by a whacko.  he is critical of LaMalfa's comments because he claims scientific consensus on the issue favors man made global warming.

At the end of the article he lists 20 scientific organizations that endorse anthropogenic (man made) global warming.  But these are political organizations (or lobbying orgaizations) that depend almost entirely on government grants, primary from the democrats. 

These lobbying organizations claim that represent the view of their constituency, which is simply not the case.

abuse of power.

Letting LaMalfa's lies lie (6)

| 8 Comments

In June of 2012, the Chico Chamber of Commerce sent out questionnaires to District 1 U.S. Representative Candidates "In preparation for the June 5th Primary Election." The chamber "asked all District 1 U.S. Representative Candidates to address some of the top issues impacting local businesses and our community."

"What is your position on California Assembly Bill 32 and the philosophy that the industrial revolution is responsible for global warming?"

Doug LaMalfa answered, in part, "The science regarding man made global warming is mixed at best. The earth was both warmer and colder than current temperatures prior to the industrial revolution. Since Mars is warming also I find it hard to blame mankind for warming across the entire solar system. I do not support returning California or the nation to the Stone Age to test a theory."

When Doug LaMalfa said that women who get abortions are more likely to get cancer, the backlash was immediate and intense. He quickly retracted his claim, issuing the following statement: "After last night's debate I checked the most recent research on the question of a link between abortion and cancer and found that current research does not support the conclusion that abortion causes cancer."

Why not with climate change? Why not check "the most recent research on the question of a link between" global warming and greenhouse gas emissions? Why not check that link and then issue a statement that reflects that scientific fact "that current research does support the conclusion that" burning fossil fuels is causing global warming?

There is considerable more scientific evidence linking greenhouse gas emissions with climate change than there is disproving the link between abortions and cancer. There are 5,000 climate change studies each year. Every scientific organization on Earth accepts that humans are responsible for our current warming. So why is no one confronting LaMalfa on this "gaffe"? And why aren't journalists even mentioning LaMalfa's global warming lie? Why does he and all Republicans get a free pass on this science test?

Three years ago the American Association for the Advancement of Science joined with the following scientific organizations:

American Chemical Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Meteorological Society
American Society of Agronomy
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Statistical Association
Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
Botanical Society of America
Crop Science Society of America
Ecological Society of America
Natural Science Collections Alliance
Organization of Biological Field Stations
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Society of Systematic Biologists
Soil Science Society of America
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research

And they wrote a letter. And the letter was addressed to all United States Senators. This is the letter:

As you consider climate change legislation, we, as leaders of scientific organizations, write to state the consensus scientific view.

Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver. These conclusions are based on multiple independent lines of evidence, and contrary assertions are inconsistent with an objective assessment of the vast body of peer-reviewed science. Moreover, there is strong evidence that ongoing climate change will have broad impacts on society, including the global economy and on the environment. For the United States, climate change impacts include sea level rise for coastal states, greater threats of extreme weather events, and increased risk of regional water scarcity, urban heat waves, western wildfires, and the disturbance of biological systems throughout the country. The severity of climate change impacts is expected to increase substantially in the coming decades.1

If we are to avoid the most severe impacts of climate change, emissions of greenhouse gases must be dramatically reduced. In addition, adaptation will be necessary to address those impacts that are already unavoidable. Adaptation efforts include improved infrastructure design, more sustainable management of water and other natural resources, modified agricultural practices, and improved emergency responses to storms, floods, fires and heat waves.

"We in the scientific community offer our assistance to inform your deliberations as you seek to address the impacts of climate change."

The letter ends here

This footnote references the statement in the second paragraph.

1 The conclusions in this paragraph reflect the scientific consensus represented by, for example, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and U.S. Global Change Research Program. Many scientific societies have endorsed these findings in their own statements, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Chemical Society, American Geophysical Union, American Meteorological Society, and American Statistical Association.

No comments



(optional field)
(optional field)
To prevent automated comment spam we require you to answer this silly question.
Remember personal info?
Small print: All html tags except <b> and <i> will be removed from your comment. You can make links by just typing the url or mail-address.