Gary F
Lv 7
Gary F asked in EnvironmentGlobal Warming · 7 years ago

Would you vote for a political party if they refused to debate scientists in public?

For their planned “Climate Science” hearings, Republicans leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee only sought to hear from administration officials – they refused to invite any scientists. Rep. Henry Waxman sent over two dozen letters requesting that the Committee talk to scientists:

“And our Committee even refused to listen to the scientists. Over the last two years, Subcommittee Ranking Member Rush and I have written 27 letters requesting hearings on climate change. Until today, no hearing was ever scheduled.”

>>Statement of Rep. Henry A. Waxman

>>Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Commerce

>>Hearing on “The Obama Administration’s Climate Change Policies and Activities”

>>Subcommittee on Energy and Power

>>September 18, 2013

http://democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/sites/de...

Do Deniers believe that actors who pretend to be doctors know more about medical science than real physicians?

Update:

======

jim z ---

If you have a problem with the Flat Earth Society, take it up with their idiot Chairman Ed Whitfield, R-Ky, who wants to hold hearings on climate science that don’t include any scientists.

As far as I'm concerned, I blame the other useful idiot McCain and Gomer Graham.

Update 2:

Yeah, you have made your love of unstable radical religious freaks quite clear.

“Rafael Cruz Declares Son Ted Cruz 'The Anointed One'”

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/rafael-cruz-decla...

Update 3:

=====

kano –

debate, however it is too easy to cherry pick which scientist to debate

Update 4:

No problem – you bring all of yours and we’ll bring all of ours.

Update 5:

=====

Mike L ----

How many times do you guys need to be told that there is no such thing as scientific proof? You are demanding something that does not exist – and that makes you the zealot and believer in imaginary things.

8 Answers

Relevance
  • 7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Deniers believe they can get away with lying like hell, because so far they have. Maybe today will be a turning point. For the first time since at least the George Awol Bush tax cuts, the Democrats have NOT flattened their waffling bodies to be run over by ever dumber Republicans In Shame only.

    Inhofe may possibly still believe that Michael Crichton was a scientist.

    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Inhofe

    http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php...

    Clearly his constituents still think it is okay to elect this scientifically illiterate fossil fuel industry financed incompetent to disgrace Capitol Hill. Maybe if they, and voters of Reps on the House Energy committee (see names below) were all to wear Confederate battle flags in their lapels, embroidered with the names of slaves who died after being whipped in their districts, ala Hester Prynne with her "A", they might eventually wise up. But nobody even talks about who these derelict voters are. Most of them probably are clueless as to what they are doing to the next 30 or 40 generations of their descendants.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intergenerational_equ...

    U.S. National Academy of Sciences, 2010:

    http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsite...

    “Choices made now about carbon dioxide emissions reductions will affect climate change impacts experienced not just over the next few decades but also in coming centuries and millennia…Because CO2 in the atmosphere is long lived, it can effectively lock the Earth and future generations into a range of impacts, some of which could become very severe.”

    “The Academy membership is composed of approximately 2,100 members and 380 foreign associates, of whom nearly 200 have won Nobel Prizes. Members and foreign associates of the Academy are elected in recognition of their distinguished and continuing achievements in original research; election to the Academy is considered one of the highest honors that can be accorded a scientist or engineer.”

    The time has come for name and shame:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efAUCG9oTb8

    Youtube thumbnail

    http://grist.org/climate-energy/divestment-campaig...

    http://www.newsweek.com/2007/08/13/the-truth-about...

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mckibben/the-gr...

    http://jcmooreonline.com/2013/01/31/engineering-cl...

    House Energy and Commerce Committee:

    Ralph Hall, Texas

    Joe Barton, Texas, Chair Emeritus

    Michael C. Burgess, Texas

    Marsha Blackburn, Tennessee, Vice Chairman

    Phil Gingrey, Georgia

    Steve Scalise, Louisiana

    Gregg Harper, Mississippi

    Bill Cassidy, Louisiana

    Pete Olson, Texas

    Morgan Griffith, Virginia

    Gus Bilirakis, Florida

    Renee Ellmers, North Carolina

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Heidi Cullen was at the last hearing , She said it will go up by

    8 degrees 2100 and no proof .

    Henry 'Frankenstien" Waxman is a zealot .

    He cries wolf as much as Sheldon Whitehouse and Barbra Boxer.

  • JimZ
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    <<<The President was right. We don’t have time for another meeting of the Flat Earth

    Society>>>

    and this is the same president that promised to lower the seas

    So who was trying to stifle debate? Republicans run the house. They don't need to listen to Nostrilitus Waxman the biggest hack there ever was in Washington. What America needs is to can Boehner and Canter. The American people are sick and tired of the idiocy coming from Washington from Democrats and the shaky Republicans that just want their turn to run things. You people have inflicted Obamacare on us and we will see how well your party fares with that. You will probably blame it on Boehner, that useful idiot, and who knows, maybe it will work. As far as I'm concerned, I blame the other useful idiot McCain and Gomer Graham.

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    The NIPCC and the IP CC would make a good debate.

    Government funded versus non-Government funded? Government funded agencies are inherently liberal so you already have that bias working for you at everyone's expense.

    It seems that the Government is already imposing your view of AGW on all people through the EPA, so why worry about it?

    You people really like an open debate? With people like Hey Dook and the FSM guy with the face who close their questions to anyone who has an opposing view? Your own AGW advocate's hypocrisy speaks for itself.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 7 years ago

    I think we have all just seen the brink Republicans are willing to take us all to to try and change a policy that Obama took to the people and won an election on.

    Is it really any wonder they run a mile from real scientists who they don't want to allow on public record challenging the carefully crafted lies deniers use.

    The public position of the scientific community is easily available to anyone who really wants it, clearly Republicans don't.

    If I had even a scrap of respect left for the Republicans left, I lost it this week.

  • Kano
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    No. I am not interested in politics, as far as I am concerned they are all sh!t, full of dogma with very little or no commonsense.

    Saying that, I am in favour of open and transparent debate, however it is too easy to cherry pick which scientist to debate with, so a debate with scientists would be fairly meaningless.

    I am not too happy with medical physicians either having observed all the shannagins that went on with my wife's cancer, and my friend having his leg amputated recently through mis-diagnosis.

    Doctors are not gods, they are like plumbers or electricians some are competent some are not and all are influenced by pharmaceutical companies with emphasis on pills and drugs.

    Source(s): Gary F. I totally agree, I would love have to that kind of debate
  • Gringo
    Lv 6
    7 years ago

    The funny thing is that when they actually do want to address the issue, they invite Christopher Monckton as their expert!

    http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2009/03/27/visc...

  • 7 years ago

    I wouldn't, but then, I'm a realist.

    And, sadly, denialists probably think anyone who agrees with them knows more about science than anyone who disagrees with them, regardless of their credentials or near to total lack thereof.

    Source(s): Please check out my open questions.
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.