1. Betsey Brownley | 11.20.08

This is more good news for the planet. The Dingle Imhoff days of stalling and obstruction tactics are no more. These sick idiots are mainly responsible for the wholesale destruction of the planet and millions of species. They are no friends to the American people. They are liars who only goal was self enrichment. It makes me sick to think of how long they have been running their scam and being allowed to lie cheat and steal from the American people. These men are thugs and should be behind bars. They are thugs in suits. They chose these two morons because they looked good in a suit and they were complete idiots. Americans showed by an overwhelming margin that they are sick of these liars wholesale destruction of the planet. Jim Imhoff saying climate change is a hoax-what a freaking moron as the planet disintegrates around us this guy is saying that all is well to protect his friends at big oil. Party is over now these two idiots should get out of the and allow us to clean up their mess.

2. bradley sumner | 11.20.08

A true blessing !

3. putrdriver | 11.20.08

So according to Betsey Brownley, the earth is being destroyed. In fact the earth is better now than in the past 100 years. I have lived through the Cuahoga River fire, the smog in LA and you have the adacity to say we are now destroying the earth. You have no knowlege of history and because of that you are doomed to repeat it, look at what is happening with the financial crisis, there were no de-regulation of the banking but more regulations that caused the failures FACT!!!

4. HappyAboutThis | 11.20.08

What good news!

5. rh | 11.20.08

BETSEY BROWNLEY = it is really funny to see the tree huggers go after
Dingle
wholesale distruction my butt
it’s a ALGORE money machine working over time thats all it is

6. Doug Nelson | 11.20.08

Sorry - Global Warming is a hoax! Morons!

7. Louis Silva | 11.20.08

It’s about time these two people were removed from their posts. It’s time for a change for the good of the country. I’m looking ahead for clean air and enviormental friendly America.

8. greg baum | 11.20.08

Change can be a powerful thing- if nothing else a fresh perspective.

9. Dan Laskero | 11.20.08

Betsey — you have no idea what you’re talking about.

10. CammanderBill | 11.20.08

This is truly unfortunate. The Democrats in cahoots with the environment fanatics will have the strength to enact legislation that will further destroy the world economy. Their incredible anti-human agenda and short sighted solutions in the end will cause extraordinary misery to the human population. With mounting evidence that global warming is a myth and global cooling may be the natural trend, all the proposed solutions of these fanatics will at extraordinary expense lower the quality of life for humans. These are sad days for the planet.

11. S. Snelling | 11.20.08

Betsey Brownley

….”the wholesale destruction of millions of species”
….”the planet disintegrates around us”

Comments like these are why people refer to some environmentalist as extremist. Patently false claims like this make you just as much of a liar as you claim Dingle and Imhoff are.

Personally, I am not fond of Waxman. He seems his primary concern is promoting Waxman…not environmental causes. He (like Chuck Schumer) is more concerned with jumping on the latest bandwagon and getting in front of the cameras instead of making any real changes.

All the Dems have done is changed one mouthpiece and set of pockets for another.

12. Stud Terkel | 11.20.08

We need to move forward and stop the back biting that occurs when there are changes being made by the new mandates.

Again, we need to recognize that global warming and climate changes are real and need to be addressed. Now. Anyone that thinks differently needs to visit the ice caps or notice that everyone else is concerned about the planet.

Lastly, we need to create green jobs, especially in the auto industry. I saw a movie about the electric car and am just waiting until the new adminstration makes it a reality.

Take care and respect yourselves.

13. David B | 11.20.08

putrdriver: “You have no knowlege of history and because of that you are doomed to repeat it, look at what is happening with the financial crisis, there were no de-regulation of the banking but more regulations that caused the failures FACT!!!”

With a sentence like that I finally understand why Sarah Palin chooses to speak in unending runon sentences. Apparently this is how all republicans think. Just throw in a few alsos, youbetchas and Joe the plumbers and you are a perfect republican.

14. James H. Penland | 11.20.08

To see #1 Betsy writing all the hate filled feelings, she alone is a big contributor to global warming with all the hot air she spilled out in her venting process. I suppose she must think she is smarter than all the folks who disagree with her. Bet you cant sit down and have a decent conversation concerning any matter unless your opponent sits and says “yep”,uhu,ok, ect. Get with it. The earth has been hotter than it is getting now and we will probably enter into a period of global cooling after some of you nuts shut your mouth and quit sqewing out the frothy fire of hate and disgust.

15. Tony | 11.20.08

Good by Dingell and good riddance. GM, Ford, and Chrysler are failing due to poor quality, corruption and cronyism in their supply chain. As a Quality professional with 20 years experience in Automotive Quality, I can vouch firsthand for the corruption in the GM supply chain. They deserve to fail and the taxpayers should not bail out their stupidity and mismanagement. Their cars suck…plain and simple. If I can buy a Toyota which lasts me 15 years or a GM car which lasts 3, which am I going to choose? DUH!!! Also…Dingell did nothing for the environment. All he did was protect the corrupt executives of the big 3 and their K street buddies.

16. No Fireworks | 11.20.08

The posts above are nothing more but hurled invectives. We’re just like the animals we’re wiping out, only we use words and somehow think we are so advanced. Rereading the posts above it is clear that name-calling has replaced thought, knowledge, and a mutual respect for differing but informed and reasoned positions. Maybe we should all run around with clubs and smash each other. At least that is more honest about what people too often really act like.

17. R. Worth | 11.20.08

This country was using water for power for eons. The TVA and our WesternDams continue to supply to huge portions of America. The old Chinese culture used WATER to operate the first known computer. AFTER ww2 BUSINESS( ESPECIALLY LARGE SOAP MFG firms) polluted European rivers and U.S. rivers with SOFT Soap rather than HARD MILLED soap bars. They added perfume and “Body/Skin Softeners” so that the ingredients went into the whole water system. During WW2 a bar of soap lasted a long, time. Grandmas LYE SOAP got you clean,just not smelling like a streetwalker. Farmers made their own soap. The Mediterranean became polluted, and the rest is history. Dumping Chemicals (which is THE PRINCIPAL user of oil) by drug firms and beauty products (AD NAUSEUM) after the creation of clothing made from Duponts Nylon ( and on and on). We shoul harness our rivers prone to flooding and create power to pump the water to dry parts of the farmbelt and mountains.

18. Matthew | 11.20.08

“Sorry - Global Warming is a hoax! Morons!”

Right. So are patriotic Republicans and a round Earth.

Sorry - Global Warming being called a hoax was brought to you by the same folks who said smoking tobacco isn’t addictive (hired and funded by Exxon-Mobile!)

Watch who you’re calling a moron (really, go ahead and watch - right there in the mirror).

19. Joe Plumber | 11.20.08

Wow, so you’re telling me for the past 28 years it’s been a DEMOCRAT who’s been allowing the whole sale destruction of our environment, pollution, global warming!? I say we all throw away our cars, move back into the country, live off the land, stop polluting, and let other people tell us how to live our lives!

How’s that for irony?

20. Jonathan Haas | 11.20.08

Putrdriver has yet to live through the holes in the Ozone layer, melting of polar ice at both poles, extinction of myriad species, depletion of vast tracts of rainforests, deadzones at the mouths of rivers such as the Mississippi and Rio Grande, and numerous other man-made changes to our environment. Let’s hope that with the election of Waxman to his new post, Putrdriver now will have a chance to live through them.

21. Eoin | 11.20.08

People, I’m reluctant to block anybody’s comments, but I’m disturbed by all the name-calling. I know that environmental degradation can be a contentious issue and that we may have wildly different views on how to fix it, but can we please try to keep it civil here?

22. Shane | 11.20.08

It continues to amaze me that individuals whom have no expertise in climate change have the audacity to make claims like “global warming is a hoax”. I’m not a scientist, but every respected scientist on the planet agrees that we have directly affected the temperature around the globe by burning fossil fuels. Those fossil fuels are stored energy from millions of years, who’s carbon is being pumped into our air and water at unsustainable rates. This isn’t an argument or debate…it is a reality.

Walk lightly and we have a future!

23. Looking Better Already | 11.20.08

To those who would illustrate how much cleaner things are now than they were in the last century - you are totally right. However, it has been an uphill battle fought by marginalized ‘radicals’ the entire way. Take notice that it has been forward looking minds from states like California rather than status quo reliant industrial states in the Rust Belt that have lead the way toward cleaner air, water, and other common resources. It was during the reign of Californian Richard Nixon that the EPA was established. Clean up and mitigation is always more difficult and expensive than clean fabrication and distribution, let’s start learning from our past. This is a step.

24. allison | 11.20.08

DELIGHTFUL! Perhaps Waxman will help CA overcome our EPA restrictions. CA wants a cleaner and safer future for our children and we were told “NO!”

25. Walter Dinwhitte | 11.20.08

Man Made Global Warming = Scam to control people by the government. Plain and simple.

26. Jim | 11.20.08

It’s time that our government looked after the people and not industry. Having said that, I hope any approach toward global warming is scientific-based and not a continuation of the political witch-hunt and games that we have witnessed over the past 15 years or so.

27. Charles | 11.20.08

Although the impact of this on the environment is important, it should be noted that Dingell was one of the most evil persons in Congress. He destroyed the careers of many fine people in his hearings. Dingell and his staff have absolutely no integrity. It is a wonderful day when such a reprehensible person can be dethroned.

28. Jeffrey | 11.20.08

Betsey, Millions of species? That’s the kind of hyperbole that alienates the educated among us who care about the environment but don’t want to make decisions that aren’t scientifically sound. Learn to stick with the facts otherwise you setback our goals.

Hopefully, Waxman will see the need for clean coal technology to reduce emissions from existing electricity plants. We need a robust mix of nuclear, solar, wind, clean coal, hydro, hydrogen, and more. The (clean) sky’s the limit!

29. Rae B | 11.20.08

Some narrow minded people don’t realize that economy can thrive while being environmentally conscious at the same time. Granted the quickest way to cash in is often involves the dirtiest practices (as many up and coming 3rd world countries illustrate), but it provides short term gain only. Investing green is just that, an investment that will pay of over time. Only problem is that the ‘dirty’ tycoons would lose their cash cow and other innovative minds would have a chance at the pot. Just like the Big 3 car companies, let them fall and be replaced by innovation.

30. Rae B | 11.20.08

(cont) Losing a ’symbol’ like Chevy is a small price to pay for a chance at joining the 21st Century auto business (Nobody misses Rockfeller’s Steel Co.), its just a matter of time before they fall either way. Why the **** was GM producing the Biggest Gas guzzler of all time (Hummer) at the peak of an oil crisis anyway, with that kind of buisiness philosophy, they deserve whats coming! Americans need to realize, SIZE DOES NOT MATTER, QUALITY MATTERS!!!

31. deltac | 11.20.08

Dingle represented the Auto Industry and fought hard on their behalf to stop the CAFE standards from being raised and other sensible regulations that would have made us less dependent on foreign oil. Unfortunately, the auto industry didn’t know what was good for them. If they produced more fuel efficient cars they might not be looking at bankruptsy or begging for a bail out.

32. Chris | 11.20.08

Amazing to see #3 spout uninformed “facts”. if you bother to do anything but watch fox news, you’d be amazed to know the cause of the housing crisis IE: unregulated securities were based on a joint venture between Republicans and Democrats, both with the best intentions at heart. Republicans wanted less regulation, and Democrats wanted more people in houses.

What we got was the worst possible combination when coupled with the capitalism prospectus. (IE: making the most amount of money possible, regardless of good or ill with the people involved.) Loans were given out to people in a payment schedule that started with low payments increasing in amount usually at the 5 or 7 year mark, this payment jump was not explained well enough and unfortunately these loans were targeted on people who quite frankly weren’t smart enough to understand what they were agreeing to, or not explained in layman terms so normal people can understand (Read: uneducated by choice or by position).

This issue was built up by an increasingly demanding workplace (IE: 5 people to do a 7 person job) who’s position on making more money involved invoking high stress positions for lower wages.

Most people who work the grunt jobs, can easily attest that this has been going on for years, even while the business owners continued to profit heavily. Greed, some people might say, but I think it wasn’t greed just flat negligence on what they were actually accomplishing. Higher profits for a shorter duration. Then, we see one market failure begin a chain reaction of market failures. All because the owners decided enough just wasn’t enough. As Limbaugh says, follow the money.

33. ivy | 11.20.08

Despite people being ready for change, I’m surprised that how many votes still went to Dingell. The real problem is not only Dingell but many others in the congress who are in pockets of Big Oil/Kstreet.
That is why changing the president is not enough to make a real progress as the system is infested w/ hundreds of congressman and senators who will do what their masters tell them to do.
If these are the #s on democrat side, one can imagine how bad it must be on the republican side who are supposedly friends of business!!

34. Maureen | 11.20.08

Thank God. Dingell has been in bed with automakers and their ilk (anti-environmentalists, drug companies & the usual list of other special interests) for over a quarter of a century… and America has the mess to prove it. As an aside: I say **** No to any bail-out of the auto industry. What happened to Chrysler’s bailout years ago? What did they and the other auto makers learn then? -0- Nada Nothing. And if it hurts the American consumer, I’m not too impressed with them either… this morning I counted hundreds of gas guzzlin’ SUVs and other beasts on Illinois’ highway system. Hummers, Navigators, Escalades, Dodge and Chevy trucks… a conga line of ill conceived (but readily purchased) cars. America should have produced a green car 20 years ago!

35. Mr Flash | 11.20.08

Yep that global warming is killing me here in Chicago, its 29 degrees and snowing. Al gore is full of BS, his carbon swap money machine is nothing but a sham, his carbon footprint from his house, jet, etc are all BS. Poor Michael Chriton was right in his book State of Fear-the world is dying-NOT. As George Carlin said the world will take care of itself, it has survived several mass extinctions. Our economy is in enough deep caca, now we will tell GM what cars to build, which will send them into even a deeper whole. Barney franks is still mandating Fannie Mae continue to give sub prime mortgages to people who can’t afford a home. Our new President’s idea of change is to put Clinton’s clowns-say Marc rich, back into office-thats real hope and change—as the WHo said-meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

36. CommanderBill | 11.20.08

Stud says “Now. Anyone that thinks differently needs to visit the ice caps or notice that everyone else is concerned about the planet.” Apparently he didn’t visit the ice caps himself. The Antarctic ice pack hasn’t significantly varied from the norm since it has been monitored by satellite commencing in 1979. Refers:
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.south.jpg
In 2007 summer sea ice in the Northern Hemisphere was significantly less than the norm. A NASA study reported that the sea ice reduction was caused by abnormal winds not global warming. Refers: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2007/10/03/nh-sea-ice-loss-its-the-wind-says-nasa/ Since 2007 the Northern Hemisphere sea ice has largely returned to its normal expense and began to thicken. Refers: http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.jpg
Equally important a U.S. Geological Survey study has found for the first time in history Alaskan glaciers are growing in size. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/10/14/alaska-glaciers-on-the-rebound/#comment-48933 The facts show little or no evidence of global warming and dramatic destructive economic policy promoted by environmental fanatics should be avoided.

37. John McAllister | 11.20.08

Comrade Wexman will continue the charge of a once great America into the ash heap of history by his unwavering devotion to the absurd science that attributes global warming at the foot of American enterprise. How arrogant to think we have this much power. Does anyone know how to spell HOAX?

38. Matt Turner | 11.20.08

hey putrdriver, name one regulation that caused the financial crisis. What regulation caused banks to lend to people who could not afford their loan? What regulation created an environment of over-leverage? I am not sure you know the definition of “fact”. Greenspan said the flaw with his world-view was that banks would create the regulations for themselves to prevent said banks from losing money. He was wrong because the lack of regulations created a culture of fraud in the banking industry because no one was confirming the loans that were bundled in various investment instruments.

39. Drew Dubya | 11.20.08

It’s about time the Democratic Party shed corporate pork-pals like Dingell; at least a portion of the Big 3’s failures as consumer products can be traced directly to his brand of protectionism. American cars would be a quality product far more likley to be selling to American households right now if Dingell hadn’t been there hatchet man in Congress. Good riddance!

40. insiter | 11.20.08

This shift between two Democrats will nonetheless have potentially enormous consequences in environmental policy. Not all Democrats are pro-environment and not all pro-environment stands are “anti-human” (whatever that term is supposed to connote). Waxman is a believer that environmental protection is an important role of government; Dingell was not. Waxman’s thinking will inevitably be more in line with the new Obama Administration.

As an aside, I find it interesting that in disagreements such as this, it is nearly always the conservatives who begin and have the stomach for personal attacks, name-calling and mud-slinging. They seem to take their cue from the right wing nuts who blather on the publicly owned airwaves. Even when they’re right, even when they have a valid and interesting point to make, their rhetoric results in an instant loss of credibility. And that’s too bad because civilized debate is a lost — and badly needed — art in our culture.

41. Drew Dubya | 11.20.08

>>>> now we will tell GM what cars to build

Yeah, leaving them to their own unfettered devices has worked absolute wonders so far. I’ve got the feeling “Mr Flash” will never be followed by the phrase “of Genius.”

42. Rickyrab | 11.20.08

Okay, good news, that’s for sure. That being said, what do we do about the auto industry? I wouldn’t mind focusing more on transit myself, but the fact remains that a) American car companies are competing with Japanese and Euro car companies, b) Michigan and the Midwest are heavily moved by the auto industry voting bloc, and c) it’s a major industry. Is there a way we could make the auto industry work for transit and the environment’s benefit? I wonder if there’s a way for the auto industry to survive without as much emphasis on the auto.

43. David | 11.20.08

it surprises me that so many still buy into the rants by global warm-mongers. the real, empirical, science shows that hypothetical anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) is a myth propagated by the disgruntled vice to America’s most recently impeached president.

the assertion is made that average temperature measurements taken at various specific places all over the world have increased over the period of industrialisation/population growth. Duh. as many of these various specific places all over the world have become urbanized, due to industrialisation and population growth, temperatures increase due
to the urban heat island effect.

there is ample scientific evidence that anthropomorphic global warming is fiction. here are two examples:
1. microwave sounding units carried aboard US Commerce Department - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration polar-orbiting satellites have shown global temperature averages of the troposphere, the lowest 8 kilometers of the atmosphere, have increased slightly but this increase remains within the realm of natural variation.

2. data from the internationally sponsored Argo project, an empirical study of temperature and salinity in the upper 2000 meters of world oceans using 3000+ autonomous diving buoys, show NO temperature increase. since measurements started in 2000 there has been a slight decrease in temperatures - again, within the realm of natural variation. [these results triggered an editorial with the clever title “Buoy Meets Gore”]

much has been made of melting ice in the Arctic ocean leading to sea level rises flooding world coastlines. ice is less dense than water (that’s why it floats), when floating ice melts there’s no net increase in sea level. only if the ice on land (Greenland, Antarctica, etc.) melts would there be danger of coastal flooding.

assertions of the dangers posed by carbon dioxide are most amusing. those who produce such copious amounts of hot air are inherently guilty of spreading extra carbon dioxide.

44. Rickyrab | 11.20.08

Global warming gains more attention in the summertime than it does in the wintertime, and for obvious reasons, too.

45. Bill | 11.20.08

I read Science and Nature cover to cover to keep up to date on the published science literature. I haven’t read an article yet suggesting that global warming is a hoax. There are article after article showing how global warming is being more acurately measured and confirmed from many different experimental angles. A big problem that is being addressed experimentally is the accumulation of corbon dioxide in the oceans causing acidification. That is a well understood phenomenon directly related to increases of carbon dioxide in the atomosphere. There is no disputing that the carbon dioxide increases are induced by people. The consequence to the ocean is eventual loss of most marine crustacieans and shell fish and the fish that feed on them. The result? Seas dominated by jellyfish.

46. BobJ | 11.20.08

I think some of the comments about Dingell are way over the top, but among other mistakes he bears a certain amount of responsibility for the predicament the US automakers find themselves in. Three decades after the energy crisis of the 70’s, the idea that our car companies were building gas-guzzling behemoths is both sad and laughable. If Dingell had not been so successful at blocking increases in efficiency, the Big Three would be in far better shape than they are now.

Waxman is at the left side of the Left, and as a moderate ex-Republican that should scare me. Frankly, after the Bush years, we are so far behind in the changes we need to make that Waxman is exactly the right guy to start forcing the Congress to move, and move it must. We all need to change, and the sooner we own up to it instead of living in denial the better it will be for coming generations. After all, fossil fuels not consumed today are fossil fuels still available when your grandkids need them. Are we so greedy we won’t even share with our own descendants?

47. Solo | 11.20.08

It’s good news for everyone and I think both lawmakers have good intentions and goals when it come to interest of the country, the citizens and the globe.

Congratulation to Waxman and also Dingell deserve a praise for serving this committee.

48. Don | 11.20.08

Jim # 26 The government could care less about the people of the USA. The only time our esteemed congressional stalwarts want to hear from you is when you are sending them your tax dollars or the occasional reward in monetary funds as a ‘Thank you’ for a job well done [re: bribe]

Waxman will embrace the radical environmentalists agenda because the squeeky wheel gets the oil. How better to ensure his face is splattered all over the evening news than to wield the sword of environmental justice for the poor down-trodden citizen of this dying nation.

49. MrJones | 11.20.08

Henry Waxman has always been a no-nonsense hard working representative from my district. More importantly, he is extremely competent on many levels and has the wherewithal to get things done in a legal manner. Those who underestimate his capabilities and effectiveness will soon learn to out of the way or get steamrolled with those who cling to the past practices of wasting and abusing our natural resources. Let’s see, under the Republican administration of the past 8 years, we created how many surplus jobs in this country while compromising our environment? The republicans are going to learn the true meaning of the phrase, “Drill, baby, drill.”

50. Sam | 11.20.08

David is right on the money. The message just doesn’t play well with the media and the public because we’ve all been brainwashed that global is MAN MADE. 99% of greenhouse gases come from water / oceans, less than 1-2% form CO2 emissions. Nobody wants to consider alternative viewpoints in seeking truth. We just take and swallow what the media and those who stand to profit feeds us. It’s not PC. If you seek truth, at least consider the science more broadly and read Roy Spencer’s book, “Climate Confusion”.

The fear I have is bad science will lead to bad public policy. What are the costs and consequences on the world food supply, the poorest nations among us all? Why, in the name of humanity, do we implement policies that HURT humanity?

BUT, does anyone care where Waxman stands on OTHER issues he will have oversight of, or are we simply single-issue minded?

Go ahead, let it fly. I’m sure your civility will speak loudly.

51. Unintended Consequences | 11.20.08

Someone suggested damming our rivers to prevent flooding, produce power, provide water to dry areas for agriculture. That’s already been done with often disastrous results: ruining fisheries, creating polluting agricultural runoff, and encouraging building in flood planes; just take a look at California’s Klamath, Trinity, and Sacramento rivers. Those who advocate reducing CO2 at any cost should beware of the law of unintended consequences.
Anthropogenic global warming is at best an unproven theory, and contrary to popular opinion, not “every respected scientist” is convinced. There are many good reasons for reducing use of fossil fuels, e.g., getting the **** out of the middle east, not further destroying the landscape and natural habitats from mining and drilling, and protecting the economy from the vagaries of oil prices, but we should proceed cautiously so as to insure prudent action likely to provide positive results rather than unintended consequences. Global warming may be real and may be human caused, and may or may not ultimately be harmful, but there is no “Global Warming Crisis”; just Climate Change hysteria due to the unrealistic worst-case scenarios used by Gore and the IPCC to scare people and governments into precipitous and potentially harmful actions. Good riddance to John Dingle as chairman of the energy committee, but let’s not drink the Climate Change Cool Aide all in one gulp.

52. Tigo Biddies | 11.20.08

Yeah right. melting polar caps smog and everything else that effects the earth only comes from the US…

53. Sam | 11.20.08

He will continue the tradition of usiong bad science to implement bad public policy. Why, in the name of humanity, do we take actions that ultimately HURT humanity, especially among the poorest people of the world?

Go ahead, let it fly. You civility will speak loudly, I’m sure.

54. basementfrog | 11.20.08

It’s about time. Thank God.

Let the car manufactures be sold to the Japanese. Set far more stringent pollution standards, and demand cars that do not use fosil fuel at all.

It’s possible, if we open the GM & Ford patents sitting on the shelves.

55. Leo Gonzales | 11.20.08

The high rate of burning of fossil fuels in ther US for the past few decades was helped in large part by short-sighted environmentalists who passionately opposed the expansion of the best source of cheap, abundant and relatively pollution-free energy — nuclear energy. I hope that this phase of hysterical and oftentimes irrational causes by environmentalists has passed. We all live on the same planet and we all want the best environment for ourselves and our children. To achieve this, we must think clearly and evaluate objectively all the alternatives open to us. To unthinkingly jump into the fashionable bandwagons espoused by misguided activists often has the opposite effect — we create a worse environment by blocking logical alternatives. Go nuclear now — we are way behind the rest of the world in this.

56. Bill Collins | 11.20.08

Bravo, House Dems!
The auto industry is suing Califnria and other states which are trying to control greenhouse gases, and Waxman will help us get the industry to back off and shape up.

57. mike doctor | 11.20.08

The good news is in the side bar to this article where a worldwide poll shows that the “ostrich in the sand” group has become a small minority. A vast majority of people are convinced global warming needs to be addressed. This includes a large majority in the USA, where 66% of people want alternative energy even if energy costs raise. There has been consensus in the scientific community for years, and the public now understands that there is a problem.

58. Pablo | 11.20.08

Everyone here (on both sides) needs to read this essay, it explains why we are in the position we are in:
http://www.michaelcrichton.net/speech-environmentalismaseligion.html

59. Greg | 11.20.08

Whether you agree or disagree with global warming, is it a good idea to leave any lawmaker in the same post in government for 28 years?

60. Mike | 11.20.08

To CommanderBill,

Sir, you serisouly cannot be citing a weather technology salesmans blog (www.wattsupwiththat.com) as a source that explains other causes of climate change. That information is called “opinion” not fact. The source that supposed blog refers to is here http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/quikscat-20071001.html. If your basing your claim that global climate change is false based upon a single report that is talking about Perennial Sea Ice Pattern Change then I don’t know what tell you since you obviously you know nothing about the scientific method or process. Second of all, that guy on that blog has a background in meteorology, which means he has the skills to tell what the weather will be like tomorrow on the evening news, which is MUCH different than say a climatologist, you know those folks who have dedicated there lives to studying global climate change.

Anyways, it trully makes me sad that we have to argue this. I hope with the new administration coming America will learn we cannot afford to be as stupid as we want to be.

61. frogger | 11.20.08

Leo G. - the high rate of burning fossil fuels in the US is from out-of-control energy waste and an oppressive consumer culture. Demand for energy drove the increase, not short-sighted environmentalists. Your conceit clearly indicates your failure to understanding the grave threat unrestrained growth poses to the ecologies of the world. Nuclear power can be an effective means of limiting the release of carbon, as long as adequate operational regulations, a clear chain of responsibility and intensive training are part of it. To blame the public’s fear of nuclear power on environmental activists rather than the true opposition: Not-In-My-Back-Yard-motivated consumers is a red herring.

62. Dave Hanks | 11.20.08

Global warming (and cooling) occurs naturally in most planet systems and over time on Earth as far as we know. Typically arrogant of humans to think we are the cause (or solution) alone to this. Cow and animal **** contributes more to greenhouse gases than car exhaust.

Waxman is an EXTREMIST who will hurt the economy with his loony plans to save the world.

63. Dave F | 11.20.08

I have been to India - 4 major cities and country in-between. I could barely breath the air and certainly could not drink the water or eat anything not boiled. When I return to the good old USA I finally was able to breath again. But I guess we are not good enough. I wonder if Al G has been to India? Oh I forgot, they have a pass.

64. Todd Peterson | 11.20.08

To: . Unintended Consequences, post 51.

Interesting perspective. It kind of reminds me of the idiots three or four years ago (Greenspan, Phil Gramm, et al)who told us it was ridicious to worry about a housing and credit bubble…. and ‘kill our economy’ with regulation… god forbid! You people never give up, do you……
The right-wing nut jobs who love sticking their heads in the sand –

* “there’s an infinite amount of oil”
* “cutting taxes always raises revenues”
* “global climate change is a hoax/exaggeration”
* “universal healthcare is communism/facisism/socialism”
* “America is the leader and Europe sucks”

You live in a friggin alternative universe, and most of you have never travelled to Denmark or Holland or Switzerland or any other place….. and most of you think that selfishness is some kind of moral value, while at the same time trying to claim that you serve the epitmoe of an anti-selfish symbol, which is J. Christ….. Your minds are so screwed up… its amazing that you stayed in power so long, it just looks like you confirmed that evil always finds plenty of company…..

And its no wonder America is now in a “once in 100 years crisis” after 8 years of Republican Rule….

Send the Republicans to Guantanamo and
[Eoin’s note: I redacted the last clause of this comment because it advocated violence.]

65. DicK Jarvinen | 11.20.08

To 43. David

“microwave sounding soundings” - That study has been shown to be flawed:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/view.php?id=24724

“Argo project” - It also has ‘issues’:
“When John Lyman from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle, Washington, and his colleagues compared the Argo and XBT measurements, it appeared that the upper oceans had cooled by 0.02 °C between 2003 and 2005 (Geophysical Research Letters, DOI: 10.1029/2006GL027033). In fact the cooling was an artefact, caused by the switch from XBTs to Argo, combined with the faulty floats. Lyman’s team has submitted a correction and is recalibrating the data. Calculations are still ongoing, but it now looks like no cooling occurred.” - From issue 2601 of New Scientist magazine, 28 April 2007, page 4

“melting ice in the Arctic ocean”
Sure, when an ice cube melts in water, the water level goes down. But it seems to me that Greenleen, Arctic and Antacrtic glaciers and ice fields are ABOVE the water. So when those ice cubes above the water level melt, I suspect the water level will not go down.

Oh… nice comment about ‘rants from global warm-mongers’. I don’t suppose we could just stick to the facts, could we?

66. Robert Schneider | 11.20.08

I was glad to see that commanderBill supported his assertions with references. I looked because, I have difficulty understanding how a few intelligent holdouts continue to deny global warming. Unfortunately after looking at his reference, and backing up to get the full context, I have the same question. commanderBill chose to send the one photo of a larger article that could be interpreted to show global cooling. Here is the larger reference. http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/ You will see that with a larger time series glacial melt, particularly since the mid 1970s is very obvious. Why, out of an article that demonstrates clearly the reduction of polar swee ice would he reference (out of context) the one graph that could be (erroneously) interpreted to show global cooling. It appears purposely misleading. Why?

67. Mike | 11.20.08

Regardless of whether global warming is a hoax or not, protecting environment is important. This is a win for Earth.

68. Informed | 11.20.08

Wow, I really look forward to Rep Waxman turning the US into California (a state where I was born and lived for 30+ years, until I could no longer stand the high costs of complete waste of resources by non other than politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Henry Waxman. They run around with their loud mouths threatening businesses, and requiring environmental impact statements on any activity they don’t support. But for all you real environmentalist (who I do respect, as real means informed and dedicated–btw most true hunters are included in this group for reasons that have to do with protecting the habitat of birds and animals), please note that one of the largest sources of greenhouse gases and other air, water and soil pollutants, is the single family dwelling of which the US has the largest number per capita (by a large margin) than any other country on earth. Add to that the automobile required to go anywhere from a single family dwelling, and the environmental impact gets even more negative. I know this as we have been working on green city development in Asia, and clearly having multiple family dwelling housing which allows for public transportation and work close to home (ala the Europe model–one of the few good things about Europe), is a major reducer of environmental degradation, including global warming (assuming it is real as I really don’t know). But when Barney Frank pushed through his Fannie and Freddie plan to privatize profits (for his good friend **** Raines) and nationalize risk (you know what behavior that created) in order to “put every family in America in a home”, neither Ms. Pelosi nor Mr. Waxman even thought to ask the questions around environmental impact and carbon footprint for this horrendously short cited policy shift. I am all for taxing the source of environmental degradation and pollutants, so in addition to taxing coal, let’s also tax every American home owner based on their contribution to environmental degradation as determined by an environmental impact analysis using the same methodology and carbon tax that we use for businesses. Of course if we did that the tax would be high and it will vary little by size of the home, so in Ms. Pelosi usual approach, she will require that the Federal Government allocate a few hundred billion dollars to those home owners who can’t afford the tax to pay it for them, thereby justifying in her mind and that of Waxman and Frank, that they made good policy…. I find it amazing that we are running around developing all kinds of “clean energy” to support an inefficient system and design, and in the process will use all kinds of resources to develop these alternative forms of energy, without regard to their environmental impact. The US has no long term integrated strategy and as such the famous line in Alice in Wonderland so aptly describes our situation, “when you don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there”. Unfortunately, he have every possibility of driving off the road as well in this current environment.

69. Ken Reid | 11.20.08

During my 82 years I learned that the ice age ravaged our country,leaving in its path new lakes, mountains, canyons, rocky land and even killed off whatever lived at that time. Our climate has changed a because man created upstream watershed programs which gave all of us a ten inch per year increase in rainfall. This Oklahoma land, judged by the government, “..not fit for human habitation”, and used to displace American Indians is becomming America’s best kept secret. The only sure thing is, and has always been - change will continue. Each season is different and change is unnoticable. As Oklahoma’s Will Rogers said,. “If you don’t like our weather, just wait a minute”. We highly suspect all the flag waving and charges against industry for messing up our ecosystem is an attempt to subvert and create false martyrs.

70. Jason | 11.20.08

Remember, the Republicans who post are people who voted for Bush/Cheney, twice. They thought that they would be surrounded by a team of experts like Rumsfeld who would run the country and the military like a business. They were all for invading Iraq to “kick their *** and take their gas”, and they still think there are WMD Saddam had hidden away somewhere.

Republicans have zero credibility. They have no character judgment capacity. The morals and ideals they do hold in esteem are against the common good of We the People and instead only seek to serve themselves, the special chosen few who they think are the only ones who work hard and deserve to benefit from it. They believe that everyone else lives by their leave and if it weren’t for them we would collapse economically, fail to stop terrorists and waste billions in mismanaged government programs.

Seems to me like the Republicans have used all their power to accomplish those goals without the help of Democrats just fine. Remember when Karl Rove told the Republicans that they would have a “permanent majority” now that Bush was in power and they had complete control of Congress and acted to appoint all of the Judges they could from the Supreme Court on down and fire anyone who won’t serve that political goal of making the third branch of government their own.

Republicans run on the notion that Government is bad and will only destroy anything it tries to control. Then, they get elected to office and do all they can to make that come true. They royally screwed everything up so severely that, not only did they lose their “permanent majority”, and the White House…they lost it to a “black dude”. The bigot wing of the party is weeping and wailing in agony. The special few who profit billions while they company burns, the people who see War as a perfect business model, are all wondering how they can stop their losses and convince you that energy efficiency and independence is bad, that these people you elected are the ones who are wasteful and cannot be trusted. They want you to believe that Democrats are the enemy and just might be terrorists themselves.

America’s trajectory is always forward, toward greater freedom, inventing our way out of problems, learning from our mistakes and willing to work tirelessly to make our dreams come true and build a future for our children. That is Liberalism. Progressive thought is what moves us forward. The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views and when he has worn them out the conservative adopts them and does all he can to force other people to believe it is the only way.

Good luck to Obama and Biden and everyone who is ready to bridge the gap and forge a way ahead together. It’s not the only way, but it is the only way which will be successful for us all.

71. Barbara - MA | 11.20.08

I don’t believe in Global Warming; it’s cyclical; in prehistoric times, we had no autos or machinery, etc. to warm the earth and the ice still melted.

It’s all a bunch of **** perpetrated by Al Gore and his cronies — that’s all. He is the biggest hypocrite there is — ask him about his lifestyle — where he lives, what kind of vehicles he drives — his fuel situation, etc. etc.

72. Todd Peteson | 11.20.08

Post 64 clarification…

Didn’t really mean to incite actual violence… meant to imply trial for high crimes….. criminal justice process…. and then capital punishment … which was hyperbole….

73. Chris | 11.20.08

Mike- Climatologists are the same as Scientologists they make up the science to fit their religion. No statistics, no controls, no verifiable results.

74. Ed Banks | 11.20.08

Betsey Brownley, you are the very best. The reason why our nation is in this mess is because of compromisers and obstructionists like Dingle. Dingle has been in the pockets of these car companies for years. This why there car companies are facing bankruptcy. And they have the audacity to show up in the congress asking for money with a threat to lay off workers if denied.

Imagine an industry that will produce gas guzzlers and resist regulation to increase MPG on cars, all because Detroit has Dingle to obstruct and impede. Imagine car companies that have resisted reduction of emission standards, all because they have Dingle has godfather. Imagine how many safety standards that Dingle has blocked on behalf of Detroit? Detroit aggressive lobbying of Dingle is called bribery in 3rd world countries, and such law makers are bound to jail for life. But here Dingle can legally operate like a Mafia on behalf of oil and car companies as long as his seat and chairmanship is maintained for 28 years to the detriment of the citizens of of this great nation.

Our interstate commerce laws have not changed dramatically since the sixties, all because of obstructions from Dingle and big corporations. Visit Europe and compare the difference. Companies cannot abuse citizens with impunity as they are doing in US. All because they have the likes of Dingle.

Only a bankrupt nation will allow one man to sit on chairmanship of the most powerful committee in its senate for 28 whole years. What do you think we are? Banana Republic?

What moral authority do we have to call idiots like Mugabe, Saudi kings, Mubarak, tugs and dictators, if one man can rule our own senate and lives for 28 years unchallenged. Where is innovation and creativity in an old and dying man? Where is freedom and government of the people by the people and for the people? No wonder we are in this mess. So this is not all Bush fault. He has enablers and one of Bush co-conspirators is Dingle the dead wood.

75. Bribes | 11.20.08

Global warming deniers are out in force today. Their insistence in the face of scientific consensus is impressive. Their defense is a tidal wave of bullshit that is almost impossible to refute for its sheer horrific volume. Their lies are so plentiful, manipulative, and misleading, that it would take years to pick them apart. In fact, it’s taken decades and is still ongoing.

Let’s see what we have in this thread alone:

(a) Global warming does not exist / is a hoax
(b) Waxman is a communist
(c) Arctic and antarctic ice levels are increasing
(d) 29 degree weather proves global warming is false
(e) The Earth is better now than in the past 100 years
(f) It was regulation that caused the financial crisis
(g) Environmentalists have an “anti-human agenda”
(h) Environmentalists have short-sighted solutions
(i) Global warming is a myth and global cooling may be the natural trend
(j) The earth has been hotter than it is getting now
(k) Good Clinton appointees are not “change” (Bush never existed)
(l) Stuff about Al Gore being evil

Each of these statements is either false, or if true, then it is a small piece of evidence in a much larger puzzle. The larger picture points to global warming as real, currently doing damage, and eminently dangerous.

And notice how broadly the lies reach. It is not enough to dispute evidence, make up evidence, ignore facts — it must reach a stage of personal hatred, of politicians, posters, activists, and in the end, most of the US.

76. John Andrews | 11.20.08

I’m going to have to laugh about the entire energy independence idea. I ask that all of you who read this realize the huge amounts of infrastructure designed to provide your home, business, and transportation with energy. Please get your copy of National petroleum council’s (http://www.npc.org/)publication regarding this issue…”Facing the Hard Truth’s About Energy” It’s not even close to achievable. This is an independent study done, not by the oil giants but by informed citizens just from a supply and demand perspective. It’s a nice dream that the green party has come up with, but that’s all it is….a dream. The green party will convince you it’s possible, then tax the living daylights out of you and after you cannot afford to eat, put your children to college, or even live a basic life you’ll be left with nothing. It’s just another money funnel for a special interest group. Read, become informed and most of all pray. We need God’s answer.

77. Hal Seeley | 11.20.08

I doubt global warming is a hoax or a scam, more likely just plain fear, the same fear that got us into a war in Iraq when it was proposed there were WMD’s behind every sand dune. What we most likely have is a problem with global chemistry. Having tens of millions of internal combustion engines breathing our air and spewing our poisonous gases has to upset the balance in some way, and I wouldn’t think it would be good. Basic chemistry tells us that we insert a foreign substance in a balanced system there is a disruption, sometimes slowly, sometimes violently. It behooves us to look at this aspect of pollution and what may be happening to our atmosphere. Could this be the source of more violent storms and strange temperature swings?
As for fear, I would suggest that good and proper solutions do not come from fear.

78. Unintended Consequences | 11.20.08

TO: #64. Todd Peterson
Watch who you’re calling a “right wing nut job”. I happen to be a liberal democrat and a scientist. Take your invective elsewhere and trade it for some common sense. You are another example of the many “global warmers” who substitute emotional argument and belief for reasoned argument and objective discussion.

79. mike | 11.20.08

Chris post 74 says, “Mike- Climatologists are the same as Scientologists they make up the science to fit their religion. No statistics, no controls, no verifiable results.”

Kinda like your statement above right? (No statisics, no controls, etc,etc…)

Anyways, for those actually wanting more information on Global Climate change:
http://www.exploratorium.edu/climate/
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/
http://climate.jpl.nasa.gov/

Depending on your political persuasion I guess, the above sites are either trusted sources of knowledge and information regarding global climate change OR ‘Them liberal propagandists tryin to take guns and good honest small town work from real Americans by confusin ya’ll with “Facts” and “Science”, youbetcha!”

80. Dan in Chicago | 11.20.08

Great news! Congratulations Rep. Waxman. I have been a fan of your actions for some time now, and am so happy that you have been appointed this post.

81. P. Arrington | 11.20.08

Excellent news! This change or something similar has been long overdue.

Thanks also, to those who wrote rebuttals of faux scientific studies purporting to disprove global warming and/or anthropogenesis of same.

The people of the Maldives Islands are trying to buy new homelands due to their current dwellings being threatened by encroaching ocean waters. For them and countless others, knowing the truth is a matter of life and livelihood.

Lying about this subject does no one any good. And much harm to the perpetrator.

82. Gabriel Engler | 11.20.08

The Dingell Family has served over the Dearborn-Detroit Area for 75 years, since 1933, This is a loss for Detroit, and for Michigan.

Little bit of background you say in bed with the automakers. If Dingell takes money from anyone is in area it would some how come from the Big 3, His district is the heart of the Big 3. So either directly or indirectly all of our money comes from the Big.

You who talk about selling the Big 3 to some other nation are fools, i’d use stronger words but the mod asked us to stay civil. You want to strip out the heard of AMERICAN manufacturing, and hand it to the rest of the world?

Did you hear Obama we need to create jobs.

While i type this message from a seat in side Dingell’s district in the Shadow of the Glass Palace, i hope that they give Dingell another seat worthy of his rank where he can still help Michigan, and serve the people who placed him and his father before there 38 times.

I hope that Waxman understands that we can’t just sell out the Big 3, I hope he works with the Big 3 to ensure that we don’t lose any more jobs and can have a better Big 3 in the aftermath. But it still hurts since MI voters kicked out two Senior Republicans who where ranking members, and now we lose another Chairmanship, just doesn’t seem right to punish us for supporting the party and trying to support our home lifeline.

-Gabe, Detroiter

83. mike doctor | 11.20.08

See items 62,71, a.o
True the climate on Earth has changed vastly–warm to cold and back many times. The sun has been increasing in luminosity for several billion years. CO2 comes from volcanoes and early Earth had abundant CO2. Had plants not evolved the and converted CO2 to solid carbon molecules the Earth would be like Venus today (huge CO2 content and a boiling hot surface.) The problem is we are now burning million year old carbon molecules and releasing the CO2 stored millions of years ago. The solar radiation has increased, but CO2, lucky for us, is now only a minor component of the atmosphere. Changes in climate have and would continue to occur without human interference, however, burning oil, coal etc. is like tossing another blanket on a bed. Climate changes more rapidly known than before there was human interference. So we are faced with more rapid climate warming, rising oceans, etc. than at any other time in Earth history. Releasing the stored carbon is throwing the entire system out of whack. This is above and beyond climate changes that have been going on for millions of years. It is a serious problem.

84. Xav | 11.21.08

Strange that in the world’s “biggest democracy”, age is used to give high positions.

Committees should be elected based on merit and knowledge of the issues. Not a retirement home for old senators.

Senators should have term limits too. How can one still have sound judgement after spending most of his life in Washington?

As someone once said, society evolves because old people die, not because people change their minds.

So this is a double good news: ousting of a fossil from the Senate, and a more reasonable chairman of the committee.

85. AWBilinski | 11.21.08

Wow, quite the range of response(s)!! Anyway, here are my two cents: Kudo’s to Mr. Waxmen and yeah, after 28 years of NOT producing a better product its time to clean Detroit’s house. Problem is we all get to share in that pain/cost. Still if not now, then when? Bigger kudos to the guys/gals who didn’t just read the scientific explanations of why global warming is a myth but came back with their own sources to show it is real and walks among us. On “scientific proof”, it took a little over 20 years to “prove” that chlorofluorocarbons (that stuff in spray cans and refrigerants) was rising into the atmosphere and dissolving the ozone to create an ozone hole over the southern hemisphere. That effort was contested every step of the way by studies largely backed by Monsanto and company (guess who made a lot of freon gas back then). Global warming is much more complex and if we are going to wait for “hard scientific proof”, the damages are just going to be that much worse. We all need to remember that there are more things that bind us to one another then set us apart. Better to treat Global warming as something to deal with now rather than sit on our hands like the Big three have done and wait for the s*** to hit the fan. It’s too late then. If you don’t buy into this, then perhaps you may wanna buy some nice island property in the Maldives? :)

86. CommanderBill | 11.21.08

To 66 Robert Schneider, I referenced a chart of data (not a photograph) sums the norm of ice coverage since readings have been taken and compares them with the past year. In the Southern Hemisphere there has been no statistical significant change of sea ice since data has become available. In the Northern Hemisphere there was a statistically significant decrease in ice coverage in 2007. It largely reformed in winter of 2008 but thinner. The thinness of the ice resulted in a larger melt in the summer in 2008 but less then 2007. The freeze of 2008 has brought Northern Hemisphere Ice back to statistical norms. Here is a good summation of recent years of Northern Hemisphere sea ice. Note this winter is on the upper edge of the norm of sea ice formation. Hardly a ringing endorsement of global warming. http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/AMSRE_Sea_Ice_Extent.png
As I mentioned U.S. Geological Survey reported two weeks ago that Alaskan glaciers are growing again for the first time since they have been taking data. This coincides with the failure of the start of Sunspot Cycle 24. We are presently in sun spot minimum. A new suns spot cycle should have started months ago. Presently the sun is very inactive and outside all predictive models of sun spot behavior. Sun Spot Cycles have been attributed to climate changes in the past. For example the Little Ice Age was during a prolong period of suns spot inactivity. Especially during the Maunder Minimum, from 1645 to 1715, sunspots became exceedingly rare and temperatures dipped which coincided with the middle and coldest part of the Little Ice Age.

Refers: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/10/14/alaska-glaciers-on-the-rebound/#comment-48933

Refers: http://www.solarcycle24.com/

I suppose I could be an alarmist and say the non-start of sunspot cycle 24 correlates rather nicely with the build up of sea ice and if it doesn’t start soon we may be in for another Meander Minimum. Of course that would be reactionary and I’d be open to vicious denier attacks

87. CommanderBill | 11.21.08

60 Mike, if you don’t like the message don’t attack the messenger attack the facts. Your link, I might add has been discontinued. You seemed displeased that a meteorologist referenced a NASA study on sea ice and abnormal winds. The shortness of the 2007 sea ice melt in the Northern Hemisphere is in the realm of meteorology and the author’s comments deserve note. Moreover, climatology is an extenuation of meteorology. You rightfully imply that Meteorology is a science in its infancy where a three day forecast is not much better than a guess. Climatologists speak with religious certitude about events 30-100 years from now. In that they use the same science as meteorology the only certitude that can be concluded of their predictions is that they are certainly wrong. When the state of the art can tell what next year’s weather will be like or even next month’s the climatologist’s predictions may start to become more than speculative entertainment.

88. WCMurray | 11.21.08

We can only hope that Rep. Waxman keeps in mind that our energy needs are very real, and that electricity is how the energy needs of the future will be met. One way is to simply ban the future sale of gasoline powered automobiles. Yes it would create total turmoil for a fairly short period of time, but in the not so distant future electric cars, trucks and the needed infastructure would emerge. Think cheap and dependable power generation from small localized power plants.

89. AWBilinski | 11.21.08

To Commanderbill

One chart covering 2002 to now? A reference to a prior post by yourself and another to a technical site about sun spot data. This is your support for no global warming? In this huge data maelstrom called the World Wide Web it may actually help to know the messenger and his/her pedigree (agenda?) as so much information is not easily corroborated. I am not a scientist nor do I have a technical background. I do read a fair amount and the general gist is that we are confronted with climate change on a magnitude/speed we only dimly comprehend. If this is wrong, then I guess the “greens” will look foolish and out investment in conservation premature. If not, then we had better get a handle on this NOW. Are you still in favor of sitting back and waiting for hard proof?

90. Wayne.NY | 11.21.08

I just finished a brief note on the GM/Ford/Chrysler financial assistance article and am struck by the interaction between these two articles and the similarly high emotional responses in the blogsphere.

My comment on the Waxman selection is simply that anyone who is in a seat of power for too long needs to be swapped out. That’s why we have term limits for our Governors and our Presidents - but none for committee chairman?

This is a much needed change, not because Chairman Dingell is from the dark side, but because he has been in one place too long for our good and for his own good.

91. jtilles | 11.22.08

He has pandered to the auto industry made them uncompetitive, this could be good news.

92. Mike Higgins | 11.22.08

I would like to write in support of CommanderBill’s assertions…

I recently came across a great article by Joseph D’Aleo (for background, see http://icecap.us/index.php/go/experts ) that helps explain why the proponents of human-induced global warming are becoming increasingly desperate in trying to prop up their failing prophesy in every way possible, including personal attacks and hyperbole.

“We are seeing increasing stories during the last year in the news about cold and snow and the global data bases based on satellite and station and ocean data suggest temperatures have leveled off over the last decade. These facts even have the IPCC head Dr. Rajendra Pachauri questioning whether natural forces are at least temporarily offsetting greenhouse forcing.”

He concludes that, “Today there is a huge ‘social support’ group of grant toting modelers and researchers, agenda driven or ratings driven journalists, environmentalists and corporations that have realized green is their favorite color and see this as a way to keep green paper flowing into their coffers and pockets, farmers who are benefiting from the misplaced focus on alternative fuel from crops which has sent the cost for their crops to record levels, traders and major market firms licking their chops at the prospects of big time money from carbon trading, big oil and alternative energy companies that has realized this is the vector to bigger profits and the politicians and political activists who see it as a way to accomplish ulterior goals about changing society and increasing their power base.”

This short and insightful article is must read for anyone interested in understanding why, ”A man with conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts and figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.”

“It will only be after the public realizes they have been snookered that the situation may turn on them. We can only hope the damage done is not great and irreparable when that day comes.”

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Why_Bringing_Sanity_Back_on_Climate_Change_Won.pdf .

93. Laura | 11.23.08

Everytime global warming comes up, the same tired skeptic responses are posted with the same kind of links and “experts” cited. Yes, Joseph D’Aleo, a man who gets his funding for his ‘climate research’ from the Fraser Institute, a Canadian free-market/libretarian think-tank that has made it its mission to debunk climate change. And “Icecap,” a blogging site funded from that same kind of think tank. I am surprised Chrichton’s book isn’t referred here as well. And for some backing of the history of human evolution, let’s open the Bible.

Then, people talk about Al Gore and his cronies, and the *government and industry* conspiracy to propel this great hoax, global warming. Well, I don’t know if those who make these claims have noticed, but for the past 8 years we’ve had an administration (the Bush administration) that first did not accept the existence of climate change (or even of evolution for Heaven’s sake) and now, it sort of does and thinks humans “may” be responsible, but not sure. This administration has not only fought any climate or energy legislation that would cut fossil fuel use tooth and nail, but has gone about the business of cutting funding for climate research, hired political hacks to edit/even rewrite climate reports or otherwise censor them, and unseated vocal climatologists, and have done their best to even slow global action on this. Hmmm…makes me think that there’s a conspiracy, but not slanted in the way the climate skeptics on this site are saying. I didn’t realize environmental groups and college kids had the same power as multi-billion dollar oil corps. like Exxon and our President.

I am a natural resource scientist and currently work as a research assistant to a state climatologist and have had the privilege of attending a nation conference of climatologists. Climatologists do not express with certainty how the climate will change in the next century. What they do express is certainty that the world is warming (this is an accepted fact) and that based on some of our current outcomes, they could become much worse over time. And also, I have lived and worked with Native people in Alaska, who are watching their livelihoods disappear before their eyes–I ask, what great agenda do they have other than safeguarding their traditions (which have existed for a millenia)? Inuits can’t hunt on sea ice anymore, it’s so thin they fall right through. The bowhead migrations now occur sometimes a month or two early…polar bears are drowning and cannibalizing each other (a phenomenon that has NEVER been recorded). Entire coastal villages in Alaska (like Shishmaref) are being relocated further inland due to rising sea levels–oh yeah, and federal money is being used to do these relocations–and people here on this site have the audacity to allude that this is not happening?

But again, it’s tiring to hear the same old rants. “The world has been warmer than this in the past.” Yes, in its billions of years of existence it has–but NOT while humans (or most of our current fauna and a lot of our flora) have existed, which leaves doubt about our ability to adapt to it well. Yes, the “world has warmed considerably” in the absence of fossil fuel use in the world’s history–but those warming events took considerably longer (thousands to tens of thousands of years) than today’s and/or were catalyzed by specific natural events/disasters (many volcanic disruptions, etc.). And no, weather is not the same as climate–and cumulative global warming can signify colder weather in some regions–so a cold snap in one region does not debunk global warming.

But what we know is this: greenhouse gases (hence the name) contribute to a greenhouse effect (this is NOT disputed by any reputable climatologist or meterologist, skeptic or not,–it’s a hard fact). Fossil fuel use, deforestation and livestock emissions result in greenhouse gas emissions. In only the past century and a half we have substantially increased these activities/emissions resulting in a somewhat unprecedented level of gases in the atmosphere in a small frame of time in history (that otherwise would be incurred by a natural phenomenon as mentioned above). The warming then leads to feedback loops–the oceans and soils losing more carbon/methane, and the sea ice melting resulting in the loss of our reflective surface that makes the sun’s heat bounce back in space. So, what’s really to dispute here?

As for “energy independence”–the average American expels 15 times more emissions than the average global citizen–and upper class demographics (yes, people like Al Gore), expel several times more than that. The U.S. energy grid could be made 40% more efficient than it is today, fairly cheaply. If the U.S. fulfilled its potential for conservation and efficiency, theoretically we could bridge much of the gap in our energy needs w/renewables. And, whether or not people agree that greenhouse gas emissions contribute to the greenhouse effect, the aforemention activities do contribute substantially to other air quality and environmental issues we should want to resolve.

But we’re still having the same, sad arguments to stall time. What I would like to see: can a skeptic on this site offer a credible source, from source/scientist that/who doesn’t get their funding from the fossil fuel lobby, agribusiness lobby, or from a conservative/libertarian/free-market think tank/corp?

How about people read/relay from credible sources–like the ‘01 & ‘07 IPCC reports, NOAA, NASA, the National Academies of Science, the ACIA (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment) report, Woods Hole Institute, etc.?

94. Mike Higgins | 11.24.08

#92 Laura,

I recommend that you view this short video, which clearly shows from the ice core records that the earth’s temperature has oscillated within a narrow range of just 3-4ºC for the past 10,000 years, refuting you claim that it was “billions of years ago” that the earth was as warm as it is today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI

95. Mike Higgins | 11.24.08

#93 Laura,

The most recent scientific studies show that the greenhouse effect in the Earth’s atmosphere is NOT very sensitive at all to changes of CO2 in the atmosphere. The only place that we find high sensitivity of CO2 in the atmosphere is in the climate models, which have proven to be very unreliable over the past 20 years. Therefore, even significant increases of CO2 in the atmosphere can not cause dangerous catastrophic warming of the earth.

See http://www.weatherquestions.com/Climate-Sensitivity-Holy-Grail.htm for further details.

If I were to claim that my computer model determined that a devastating earthquake was going to hit Seattle next week, any rational-thinking person in Seattle would want to know what the previous record of the computer model was before determining whether to take it seriously or not.

Those of us that you refer to as skeptics are simply advocating that the same caution should apply to the claim that increases in CO2 can cause dangerous global warming. Currently, the only supporting evidence for this theory comes from computer models with a very poor track record. Is that such an unusual position to take in the absence of empirical data?

1. GreenTech Pastures mobile edition | 11.20.08

2. Irregular Times: News » Henry Waxman Wins Energy Chair… Will Democrats Make a Difference? | 11.20.08

3. Henry Waxman « Grab and Keel | 11.20.08

4. News Updates: the future of federal carbon regs? and the Sunflower Electric case « Climate and energy | 11.22.08

5. New Agriculture Secretary a Trick up Obama’s Sleeve? | Food Bubbles | 12.18.08