Posted on 11/16/2014 12:40:42 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Senate Republicans appear likely to use their majority status in the next Congress to attack the science behind climate change in an attempt to undercut environmental policies.
But some GOP strategists wonder whether such an offensive might backfire.
Questioning — and attempting to delegitimize — climate scientists them has been an oft-used tactic of Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), who is poised to reprise his role as chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee.
It was a hallmark of his 2003 to 2007 chairmanship of the panel — and the following six years, when he was its ranking member.
As one of the most outspoken skeptics of the scientific consensus that greenhouse gas emissions from humans cause climate change, Inhofe is still a frequent critic of climate scientists.
“A lot of us, way back in 2001, in that timeframe, they thought there was actually some truth to the global warming thing, and a lot of people are trying to resurrect that now,” Inhofe said on the Senate floor Wednesday in a speech about President Obama’s deal with China to limit greenhouse gases in both countries.
Inhofe dove deeper into his scientific arguments in July, while Senate Democrats took to the floor for hours to call for legislative action to mitigate climate change.
“While some Democrats may be convinced that global warming is continuing to occur, the scientific record does not agree,” he said.
“In fact, for the past 15 years, temperatures have not increased,” he continued, citing data from the University of East Anglia.
As many Republicans have declared this year that “I am not a scientist” to explain why they are skeptical of climate change conclusions, Inhofe has only gotten louder in his declarations that the people who are scientists are wrong.
And while environmentalists and Democrats often say 97 percent of climate scientists agree that humans are causing the climate to change, Inhofe and many other Republicans say otherwise and highlight the dissenters.
Tony Leiserowitz, director of Yale University’s Project on Climate Change Communication, said that skepticism of science is likely to continue as an argument in the GOP-led Senate, especially with Inhofe controlling the environmental agenda.
“He has clearly, very publicly positioned himself as saying that it’s the greatest hoax in American history,” Leiserowitz said. “I doubt anything has happened to convince him otherwise.”
Rep. Larry Bucshon (R-Ind.), a member of the House Science Committee, is looking forward to Inhofe’s chairmanship and Republican control of the Senate.
The House Science Committee, under leadership of Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), has held multiple hearing to promote climate change skepticism and undermine scientists who disagree with them.
For example, Smith called a hearing in May to question the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which has called in recent reports for dramatic measures to reduce carbon emissions quickly. Three of the four witnesses argued that the report had major flaws.
“Right now in the country, in the media particularly and on Capitol Hill, it’s been a one-sided discussion,” Bucshon said. “I’m hopeful that we’ll have a balanced discussion about the facts, and let’s determine what the facts are.”
Bucshon doubts that humans play much of a role in the climate, and he believes there are many scientists who agree with him.
“There’s thousands of scientists that have a different view. We should be hearing everybody’s voice on both sides,” he said.
But focusing too much on attacking climate change could end up hurting Republicans, a GOP strategist said.
Ford O’Connell, who advised Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on his 2008 presidential bid, said that it’d be difficult for Republicans to win arguments on climate change by only criticizing science.
“Inhofe has to really walk a tight-rope here, in the sense that if he can frame this as about the need for American energy security and a war on jobs, he could be successful,” O’Connell said. “But if he uses this pedestal to throw out heaps of red meat, it could backfire.”
Climate change repeatedly ranks low in Americans’ top concerns in major surveys. But O’Connell fears that if Republicans stray from economic and energy security arguments, it could highlight the issue more and open the door to criticisms that they do not care about the environment.
“When you start talking about the need for energy security, the instability around the world and the need for jobs, [Inhofe]’s got a winner,” O’Connell said. “But he’s got to keep the car between these two lines.”
But focusing too much on attacking climate change could end up hurting Republicans, a GOP strategist said....
We MUST do an end run around these GOP strategists. (I will call them LOBBYISTS!)
Our representatives THINK we worry about Climate Change (they are CONFUSED or believe we are "stupid") and we need to EDUCATE them.
Read this (in full) and then send it around.
S. Fred Singer: A Suicidal Collapse of Western Civilization? "....US media, academia, and other opinion-makers are chiming in. In her latest work of science-fiction, Harvard’s Naomi Oreskes, co-author of the mendacious Merchants of Doubt, imagines a future world devastated by climate change. She generously gives the West another 80 years--well beyond her own life span, of course. But she totally ignores the dangers of rising Islamo-Fascism and of demography."......
climate science , LOL Stop using that Liberal Fantasy Crap
I wouldn’t waste my time “attacking” the climate change kooks. I would just quietly cut off all the funding. If they complain, then just ignore them.
Cut back on the government grants until the enviroscammers get their heads straight, get out of politics and back into science.
Climate scientists build and promote (loving all that grant money) climate change MODELS that elites are using to sell green dictates (EPA has been unleashed) -- environmental regulations are killing our economy.
Haven’t you heard, Timothy? The climate is on hiatus.
If we concede the junk science behind global warming, we lose the war.
I’ve heard that liberals were upset that Inhofe will be the committee chairman. In their world, we are supposed to listen with shock and awe as they tell us the world is going to come to an end, unless we pass a cap and trade bill.
Republicans need to add a new word to their lexicon - “Gruber”. “Grubering” is where rats obfuscate, distort, confuse, omit information contrary to their position and outright lie to get the public to go along with their leftist agenda.
The public has certainly been “Grubered” when it comes to anthropometric global warming.
Inhofe is one of the most vocal critics of global warming and is now in charge of energy in the Senate. Thank God.
Yeah despite the fact that the majority of the country thinks and knows the whole thing is a hoax. Leave it to the Repub-Es to completely ignore the will of the people just like they do with foreign invasion. "80% of the country is against foreign invasion, b-but maybe I should support Obamas ScAmnesty anyway"
Have Che take it out back for an execution.
Science is always “on trial”, that’s how it works. Peer review is essential. Getting answers that you want to believe is ideology or religion.
LOL! Great new word, I’ll be using it.
My thought exactly.
How about telling the American people about the EPA’a land grab in their newest interpretation of the Clean Water Act, extending their control over every bit of water in the USA? This should be stopped in its tracks. Whoever controls the water, controls the economy, and that should absolutely not be the environazis in the EPA.
Why do we have House and Senate Science committees anyway?
“Democrats often say 97 percent of climate scientists agree that humans are causing the climate to change, “
Bunkum! That number has been debunked! And a great many of the scientists who believe man is having an effect, admit that the effect is so minuscule that it has no effect in real terms. Approaching abdo-lute zero!
They should use hearings to give reputable climate skeptic scientists a platform to be heard, which the media hasn’t.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.