Posted on 01/21/2015 2:17:54 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
United States senators are now on the record on the question of whether climate change is "a hoax."
The Senate on Wednesday passed a measure stating that "climate change is real and is not a hoax" by a margin of 98-1.
The amendment was designed in part as a jab at GOP Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, who has questioned the science of climate change.
Inhofe voted for the measure, arguing that the true "hoax" is that climate change is the result of human activity.
"Climate is changing, and climate has always changed, and always will, there's archeological evidence of that, there's biblical evidence of that, there's historic evidence of that, it will always change," he said on the Senate floor. "The hoax is that there are some people that are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful that they can change climate. Man can't change climate."
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
That vote indicates that 98 senators think they and their pals can profit in one way or another from the Climate Change scam
and the money they will be able to extort from taxpayers.
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) co-sponsored the amendment with Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who introduced it. Inhofe can claim credit as a primary inspiration for the amendment, having literally written a book called, "The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future." But Inhofe joined Whitehouse and urged its passage.
He was up to something. On Twitter, beforehand:
When offered the chance to speak on the amendment, Inhofe -- did we detect a twinkle in his eye? -- explained his unexpected argument. The climate changes all the time, he said, citing both scientific and "Biblical evidence." There was a hoax: the idea that man was responsible. Such a position was "arrogant," in his formulation, the idea that people could affect the mechanisms that controlled the globe. With that distinction drawn -- the climate changes, and that change isn't a hoax, even if the role of humans is -- the vote was held. Only Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) voted 'no.'
It was a nifty, if insincere, bit of politics. There's no question that a vote against a flat statement that climate change is real could have been problematic for candidates down the road -- especially for those various Republican senators quietly preparing for the big election in 2016. With Inhofe's re-framing the question, the Democrats, trying to engineer a gotcha moment, ended up empty-handed on the vote, with neither the satisfaction of nailing down opposition to scientific consensus and without a point of leverage for future discussions of addressing the warming planet.
Update: Two later votes on amendments linking humans to climate change were rejected. One was introduced by Sen. John Hoeven (R-S.D.), who ended up voting against it. A vote to end a filibuster on that amendment failed 59 to 40. Another, from Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), said that humans were "significantly responsible" for climate change. It failed to achieve cloture as well, 50-49, after Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) argued that it placed too much emphasis on human causes. Several Republicans supported it.
How will these votes come to bear on future elections? In every case, senators can say they supported the idea that climate change is real, which would blunt their votes on the other amendments. Well, in almost every case: Mississippi's Wicker can't say that, but it seems unlikely to hurt him.
Yeah yeah I never claimed otherwise.
That's because between he and Cochran, they split the vote to satisfy the Conservatives in the state. Cochran is an Obama RINO suckup. Wicker plays the part whenever it suits him.
I’m doing my part ... :-) ...
5 Senate Republicans voted on the Schatz amend stating "human activity significantly contributes to climate change" 
You have the Global warming pinglist?
Well, get this. Global warming is real. Repubs just said so.
What a ridiculous waste of time. Now will the Senate defend the Constitution against a lawless president and an out-of-control bureaucracy? I’m sure that’s a slam dunk.
Do not fret SoCon, I know at least 40 years of truth about Republicans!
Just because Britannica labels natural cycles as climate change doesn’t make it any more correct than labeling cycling from winter to spring weather change.
But you may believe anything you like.
It would help tremendously if the senate would now pass a resolution denouncing Man driven climate Change.
Just so Inhofe could have one of his patented 98-1 losses?
Whew, so glad that’s off the table now. I know this was obviously one of the top 50 things that needed to be addressed in this country. /sarc
A long-term change in the earth’s climate, especially a change due to an increase in the average atmospheric temperature:
Melting glaciers imply that life in the Arctic is affected by climate change.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/climate+change
—
Climate change is a change in the statistical distribution of weather patterns when that change lasts for an extended period of time (i.e., decades to millions of years). Climate change may refer to a change in average weather conditions, or in the time variation of weather around longer-term average conditions (i.e., more or fewer extreme weather events). Climate change is caused by factors such as biotic processes, variations in solar radiation received by Earth, plate tectonics, and volcanic eruptions. Certain human activities have also been identified as significant causes of recent climate change, often referred to as “global warming”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change
—
Climate change is a large-scale, long-term shift in the planet’s weather patterns or average temperatures. Earth has had tropical climates and ice ages many times in its 4.5 billion years.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate-guide/climate-change
This is essentially what they did.
In a couple of months the weather will "change".
If the climate was changing we wouldn't have the repeating patterns over 4.5 billion years.
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.