Posted on 12/06/2015 1:44:14 PM PST by Isara
In an exchange with a heckler, Ted Cruz himself gives a masterful mini-lecture demonstrating his grasp of the essence of science, confounding the major media reports that he "flunks" a test aced by Democrats contending for the Presidential nomination.
At a lobster restaurant, a "climate activist" demanded that Cruz answer-yes or no-the question "Do you deny climate change?"
The form of the question is the equivalent of "Do you deny that the earth is round?" The implication is that if the answer is "yes," you are a medieval flat earther, and thus unqualified to be President.
Cruz explained that science is not a matter of belief or computer models or expert opinion, but of objective data and facts. The fact is that satellite data show no rise in atmospheric temperature for nearly 20 years.
He also points out that in the 1970s some of the very same scientists were predicting an ice age-if we didn't adopt the same remedy that they are demanding now: drastic cuts in the use of the fuels that power the world's economy.
And since people hit with record winter cold are finding it hard to "believe in" global warming, the threat has morphed into "climate change." It might be cold, or warm, or dry, or wet, or stormy, but it will be unprecedented disaster-if we don't cut the use of carbon-based fuels.
Three different apocalyptic scenarios-too cold, too hot, and changing-but the same remedy.
Cruz didn't mention a still earlier threat, again with the same remedy: that we would run out of "fossil fuels." The very name implies a limited supply from dead dinosaurs and primeval forests. The fact is we have plenty of hydrocarbon fuels to last for a century or two, especially of methane, the main component of natural gas.
There truly is an emergency though. A political emergency. If the "climate" activists don't get their way at the Paris climate summit now underway, their drive toward a global wealth-redistribution, energy-rationing bureaucracy might fail. What if the sun enters a phase of less energy output, as many predict?
Obama is off to Paris, claiming that climate change is the greatest threat confronting humanity. Escalating tensions in Ukraine and the Middle East could set off a nuclear war. There is widespread civil strife, and hordes of migrants (mixed with jihadis) are overwhelming Europe. But climate change is a driver of conflict, says Prince Charles-still another problem with the same solution.
Apparently, all Democrats running for President agree with Obama. The Associated Press had eight scientists judge the "scientific accuracy" of candidates. Hillary Clinton was the star on their politically correct scale, scoring 94, while former Maryland governor Martin O'Malley earned a 91. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders got only 87; he was downgraded for "exaggeration" during one of the debates, when he suggested that the earth may become "uninhabitable."
The lead examiner was Michael Mann, best known for the "Mann-made hockey stick," which supposedly proves the assertion of unprecedented rapid warming. This graph, based on "reconstructions" by secret methods of a limited set of historical "proxy" data such as tree rings, has been quietly withdrawn from official publications of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This has not been announced by the major media.
The gang of eight inquisitors gave Cruz 6, Carson 13, Trump 15, Rubio 21, Fiorina 28, Paul 38, Kasich 47, Christie 54, and Bush 64 on their Mann-made, upside-down scale.
There is a multi-billion dollar global cabal of government-funded scientists, wealthy non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and crony capitalists that profit from "finding" human-caused climate effects or from tax subsidies for unreliable, economically nonviable, otherwise unaffordable substitutes for the fuels that make modern industry and prosperity possible. Their darlings like Mann resort to character assassination in an attempt to silence scientific critics, who face loss of their livelihood, onerous "investigations," and even threats of prosecution for speaking out.
Cruz tops the honor roll of those intelligent and courageous enough to confront fraudulent establishment pseudoscience. It is not surprising that a highly skilled lawyer and a neurosurgeon are leaders, and the career politicians are trust-and-parrot followers of politicized science and a global big-government agenda.
Cruz NAILS it!
Cruz/Trump or Trump/Cruz!!!
With a lib neighbor, he was touting climate change, (again). I said the earth’s warming and cooling was caused by the sun, not man. He went on to “prove” it was manmade, using the same old talking points. Then I asked him, during the last ice age, was any of the present USA covered in ice? He said he didn’t know. I told him south of the great lakes, it went as far south as Kentucky. That was 18,000 years ago. What caused the warming that made the glaciers retreat 2300 miles to where they are now? There weren’t any factories or carbon footprints 18,000 years ago. So what could have caused it? (crickets)
Science is never “settled”. It is only that one or another working hypothesis seems to have more validity than any of a number of other hypotheses, some of which shall NEVER work in the real world.
In a rigorous application of the “scientific method”, EVERY theory must be measured against the body of knowledge gained through repeated and replicated experiments, designed to test the soundness of the working hypothesis. If the theory does not offer some degree of prediction of outcome, then that theory faces the fate of being discarded.
Nobody believes in the phlogiston theory any more, in which fire was considered to be a substance and not a chemical process. A most peculiar substance, in which the mass of the combusted substance seemed to be unaccountably LIGHTER than before it was set aflame, and the flame had somehow disappeared altogether.
Then they discovered oxygen. Oxygen, the second most corrosive element in the Universe. And here we have been breathing it in every day.
Ted & Trump make progressive heads explode.
Entertaining.
I’m just in awe of Cruz’s ability to firmly control ambush confrontations with rabid leftists and turn it to his advantage. The video linked in the article is another enthralling example of facts, logic and reason overshadowing the insanity of liberals with eloquence and poise. The bystanders appreciated the clarity of his arguments, backed by nearly two decades of satellite data, and applauded at the conclusion. Ted Cruz is simply amazing.
trump/ cruze or cruze/trump . I hope that this is the outcome. I cant see the others even doing it.
“The form of the question is the equivalent of “Do you deny that the earth is round?” The implication is that if the answer is “yes,” you are a medieval flat earther, and thus unqualified to be President.”
(sigh) Just to let everyone know: The earth is not round - it’s actually more of an oval shape. Also, people in the Middle Ages did NOT believe the Earth was flat. http://www.amazon.com/Inventing-Flat-Earth-Columbus-Historians/dp/027595904X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1449441042&sr=1-1&keywords=Inventing+the+Flat+Earth
This is frequently claimed, but let's look at the figures:
Data from the EIA as of 2014:
U.S. proven natural gas reserves: 338.264 trillion cubic feet
U.S natural gas consumption: 26.698 trillion cubic feet per year
Conclusion: Our proven reserves will last 338.264/26.698 = 12.67 years at the current rate of consumption
Of course we will discover lots more gas in the next 12 years, but the idea that we have already discovered enough for hundreds of years is not true.
I would be glad for anyone to check these figures and my arithmetic.
In response to their stupid “97% of scientists” meme I ask them, “If the theory is true, would it become false if it was only 3%?”
How much exist in un-proven reserves?
"Proven" reserves tells us almost nothing about how much is in the ground. There is no reason to "prove" a resource beyond what futures can be sold. So, 12 years from now, we will still have a 12 year "proven reserve".
Trump is a hot-headed celebrity patriot.
Fantasty -- we have to choose one or the other. Sorry. We don't get to have both, no matter how much we fantasize.
Care to provide an estimate of methane available through methane hydrate deposits on the ocean floor?
Hey, let me dream!
The reality is neither will take the no. 2 spot under the other.
Best hope:
Trump wins. Cruz is appointed to the Supreme Court. WE WIN.
Cruz wins. Trump is appointed to Secretary of Commerce. WE WIN.
Cruz wins. Trump is appointed to Secretary of Commerce. WE WIN.Trump to head a federal agency that Ted plans to eliminate? The Department of Commerce is one of the agencies Ted Cruz proposes to eliminate in his Five for Freedom plan.
The IRS and these cabinet agencies are unnecessary and will be shuttered for the following reasons:Internal Revenue Service - to dramatically simplify the tax code and enable everyone to fill out their taxes on a postcard or smartphone app.Department of Education - to return education to those who know our students best: parents, teachers, local communities, and states. And to block-grant education funding to the states.
Department of Energy - to cut off the Washington cartel, stop picking winners and losers, and unleash the energy renaissance.
Department of Commerce - to close the "congressional cookie jar" and promote free enterprise and free trade for every business.
Department of Housing and Urban Development - to offer real solutions that lift people out of hardship, rather than trapping families in a cycle of poverty, and to empower hurting Americans by reforming most of the remaining programs, such as Section 8 housing.
Didn’t know that. Ok, Trump somewhere.
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.