Antarctica melting. Waxman is a heavyweight. Global Warming is like gravity. Deniers cause cancer.
The scientific champions were equally vehement. One Democrat equated the bill to an attempt to repeal gravity, while another hauled a tower of published climate investigations to the meeting and argued that if Copernicus, Galileo, Newton and Einstein were testifying, Republicans would still not accept the science until Antarctica had melted.
Californian heavyweight Henry Waxman called Republicans a ”party of science deniers” and declared that they ”can’t cure cancer by passing a bill that declares smoking safe. And they can’t stop climate change by declaring it a hoax.”
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
ROTFLMAO!
The time is getting closer for when these people will be tarred and feathered. There is clearly panick within their stations. The jig is over. The parrot is dead. The lies don’t convince. This is a dead parrot.
..and I was thinking Clarabell, Howdy Doodey, Mr. Greenjeans, and Mighty Mouse……..
Hansen was convinced about something else causing the warming while Jones speaks with forked tongue then honesty.
The above reveals all you need to know about the Earth’s temperature since the 1980s. AGW is a SCAM.
Phil Jones: Seven years of inconvenient data is insignificant, like the seven years contained in the blade of the hockey stick. Horse Pucks.
One Democrat equated the bill to an attempt to repeal gravity, while another hauled a tower of published climate investigations to the meeting
Did anybody get a picture of that stack? I sure would like to see that bibliography. It’d be good for a bunch of belly laughs.
I hope Waxman can see the irony in his statement. That he declares “skeptics” (or whatever else he is labelling them as) as wrong doesn’t make it so, either.
I’m so tired of this anti-science BS…ridiculously tired of it. I know of no one who denies standard observational science…gravity, electromagnetism, physical chemistry, etc. This is the science that can be done following the scientific method.
Now it’s the theoretical science, historical science, and projection science that people don’t like, usually because all of those require unprovable assumptions and guesses that people with different presuppositions don’t care about. Worse, sometimes these assumptions are in no way provable, so the debate will never die. In the case of AGW, however, eventually the hypotheses WILL be tested, it will just take quite some time. We’ll see if we manage 5-6 C warming by the end of the century. If not, there’s the observation of a lack of highly positive feedbacks.
-Scott