• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Inhofe appointed chair US Environment and Public Works Committee

digitaldurandal

Golden Member
Dec 3, 2009
1,828
0
71
Inhofe is a climate change denier. I find the appointment very disappointing. I wrote him an email at http://www.inhofe.senate.gov/contact. Although I am doubtful it will have any effect as he received nearly $500k for his campaign from Big Oil.

Good afternoon Mr. Inhofe,

Did you know the reason why gasoline says unleaded next to it? It is because there used to be lead in gasoline. Lead was placed in gasoline in the 1920's as an antiknock agent. It was cheap and it was effective.

Today we know that lead is a poison to humans, it is a neurotoxin. Actually even the Romans knew that this was the case.

GM made Kettering, the scientist who found that lead was an excellent antiknock agent, an executive in their company. In 1965 Patterson began attempting to draw public attention to the problem of increasing lead levels in the environment and food chain.

Patterson was fought on all levels, GM and the Ethyl Corporation immediately began lobbying against his statements. They began to put large sums of money into lobbying and campaign contributions. It was said that man cannot change the environment only God can. They said lead is natural in the environment and has always been there.

Note the similarity between the position of big oil on lead and your statement on climate.

Patterson ultimately dedicated his life to proving something that was already known, but he had to fight for years because the campaign by big oil had miseducated so many. He went all over the world measuring levels of lead in the environment. He found high levels of lead in the oceans and on the surface of ice at the North Pole. He started digging deeper into the ice and found that after the first few inches there was an immediate drop off in lead levels which was in direct conflict with the statements of GM's scientists. Big Oil even offered Patterson a position in their company to stop research into the issue.

We are here again, history repeats itself.

I would also ask you to look at the history: Galileo, Copernicus, Isaac Newton. Galileo was arrested and labeled a heretic because in his model Earth was not the center of the universe, Newton was told we cannot ever hope to know God's laws. It was said that man cannot cure diseases such as Polio because they are God's will or punishment, but we did.

We have the technology to kill every person on the planet with nuclear bombs. Why then, if we can do that, can we not change climate? What makes climate different from the advances in medicine, physics, and astronomy that have been made in the face of very similar claims?

I would ask you to remember who you represent. Though the oil and gas industry donated half of a million dollars to you, you represent the people of the USA. You have a duty to protect the future of our country.

I sincerely hope that you consider the information in my email and that you do additional research to ensure your position is the best one for our country, and our children's country.

The vast majority (over 90%) of scientists today believe the climate is changing and that mankind is the main cause. Prominent climate change deniers such as Richard Muller are changing sides. He was a director on a Koch-funded climate change project.

“Three years ago I identified problems in previous climate studies that, in my mind, threw doubt on the very existence of global warming. Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.”

Best wishes,
digitaldurandal
 

Ns1

No Lifer
Jun 17, 2001
55,399
1,510
126
hm, this also popped up on my feed today

For some very depressing reasons, this video clip from a recent U.S. Senate hearing is going viral. Senator James Inhofe believes the climate may be changing but that it has absolutely nothing to do with human activity like burning fossil fuels, because The Lord.

“Climate is changing and climate has always changed and always will,” Inhofe told the Senate last week.

"There's archeological evidence of that. There's biblical evidence of that. There's historic evidence of that."

"The hoax is that there are some people who are so arrogant to think that they are so powerful, they can change climate. Man can't change climate."

Sen. Inhofe chairs the Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee.
http://boingboing.net/2015/01/28/man-cant-change-climate.html
 

K1052

Lifer
Aug 21, 2003
35,167
8,472
136
It's alright, the GOP even with majority control seems to be in such disarray that I highly doubt much except short term stopgap funding measures will escape it's black hole like productivity.
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,530
0
0
it's ok - the right wing nuts will tell us this is fine, like Cruz's appointment to a committee that makes science oversight decisions...
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
The 'lead to climate' analogy change seems really strange to me. It just doesn't work.

But does bring up a good point: We should be more concerned about heavy metals and other pollution (vast amount of plastic in the Pacific or fertilizer in the Gulf etc) than some plant food known as CO2. Just stop cutting down trees.

Is this correct? One molecule out of 10,000: http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/03/hey-ipcc-quit-misusing-the-term-risk/

Honest question, IDK but am curious.

Fern
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,990
84
91
Does anyone else think its time that congress-critters have to pass a basic proficiency test to be on certain committees? If you don't understand how the scientific method or scientific consensus works....then you don't get to serve on that committee. The same could be said for committees on education, finance, etc. Having Inhofe serve on any science-related committee is just as much of a joke as having the DPRK chair the UN committee for human rights.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
Does anyone else think its time that congress-critters have to pass a basic proficiency test to be on certain committees? If you don't understand how the scientific method or scientific consensus works....then you don't get to serve on that committee. The same could be said for committees on education, finance, etc. Having Inhofe serve on any science-related committee is just as much of a joke as having the DPRK chair the UN committee for human rights.
If congress critters had to pass any proficiency test we wouldn't have a Congress.

People need to stop this crap. Congress critters on the Science committee do no more science work than those on Judiciary committee do in judging court cases.

Almost every Congressperson is a lawyer. If they were put on a committee they actually had experience in we'd have one huge committee and the rest would be vacant.

What committee should Obama have been assigned to while in the Senate? Is there a 'community activist' committee?

Fern
 

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,867
3
76
The problem is, Government having anything to do with _____ (fill in the blank.)

Ya'll vote for more Government, this is what you get.

-John
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,990
84
91
If congress critters had to pass any proficiency test we wouldn't have a Congress.

People need to stop this crap. Congress critters on the Science committee do no more science work than those on Judiciary committee do in judging court cases.

Almost every Congressperson is a lawyer. If they were put on a committee they actually had experience in we'd have one huge committee and the rest would be vacant.

What committee should Obama have been assigned to while in the Senate? Is there a 'community activist' committee?

Fern
I never said that they had to take a test to be "in" congress at all, just on certain committees. They don't need to have a Ph.D. in that field either, but I do expect that they understand what they are overseeing better than the average high school freshman. The fact that Inhofe is on that committee is testament to the fact that we don't hold these guys to any real standard.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
-snip-
The fact that Inhofe is on that committee is testament to the fact that we don't hold these guys to any real standard.
Of course we don't.

My observations lead me to feel confident that one gets placed on a committee based on the following:

1. Seniority

2. District they're from. (E.g., those chosen for the NASA committee, Cruz or whoever, represent the district NASA is primarily located in. I.e., it's so they can represent their constituents, not because they are 'space experts'.)

3. Personal interest. (See #1, without seniority this won't matter much.)

Notice "competence" or "experience" is absent from the list.

Fern
 

digitaldurandal

Golden Member
Dec 3, 2009
1,828
0
71
The 'lead to climate' analogy change seems really strange to me. It just doesn't work.
It works very well IMO. Big Oil did not want to change and lobbied very hard to deny scientific evidence that we knew was fact on an issue that concerned the environment. This is exactly the same thing, just replace 'increasing levels of lead in the environment caused by fossil fuels' to 'global warming caused by fossil fuels.'

The other thing that kills me is the whole arrogant to think man can have an impact on God's plan deal. How many times has something similar been said?
 

digitaldurandal

Golden Member
Dec 3, 2009
1,828
0
71
Of course we don't.

My observations lead me to feel confident that one gets placed on a committee based on the following:

1. Seniority

2. District they're from. (E.g., those chosen for the NASA committee, Cruz or whoever, represent the district NASA is primarily located in. I.e., it's so they can represent their constituents, not because they are 'space experts'.)

3. Personal interest. (See #1, without seniority this won't matter much.)

Notice "competence" or "experience" is absent from the list.

Fern
Probably chose him for that specific committee to anger everyone who disagrees with the party stance. Or possibly Big Oil wanted him in that specific seat given his stance and their funding of his campaign.
 

DrDoug

Diamond Member
Jan 16, 2014
3,546
1,516
136
Inhofe will always be remembered by me for this boneheaded move. He comes across as someone who does whatever the fuck he wants to because he's always right and everybody else is wrong.
 

Newell Steamer

Diamond Member
Jan 27, 2014
6,895
7
0
All along GOPers were hemming and hawing with Well, I'm no scientist,... And now it's become a hard stance that we can't and shouldn't do anything,... based on the Bible.

Damn, GOP, the 1st month of 2015 isn't even over yet, and your people have had all sorts of crazy shit come out of their mouths. Well, it's not like we were expecting anything else.

The 'good news' is that some of these Righthadists have some sense in them - but, I don't think it's enough to get us through the next few years unscathed.

Statements like this from people like Inhofe will turn America into a sad and broken nation. But, of course, I am just Thinking Of The Children, or some other dismissive bullshit response from some meathead that stuffs his mind with crap just as much as he stuffs his mouth with crap.
 

Thebobo

Lifer
Jun 19, 2006
18,596
7,665
136
Public service disqualification test.

_The earth is less then <10K years old. - If you say yes you are fired and are prohibited
running from for public office.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,388
1,013
126
Who fucking cares? Not like carbon taxes or any of your climate change wish list items are coming anyway regardless who chairs this worthless committee. You ought to be happy with ensuring that oil has to be transported by rail cars instead of pipelines which are orders of magnitude safer. Twenty years from now the same people will be making the same Al Gore style warnings from the early 1990s than unless we do something in 10 years we're all doomed.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,658
4,481
126
That's what the American people voted for this past November. I am sure he'll take good care of the environment for them...
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,388
1,013
126
That's what the American people voted for this past November. I am sure he'll take good care of the environment for them...
And if it turns out he's wrong, global warming will raise sea levels and drown liberal coastal towns. Either way it's a win-win.
 

cliftonite

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2001
6,866
42
91
And if it turns out he's wrong, global warming will raise sea levels and drown liberal coastal towns. Either way it's a win-win.
Drowning liberal towns and the death of liberals is a win-win? You have some anger management problems, I think a psych visit would do you wonders.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,658
4,481
126
And if it turns out he's wrong, global warming will raise sea levels and drown liberal coastal towns. Either way it's a win-win.
Those coastal liberals will then move to your state, take all the high paying jobs and turn it Democrat.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY