House Committee Cancels Climate Denier Hearing — Because Of The Weather

Ever since Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) first took over as chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, the climate denier and Koch Industries beneficiary has planned a hearing to “review” climate science. But on Wednesday, a major snowstorm in Washington, D.C. put the hearing, which was stacked with climate deniers, on hold.

Wednesday’s event planned to “examine the current understanding of key areas of climate science,” and yet two of the three witnesses invited to testify hardly represent the scientific consensus on combatting global warming.

One of those two witnesses, Judith Curry of Georgia Institute of Technology, is a conspiracy theorist who defends climate deniers like Anthony Watts and the Heartland Institute as being more credible than climate science advocates. The second witness, President of Copenhagen Consensus Center Bjørn Lomborg was a “friend” and “expert” of Heartland, until Lomborg left the discredited think tank over its unabomber billboard campaign. Lomborg has argued that inaction is the best course, despite the threat of climate change. So unless another well-timed storm strikes, expect ignorance on display at the rescheduled hearing.

While Washington’s “snowquester” may fall short of the forecasted snowfall, the city’s winter has mostly followed the climate change “less snow, more blizzards” pattern characteristic of the past 30 years.

15 Responses to House Committee Cancels Climate Denier Hearing — Because Of The Weather

  1. One does have to wonder what is the point of this congressional charade. I guess they are trying to give themselves cover for being fossil prostitutes.

    Concerning snowquester: I’ve come up with a term for the House’s recent efforts to claw back the sequester bucks — entirely for military and security state purposes. It’s a “requester.”

  2. Sasparilla says:

    “One does have to wonder what is the point of this congressional charade.”

    To try to give the appearance of legitimacy to a lie.

  3. Harry Middlemas says:

    Boy, reading this sounds just like being in a science fiction story. And it does not end well.

  4. Dennis says:

    I would hope that when they do get around to holding the hearing, at least one of the Democratic reps. on the committee challenges the witnesses to provide written, scientific, and peer reviewed responses to the thousands of published scientific papers that easily show how wrong those wittnesses are. Get it into the record.

  5. bratisla says:

    Just how many climate science hearings had the Republicans done during the last years ?

    Is it just me or do I have the impression that they make hearings on this subject again and again and again with the same usual suspects ? Don’t we have here a classic communication scheme “a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth” ?
    And when will the Dems denounce this blatantly obvious tactic ?

  6. Lance says:

    Simply put: Whether or not Global Warming is a natural cycle or not, it is undeniable that man has contributed profoundly to it in the past 150 years, with the most egregious contributions yet to come, as China and India and Indonesia and other nations raise their standards of living and level of pollution. The result, in addition to a general warming of the earth on average, are sharp swings and variabilities in local weather patterns – storms, droughts, hurricanes, tornados, etc. all worse than they would have been and in places they might not have been. While we might be able to cut back on the damage, it is really too late to affect the next 50-100 years. So we now should be budgeting trillions of dollars to shore up coastal cities world wide. But we won’t. We are controlled by people and corporations that are more concerned about immediate profit than long range survival. It’s really a shame. Prepare your kids. It will be their mess.

  7. Ozonator says:

    The only thing tougher than the extreme GOP is are gizzard shad during low O2 conditions.

  8. EmmittBrownBTTF1 says:

    The planet is perhaps trying to send these nutters message. Or it is just dumb luck.

  9. Sue says:

    It will be interesting to get a good scientific overview of the climate IF THERE ARE NO CLIMATE SCIENTISTS INVOLVED! You are not fooling anyone…well I guess enough people, by selling out to the highest bidder and ignoring your constituents. Please include real scientists, please keep an open mind, please do the right thing not the profitable thing, and please think of the future. I tell my students about climate change this way. If you left your freezer open, what would happen to the temperature of the rest of the room? What is happening to the temperature of the freezer? How long will it take for the freezer and room to acclimate?

  10. Camburn says:

    What you don’t realize is, there are 100,s of per reviewed journal articles that show reality, verses projections.

    This is very important. The reason that Dr. Curry has “fallen” is that she actually examines observations verses projections.

    Go figure huh?

  11. Camburn says:

    It is called the “Gore Effect”.

  12. Mulga Mumblebrain says:

    ‘Ka-ching’-the cheque’s in the mail. Bonus for the use of the word ‘Gore’.

  13. EmmittBrownBTTF1 says:

    I’m parodying devine provinance.
    Unlike those those who fail to understand climate change because their pockbook depends on their failure to understand it, I know the difference betwwen climate and a weather.

    Weather is like a wave crashing on a beach, climate is the level of the tide. If you to know if the tide is coming in watching the waves come in for five minutes will give you noisy data which the trend is buried. But if you observe over an hour, the trending effect becomes larger than the noise.

    So a single years weather wont necessarily point to a trend, but weather observations over 30 years can show trends in climate.
    And indeed we see a divergence of temperture trends with solar radiance trends, and an up tick in extreme weather events in severity and duration.

  14. pinroot says:

    “less snow, more blizzards” pattern characteristic of the past 30 years.

    Yeah, because the past 30 years is pretty much an indicator of what the future will be like.

  15. kermit says:

    Here’s an observation for you:
    the 13 hottest years on record have been in the last fifteen years.

    Here’s another:
    The current temperature climb was projected by James Hansen 25 years ago.

    There are, BTW, tens of thousands of peer reviewed papers documenting the observed and projected process of global warming.