GLOBAL WARMING ALARMISTS -- (House of Representatives - January 30, 2007)
Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, conservatives who oppose world government and massive foreign aid, such as our very unconservative war in Iraq, are sometimes called isolationists. However, anyone who makes the isolationist charge is really resorting to childish name-calling rather than a discussion on the merits.
Another major issue on which there is a lot of name-calling these days is the debate over global warming. Just today the Oversight and Government Reform Committee held a one-sided hearing on allegations that the Bush administration is guilty of political interference in the global warming debate. The implication was that Federal scientists are being intimidated by those who are skeptical about global warming.
Actually, the intimidation is coming from those who believe that global warming is the biggest or one of the biggest problems we face. Global warming alarmists get very angry if anyone even dares to question their views.
Richard Lindzen, a professor of atmospheric science at MIT wrote a few months ago about what he called, ``the sinister side to this feeding frenzy about global warming.'
Professor Lindzen said, ``Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence, even when they fly in the face of the science that is supposedly their basis.'
Professor David Deming, a geophysicist, said, ``The media hysteria on global warming has been generated by journalists who do not understand the provisional and uncertain nature of scientific knowledge. Science changes.'
And Robert Bradley, president of the Institute for Energy Research, writing in the Washington Times, said, ``The emotional politicized debate over global warming has produced a fire-ready-aim mentality, despite great and still-growing scientific uncertainty about the problem.'
Mr. Bradley added, ``Still climate alarmists demand a multitude of do-somethings to address the problem they are sure exists and is solvable. No job is too big for government because they welcome bigger and bigger government. They pronounce the debate over in their favor, and call their critics names such as 'deniers,' as in Holocaust deniers. This has created a bad climate for scientific research and for policymaking. In fact, the debate is more than unsettled.'
I can produce hundreds of quotes like this from experts and scientists who question or are skeptical about the wild claims from some climate change alarmists. And the charge that the Bush administration is intimidating scientists or suppressing their work seems to be coming from scientists who want more attention or publicity or who want to make themselves out to be some sort of courageous, heroic martyrs.
Actually the Bush administration has spent $25 billion on global warming and climate change research in the last 5 years, far more than any previous administration. Almost all global warming alarmists either work full time for the Federal Government or get Federal funding for their research. They know they are very unlikely to get more Federal money unless they say this problem is terrible and getting worse all the time.
There may be some global warming and some of it may be bad. In some places it may be good. However, we need to make sure we solve the problems that exist without destroying our economy, or harming humanity in the process. The worst polluters in the world have been the Socialist and Communist countries.
Only free market systems generate the excess funds to do the good things for the environment that all of us want done. Anger and name-calling and biased hearings will not solve any serious or legitimate problems.