[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Detailed evidence fails to support man-made climate change



Let me see.  Who should carry more weight in the

debate of global warming:  The National Academy of

Sciences (see

http://www.nap.edu/books/0309043867/html/index.html)

or a politician from Oklahoma?



And there are people on this list server who complain

about bad science?  



--- maury <maury@webtexas.com> wrote:

> Recognizing the controversial nature for some; and

> granting perhaps

> tangential relevance to radiation safety and to risk

> analysis; I have

> bitten off both of my typing fingers and present

> only the links and the

> barest summary of Sen. Inhofe's excellent, detailed

> stake driven into

> the heart of anthropogenic global climate change

> ....

> Cheers,

> Maury  maury@webtexas.com

> _________

> PP=PPP

> =============================

> The press release may be seen at:

> http://inhofe.senate.gov/preleases.htm

> 

> The entire presentation is at:

> http://inhofe.senate.gov/floorspeeches.htm

> 

> 

> Monday, July 28, 2003

> 

> INHOFE DELIVERS MAJOR SPEECH ON THE SCIENCE OF

> CLIMATE CHANGE

> “Catastrophic global warming alarmism not based on

> objective science”

> 

> Washington, D.C.-Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.),

> chairman of

> the Committee on Environment and Public Works,

> delivered a comprehensive

> speech on the science of climate change today,

> concluding that, based on the best, most objective

> science available,

> predictions of catastrophic global warming are

> baseless and should be rejected.

> 

>  The following are excerpts from today’s press

> release:

> 

>  · “Much of the debate over global warming is

> predicated on fear, rather

> than science.”

> 

> · “I have offered compelling evidence that

> catastrophic global warming

> is a hoax. That conclusion is supported by the

> painstaking work of the

> nation's top climate scientists.”

> 

> “What have scientists concluded? The Kyoto Protocol

> has no environmental

> benefits; natural variability, not fossil fuel

> emissions, is the

> overwhelming factor influencing climate change;

> satellite data, confirmed by NOAA balloon

> measurements,

> confirms that no meaningful warming has occurred

> over the last century;

> and climate models predicting dramatic temperature

> increases over the

> next 100 years are flawed and highly imperfect.”

> 

. . .



=====

-- John

John Jacobus, MS

Certified Health Physicist

e-mail:  crispy_bird@yahoo.com



__________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?

Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software

http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/