Friday, February 18, 2011

The Inhofe Ambush and Subsequent Rout

The Gold Standard
Inhofe Gold Standard
  In late January Hertsgaard explained his big scheme to “confront the climate cranks” in an article in The Nation.

“Our plan is to confront the climate cranks face to face, on camera, and call them to account for the dangers they have set in motion. We will highlight the ludicrousness of their antiscientific views, which alone should discredit them from further influence over US climate policies,” he wrote. -
Sen. Inhofe turns tables on global warming ambushers — and gets it on tape [VIDEO]

Yesterday Hertsgaard's posse "ambushed" Sen. James Inhofe.  You can read a transcript, and watch the video at Daily Caller.  Suffice to say that Hertsgaard's nickname is now "General Custer".  What Inhofe did is what nobody on the right ever does when the left insists on rehashing settled debate they've already lost.  That is, deferring to mountains of paper on the table that put the lie to the thing. 
 

Mark Hertsgaard (MH): Why does your party continue to deny what the National Academy of Sciences and virtually every scientific organization…

Sen. James Inhofe (JI): You know you ask the same question over and over again. Did you happen six days ago to be at the hearing at the House where I testified?

MH: I was not, sir.

JI: See I answered all those questions in detail. The science is mixed. We all know the science is mixed. The economy is not mixed because the economics are pretty well established.

MH: How is the science mixed when the National Academy of Sciences and every…

JI: We have reports all you have to do is go back and look,


Next, Inhofe cuts short another leftist tactic; framing the argument with false supposition.

A Woman from ACP, identified by Solve Climate News as Allie Carter, a recent Michigan State University graduate (AC): I don’t understand why my generation has to suffer because it sounds like you’re not liking what you are hearing from these scientists you’re cherry picking.

JI: So your generation — Now who are you with?

AC: I’m with the Alliance for Climate Protection and I am here speaking on behalf young people.

JI: …No you’re not!

AC: I absolutely am.

JI: I have twenty kids and grand kids. You want to see a picture of them? [pulls out pictures]. Okay that’s good.

Inhofe then proceeded to calmly explain that the United States cannot sink its economy to satisfy the unproven hypotheses of a mixed group of scientists and activists.


Thank you Professor Inhofe.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am not sure about "turns the table on" as much as much as gave a polite and well reasoned response to. Inhofe seems to be practicing the new civility the left demands of the rest of us.

The scientific method requires observations, forming a hypothesis which explains the observations, performing experimentation with predictions based on hypothesis and modifying the hypothesis based on the results of the experimentation.

AGW is based on observations and computer modeling designed to fit the preconceived hypothesis. Rather than being able to design experiments, the scientists so cavalierly treated their raw data that it is not available to others who might want to check their work.

How about asking Breitbart to offer a cash prize to any modeler who can take the data up to 1990, plug it into their programs and predict the last 20 years without changing any of the fudge factors they have built into their model?

It would not prove anything but would show us who seems to have the best model.

Laurence

Anonymous said...

"It's not personal"
That sounds a lot like
"No pressure!" = we hate you and wish we could kill you where you stand.

Post a Comment

Just type your name and post as anonymous if you don't have a Blogger profile.