Republican critical thinking on climate changeby Jonathan DuHamel on Sep. 05, 2013, under Climate change, Politics
Senate Republicans on the Environment and Public Works Committee have issued a 21-page Minority Report entitled Critical Thinking on Climate Change wherein they question the lack of evidence to support the Obama administration’s agenda on climate regulation.
“The EPW Minority report analyzes significant predictions and claims made by climate change scientists and activists over the last several decades regarding global warming, and then compares those predictions and claims to the most recent science. This report provides an opportunity to think critically and asks important questions about the impacts, policies and motivations related to climate change. The key sections examine the 15-year break in global warming not predicted by the models, the rate of sea level rise, extreme weather events, and the impact that unilateral regulatory action will have on the economy.”
Among the specific questions the report asks are these:
“If the computer models and predictions have been inaccurate, why is our federal government relying on these models to take unilateral action?” And the computer models have been very inaccurate, see:More evidence that climate models are wrong.
“If global warming has been ‘worse than predicted,’ why won’t the federal government provide the data supporting this claim?” This refers in part to the refusal by the EPA to provide data to justify their regulations.
“Given that many of these models predicted warming trends well before China surpassed the United States as the largest GHG emitter, and given the fact that emissions continue to grow at a pace beyond what was originally incorporated into the models, shouldn’t the warming be far worse than what was predicted in the worst case scenarios rather than well below predictions?”
“If the present rate of sea level rise would put the world on pace to see an increase of less than 7 inches by the end of the century, then where are the data sets the IPCC and other advocates use to come up with estimates that are in feet and/or meters?”
For background see: Sea Level Rising? and Rate of sea level rise is controlled by natural oscillations
“If empirical evidence indicates that the rate of sea level rise is decreasing, how does the IPCC claim that there definitively is a strong correlation between sea level rise and CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere? Doesn’t the science tend to indicate that there is a lack of correlation?”
“When we are unable to predict extreme weather events, and empirical evidence does not show that extreme weather events are increasing, why would some scientists/activists claim that extreme weather events are the product of human activity?”
“Did extreme weather events begin with the advent of the internal combustion engine, or does historical and geological evidence exist indicating extreme weather events have been occurring for hundreds, thousands, or even millions of years?” See:
“Given the dynamic nature of our climate and the factors well outside of human … including lack of technology to govern these factors, is it possible to control and stop climate change through government regulations?”
This report is a political document, but then “climate science” is mostly political. The report asks questions that should be answered before any regulations affecting our energy and electricity generation are promulgated.