House votes to defund IPCC

From Climate Science Watch , their take on the issue, though a bit political, shows how it is viewed:

Just before 2 a.m. on February 19, the war on climate science showed its grip on the U.S. House of Representatives as it voted to eliminate U.S. funding for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The Republican majority, on a mostly party-line vote of 244-179, went on record as essentially saying that it no longer wishes to have the IPCC prepare its comprehensive international climate science assessments. Transcript of floor debate follows.

The amendment was sponsored by second-term Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Missouri), who obviously knows nothing about climate science or the IPCC, and I expect could care less. His talking points were clearly provided by some denial machine operative and Mr. Leutkemeyer simply followed the script. Leading off with a reference to the stolen climate scientists emails (‘climategate’), he said:

Luetkemeyer: Scientists manipulated climate data, suppressed legitimate arguments in peer-reviewed journals, and researchers were asked to destroy emails, so that a small number of climate alarmists could continue to advance their environmental agenda.

Since then, more than 700 acclaimed international scientists have challenged the claims made by the IPCC, in this comprehensive 740-page report. These 700 scientists represent some of the most respected institutions at home and around the world, including the U.S. Departments of Energy and Defense, U.S. Air Force and Navy, and even the Environmental Protection Agency.

For example, famed Princeton University physicist Dr. Robert Austin, who has published 170 scientific papers and was elected a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Austin told a congressional committee that, unfortunately, climate has become a political science. It is tragic the some perhaps well-meaning but politically motivated scientists who should know better have whipped up a global frenzy about a phenomenon which is statistically questionable at best.

Mr. Chairman, if the families in my district have been able to tighten their belts, surely the federal government can do the same and stop funding an organization that is fraught with waste and abuse. My amendment simply says that no funds in this bill can go to the IPCC. This would save taxpayers millions of dollars this year and millions of dollars in years to come. In fact, the President has requested an additional $13 million in his fiscal 2012 budget request.

My constituents should not have to continue to foot the bill for an organization to keep producing corrupt findings that can be used as justification to impose a massive new energy tax on every American.

That is now the prevailing viewpoint of the majority party in the U.S. House of Representatives.

more here

=========================================================

This comes on the heels of defunding some EPA programs and voting to take control of GHG regulations away from the EPA.

House votes to block EPA’s global warming power

(AP)

The Republican-controlled House has voted to block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases that scientists say cause global warming.

The 249-177 vote added the regulation ban to a sweeping spending bill that would fund the government through Sept. 30. The restriction is opposed by the Obama administration, which is using its regulatory powers to curb greenhouse gases after global warming legislation collapsed last year. The administration also says the ban would cost thousands of construction jobs.

full story here

==========================================================

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

150 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Wijnand
February 19, 2011 8:31 am

God bless America!!!!!

tallbloke
February 19, 2011 8:36 am

We’ve been chatting about this in the UK for a few hours now. The general feeling is that this is a symbolic act, and that there is more to come before the final shape will be seen.
I think the IPCC is an albatross for governments now. The writing is on the wall. It’ll be interesting to see how other governments react. If IPCC was costing the U.S. $15m I wonder what their total budget is?

c1ue
February 19, 2011 8:38 am

I’m not sure why this was posted? While the news is interesting, it is odd that the version posted is the one which is apparently alarmist – at least the numerous mentions of denialist and what not would seem to indicate that.
Certainly there are no ‘good’ sides to this particular issue, but nonetheless the shoe being on the other foot should equally be presented from the normal WUWT point of view.
REPLY: it’s news, get over it. – Anthony

D Caldwell
February 19, 2011 8:46 am

Elections have consequences….

Douglas DC
February 19, 2011 8:46 am

“Know nothings?” In the middle of a nasty cold eastern winter? talk about
know nothings….
More like the last desperate gasp of the Gaia cult…

G. Karst
February 19, 2011 8:48 am

Finally, if only, we could get a refund. GK

Galvanize
February 19, 2011 8:48 am

Blessings from across the pond!
Is it up to the Senate to drive this nail home?

Roger Knights
February 19, 2011 8:51 am

Next up, GISS.

JDN
February 19, 2011 8:51 am

Who is writing this? I’m wondering why they are calling scientific realism a “denial machine”?

Hawkwood
February 19, 2011 8:57 am

Now if we can get the Canadian government to do the same it will sent a clear message to the EU and the rest of the world that we aren’t buying into this nonsense.

Roger Longstaff
February 19, 2011 8:58 am

This is excellent! But can your Senate, or President, block it? (I am an ignorant Limey).

Paul C
February 19, 2011 8:58 am

Canada will have to wait , as we are being set up for another election.
However if the Liberals push another Carbon agenda they will again be spanked by the voting public.
It happened last election , but the media spouted the loss as an unpopular frankaphone , leader.
However Canadians know where the “Mega tons of money” would come from and where it would go.

Bruce Cobb
February 19, 2011 9:01 am

Ah the Republicans, bless their hearts. Putting sugar in the gas tank feeding the CAGW engine, one teaspoon at a time. Fun.

Jimbo
February 19, 2011 9:01 am

Great news! The AGW monster is being dealt a thousand cuts and many nails in the coffin. Let’s hope the end is indeed nigh.

Brian H
February 19, 2011 9:03 am

As Anthony said, it’s from “Climate Science Watch”, one of the Warmist party-line sites. It’s interesting to see how disgruntled they are! It’s game on! Repubs vs Obama and “the scientists”, is their take.
Heh.

February 19, 2011 9:09 am

“Things can only get better, can only get better….”
At last a bit of reality

Steve Keohane
February 19, 2011 9:10 am

Roger Longstaff says: February 19, 2011 at 8:58 am
This is excellent! But can your Senate, or President, block it? (I am an ignorant Limey).

It is true either can, and Obama has said he will veto the spending bill with these attachments. I would guess it unlikely for this bill to get past the liberally-controlled Senate. I expect a stand-off as to who can stand the most pain, no budget at all, or one with compromises.

Neo
February 19, 2011 9:20 am

Everybody take a deep breath … see, it’s not that bad.

Taphonomic
February 19, 2011 9:20 am

Galvanize says:
“Is it up to the Senate to drive this nail home?”
The Senate doesn’t like this.
This is for a new continuing resolution for Fiscal Year 2010 (October 2010 through September 2011). So far a budget for this fiscal year (FY) has never been passed and the government is operating on a “continuing resolution”, which means that everything is funded as it was for FY 2009. The previously elected House of Representatives shirked its duty to prepare a FY 2010 budget (afraid of the political fallout in an election year; it didn’t really help them much, passing Obamacare led to a slaughter of Democrats). This new FY 2010 continuing resolution proposed by the Republican majority House of Representives contains many things that the Democatic majority Senate and president do not like (cuts to EPA, funding for Yucca Mountain, cuts to Planned Parenthood, cuts to National Public Radio, cuts to the IPCC, etc). The Senate and the House can try to reach an agreement that the President will either sign or veto. If not, the House and Senate will either pass another continuing resolution at FY 2009 levels or shut down the government. The current continuing resolution runs out of funding on March 4. The Democrats in the Senate are already threatning that after March 4, checks for Social Security, Medicare, etc. will not be sent out as the governement will be shut down due to the Republicans.
Ain’t politics fun???

walt man
February 19, 2011 9:27 am

2007 US contributions were $2M
http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session28/doc6.pdf
To 2008 US contributions TOTALLED $34M over 21 years
http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session30/doc3.pdf
“In 2009 the cosmetics industry in the U.S. is expected to reach $60.37 billion, which represents a decline of about 1.2% from 2008.”
http://www.ibisworld.com/Common/MediaCenter/Cosmetic%20Special%20Report.pdf
So around 0.05% of cosmetic spend (a personal choice of course) is spent by the US on the IPCC.
How much of an Albatross (tallbloke) is £100M over 21 years? When spread out over 50 contributors?? It is 1/1000 of the money spent on cosmetics in US in one year.

Steven Hoffer
February 19, 2011 9:31 am

How does that old saying go….
those on the right feel that those on the left are misguided.
those on the left feel that those on the right are evil.
and the more misguided they get, the more apparently evil I am.

DJ
February 19, 2011 9:32 am

This is a simple and expedient way to send the message to large, corrupt organizations…like the IPCC and the EPA.
It’s also a way of balancing the effective defunding of scientists who don’t hold hands with the “consensus”, and, well, that’s the way it works.
Decry foul play by republicans if you will, but it’s really the result of the system working, albeit slowly, lumbering, and inefficiently. The democrats had their day, and they’ve bungled it. No doubt the republicans will bungle as well, but only by keeping the pressure on will we have true science exposed to the light of day.
We must have the freedom to judge for ourselves if Michael Mann is right, or if Richard Lindzen is. The IPCC denies me that right, so I deny them my money.

Hawkwood
February 19, 2011 9:34 am

PM Harper killed the Bill c-311 Climate Change Accountability Act in the Senate last November. That would have bound us to unattainable, economically ruinous CO2 emission targets. Personally, I don’t think there will be an election this spring and I don’t think the Liberals, NDP, Bloc and Greens would attempt another Green Shift in this economic climate. (Info- Canada has had a minority government lead by the Conservative Party since 2006.) Certainly the provincial “green” initiatives in Ontario and British Columbia have voters very unhappy about the costs with little or no benefit.

don penman
February 19, 2011 9:35 am

I am not convinced that anything is happening to the climate today that is anything unusual. I have listened to the AGW side and the scientific evidence, I am not in denial about anything that has been said. If you believe that man is altering the Earths climate dangerously then you should have the right to express that view but I have the right to disagree with that opinion. The narrow scientific opinion that AGW represents should not try to dictate to the public and Governments what they ought to do by using the peril that the earth is in as an excuse. I do not want to live in a world where what we can and cannot do is dictated by scientists in the same way that our lives were ordered by religious doctrine in the middle ages.

February 19, 2011 9:36 am

Expect to see the “anti science” meme this week from every corner.

1 2 3 6