PRESS RELEASE August 2, 2012
Contact:
Matt Dempsey Matt_Dempsey@epw.senate.gov
Katie Brown Katie_Brown@epw.senate.gov
Inhofe Exposes Another Epic Fail by Global Warming Alarmists
Photo Posted by KFOR and Think Progress
The dumpster fire that caused the melting lights
Photo Provided by KFOR
Link to Think Progress Blog Post
Link to Watts Up With That: Alarmist fact checking – street lights don’t melt at 115°F
Washington, D.C. – Today the far-left blog Think Progress posted a photo (originally posted on KFOR’s facebook page) of street lights in Oklahoma that had melted, they claimed, because of extreme heat. Global warming alarmist Bill McKibben took to Twitter immediately to publicize what he believed to be proof of global warming, tweeting to Senator James Inhofe (Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, “Senator Inhofe, God may be trying to get your attention. Check out this picture.”
Not long after the picture surfaced, Oklahomans posted comments on Think Progress’ blog saying that these lights had melted due to a fire – which makes sense considering that the two front lights were melted while the two back lights remained unscathed. Once this news came to light, Think Progress immediately removed the post and provided an update that reads: “After we published this piece, we saw reports from people on the ground in Stillwater that the melting streetlights were due to a nearby fire. The person who took the photo, Patrick Hunter, described the scene: ‘Being the person that actually took this photo, I’d say that this was due to a fire semi-close by coupled with the unbelievable heat we are experiencing.’ Still an amazing photo and not fake as many are saying on here. Enjoy!”
This afternoon, KFOR confirmed that the melted lights in the photo were not caused by hot temperatures but a nearby dumpster fire.
“Poor Bill McKibben – he’s been trying to get something to melt for ages but it keeps backfiring,” Senator Inhofe said. “These alarmists never learn their lesson. Remember Bill McKibben was the one who was going to melt a giant ice sculpture in the shape of the word ‘hoax’ on the national mall, but his group had to cancel because there wasn’t enough interest. Now, after proclaiming that street lights in Oklahoma are melting because of global warming, we have confirmation that a fire caused this scene.
“Amid the resurgence of hysteria from my friends on the left, I appreciated climatologist Dr. John Christy who testified this week before the Environment and Public Works committee saying that instead of proclaiming this summer is ‘what global warming looks like’ it is ‘scientifically more accurate to say that this is what Mother Nature looks like, since events even worse than these have happened in the past before greenhouse gases were increasing like they are today.’
“This isn’t the first time alarmists have tried these stunts and it certainly won’t be the last – when will they finally realize they’ve lost this debate?”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
You can’t put a price on the notion of alarmists being able to feel sanctimoneous. What wouldn’t we give to help them maintain that special feeling?
Entropic man says:
August 3, 2012 at 3:05 am
A cynic would wonder if Senator Inhofe is protecting his campaign funding by promoting an anti-cAGW agenda in the Senate, since his most generous supporters are the Koch brothers.
A cynic would wonder why E-man posts links to papers hidden behind paywalls when he’s offering a “contribution” to the scientific debate
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/01/pielke-jr-demolishes-ipcc-lead-author-senat-epw-testimony/#comment-1049570
but posts links to open source material when it comes to politics.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/01/pielke-jr-demolishes-ipcc-lead-author-senat-epw-testimony/#comment-1050272
His selective cynicism is amusing, considering he avoided commenting on Big Oil’s $225 million donation to Christopher Field’s employer for “research on ways to meet growing energy needs without worsening global warming.”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/08/01/pielke-jr-demolishes-ipcc-lead-author-senat-epw-testimony/#comment-1049785
Field has to maintain that AGW is both real and a threat, E-man – if it doesn’t exist, or if it’s not a threat, all those lovely hundreds of millions of petrodollars will go to someone else, and Field will be out on the street…
“I’m melting! Melting! Oh, what a world, what a world!”
Steve Thatcher says:
August 3, 2012 at 4:50 am
I heard from a certain Mr Ken Dodd that PhD stood for prepares hot dinners, some may be better off doing just that.
A PhD I knew for 30-odd years referred to himself as a “Phony Doctor” – but said he was authorized to prescribe alcohol for medicinal purposes…
Bill Tuttle says:
August 3, 2012 at 5:26 am
“A PhD I knew for 30-odd years referred to himself as a “Phony Doctor” – but said he was authorized to prescribe alcohol for medicinal purposes…”
Isaac Asimov used to teach biochemistry at Boston College medical school before he became a full time science fiction writer. He said one of his students asked him,
“Dr Asimov, are you a real doctor or a PhD.”. Asimov said that after this, he referred to PhDs as
Phony Doctors.
Well, somebody was trying to get the Senator’s attention. Does this McKibben chap frequently confuse himself with God – or is it just once and forever?
As should be no surprise at all, this story has made it to Yahoo’s front page.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/oklahoma-hot-street-lamps-melting-203656312.html
The left wants an end zone dance. If they can’t get it they change fields.
This common association of environmental concerns with the “left” is most unfortunate and it is a shame that the “right” is, indeed, brain-dead on the subject. Who in American history was perhaps most important in starting the “environmental movement” of the 20th Century? Republican President Teddy Roosevelt certainly comes to my mind. There was a time when those most sensitive to the “conservation” of our natural world were “conservatives”. Now, it seems that our misnamed “conservatives” are those that only care about money they can make by not being conservationist and by undermining the public’s confidence in modern environmental science. So “Watts Wrong With That?” While it might make some of us short term winners, it will make us all long term loosers.
Maybe the dumpster fire was caused by global warming?
Ever think about that? Hmmm??
A PhD in science does not impress me when it comes to common sense. I once had a VP of Research bring me a paper prepared by one of his PhDs to analyse a proposal by a person outside the company. After four pages of discussion showing that the proposal wouldn’t work, he suggested that we hire the guy as a consultant to look into it further.
The VP and I had a quiet laugh over that one.
WTF, these people are really THAT stupid? I don’t know if I should laugh or kick a cat.
To Reg and others – who have claimed that I am just trying to sell a book:
I have encouraged people here to have a look ONLY at my free “short course” on climate change that is available on my web site, ericgrimsrud.com. My own approach is to make the science as clear as “is the world flat or round” so that individuals do not have to rely on just the bottom-line opinions of their preferred “experts”, one now being the recent author of a new book on AGW by Senator Inhofe – whose main qualification seems to be that he does NOT have a PhD.
I know that it takes a bit of effort and time to learn some of the science yourself – much more effort than simply embracing someone else’s botton line opionion – but give it a try its not that tough. Just as you could probably explain why you think the Earth is round, rather than flat, you can similarly develop your very own opinion of the subject of AGW.
Teddy Roosevelt was most definitely not a conservative or any subspecies of the classical liberal. He was a Progressive.
I have an alternative definition for the “grimsrud” as a unit. It would be a multiple of a “couric”, as in 10 grimsrud = 1 couric. A measure for smaller turds.
Brian H says:
August 3, 2012 at 4:29 am
And this was odd, because it was
The middle of the night.”
Just like the dumpster fire …Maybe very slow-acting sun’s rays?
Must’ve been — look how all that dark smoke has obscured the clear, blue sky!
Heh. Nice catch.
ericgrimsrud:
In this thread you have made a series of silly, ignorant, misinformed and self-promoting posts.
So, I was surprised when you began your post at August 3, 2012 at 7:32 am by making a statement to which I could agree; i.e.
Indeed, Senator Inhofe agrees with it, too.
I am certainly more left-wing than most who post to WUWT and very far to the left of every US Republican Senator. Indeed, I am a left-wing socialist of the old-fashioned British kind, but Senator Inhofe has quoted me on the floor of the US Senate because he is interested in – and he is knowledgeable of – the science of AGW. And, importantly, Senator Inhofe considers the scientific evidence concerning AGW to be more important than partisan political posturing.
It is clear that you need to learn much about AGW, and I suggest that you should start by learning from Senator Inhofe.
Richard
I love the photo of the melting lights. It is fun to watch these guys try new approaches every time one of their false ideas is debunked.
Speaking of new approaches, maybe they are trying something new with methane. I saw this over on Spaceweather.com, a link to a NASA article on the increase of noctilucent clouds being the result of increasing methane in the atmosphere. I don’t know if they are right, but I’m sad that my first reaction is distrust.
Oops forgot to put the link to the article in: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qzs9ZOsjF-c
ericgrimsrud says:
August 3, 2012 at 8:18 am
To Reg and others – who have claimed that I am just trying to sell a book:
I have encouraged people here to have a look ONLY at my free “short course
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And I’ve looked at it. I think what you fail to understand, being a relative new comer to this forum, is that the level of science literacy in this forum is much higher than you seem to think. Your section on the various modes in which a CO2 molecule can store a higher level of energy is actually of value. I’d expect a chemist to get that right. But you’re in over your head when it comes to the physics, youre energy balance diagram is nothing more than a regurgitation of Trenberth’s diagram, which, if you bother to do a search on this site, you’ll find has been debated hotly by highly qualified commenters with doctorates in everything from physics to chemistry to engineering. Similarly, your calculation of earth’s surface temperature sans greenhouse effect fails to take into account Holder’s Inequality, so your numbers are wrong..
Your assumption that the regulars in this blog are simply the great unwashed with no background in the science itself is an arrogant assumption, and wrong. Yes there are some luddites who appear here (on both sides of the debate). But it doesn’t take much time and effort to sort out who is who on this site.
Based on my brief perusal of your free short course, you have far more to learn from this site than you have to teach.
DavidMHoffer, you rascal,
If you really are a physicists who knows squat about the three factors that affect climate, you also know very well that the minutia you focused on here concerning the “sans greenhouse gas” calculation of the Earth’s temperature is of little importance relative to the large T boost provided by the GHG effect. It appears to me that your statement concerning the needles in that haystack have been presented here simply to confuse the public – which, I suspect, was your intention. If I am wrong, perhaps you could arrange to have Senator Imhofe explain to us the importance of what you said. I have no doubt that he liked it – but like the audience of WUWT – which you hold in such high regard – probably has no clue concerning what you said.
John B., M.D. says:
August 2, 2012 at 9:02 pm
Nerd –
1) Ever cared for a patient dying from metastatic melanoma? I have. Just take a vitamin D capsule.
2) You don’t know squat about the pathophysiology of coronary artery disease.
=============
Quickest way to spot that someone has no grasp of the science is to check whether they cite naturalnews.com.
This has gone on for so long that I now have one leg that is longer than the other!
We are only a few more “crop circle” reports from permanently relegating the warmists (man-made, that is) to a ranking somewhere between the UFO “I want to believe” crowd and cryptozoology nutjobs.
It does not matter to their followers that they lied, nor does it make any impact on public opinion that this was exposed as a lie so quickly.
This, like all the other AGW propaganda has already entered the public consciousness and it will be circulating among the slack jawed climate cult followers for years to come as some urban myth that they well all cite as “proof” of AGW.
Bill Tuttle
Exxon-Mobil’s $225million dollars to Mr Field may reflect a change in emphasis. It will be interesting to see if its donations to sceptic research and lobby groups change in coming years.
I referred to a paywalled paper because I could use the abstract in my discussion and no open access copy is available yet. Fortunately, political lobby sites like http://www.opensecrets.org do not charge, though they do appeal for donations.
Global warming alarmists are arsonists in the making.
It’s only a matter of time before one of these brainwashed idiots, or a follower, start a serious fire to validate a global warming point.
DirkH says:
August 3, 2012 at 4:39 am
Entropic man says:
August 3, 2012 at 3:05 am
“A cynic would wonder if Senator Inhofe is protecting his campaign funding by promoting an anti-cAGW agenda in the Senate, since his most generous supporters are the Koch brothers.”
Shall we start enumerating the environmental groups receiving money from the Rockefeller foundation now? Let’s start with 350.org…”
It seems to be standard practice in the US. You pay people to say things that support your point of view.
Politicians are given campaign funds, lobby groups are given funding and websites that express your viewpoint are given donations.
This happens on both sides of most political choices, especially contentious ones like climate change.
It makes it difficult for an European observer to distinguish between people who are given funding because they express an opinion and those who express an opinion because of their funding.