Climate change showdown coming to the Senate Thursday

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Thursday will hold the first big congressional climate change hearing since President Obama unveiled his global warming plan in late June.

Below is the witness list for the hearing titled “Climate Change: It’s Happening Now.”

Dr. Heidi Cullen, chief climatologist, Climate Central

Mr. Frank Nutter, president, Reinsurance Association of America

Mr. KC Golden, policy director, Climate Solutions

Dr. Diana Furchtgott-Roth, senior fellow, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research

Dr. Robert P. Murphy, senior economist, Institute for Energy Research

Dr. Jennifer Francis, research professor, Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University

Dr. Scott C. Doney, director, Ocean and Climate Change Institute, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

Dr. Margaret Leinen, executive director, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute, Florida Atlantic University

Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr., professor, Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Colorado

Dr. Roy Spencer, Principal Research Scientist, University of Alabama, Huntsville

Read more:

103 thoughts on “Climate change showdown coming to the Senate Thursday

  1. The hullabaloo over the Zimmerman/Martin issue is an orchestrated crisis to distract attention from the climate change efforts of the administration (and Reid’s efforts to do away with the filibuster, and a host of other issues).

  2. GTFrank says:
    July 16, 2013 at 8:16 am
    don’t see Dr. Spencer in the list
    — last name on it. Try again.

  3. Does anyone have a feeling for how well balanced this hearing will be vis-a-vis whether global warming is actually caused by anthropogenic CO2? Who among the witnesses are actual climate scientists? Cullen and Spencer are, others obviously aren’t. I expect that those others will take global warming as a given and will talk about the possible consequences.
    Whatever the climate is doing, the big deal is whether the change is due to CO2. Will that issue be adequately be addressed?

  4. Philip Aggrey: Dr Spencer is last on the list.
    Dr. Spencer doesn’t appear on “The Hill” list. Their omments only attribute the skeptic side to Pielke.

  5. DUH – climate change is happening now. Get real – climate change is always happening. Done so ever since climate was invented.

  6. Sad, two scientists and a bunch of socialist propagandists and most of those have a vested interest in the CAGW scam.

  7. eugene watson says:
    July 16, 2013 at 8:30 am
    Climate, it would appear, was invented in Wirth’s hearing in 1988 or whenever it was. Before then it was just weather.

  8. The reason the warmist nuts changed from “global warming” to “climate change” is that now, instead of being woefully wrong, they can always be right.

  9. I have a geology book printed before 1988 that talks about “climate”.
    How prescient is that?

  10. eugene watson says:
    July 16, 2013 at 8:46 am
    The reason the warmist nuts changed from “global warming” to “climate change” is that now, instead of being woefully wrong, they can always be right.
    Well it is about since that the climate stopped changing 🙂

  11. It’s interesting to note that those hearings about Global Warming – Climate Change – Climate Disruption are never scheduled in January or February, but always in July and August.
    I wonder if someone will be tampering with the room’s air condition during the hearings again…?

    • And since Dr. Spencer confirmed he was added to the list, I put his name there, so that the list presented here would be correct.

  12. Quick, haul out the poor, tired “usual suspects”;
    the ice is melting
    hottest decade
    weird, extreme weather
    species vanishing
    97% consensus
    etc., ad infinitum absurdium
    and be sure to mention the recent flooding in India.
    Also, be sure air conditioners are suddenly in need of repair.

  13. Among the people in the list, one of them would be more informative if it was lengthened to say, Mr. Frank Nutter, president, Reinsurance Association of America, representing the viewpoints of Al Gore and Greenpeace.”
    In only the 2nd paragraph of this PDF file ( ), it says “At the Conference on Climate Change and the Insurance Industry in 1993. Frank Nutter, president of the Reinsurance Association of America, drew much attention in the insurance and environmental press. In 1995, Nutter joined officials from six other major U.S. insurance organizations to discuss climate-related threats with Vice President Gore and experts on climate change.”
    The 1993 conference was put together by Greenpeace:
    And Al Gore was more than happy to quote Nutter in 1994 ( , 11th paragraph), As Franklin Nutter says — he’s the President of the Reinsurance Assn. of America: “The insurance business is first in line to be affected by climate change. Global warming could bankrupt the industry.”
    And where did Gore find Nutter’s “bankrupt the industry” quote? From the ’93 Greenpeace conference, as noted deep within this article written by Greenpeace’s Jeremy Leggett ( ): In September, at a seminar organised by the US College of Insurance, Greenpeace USA, and the insurance consultancy firm ET&T, further leading figures in the reinsurance industry spoke out on the subject. Said Frank Nutter, President of the Reinsurance Association of America, “Greenpeace, it seems to me, makes a good case that we have significant and, perhaps, permanent changes in our climate in this country … It is the threat of natural catastrophes that drives the demand for insurance products on property. It’s also clear that climate change could bankrupt the industry.”
    Enviro-activists are all just one big happy family. No surprise that Frank Nutter shows up at their various reunions……

  14. My amateur assessment of the cast with respect to ACGW probable position:
    Cullen – pro
    Nutter – pro
    Golden – pro
    Furchtgott-Roth – skeptic
    Murphy – skeptic, but his main interest and knowledge seems to be how to fight carbon taxes
    Francis – pro, but not sure
    Doney – pro
    Leinen – pro
    Pielke, Jr. – skeptic, but always to my mind a bit unpredictable and unable to put my finger on his actual position
    Spencer – skeptic
    I guess this is what passes for a well-balanced panel these days.

  15. “The reason the warmist nuts changed from “global warming” to “climate change”….
    Is that so? The IPCC is the International Panel on Climate Change, so “Climate Change” is a name that exists since at least the IPCC has been created. Or am I missing something?

  16. Good luck Dr. Spencer. I hope at least some of the committee members hear what you’ve got to say.

  17. “Dr. Scott C. Doney, director, Ocean and Climate Change Institute, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution”
    Not too much bias in that institutional name, eh?
    Reminds me of a Monty Python sketch:
    Patron: What’s on the menu?
    Waitress: Climate change, climate change, climate change, climate change, baked beans, and climate change. That’s not got MUCH climate change in it!
    Patron: But I don’t like spam!

  18. The really telling name on the list is Mr. Frank Nutter because of his position as President of the ReInsurance Association of America. Few groups or businesses have stood to benefit more and been active in promoting and exploiting the doomsday scenarios of global warming and climate change promoted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Since the IPCC views are also the official position and policies of the US government, especially the present Executive branch, he is likely participating at the hearing to push for even more profit through fear. It cannot be about understanding the science.
    Here is an article I wrote with Tom Harris very recently on the role of the Re-insurance industry in promoting and benefitting from false science.

  19. Let’s hope Senators James Inhofe (R-OK) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) attend this meeting. I’m sending messages to both of them/

  20. I think DR Spencer was added later due to complaints re too many alarmist. It appears more balanced now at least

  21. I hope Dr Spencer shows them his “Epic Fail” comparing ALL models versus ACTUAL RSS and UAH satellite temperatures graph. LOL

  22. @R. de Haan –
    Yes, an extremely important, extremely well said piece by Joe Bastardi.
    @ Joe Bastardi –
    I’ve forwarded the link to your article to Senators James Inhofe (R-OK) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) and have requested that they attend Thursday’s meeting.

  23. Tim Ball says:
    July 16, 2013 at 10:02 am
    “The really telling name on the list is Mr. Frank Nutter because of his position as President of the ReInsurance Association of America.”

    The insurance industry is never happier than when selling you a policy they don’t believe they will ever have to pay-out on. Especially if you have no choice about whether to buy the insurance…

  24. @Russell Cook
    “As Franklin Nutter says — he’s the President of the Reinsurance Assn. of America: “The insurance business is first in line to be affected by climate change. Global warming could bankrupt the industry.”
    He means ‘second in line’ surely. I mean after the people making the actual claims!!

  25. @Eliza –
    They damn well ought to add Joe Bastardi to the list too. Let those alarmists try to shout him down! As far as that goes, too bad Anthony can’t be there as well, or Dr. William Happer, or Steve McIntyre. All of them could tear those people a new sphincter.

  26. Mr. Nutter’s comments about bankrupting the insurance industry are a bit disingenuous, considering that insurance companies are in the business of not doing what they have contracted to do. /sarc

  27. For people wondering at the lack of balance, note that this committee is chaired by the virulent Barbara Boxer since Democrats are in the majority in the US Senate. We will get the hearings that Barbara Boxer wants us to get. Vitter and Inhofe get some input, but Boxer runs the show.
    Members – Home
    Senate Majority Committee Members
    Barbara Boxer (Chairman)
    Max Baucus
    Thomas R. Carper
    Benjamin L. Cardin
    Bernard Sanders
    Sheldon Whitehouse
    Tom Udall
    Jeff Merkley
    Kirsten Gillibrand
    Mazie K. Hirono
    Senate Minority Committee Members
    David Vitter
    James M. Inhofe
    John Barrasso
    Jeff Sessions
    Mike Crapo
    Roger F. Wicker
    John Boozman
    Deb Fischer

  28. “Climate Change: It’s Happening Now.”
    ..well, let’s just load the dice right up front why don’t we

  29. Emailing good questions to ask of the panel to one of the junior Republican Senators might be a good idea, you’ll have to provide the reference framework to support the question. Remember the staffers will have little, if any scientific background.

  30. Jennifer Francis is there… LOL This one is such an ignoramus of meteorology and climatology and her theory is so absurd!

  31. Dr Spencer, I’m a bit worried about you being “somehow” left off the list. Just so long as they don’t use that excuse to “somehow” forget to call you forward. Maybe I’m being paranoid, or maybe I’ve just plain seen too many down and dirty tricks played by the other side. Good luck with it all.

  32. “””””””…….Below is the witness list for the hearing titled “Climate Change: It’s Happening Now.”…..”””””
    No kidding !! ??
    Now when was the last peer reviewed historical episode of climate NOT CHANGING ??

  33. Let’s hope Eva Braun – uh, Barbara Boxer – can’t shut up the skeptics entirely. La Fanatica Tiranica can be expected to try hard, however. She is not one to tolerate opposing viewpoints on any subject.
    Someone should tap Boxer on the shoulder and remind her, as a Jewish person, of the parallels between her idol the Fuehrer’s administration and the early days of Nazi rule in Germany.

  34. eugene watson says:
    July 16, 2013 at 8:46 am
    The reason the warmist nuts changed from “global warming” to “climate change” is that now, instead of being woefully wrong, they can always be right.

    There is a Nutter on the panel after all. 🙂

    ………Mr. Frank Nutter, president, Reinsurance Association of America…….

  35. @ commieBob.
    “””””….. Who among the witnesses are actual climate scientists? Cullen and Spencer are,…..”””””
    Actually isn’t Dr. Heidi Cullen simply a meteorologist, formerly of the Weather Channel on T&V ??
    Not knocking Meteorologists; but a proctologist is also another kind of ologist who is not an accredited scientific expert on climate.
    I’m just guessing (a branch of climatology) that Dr. Roy Spencer is about the only non MMGWACCC disciple on the list . I never can keep Pielke Sr and Jr separated into the correct encampments.
    Oh I forgot; this is check bouncing Mrs Barbara Boxer’s ( hey I’m a Senator here General, and don’t call me ma’am; well how about Madam then ?) committee.

  36. I think “Stupidity: It’s Happening Now.” would have been a more apt slogan.
    I wonder what other upcoming committees are scheduled:
    “Gravity: It Weighs on All of Us.”
    “Evaporation: Moisture’s Murderer.”

  37. “””””…..Eliza says:
    July 16, 2013 at 10:15 am
    I think DR Spencer was added later due to complaints re too many alarmist. It appears more balanced now at least……””””””
    Yeah Eliza; just like a diving board is balanced, so it doesn’t fall into the pool by itself; you actually have to jump for yourself. It would be too dangerous (for the preorgenda) to have a “see-saw”/teeter-totter/ whatever, instead of a diving board.

  38. Roy Spencer says:
    July 16, 2013 at 9:33 am
    I “somehow” got left off the list given to The Hill. I told Anthony I was, indeed, testifying.

    I don’t know the inner workings of how such hearings are set up.
    Is there a possibility that others that are not on the list above will be testifying?

  39. I hope someone during the hearing points out that the temperature has only risen 1 degree F since 1880. The whole climate change fiasco is nothing more than a tempest in a teapot.

  40. I would take each senator a copy of “Use and Abuse of Statistics” and open my testimony with some relevant quotes from it.

  41. Okay, all important question here…..
    What word or phrase should be allocated for our “drinking game”??
    Consensus?? Extreme weather events?? Extreme glacier ice/snow melt?? Unprecedented temperature extremes?? Massive sea level rise??
    Wow, this could get ugly, I better call my office and request a day off on Friday….

  42. Dear Dr. Spencer,
    Even if the number of those on the side of truth in science are small, even if you are the only one, GOD AND ONE ARE A MAJORITY.
    Remember Gideon! [Judges 6-7]
    “… ‘The Lord is with you, mighty warrior.'” [Judges 6:12]
    I am praying for you.
    Janice Moore
    Truth will win.

  43. @Gunga Din –
    Yes, let’s hope so – it sure wouold be nice to have Anthoony, Dr. William Happer, Stewve McIntyre, Dr. Tim Ball, Dr. Fred Singer, to name a few.
    Since Senator James Inhofe is on the committee, I wonder if he could call them as witnesses? I’ll check with his office

  44. This is for you, Roy Spencer, for all those long hours reading until you could hardly stay awake. For all those lonely hours writing and writing and thinking and writing in front of that computer screen. For the years and years spent training your mind, fighting for the truth, with very little recognition. Now is your moment. GO FOR IT!
    “… only one, but not alone.”

    And, Joe Bastardi and ALL you WUWT science giants, hang in there! Your opportunity is coming.

  45. President Obama unveils his global warming war plan:
    According to intelligence reports from Eric Holder’s Department of Political Crimes, we now have comprehensive proof that the American people have weapons of mass carbonization, and they pose an immediate threat to our government.
    We have no choice but to take action against America. I am calling this “Operation Enduring Freedom”.
    First we will gain air superiority, by using our drones to take out all republican voters, all power plants, and every oil pipeline.
    Then we will put boots on the ground to ensure there is a smooth transition from a democracy to a benevolent wind powered collective.
    I ask that everyone remain calm and cooperate fully with EPA storm troopers as they do their job in rooting out Carbon terrorists. If you see your neighbors creating carbon pollution make sure that you turn them in to our troops in the “Carbon Rapid Response Force”.

  46. Well I’ll be in the cheering section for Dr. Roy, but having watched those things in the past; I’m convinced that the whole lot of those bumson the committee have no interest in any facts, and they just want to give the public illusion that the senate actually does something in the public interest. Well they really just want to get back out to the Senatorial Bar, and in Mrs Boxer’s case, just kite another unfunded check.
    As an aside, when Richard Wagner was a sort of political activist refugee in Paris in the mid 1800s, he had finished his new opera Tanhauser; and desperately wanted to get it performed, because he (and I think first wife Minna too) needed some income.
    Well the Paris Opera, was the only place worth getting your opera performed, in Paris, if you needed the money; and you had to compete with the Offenbachs and the Meyerbeers for time on the ticket.
    Well the Paris Opera, at the time, was run by the Paris Jockey Club (you think I’m kidding don’t you ?). So if you wanted your opera performed at their Opera, then you needed to put a ballet, in the second act of your opera. Well Offenbach can can write a ballet with the best of them; but Tanhauser is about the knights of the Holy grail, and all that which goes with Lohengrin, and eventually Parsifal. It has as much chance of performance at the Paris Opera, as Tales of Hoffmann does at the Vatican on Sunday.
    Now the reason the ballet has to be in the second act is highly technical. The jockey club patrons liked legs, and you can can appreciate that they also didn’t like to get to the Opera, in time for the opening Overture, or the rest of Act One for that matter.. So nyet on the ballet in Act One idea.
    Well the jocks also didn’t want to hang around for act three (III), because they were in a hurry to get to the bar, so nyet on Act three for your ballet.
    So Richard Wagner wrote that whole underworld baccanalian BS, in “The Paris Version” of Tanhauser (in the second act), just so’s he and Minna could buy some groceries in Paris.
    Now does Mrs bouncer Babs Boxer’s Senate committee on Environment and Public Works sound to you anything like the Paris Jockey Club of the mid 1800s ??
    So Dr Roy, you just go get ’em, and do your thing. Remember that Richard Wagner went on to shatter the public’s notion about what a truly great work of Art should be.

  47. Let someone watch the windows and the thermostat of the Senate’s heating system(LOL)

  48. Jean Meeus says:
    July 16, 2013 at 9:49 am

    “The reason the warmist nuts changed from “global warming” to “climate change”….

    Is that so? The IPCC is the International Panel on Climate Change, so “Climate Change” is a name that exists since at least the IPCC has been created. Or am I missing something?

    It’s true that the term “Climate Change” has been there from the beginning and warmists haven’t just pulled it out of a hat recently. What HAS happened is that in public discourse “global warming” used to be used much more often by warmists than it is now–they’ve switched to “climate change,” for an obvious reason.
    I urge someone here to do a survey of the relative frequency of the two terms on Google, for each year going back to 1985 or earlier, if possible, and to present a chart showing the trend in usage.

  49. I actually disagree with many skeptical climate scientists that in the Earth’s atmosphere situation C02 has any effect at all (most of them do), on global temperatures unless it was to reach many thousands of parts per million. It seems to me that the negative feedback massively outweighs any positive effect whatsoever that added C02 may have.. re past ice ages when C02 was way above current levels and Lindzen’s work on positive and feedback.effects of added human C02

  50. rogerknights says:
    July 16, 2013 at 3:04 pm

    I hate to sound …uh… skeptical but that does leave one to wonder if the IPCC knew all along the hypothesiss of CAGW and Hockey Sticks raining from the CO2-laden sky was BS …but it was useful.
    If “Climate” isn’t “weather” then why haven’t we heard the the ethical, fine upstanding spokesmen for IPCC object to terms like “Weather Wierding” and “Exteme Weather”?
    PS These guys aren’t dumb. They are shrewd.

  51. It’s a scandal that countries that have fallen for the warmist scare apparently didn’t give contrarians a hearing like this one (and others that have preceded it in the US). That is what Europe’s we-know-best politicians should be held accountable for. They shouldn’t be allowed to weasel out of their responsibility to have held hearings by saying that they “trusted the scientists.” Instead, they apparently trusted the activists’ line that all contrarians had to say was misinformation that should not be given any opportunity to publicize itself.

  52. CAGW is not affecting the insurance industry. What is affecting the industry is the stupidity of covering idiots who invest large sums of money in property in the coastal zones. These insurance costs should be barred from being spread to those wise enough not to build there.

  53. Roy Spencer —Give them HILL Roy…um where is my spill checker?
    Seriously, Good hunting!

  54. George E. Smith
    “I never can keep Pielke Sr and Jr separated into the correct encampments.”
    If you’re talking about encampments of warmists or “skeptics” that’s because I don’t think they are affiliated. They are running around doing real science and talking about where they are on the trail at this point. Agree or disagree with them, their correspondence here reeks of science done well rather than the crud that we often see (sometimes from both camps). Anthony’s website roof is adequate to handle all who practice science well, no matter what the result seems to be. The result is we all come away with a better understanding.

  55. With Boxer as the Chair, every known cliche preferred by Alarmists will be trotted out at the beginning. How to respond, given that Rush Limbaugh will not be permitted to puncture all those little balloons? Maybe Spencer’s now famous graph.

  56. @ Dr. Spencer
    “It’s in my written evidence”
    What use is that? You will be faced with politicians who can’t read and “journalists” who won’t. You need to present it as a big, colourful, very simple graphic, and hold it up in front of the committee and cameras.
    Re-mem-ber to put hy-phens in an-y big words.

  57. @Janice Moore –
    Yes, I hope it is Dr. Spencer’s moment, and the moment of all who have been fighting the good fight against the worst campaign of ignorance since the Inquisition. And I hope that we skeptics all have the satisfaction of seeing the alarmists crumble before Dr. Spencer, Senator Inhofe and the others on the front line here, and be reduced to incoherent whining. Will I cry if they are brutally humiliated? Yes, with joy.

  58. Pay attention folks. This is the part of the debate that counts….
    Speak up, or not be heard.
    You do make a difference just by understanding the questions.

  59. Hey, Chad, yes, indeed. GOOD FOR YOU to do your best (as I read above) to get the word out to the senators/staff. I hope God says “Yes” to my prayers… (He so often says, “Not yet,” or “No”… but, every so often, there is a great big “YES!” well, we shall see…)
    OssQss, you are SO right and your commonsense observation NEEDS to be emphasized. Our wonderful scientists are so careful, so true to the scientific method (and GOOD FOR THEM), that, it is hard for them to switch gears and advocate for a position. They need to be reminded of the dire importance of standing up NOW and speaking FORCEFULLY for a position, the truth. Our freedom, our livelihoods, and, in some cases, our very lives depend upon it.

  60. george e. smith says:
    July 16, 2013 at 1:02 pm
    @ commieBob.
    “””””….. Who among the witnesses are actual climate scientists? Cullen and Spencer are,…..”””””
    Actually isn’t Dr. Heidi Cullen simply a meteorologist, formerly of the Weather Channel on T&V ??

    Actually George, Heidi’s Ph.D. is in climatology and ocean-atmosphere dynamics.

  61. “””””…..
    Mike Bentley says:
    July 16, 2013 at 5:47 pm
    George E. Smith
    “I never can keep Pielke Sr and Jr separated into the correct encampments.”……””””””
    Mike you completely misunderstand my comment. Based on the work of both the Pielkes, which have been reported here often at WUWT those two scientists are not always in lockstep. They sometimes have different views. And I made no judgment of the sincerity of either of them, or the quality of their separate works.
    It’s just I have never made any note of which of the two is more of a skeptic; or more of a believer or whatever; I just know they often have different views.

  62. “””””…..Eliza says:
    July 16, 2013 at 3:14 pm
    I actually disagree with many skeptical climate scientists that in the Earth’s atmosphere situation C02 has any effect at all …..”””””
    I’m with you Eliza. I think the water cycle feedback regulation (evap / condense / precip) is so powerful, that we would have to eliminate the oceans to change the Temperature of the earth by much (given the existing orbital and solar conditions.

  63. george e.smith says:
    July 16, 2013 at 10:22 pm
    “””””…..Eliza says:
    July 16, 2013 at 3:14 pm
    Count me in. Climate Sensitivity to mankind’s CO2 output will eventually be found to be a big fat zero.
    And, Jean Meeus – you know full well that the meme, when it suited the lawyers/activists was ‘global warming’. It only changed to ‘climate change’ when the globe was found to be not warming catastrophically.
    The statement you made could be construed as trolling and definitely puts you into a certain camp that like to nitpick and split hairs to get points.

  64. George,
    Sorry, sometimes my brain doesn’t sync with what the words mean to the author. Yeah, sometimes they don’t agree, wouldn’t you like to be at the Sunday family dinner table to hear the conversaations between them?

  65. beng says:
    July 17, 2013 at 8:32 am
    “Dr.” Heidi Cullen must be there for the pre-schoolers in the crowd.

    She’s not as light-weight as you think. Check her publications. link It is possible for intelligent people to make a reasoned argument for CAGW. Insulting those people won’t convince them otherwise. Some of them will never be convinced, no matter how much evidence we throw in their faces. It doesn’t matter, science will pass them by and the population in general will see that we have the evidence on our side.
    Name calling is what people do when they don’t have evidence.

  66. ***
    commieBob says:
    July 17, 2013 at 9:14 am
    Don’t care what her publication list is — she showed her real colors for the few seconds I could tolerate on the notorious TWC. Her “presentation” to the senate will be perfectly predictable and politically correct.

  67. @Janice Moore –
    And I’m also badgering the local media in my community, Chico, California (mostly to the left of left, as Anthony who also lives here can tell you) mercilessly to push them to present stories on global warming alarmism and the scientists who reject the AGW fantasy.
    Of course it’s an uphill battle anywhere in the Democratic People’s Republic of Kalifornia (DPRK – the initials expressing so well its philosophical and ideological solidarity with North Korea, the other DPRK) to get media recognition of simple facts. The funny part is how all these so-called reporters are passing up the greatest news scoop of our time.

    I feel your pain (writing to you from beautiful SS (Seattle Socialists)-infested Washington). Geographically speaking, about 80% of the state is for free markets and liberty. Population-wise, three or four Envirostalinist cities on Puget Sound turn our state blue every time.
    Liberals are, as a rule, are timid, “worried,” people, hence, they tend to congregate in cities where they feel secure and cared for (BARF!).

  69. @Janice Moore –
    I look at it very simply: the alarmists are pushing me (along with a helluva lot of others, of course, but I still take it personally), so I push back as much as I can. It doesn’t take any thought – it’s simply a reflex..
    In 1998-1999 I spent 6 months in Seattle at a job that didn’t work out, and got plenty of leftist claptrap thrown at me while I was there. I was the CFO of a startup company there, and my boss, the CEO, was as rabid a leftist as any – and to show his true colors, one of the reasons he canned me was because he found out I am married to African-American woman (still am – together 23 years now, and still as crazy about this beautiful, wonderful, extraordinary person as ever).
    Scratch any lefty (and presumably any global warming alarmist) deep enough and the good ol’ boy mentality comes right out in ’em. They might express it a little differently (they say to black folks, “you really aren’t smart enough to think for yourselves, so we have to think for you), but the bigotry is just as pure.
    I had to snicker, because this mollusk lived on Republican Street in the Capitol Hill section of Seattle. Just deserts, methinks, for him.

  70. Anyone want to start a pool about how much time Spencer will have? My guess is 90 seconds. Just long enough for the record to show that a skeptic and a scientist was present and for him to be thanked for his written testimony and to apologize for being out of time.

  71. Chad,
    Thank you so much for sharing. One of the drawbacks to this site (which is also, a strength, viewed in another light) is the lack of getting to know people a bit. I feel okay going OT here, BTW, because this thread is largely defunct. Yes, Democrats come in all flavors — kindhearted ignoramuses, pro-union racists, closet-racist socialists, etc… . A LOT of minorities, amazingly, are openly “my people”-race-supremacists. Well, all we can do on that front is to live a life of love and ignore the ignoramuses.
    I AM SO HAPPY FOR YOU, that you are still madly in love with your lovely wife (that never happened for me). That you two are together makes me smile and smile. You (and she, too) have been in my prayers as you deal with your challenges. I did picture you as both of the same race, that you are a beautiful blend is SO COOL.
    Well, well. There are so many extraordinarily fine people on this site (every once in awhile, a poster will let out a clue or two… hm… that goes for some really TROUBLED people, too — boy, do we have those, too!).
    The big TWENTY-FIVE is coming up in 2015 (or so). In case I’m not around here to wish you well, please accept my heartfelt, CONGRATULATIONS!!! (oh of COURSE you will make it, lol)
    That was kind of you to bother to capitalize my precious last name, but, please don’t trouble yourself in the future. I would have thought nothing of it.
    Looking forward to Roy Spencer’s Big Day tomorrow!

  72. @ Chuck Bradley — LOL, I think the odds are in your favor, there.
    I’m going for the long shot, though (because I want it to happen so badly!). My bet is (I’ll pay $2 each to up to 50 people who win — they can just tell me “way to go” if I win, I’ll be so happy money wouldn’t add a thing to my joy): SPENCER GETS ALL the time and CLEANS UP!
    God may say, “No,” but, I’ve asked for the above and He just may say “YES!” — thus, my optimism — “faith is the substance of things hoped for.” #[:)]

  73. “still as crazy about this beautiful, wonderful, extraordinary person as ever” [Chad Wozniak about his wife]
    A husband with that kind of love, so strong that he SAYS it…. OUT LOUD, is rare. This one’s for you, Chad, and your beautiful wife. Here’s to the next 23!

    “… heaven’s gift to me… .”
    God bless you.

  74. Not all is lost with the world. I was fully expecting George Zimmerman to be convicted regardless of the evidence, and he was not. I live in Florida so this is important to me.

  75. Zimmerman is not entirely without blame, since he should not have gotten out of his car, but all the evidence shows that not only was he not guilty as charged, but harbored no racial antipathies – he took a black girl as his date to his senior prom in high school, and he participated in a mentoring program for black kids, which he continued to do after the program was officially discontinued.
    A tragedy, all the way around. But critics of the verdict should be reminded that the.choice they are making is for mob rule, and black folks in particular should remember what that means – lynching.

Comments are closed.