Roy Spencer passed on a note about this, and I figured I should post here before the event because there will be live video. And Mark Steyn.
Roy understates:
Ted Cruz’s climate change hearing (today at 3 pm EST) should be interesting. Witnesses on our side include my sidekick John Christy, Judy Curry, Will Happer, and (drum roll) Mark Steyn. I expect a few zingers.
He also notes live video will be available, see www.commerce.senate.gov for details, I don’t see them yet.
Here: http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings
Excerpts from http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060029040:
Cruz tees up panel on warming after taunting Obama
Hannah Northey, E&E reporter
Published: Monday, December 7, 2015
After poking fun at President Obama’s call for action at climate talks in Paris last week, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), a GOP presidential candidate, is scheduled to convene a hearing on the effect of money and politics on climate research.
The senator last week accused Obama of mistakenly focusing on the threat of emissions over terrorism (ClimateWire, Dec. 2). “Instead of focusing on the perceived threat to national security of the SUV in your driveway, President Obama should be standing up and leading to defeat radical Islamic terrorism,” Cruz said during an interview in the Capitol. “But he refuses to confront the very real threats facing America today.”
The hearing will feature a number of climate doubters, including John Christy, a climate scientist at the University of Alabama, Huntsville, who disputes the consensus on human-induced climate change; Judith Curry, a climatologist at the Georgia Institute of Technology; and William Happer, a professor of physics at Princeton University.
Also testifying will be Mark Steyn, the Canadian National Review writer and author of “Climate Change: The Facts” who told attendees at the Heartland Institute’s International Conference on Climate Change this summer that his claim to fame is calling fraudulent the well-known “hockey stick” theory that Michael Mann — a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University — has developed.
The lone call for action to thwart the effects of climate change will likely come from the Democratic minority’s witness, Rear Adm. David Titley, formerly of the Naval Oceanography Operations Command, who recently joined Sherri Goodman, President Clinton’s deputy undersecretary of Defense, in calling on politicians to stop politicking on the issue of global warming (Greenwire, June 10).
Titley has predicted that as more Arctic ice melts, nations may want to revise the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, especially with regard to fish stocks moving north due to rising ocean temperatures. If that happens, he has said, nations like China could potentially file claims on Arctic resources while the United States would be left out of the negotiation process (E&E Daily, Oct. 1).
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Prof Tim Noakes Gives a scientific presentation that what the UN World Health Org and the US FDA continue to push. You will see how we climate skeptics can use this in his address for our battle for truth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL5-9ZxamXc
P.S. Its taken 45 years for the truth to begin to come out.
From Dr. Roy’s site. What underhanded tactics will be used next!
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2015/12/greenpeace-founder-reports-it-to-the-fbi-under-rico-and-wire-fraud-statutes/
Good choice of characters. I am surprised someone from the AG side of life was willing to turn up. I hope everyone is polite and sets an example of how to present a scientific argument,
I don’t see any links anywhere for the live broadcast of this event? I do see the Senate Live on C-span 2 via cable TV, but don’t see anything on their schedule for the event referenced on this blog? WUWT?
http://www.c-span.org/
http://www.commerce.senate.gov
Try this link and scroll down to the feed:
http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings?ID=CA2ABC55-B1E8-4B7A-AF38-34821F6468F7
Cheers
Perfect! Thanks Bob
Got my Pepsi and a big ol bowl of popcorn….gonna watch me some Ted Cruz and Co.!
I hope that they’re just late getting started and that the feed hasn’t been cancelled.
Pardon, is anyone receiving the video feed from this Senate hearing?
The Admiral now works at State Pen, I mean Penn. State.
You found that quite a coincidence as well? After all that time working in the Navy, in 2009 he gets a command to work on climate change from his superior whom received the command from ?, and then he gets a job at Penn. St. Do I see smoke?
I’m watching http://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/
All I get is: “Error: No valid source could be found”
Maybe it requires that abysmal Adobe Flash Player.
I will quote Dr. Evans :”The World has spent 100 billion dollars
on global warming research since 1990 and
we have not found any actual empirical
evidence that carbon dioxide has caused
most of the recent global warming.
If there really was any evidence that
rising carbon dioxide caused the warming
don’t you think we would have heard about it?
Instead we hear a deafening silence about
the non-warming of the last 18 years.”
~Dr. David Evans~
Steyn didn’t disappoint.
I LOVED Steyn’s testimony! HEY….I’m a human on this planet and I COUNT. The rigors of science SHOULD BY DEFAULT invite opposition to ANY and EVERY theory…if the goal of that science is to discover unbiased facts that is. The only theory that needs to be protected from criticism and refutation is a WEAK ONE. So obviously politicians and their “science community” informers are trying to prevent open, honest, critical discussion because they KNOW their position is WEAK.
Dr. Titley was contacted in 2009 (one year into current POTUS) by a 4-star general to assess Arctic climate change’s impact on the Navy. I’m sure an exact transcript of that conversation would be much more interesting.
Dr Titley – “Let’s talk about orbital decay adjustments, stratospheric contamination, …” Waiting……….Oh, moving on?
Oh my…LOL…Cruz teases that the bias of the models is keeping the chart from staying on the easel for all to see….:)
Titley moronically, and in robot fashion follows the script of the IPCC and the Obama administration. Really? That’s the best they could do? This is a romp. Climatism is such a complete joke that it is bizarre that it hasn’t been laughed off the planet.
Oh YEAh!! The Democrats go for the “97% consensus” as defense!! Which only proves that the Democrat representative either doesn’t understand the actual “evidence” or likes slogans and “DOGMA instead of Data”! Nothing like using sloppy, inaccurate, published drivel to support one’s argument!
I wish that every time they bring up the 97% that there is a response that it is actually simple – that the survey was conducted by a cartoonist, and that 96.2% (76 of 79) answered “risen” to question 1 and 97.4% (75 of 77) answered yes to question 2. It is based on only 75 or 76 scientists…
The two question poll was not run by John Cook. You need to check the history….
That’s why the counter has to be simplified. I can never find the basis for the 97% when I do a search. Too confusing.
I look forward to updates on climate focus science related summaries from John Christy, Judy Curry, Will Happer, and Mark Steen.
And also look forward to any other witnesses, whether they be consensus CAGW proponents or independent critical thinking proponents (aka skeptics).
The assessment of which set of proponents has the better science and more integrated approach will be fun to do.
John
The hearing is over.
Cruz was impressive, Curry was effective, Steyn went on one political seeming rant but otherwise contributed.
Titley was the representative for Cook’s false 97% consensus.
Those democratic committee members amplified Titley’s statements and tried to damn the heretics.
John
Happer was low key and quietly reasonable.
John
I was late to listen live to the hearing, I did not see Christy.
John
Titley’s 4 “facts” or “things we know” all turned out to be nothing but climate memes. The “debate” will be stalled as long as the cult of global warming refuses to stop confusing facts with conjecture.
And here comes Senator Schultz to demonstrate his ignorance and more tired climate memes. He is certainly full of beliefs but devoid of well constructed thought.
I especially love his logic that, he will believe non-cognitive entities, i.e. AGU, but not these climate scientists that just so happen to be members of the AGU. The takeaway, believe the political administrators posting a message statement but not the scientists.
OMG…and they are BACK to Cook et al! I love it! This is how well these idiots understand it! Appeal to authority established by opinion!!!! It’s like a logical fallacy on top of another logical fallacy! I hope, it is my personal, vindictive, human, horrible, corrupted desire that if/when the world collapses due to the economic choices based on NON science (and not due to climate changes) that the entire world calls it the “Cook Effect”. May John and his buddies live in INFAMY as they so desire and deserve.
Climate “science” is fallacies lasagna.
OMG “OMG…and they are BACK to Cook et al! I love it!” – and no one called them on it!!
The 97% consensus scam was deflected to the opinion of 97% of the public that AGW isn’t a crisis. The good guys AGREED to write off the majority of the world’s scientists by their silence, and let the most important fraud in marketing the AGW scam persist.
I don’t think ignoring the lies and merely presenting the truth is a robust policy; it’s not a policy of being as clever as serpents and as gentle as doves.
This broadcast is a good example of why these congressional hearings end up accomplishing nothing: You have two sides with witnesses for each and advocates for each, but no judge running the hearing. And with no the rules of evidence in play you get nothing but a bunch of speeches and sloganeering with no meaningful cross examination (and senate committee rules are NOT rules of evidence). This hearing is not going to change anyone’s mind about anything; it’s just a bunch of “Hooray for our side and boo to yours!”
It will however mark in history that Ted Cruz and others tried to expose the lies, that he saw another side to the argument, and that ALL the AGW side had is a phony consensus study and the tactics of bullies on their side. Whatever happens in the future, history will show that not everyone were sheep, and that no matter how smart we think we are, we still need Gallileos in this world. (And no idiot Democrat Senators…it’s the underdogs opposing the consensus that are Gallileos….not poor stupid Dr. Titley who agrees with it.)
And now, The Happy Tune Ice Cream Man, Ed Malar . . . er, Markey.
According to Titley, the climate models are great at showing boundary conditions and don’t depend on boundary conditions. So apparently, he thinks that starting the climate model average temperature below or above equilibrium has no baring on what it will project. Amazing!
*don’t depend on initial conditions…
I wanted so badly to extend Dr Titleys little graph a LOT more to the left and shrink that HUGE trend (which showed mere 100ths of a degree) down to size and then smack him over the head with it! How idiotic did he look making a TINY increase in temps look like a skyscraper? And NOT citing his sources? And NOT putting his own chart into geological perspective? Shame on him and everyone who falls for his stupid.
Wow…Senator Markey missed the entire point that the SKEPTICS are being called heretics, NOT Dr Tittley! That the apology will be directed at the OTHER panelists, NOT to him. He can’t even follow the conversation taking place in front of him today!
If Sen. Markey is there then who is running hell?
Pepsi spewage! Has anyone seen John Kerry today? or Al Gore?
GO JUDITH, GO!
Awesome – Judy Curry has the skills to deal with political policy marketing shills; it sure was wonderful watching her getup on her hind legs and call them out.