Author and pro-energy advocate Alex Epstein shocked attendees of a congressional hearing when he told a Democratic senator to “apologize” to fossil fuel companies he’s vilified and tried to silence, or he should simply “resign.”
Epstein made the statement during a Senate hearing Wednesday, referring to Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse:
“As long as your life is being made possible by the people in the fossil fuel industry, I think you should be grateful, and I think it is a crime — a moral crime — that you are damning anyone by association,” “I wish Sen. Whitehouse were here because what he is doing to the free speech of those companies and anyone associated with them is unconstitutional and I think he should apologize or resign,”
Epstein, who runs the think tank the Center for Industrial Progress, was referring to Whitehouse’s continued vilification of fossil fuel companies and groups skeptical of global warming.
In recent months, Whitehouse has even promoted federal prosecution of groups he believes cast doubt on the supposed dangers of man-made global warming. Whitehouse recently praised an op-ed calling for federal prosecutors to go after companies and think tanks under an anti-mafia law.
“Fossil fuel companies and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution,” Whitehouse wrote in a May Washington Post op-ed.
“Their activities are often compared to those of Big Tobacco denying the health dangers of smoking,” he wrote. “Big Tobacco’s denial scheme was ultimately found by a federal judge to have amounted to a racketeering enterprise.”
Epstein argued it’s immoral for Whitehouse and others to attack the free speech rights of companies and think tanks, especially since the modern world and all its prosperity would not be possible without fossil fuels like oil, coal and natural gas.
Full story: http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/14/author-tells-dem-senator-to-resign-for-vilifying-the-fossil-fuel-industry/
h/t to Matt Dempsey
My favorite moment was when Barbara Boxer wondered why she should listen to Epstein, a mere philosopher, on the subject to climate, and he responded “to teach you to think more clearly.”
More to the point Babs Boxer is a mere Senator Ma’am. She’s not competent to comment on climate science or energy science either.
G
Babs Boxer is a mere yenta from Sheepshead Bay, Brooklyn, and was a cheerleader for the Brooklyn College basketball team. It’s been all downhill from there. Oh, she does have a degree in Economics, but doesn’t seem to have learned or retained much from that.
Just so nobody forgets, this was not the first time Sen Boxer got blowback from a witness. Watch what happens just a bit after the 1:23 point here in the 2009 Alford v Boxer confrontation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE_jGD5nZ6U&t=83
A few years ago now, during the first $4 / gallon gas price spike, some senators went on a crusade to “save” consumers from expensive gasoline by trying to prove Big Oil collusion and price fixing. (Ironic, ain’t it, since now they want to *impose* high prices, to “save the planet”!)
A friend of mine (energy sector economist) and many economists from top universities were paraded in front of committees. To a man, they all said the current price surge was down to market forces, i.e. supply and demand. No evidence of collusion or price fixing. The estimable Babs Boxer was having none of it, exclaiming “Well, I’m all *for* supply and demand, and all, but …. blah blah blah …”. She smelled a rat and trusted her nose more than she did any so-called experts she herself had invited to testify. Poor yenta from Sheepshead Bay – usually wrong but *never* in doubt.
Speaking of hypocrites:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business-july-dec00-oil_09-21/
Principles are so malleable when you’re groveling for votes.
As with virtually all these imbeciles who want to stifle free speech on climate, Boxer has no scientific training. Same with Whitehouse. Whenever I read or hear these stupid and nasty comments about anyone who questions AGW I Google that person making the stupid criticism. It is rare to find they were anything other than Poli Sci, History, or English majors in college (if they went to college). For example, McKibben was an English major from Harvard, They’re all scientific nincompoops.
The truly hilarious part was when Senator Boxer replied that she didn’t need to be taught how to think more clearly. This form one of the most muddle headed politicians around.
Well I remember when she pointed out to a testifying general, that she had to work hard for her title as Senator. This in a land where titles of nobility are banned.
The general might have hedged his bets, and referred to her, as ” Senator Mrs. Barbara Boxer Ma’am. ”
I guess Military protocol, only required him to use the Ma’am part.
G
PS Senator is a Public Service Government job category.
from
A classic example of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
THINK is the critical issue for Ms. Boxer.
Paraphrasing Boxer:
‘How dare you lecture me, you lowly philosopher.[1][2] Only scientists can speak the truth about Climate Change policy.[3]’
1. Ad hominem
2. Poisoning the well
3. Appeal to authority
It’s sad that people who can’t think clearly have such power and cause so much human suffering.
4. Blind faith
Quinn the Eskimo on April 14, 2016 at 10:34 am
My favorite moment was when Barbara Boxer wondered why she should listen to Epstein, a mere philosopher, on the subject to climate, and he responded “to teach you to think more clearly.”
____________
Quinn the eskimo:
nothing wrong with allowing Barbara Boxer get taught thinking more clearly.
Or showing disdain on her behalve.
Barbaras desicion. Live with either.
This presumes someone like Sen. Whitehouse is capable of shame.
Too true!
Doesn’t the “Sen.” part make this obvious? Sort of like the ol’ UseNet trick of calling someone !Dr.
(Programmers should get this…)
for us non Programmers……..?
! prefix reverses the sense of a word. !Not = not-not, e,g.
I get the error :
Operator ‘!’ cannot be applied to operand of type ‘string’
var boxer = “Boxer”;
boxer = !boxer;
The ! only works with Boolean types or expressions that evaluate to a Boolean. For example I often check is something is !null, though there are new enhancements to modern languages that greatly reduce the need to check for null. I am particularly fond of the null-coalescing operator. Then there is the Null-conditional Operators that save a huge amount of coding and greatly improves my productivity (as a software developer).
The fact that politics is so intimately tied to climate science is why the science supporting the consensus is so incredibly wrong. So wrong in fact, that those who believe the CAGW meme simply can’t accept that ostensibly intelligent scientists can be so incredibly wrong about something so important, especially when the harsh and expensive remedies will have little, if any, effect even if CO2 was a driver of the climate system.
AGW is ALL about control of energy and the transfer of wealth from those that produce to to those who don’t. Whitehouse and Boxer sadly are in control.
Would this be the Barbara Boxer who said:
“There’s so much revenue that comes in from a cap-and-trade system that you can really go to a person in a congressional district and get enough votes there by saying, ‘What do you need? What do you want?'”
The fact that disagreement exists proves that the science is not settled. If the science of climate change were certain and unequivocal there would be no debate. There is substantial disagreement on really important things, including climate sensitivity, attribution of cause, really large uncertainties, … But truth is if the science were completely clear and unequivocal, there would be no debate. It is not, and the debate goes on.. To ignore this fact and quibble on specific details .. which model was used, how data is reduced during analyses, is a defensive response by proponents creating a giant fog over on the entire discussion in order to avoid the big question, ‘is the debate really over.”
Bravo!!!
An extraordinarily clear thinker and speaker who shows no fear. If I were Senator Whitehouse — who appears to want to be the Joseph McCarthy of our era — I would be very afraid.
You are so right. Epstein is a genuine hero.
You have just slandered a man that has been slandered enough. It really takes very little research to realize that communists had deep inroads into the US government at the time of Senator McCarthy. McCarthy was trying to save the country and the government, right or wrong, but Whitehouse is doing nothing for either the country or the government. Compare Whitehouse to Obama if you wish, that’s fine, both are willing to throw your children and grand children “under the bus,” as the expression goes. But McCarthy was unmercifully maligned at the time, and it won’t take you a day’s worth of due diligence to prove it for yourself.
And if you read the actual history of the time (original documents not Communist NYT slander), you find that the abuses that did happen occurred in the House UnAmerican Activities Committee, not the Senate committee led by Senator McCarthy. McCarthy was trying to get the Soviet Agents and sympathizers out of US government service. The rest of the cultural junk was in the House.
Tom,
Right on. Joe was right. There were a lot of communists in Hollywood and still are. But today they are called Democrats. Nothing like the Democrats of the 1950’s and 60’s. No JFK’s in this bunch, sexual proclivities aside.
here here!!!!
I agree that communist spying was a problem in that era, and that people were right to be concerned. But Joseph McCarthy’s tactics were not the way to go. He did a lot of intimidation and drive-by smearing based on the flimsiest of evidence. He particularly loved to exploit opponents’ homosexuality or alleged homosexuality. He was a bully who deserved to be taken down.
rabbit,
I agree about McCarthy’s tactics. Also, that he was right.
But compared with today’s tactics, he was an angel — and thoroughly pro-American. . Whitehouse is a good example of the opposite.
joe;
hear, hear!
Thank you Tom O. All those who slander McCarthy or repeat Communist attacks against him need to do a little research. Start with Venona files and them continue to follow the red brick road.
Bonus question: Roy Cohen was majority counsel for McCarthy’s Senate committee. Who was the minority counel?
Poor analogy, Senator McCarthy, though his methods were abhorrent, at least was correct about Russian spies in the FDR administration. Senator Whitehouse is wrong on the facts.
More on this on another blog: Also, you get another link if you read my following comment.
You know the parallel you’re trying to draw with McCarthy but he was trying to rid the country of people PRECISELY like Whitehouse, Boxer, Reid, Pelosi and their socialist pals in Hollywood who’ve only grown stronger in the decades since their mentors beat the rap.
Joseph McCarthy was right. There were communists and communist sympathizers all over the place. The trouble is that it isn’t illegal to hold communist beliefs and advocate for those beliefs. What is illegal is being a foreign agent or otherwise being a traitor. McCarthy and company had trouble with that distinction.
Here are the principles laid out by Senator Margaret Smith in her criticism of McCarthy et al.
Freedom made America great. Those who advocate against freedom are traitors especially if they have taken an oath to uphold the constitution.
But commiebob, on another post you agreed with whitehouse and others criminalizing the views of others on the causes of “climate change”. So, are you saying whitehouse is a traitor as well.
How about a quote and a link. I try not to be dogmatic so I probably agree with the good senator on a lot of things. For instance, we both agree that the sun comes up in the morning and sets in the evening in Vermont. On the other hand, I doubt that I ever agreed that it would be a good idea to limit free speech.
You forget that communists were directed by Moscow. If that isn’t treason, what is?
If you do a little checking, you will find that Joseph McCarthy was correct with respect to his assertions about Communists in our government. Still, after he was proven correct many years after the fact, people are still using his name to malign people with whom they disagree.
Don’t get me wrong I have not love or respect for Senator Whitehouse, I just have a problem with equating him to Senator McCarthy who was a patriot who ran afoul of the political powers and media of his day.
Senator Whitehouse is a Jackass both figuratively and literally. He is an innumerate fool who can’t see the foolish effort now that has been numerately dis-proven, for a potential problem diagnosed 60 years ago that was then only an innumerate possibility to be studied.
He is too illiterate and innumerate foolish to see that only the innumerate true believers and people pushing for their “rentier” profits, are the only proponents of what is now a slowly dying giant hoax. The so-called Global Warming “problem” proved to be numerately de minimus.
Science advances by observation, proposing theories, and then proving them wrong, as as it has done to CAGW.
I suppose there are still proponents for the “Pltdown Man”; and Stalin’s Marxist Party genetics of Lysenko. Perhaps Mr. White house is a believer in those too?
I believe Whitehouse is simply corrupt . He , and Boxer and … are willfully ignorant to the point of criminal malfeasance .
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
Science advances one funeral at a time.
Oops. Max Planck said that, no
Now that you mention it, he is a Democrat. I always wondered about that and now because google is my friend …
Any person involved in a debate that tells the other person to shut up has just realized he’s losing the debate.
Here here!
It’s hear, as in hearing.
Shuer.
Canucky spelling ??
Trad call of support in Brit. Commons: “Hear the man! Hear the man!”
Praps he was calling his dog.
Boycott Rhode Island!!
Did you see how shameful Barbara Boxer’s behavior was? I’m boycotting California, moving at the end of this month.
I can’t look at that image any more. It is just too offensive.
Why not just relocate Rhode Island to a place more in tune with their philosophy.
There are 20 (count ’em) non overlapping sites where Rhode Island could be relocated to in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. The ‘bad’ oil companies, would of course promise to never drill in the one out of 20 relocation sites that Rhode Island moves to.
They would pick their 2,000 acres in a plae that has oil, and we could select a site with no oil to put Rhode Island.
Why is Rhode Island a State, and not just a County or City ?? Izzit a State because the America’s Cup races, were held there for 134 years or so ??
g
It is a state because a few malcontents got thrown out of Massachusetts colony and that is as far as they ever got. It was just far enough away to keep the MA colonists from shooting them and defensible enough to hold onto.
For the record, we don’t want any Rhode Islanders in Alaska.
Rhode Island is the place where wealthy residents of Massachusetts moor their yachts and thus avoid the high taxation and dock fees of their native state, aka Taxachusetts.
Just ask John Kerry.
RI is a State because its founder, Roger Williams, secured a charter from the English Crown in 1663. Massachusetts and Connecticut were trying to usurp its lands. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhode_Island_Royal_Charter
I’ve been boycotting Rhode Island all my life! Not intentionally, just never had any reason to go there, or even think about the place, other than its distinction of being the smallest state. Given the election of Sheldon Whitehouse to the senate, it must also be the state with the smallest average IQ.
The story is that when Sen. Whitehouse moved from Rhode Island to Washington DC, the average IQ went up in both places.
Could be. It’s been dominated by the Democrat Party since 1937. Its also heavily clannish and dominated by union influence. Arrogant corruption and short-sightedness go hand in hand.
“Fossil fuel companies and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution,” Whitehouse wrote in a May Washington Post op-ed.”
Interesting.
So “carbon pollution” is the problem discussed by Whitehouse, not CO2 emissions.
That’s the newspeak scam – “carbon pollution” sounds worse than CO2 pollution. It invokes images of soot from belching smokestacks (like the back-lit photos of steam from the AGW crowd try to imply).
@ dinsdale, no, re: ‘carbon pollution”, it is getting even worse. The words, “Climate Science Deniers” is a new twist that showed up a few days ago.
Here is Epstein’s complete testimony. It’s worth 15 minutes.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexepstein/2016/04/14/senate-testimony-on-the-obama-administrations-energy-policies/#5f8dfb3271db
It´s really great!
Best testimony ever about “ENERGY”. He does not care about the source and he does not advocate for any particular form of energy supply. He cares about the cost and how supplying energy at the lowest cost should be our objective.
Sure, there is always some negative about any process. Make sure these are contained as best we can.
Thank you for the link.
Epstein was great. Boxer is an idiot.
Rhode Island, 1212 sq miles, with barely a population of 1 million, is represented by two senator. It boycotted the Constitutional Convention and refused to ratify the Constitution until a full year after it was already ratified by the rest of the states.
So – why do the oil companies even bother to sell their products to the state? It isn’t creating even as much revenue as Dallas. Thats if you include the Navy facilities.
If the people of Rhode Island are so stupid as to elect people like Sheldon Whitehouse then they are probably too stupid to understand where that golden liquid that flows into their vehicles comes from.
I say the oil companies should turn off the spigot until the state elects somebody else. There is no requirement in Federal Law that mandates private companies deliver commodities to any particular location or resale outlet.
Rhode Island is part of the New England, very liberal thinking, States. Whitehouse is the kind that they vote for. It is called democracy. To try and coerce such States to think differently, through denial of services/products, would be immoral, in my opinion.
FJ Shepherd,
Just curious if you think it’s immoral for New York to ban state employees from traveling to North Carolina because they disagree with a law that NC passed. Shouldn’t states worry about what goes on in their own borders and not try and coerce other states “to think differently, through denial of services/products…” to NC?
Is it immoral for Bruce Springsteen (and others) to try to coerce NC by economic blackmail (although the economic impact is probably negligible) because they also disagree with a state law?
If it’s not immoral, then why would it be immoral for other states, businesses, etc.to try to coerce Rhode Island to think differently? Or is it only selective morality, that only depends on who is disagreeing with what issue?
Normally I’d agree with you. However the liberals don’t believe in live and let live.
They have an insatiable desire to force everyone else to think and believe as they do, and they are eager to use govt power to enforce their will on others.
Playing by Marquis du Queensbury rules, while the other guy is using street brawling tactics is a sure way to lose.
The RI Legislature is 90% Democrat. They hand out the favors and get the union support. Everybody is related to somebody who benefits from the situation. RIers aren’t uniformly stupid. They know who is in control and go along to get along, at least enough of them to re-elect the same crowd every two years.
We have a possibility of a “super” La Niña coming (Scripps forecast .. although they are currently featuring a ditty called Distinct energy budgets for anthropogenic and natural changes during global warming hiatus on their website so can you believe anything they say?). Couple this with a cold north Atlantic, cold Antarctic ocean and other changes to the presently balmy globe, the next few years may move the global temperatures down substantially.
I think my point on this is as much squawking going on now on the supposed heat, I’m not really sure how the alarmists are going to counter the abrupt downturn in temperatures, especially if Europe goes into the deepfreeze. Germany is going to be in a world of hurt if the wind stops blowing and the outside temperatures are -20C. Most people forget Europe is way up there in latitude and if the winds blow from the north or northeast, it can get really cold.
I haven’t forgotten. In the early ’70s we lived in Guterlsoh on the edge of the North German Plain. One winter the temperature dropped to -20 Celsius and stayed there for quite a while. It was beautiful, clear cold, crisp. Ice-skating everywhere. We had over 2 tonnes of coke in the cellar, and it was my job to stoke the boiler, first thing in the morning and at night. The house was toasty. Not very PC by today’s ‘standards’, but toasty.
“We had over 2 tonnes of coke in the cellar”
I have to stop skimming comments…(yes, I eventually got your meaning).
But that would make for an interesting winter if it was the first kind of coke I thought it was.
BTW, our mid-70s winter in Canada were the same: we moved into our newly-built house in December, 1976.
Min temp: -33.9C
Max temp: -10.0C
33cm of snow
http://climate.weather.gc.ca/climateData/dailydata_e.html?timeframe=2&Prov=ON%20%20&StationID=4477&dlyRange=1934-07-01|2015-12-10&Year=1976&Month=12&Day=13
We had let the oil burn down in the old house, and there was actually frost on the walls in the morning.
Early 70’s, you burned coke? That white power stuff is expensive! 🙂
Easy peasy.
Excuse #1: “Climate change”.
Excuse #2: “Heat hiding in the oceans.”
Excuse #3-100: “Aeorosols, we’re winning, still warming (just have ta know how to cherry-pick), and various and sundry dog-ate-my-heat excuses. Climateers are nothing if not inventive.
Having followed Alex Epstein for years, I remain convinced that he is one of the most-original and clearest-thinking young voices I have been fortunate enough to hear in ages.
He hit it on the head when he told the committee that what he brought to the table was clear thinking. There’s little enough of that on one side and none of it on the other.
How do we follow him? I’m in need of some clear thinking in the thick media fog of the climate con war.
http://industrialprogress.com/
Longer video here:
https://youtu.be/R5KoYJ64vjA
And Whitehouse made at least two statements at the hearing that reveal his lack of knowledge on basic climate science: http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/sen-whitehouse-knows-nothing-about-elementary-climate-science.html
This demonstrates that Senator Whitehouse is careless with facts. Also – his attempts to silence his opponents is a totalitarian attempt and demonstrates that he is also careless about the constitution.
I have to agree with Epstein (from 11:30 in the video above):
I´m serious – as senator Whitehouse violates the constitution he is obliged to resign – I though that was the policy in the United States.
Imagine a bunch of senators starting to loose respect for the constitution, stop defending the constitution and even violate the constitution – that will be very hard to rein in.
It was Justice Robert H. Jackson who said “The Constitution is not a suicide pact.” If you believe (as Whitehouse purports to) that CAGW poses a dire existential threat to the nation, then the First Amendment may just have to be abrogated to save it.
brians356- You could not be more wrong. You are advocating for a turn to tyranny. Though you rationalize some response to vague threat, there is no justification for abrogating the rights of individuals to fulfill the agenda of government.
Furthermore, brians356, those with whom Sen. Whitehouse caucuses and who have now joined him in trying to nullify the 1st Amendment, represent the same group who have for years, been acting to end the 2nd Amendment. Their attempts to end the 2nd Amendment have failed. Senators Whitehouse and Boxer, et al, might well heed the fact that having failed to end the 2nd Amendment, they will not end the 1st.
Totalitarians are always looking for an excuse to strip liberties from those who disagree with them.
If this truely is an existential threat, than it should be a trivial matter to convince a majority of people of that.
That fact that you and use can’t demonstrate the danger is precisely why you have to use totalitarian tactics.
Moderator – I seem to have got stuck in moderation – I have no idea why?
[Nothing found, sorry. Please re-submit. -mod]
CO2 whut done it.
Moderator – This is unbelievable – the quote by Justice Marshall about freedom of speech, in the third last section of the following article is impossible for me to post – it just disappears!
http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/publication/2008/05/20080501220654myleen0.3144451.html#axzz45vUnwnvz
That´s pretty absurd ! Anyone have any idea why that happens? Can someone else try?
[Reply: I’ve cut and pasted the quote below. -mod.]
“Above all else, the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression because of its message, its ideas, its subject matter, or its content. To permit the continued building of our politics and culture, and to assure self-fulfillment for each individual, our people are guaranteed the right to express any thought, free from government censorship.”
Beats me . I couldn´t even post the french translation of that quote! 😉
The entire Senate EPWC — complete testimony and Q&A.
Senate EPWC — complete testimony and Q&A
Ah posted same time as Travis Casey
You have to have shame before you can feel shame, and that’s the first thing guys like Whitehouse (or Mann, or Hanson, or Gore, or Obama, etc.) jettison. It really is very freeing – it’s a state of absolute lack of restraint, concern for consequences. Cause forgives everything, even things you haven’t even done yet.
Joel, You are describing sociopathology, or worse.
Indeed.
Following on from the previous post by Tom D.Tamarkin, but relevant to the orchestrated victimisation and reduction of fossil fuel for generation and transport, a study about three years ago identified that if the electricity grid in the USA were to collapse at least 75% of the population would perish in three months. No transport, refrigeration, heating, communication,cant even pump petrol. Removing fossil fuel generation without erecting a substantial alternative initially in parallel would achieve a similar result.
Anyone who uses the term “carbon pollution” has already self outed themselves as a moron. I stop listening to anything a person has to say once they use that ridiculous term.
“When the pope says things that have to do with science, he does not speak from the magisterial authority of the church. When he speaks on moral issues, such as abortion and contraception and the like, then he speaks on magisterial authority,” Sirico responded before again being interrupted.
“So who’s cherry-picking?” Boxer said. “You’re saying that when the planet is facing all these problems, it’s not a moral issue.”
“I never said that,” Sirico said. “Where did I say that? Could you give me that quotation, senator?”
“You just said it, sir,” she said. “Sir, you receive money […] from Exxon, you disagree with the pope… I think you ought to have a talk with Reverend Nelson.”
“Who is by the way, not a scientist,” Sirico responded.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/14/sen-barbara-boxer-attacks-catholic-priest-for-questioning-global-warming-video/
A true statement if ya change just 2 words: “Green energy companies and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution,”
You nailed it 🙂
Worse! The oil and gas industry is funding the green energy companies’ and their allies’ sophisticated campaign to mislead everyone. I really wish they would quit! Killing their coal competitors is only the start, as the weapon they unleashed will now be turned fully on them to the detriment of us all!
Alex Epstein speaks with clarity in a way anyone, particularly non-scientists, can understand. I can understand way Ms. Boxer is fearful of allowing him a large audience. The typical “liberal” response to irrefutable facts is an ad hominem attack.
Ms. Boxer is from Brooklyn, has a degree from Brooklyn College in Economics (obviously never paid attention in classes), worked as a stock broker, then into politics. Since she lacks any training in science. I presume she will recuse herself from any further hearing on “climate science” for the thankfully short remainder of her term.
Forgot to mention her work as a “journalist” at the Pacific Sun, an alternative weekly newspaper published in Marin County, CA about four years. Her brokerage gig lasted about 3 years. Not a lot of work experience to draw on here.
She married well.
Politics is show business for ugly people. I believe its Frank Zappa, to lazy to look.
Seriously, why do people whose top skill is using other people’s money to win a popularity contest think they are experts on anything?
They also like travel and sailboats.
“A lot of people haven’t seen through the scam that’s being perpetrated,” Whitehouse said.
Yes, and that includes Climate Liar Whitehouse, who is busily perpetrating it.
Sen.Whitehouse’s statement “Fossil fuel companies and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution” could just as easy be changed to: “Climate alarmist movement and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution,” – and this statement would reflect the reality of today much more accurately…
I’ve noted the parallels between the Tobacco Institute and the Climate Change crowd from my early expose to this topic.
Both were the “center of the universe” for PhD Statistics holders where data is tortured until it gives up the desired results.
Kind of wrong in that Whitehouse is a Democrat and therefore cannot be shamed
Alex Epstein nails the most important political point.
These politicians and bureaucrats all swore oaths to uphold the USA Constitution.
Now they seek to violate every major aspect of it to feather their own nests and protect their big Climate Lie.
Time to bring back physical punishment for oath breaking and stupidity..
Never in the history of mankind has one industry contributed more to the technical, social, scientific, medical, agricultural and economic advancement than oil industry.
ONE gallon of gasoline is the equivalent to 500 man-hours of work, which has freed billions of people from a life of abject poverty and a grueling life of hard manual labor, with an average life-expectancy of just 40 years, which it was prior to the first oil well being drilled in 1859.
Feckless Leftist political hacks like Whitehouse seek to demonize and destroy the oil industry and, by proxy, capitalism, in the pursuit of failed Leftist political agendas of economic and political tyranny over those they rule over.
The more Leftists try to destroy economies and the more money they waste on the disconfirmed CAGW hypothesis, the bigger the political blowback against Leftists will be once CAGW crashes and burns.
“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.” ~ Napoleon Bonaparte
No wonder the public wants Washington outsiders . The current intelligence gene pool is evaporating no doubt because of global warming .
The spirit behind the environmental movement is clearly anti-Homo Sapiens.
He should have implored Boxer M’am to fly to Washington in one of her solar-charged electtric airplanes, and reminded her that the lights and her microphone on Capital Hill are powered by a coal-fired generator.
“…the modern world and all its prosperity would not be possible without fossil fuels like oil, coal and natural gas…”
Absolutely spot on!
Epstein made the statement during a Senate hearing Wednesday, referring to Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse:
“As long as your life is being made possible by the people in the fossil fuel industry, I think you should be grateful, and I think it is a crime — a moral crime — that you are damning anyone by association,” “I wish Sen. Whitehouse were here because what he is doing to the free speech of those companies and anyone associated with them is unconstitutional and I think he should apologize or resign,”
____________
Epstein – all thumps up!
Sounds like self defense will be going along with speech.
One other thing, the phrase “A federal judge found” means a lot less than Whitehouse thinks it does. In terms of who the activist on the bench is, which judge hears it next, and in terms of what actually is. And a lot less than it should mean in terms of the degradation of the courts via partisanship and judicial integrity.
Go to YouTube and check out Alex Epstein standing in he middle of the NYC climate March; absolutely brilliant.
New definition of Boxer: “term limits, obvious reason for”.
She provides a good argument for a qualifying exam for public office.
Oh NO, not THAT!
In his congressional testimony video we see Alex Epstein telling Senator Boxer that he, as a philosopher, can teach her to think more clearly on energy, fossil fuels and the climate.
In her career to date, Boxer thinking clearly would have been a fatal liability to her well known ideology that was used in all her political activities.
Her version of the so-called ‘democratic’ ideology and thinking clearly are fundamentally incompatible.
John
“Their activities are often compared to those of Big Tobacco denying the health dangers of smoking,” he wrote. “Big Tobacco’s denial scheme was ultimately found by a federal judge to have amounted to a racketeering enterprise.”
So what is the take-away from that analogy with Big Tobacco? Aren’t they still selling harmful tobacco products to any adult who wants to buy them? The only difference now is that their products are more expensive because the government, like the mob, is extorting “protection” money from them in return for letting them remain in business. Is that what Sen. Whitehouse and his friends plan to do with fossil-fuel companies, extort them for a share of the profits in exchange for letting them stay in business? That would allow politicians to redistribute wealth to buy votes and line the pockets of their cronies, but how does it stop climate change?
Among the may sure paths to failure there are two that stand out: (1) try to please everybody, and (2) try to get Senator Boxer to think.
“The Climate Industrial Complex and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by a beneficial trace gas”
There… Fixed it for ya.