Global Warming Denier Sen. Inhofe: I'...

Global Warming Denier Sen. Inhofe: I've Been Vindicated

There are 432 comments on the Oklahoma Impact Team story from Jun 24, 2010, titled Global Warming Denier Sen. Inhofe: I've Been Vindicated. In it, Oklahoma Impact Team reports that:

U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe recently told a town hall meeting in Perry that his stubborn belief that global warming is a hoax is turning out to be correct, and there's proof that the science has been cooked.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Oklahoma Impact Team.

First Prev
of 22
Next Last
Angel

Oklahoma City, OK

#1 Jun 25, 2010
If Global Warming is not occurring, then please explain why it is that Oklahoma Summers have gotten hotter and hotter every year for the past 11 years.

What is up with Senator Inhofe telling Senator Boxer, "It's over, gone, done. We won, you lost, get a life"? Is 12 years old?
Ralf The Dog

Oklahoma City, OK

#2 Jun 25, 2010
Senator Inhofe is not qualified to have an opinion on the subject only a belief. He does not understand the language used by CRU. When talking about "Hiding the drop", they are talking about the best way of removing an artifact without compromising the data.

At one point in time, the method of recording temperatures changed from one day to the next. This caused a sudden drop in temperature. The drop was not a real drop, it was just a change in how they recorded the numbers. There are many ways you can compensate for that change. The discussion about the "Trick" was just talking about the best way to do it without causing other artifacts.

I use the term, "Trick" to describe cleaver ways of solving problems quite often. It is a normal part of a scientists vocabulary. "The trick to keeping the centrifuge from locking up is to give it a good whack on the left side when it gets to speed."

The other big thing everyone got upset about was a commented out function. When you write code, you sometimes have functions that don't work. CRU had a function that normalized the data. When pumping sample data through the program they found that function did bad things to it (The data coming out was "artificial".) What did they do? They commented out the function (That is a way to turn the function off so it does nothing.) They left the bad function in the code for documentation along with a warning not to use it. This is normal and the responsible thing to do. Some people who are not programmers, spotted the warning and did not know the function was turned off.

Here is an example of what the code might look like:

...
Data = i*m;
/* Data=normalize(Data);

*** Do not use this normalize function. The results are artificial ****/

...

Nothing between the /* and the */ get executed. they are just notes so the next guy who comes along can understand what is happening.

I am sure that if people who hate Inhofe were to go over every email he has sent out over the past 10 years an take every word out of context, he would not come out looking all that great.

“EnvironMENTAList ”

Since: Feb 07

Near Detroit

#3 Jun 25, 2010
Ralf The Dog wrote:
Senator Inhofe is not qualified to have an opinion on the subject only a belief. He does not understand the language used by CRU. When talking about "Hiding the drop", they are talking about the best way of removing an artifact without compromising the data.
At one point in time, the method of recording temperatures changed from one day to the next. This caused a sudden drop in temperature. The drop was not a real drop, it was just a change in how they recorded the numbers. There are many ways you can compensate for that change. The discussion about the "Trick" was just talking about the best way to do it without causing other artifacts.
I use the term, "Trick" to describe cleaver ways of solving problems quite often. It is a normal part of a scientists vocabulary. "The trick to keeping the centrifuge from locking up is to give it a good whack on the left side when it gets to speed."
The other big thing everyone got upset about was a commented out function. When you write code, you sometimes have functions that don't work. CRU had a function that normalized the data. When pumping sample data through the program they found that function did bad things to it (The data coming out was "artificial".) What did they do? They commented out the function (That is a way to turn the function off so it does nothing.) They left the bad function in the code for documentation along with a warning not to use it. This is normal and the responsible thing to do. Some people who are not programmers, spotted the warning and did not know the function was turned off.
Here is an example of what the code might look like:
...
Data = i*m;
/* Data=normalize(Data);
*** Do not use this normalize function. The results are artificial ****/
...
Nothing between the /* and the */ get executed. they are just notes so the next guy who comes along can understand what is happening.
I am sure that if people who hate Inhofe were to go over every email he has sent out over the past 10 years an take every word out of context, he would not come out looking all that great.
It's been 24 years of wrong predictions and post climate gate it's fair to say that until we experience this crisis that they say we ARE experiencing, voters will continue to kill this CO2 Phobia insanity.
Support is gone and it's voters who dictate public science policy and taxes and personal sacrifices, not lab coat consultants of disco science.
Why do these new neocons of fear mongering wish, hope and pray for my kids to die on a dead planet.
There is growing rage against climate changers and judging by the few believers on this, the nets largest open forum on the subject, it's fair to say the end is near for this modern day witch burning of climate change. Now comes the justice and prosecutions and arrests of these enviro terrorists who tried to scare our kids for 24 years. Bring it on.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#4 Jun 25, 2010
Truth will out.
Glasnos

Fabens, TX

#5 Jun 25, 2010
Sunspot acrivity eerily quiet:

What the sun will do next is beyond our ability to predict. Most astronomers think that the solar cycle will proceed but at significantly depressed levels of activity, similar to those last seen in the 19th century. However, there is also evidence that the sun is inexorably losing its ability to produce sunspots. By 2015, they could be gone altogether, plunging us into a new Maunder minimum and perhaps a new Little Ice Age.
http://www.impactlab.com/2010/06/22/sunspot-a...

It seems the sun is not cooperating with scientists "computer models" ... hmmm ... where have we heard this before?

So which is it going to be ... warming ... or cooling?
If it is cooling ... should we be worried about CO2 levels?

Perhaps a little more study is in order before we do something really foolish?
Ralf The Dog

Oklahoma City, OK

#6 Jun 25, 2010
mememine69 wrote:
<quoted text>It's been 24 years of wrong predictions and post climate gate it's fair to say that until we experience this crisis that they say we ARE experiencing, voters will continue to kill this CO2 Phobia insanity.
Support is gone and it's voters who dictate public science policy and taxes and personal sacrifices, not lab coat consultants of disco science.
Why do these new neocons of fear mongering wish, hope and pray for my kids to die on a dead planet.
There is growing rage against climate changers and judging by the few believers on this, the nets largest open forum on the subject, it's fair to say the end is near for this modern day witch burning of climate change. Now comes the justice and prosecutions and arrests of these enviro terrorists who tried to scare our kids for 24 years. Bring it on.
I am not sure I get what you are saying. Global warming predictions have been a bit off, the values are rising faster than predicted. We know the exact value of the output of the sun. We know the average temperature of the Earth. We can plot them and watch the trend. When CO2 levels go up, the temperature goes up (The relationship is linear and matches 1 to 1). We have been at solar minimum for the past 10 years or so (as was predicted). Solar minimum is coming to an end. Unless we have quite a bit of volcanic activity over the next few years, it will get quite warm.

One note about tipping points and strange attractors. When you cross the threshold value and can see the change just by going outside, it is far to late to do anything about it.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#7 Jun 25, 2010
The relationship is not linear, as CO2 increases geometrically, temperature increase is arithmetic. Each CO2 molecule has less greenhouse effect than the previous, its self dampening.
Carl

Hennessey, OK

#8 Jun 25, 2010
It appears that whenever Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe opens his mouth it is on behalf of the pollution industry - they must pay well!
I personally wouldn't deny anyone the right to be skeptical, skepticism is healthy and progressive, if the first humans hadn't asked questions and experimented, we'd still be living in caves and hunting with stones.
There should come a point however, in every skeptics life when you at least acknowledge the other side could be right. If the other team is such august organizations as NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the world's multifarious climate scientists, you should present your case against them rather than just defending your position of, "I don't believe you", with a religious type of fanaticism.
I have yet to see, or hear Senator Inhofe present any kind of argument as to why he may be right, and as far as the planet is concerned his religious leanings tend to be towards the dark side!
James Inhofe's latest musings on smog and ozone are pretty much in line with his views on climate change - saving the planet is not good for the economy.
Half a century or so ago, Senator Inhofe at 75 years old would have been considered a very old man. Thanks to advances in technology, some of those advances in the area of controlling pollution, our life spans have increased, although clearly Mr. Inhofe is closer to the end of his allotted time than the beginning.
On those mornings when the air is thick and chewable, when you cannot see or hear a vehicle, yet you smell and choke on diesel fumes at a thousand paces, those toxic particles probably only make a few minutes of difference of life to an old set of lungs. But that same exposure for newly formed lungs is not conducive to good health.
While I agree, spending cash we don't have is not good economically, it becomes irrelevant if we don't have a future economy.
If our children and grandchildren can't breathe the air we leave them, have clean water or grow food, our own existence will have been pointless.
I too, like Senator Inhofe, am getting on a bit, so I'll be long gone by the time anything really bad happens, but I would like to think I'd at least given my offspring a fighting chance at survival!
Geolife

Oklahoma City, OK

#9 Jun 25, 2010
Geologist for 11 years, hold a Masters in Geology and a Bachelors in Earth Science...
...anthropogenic global warming (human-driven global warming) doesn't exist. The so called scientific evidence supporting this theory has been found to be altered, wrong and often times completely fabricated by a specific group in the scientific community. Why would they do this? Very simple, it's how they make their living, it's their income.
Unfortunately for the rest of the world, honesty doesn't always enter into their equation.
So while the mean temperature of the earth might be very slightly rising, man and the CO2 he generates has little to no influence.
Warming and cooling are natural phenomenon and both will continue long after the human race has gone the way of the dinosaur.
When in doubt just remember this fact......not too long ago (geologically speaking) the earth didn't have ice caps......and we weren't around to melt them.
Steve the displaced Okie

Statesboro, GA

#10 Jun 25, 2010
What the left wing loonies don't seem to understand is that the earth has gone through many climate changes over the last thousand or more years. As recently as 1970/71 the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland froze so thick they drove cars underneath the Bay Bridge. Back then the alarmists were screaming that man had made the earth colder.
What most people refuse to understand is that people like Al Gore and his buddy George Soros (CEO and owner of GC) stand to make billions over this scam. Take the "green"light bulbs, an incandescent light bulb costs around 1 to 3 dollars, the new fluorescent "green" bulb costs 5 to 10 dollars, thanks to, you guessed it GE, plus if you break the "green" bulb you need a Hazmat team to clean it up.
Conclusion, the more sheep George and Al can force to follow the more money they make.
Wake up to the scam.
Don

Cleveland, MS

#11 Jun 25, 2010
Thank you, Senator Inhofe!
Smarterthanyou

Montgomery, AL

#12 Jun 25, 2010
Tell will show Inofe is correct and global warming/climate change is all a fraud created to make the eco-terrorist money.

They thought we would just roll over and take what they said hook line and sinker and were shocked people starting asking for real scientific data that has not been altered.
Smarterthanyou

Montgomery, AL

#13 Jun 25, 2010
That should have read

Time will tell... in my previous post, for you grammar police out there.
Fun Facts

AOL

#14 Jun 25, 2010
Angel wrote:
If Global Warming is not occurring, then please explain why it is that Oklahoma Summers have gotten hotter and hotter every year for the past 11 years.
What is up with Senator Inhofe telling Senator Boxer, "It's over, gone, done. We won, you lost, get a life"? Is 12 years old?
You are confused. There is a difference between global warming and anthrpopogenic global warming.

Global warming is natural and happens on a cyclical basis. The rate of warming in the first half of the 20th centruy is equal if not sightly more than the last half of the 20th century. The earth has been warming up since the end of the Little Ice Age, approx 150 years ago.

Anthropogenic global warming, AGW, is the premise that the amount of CO2 generated by mankind has increased the temperature. This premise still has not been validated. No where can you find any science that shows that the amount of CO2 produced by man has/can/will change the climate.

Since: Sep 08

Neon City Oh.

#15 Jun 25, 2010
At the same time as NOAA says we have had the warmest spring on record.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/2010...

Inhoff and his cronies would be willing to kill off millions of people just to increase their own wealth.
tazzman

Newcastle, OK

#16 Jun 25, 2010
Does anyone remember december 26 to march of 2010.How cold and how much ice snow we had. They have just recently found out that the polar caps are the largest that they have been in 100 years.so who do you believe.Myself I wake up go outside,put the birdfood and deerfood out go to work and could'nt care a less whatanyone is saying about the weather change .If I'am breathing then it's a great day.
Hokie Okie

Montgomery, AL

#17 Jun 25, 2010
WDRussell wrote:
At the same time as NOAA says we have had the warmest spring on record.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/2010...
Inhoff and his cronies would be willing to kill off millions of people just to increase their own wealth.
Cool kill'em more money for me, and less unemployment. We can kill two birds with one stone become richer while reducing unemployment.
tazzman

Newcastle, OK

#18 Jun 25, 2010
Steve the displaced Okie wrote:
What the left wing loonies don't seem to understand is that the earth has gone through many climate changes over the last thousand or more years. As recently as 1970/71 the Chesapeake Bay in Maryland froze so thick they drove cars underneath the Bay Bridge. Back then the alarmists were screaming that man had made the earth colder.
What most people refuse to understand is that people like Al Gore and his buddy George Soros (CEO and owner of GC) stand to make billions over this scam. Take the "green"light bulbs, an incandescent light bulb costs around 1 to 3 dollars, the new fluorescent "green" bulb costs 5 to 10 dollars, thanks to, you guessed it GE, plus if you break the "green" bulb you need a Hazmat team to clean it up.Man well said and by the way al gore is king of idiots.
Conclusion, the more sheep George and Al can force to follow the more money they make.
Wake up to the scam.
Well said and by the way,AL GORE is king of idiots.
mayo420

Baltimore, MD

#19 Jun 25, 2010
Don wrote:
Thank you, Senator Inhofe!
Yes senator, thanks. You have shown just how many people will blindly follow someone who really hasn't got a solid clue one way or another what's going on.
Jessica

Oklahoma City, OK

#20 Jun 25, 2010
More of the uneducated expressing their opinions about things they truely know nothing about...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 22
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

James Inhofe Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News GOP chairman intensifies fight with White House... Dec '15 goonsquat 10
News On climate change, Republicans are truly except... Dec '15 serfs up 3
News Sen. Inhofe's 81st Birthday Present: Senate Vot... Nov '15 Patriot AKA Bozo 1
News Global warming deniers unimpressed with pope's ... (Jun '15) Aug '15 Earthling-1 126
News Pope Francis Expected To Blame Global Warming O... (Jun '15) Jul '15 don t drink the k... 6
News James Inhofe to Pope Francis: Shut up with your... (Jun '15) Jun '15 2all 42
News Obama cites public health in urging climate cha... (Jun '15) Jun '15 LeDuped 29
More from around the web