Celebrate Flat Earth Day With James Inhofe!

It wouldn't be Earth Day without a diatribe from the US Senate's anti-science curmudgeon, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK). He didn't disappoint. The Senate Minority Environment and Public Works committee website shouts at us in large red font, (IN CASE YOU MISSED IT), and gives us the text of his editorial in today's Washington Times.

He writes about “America's Climate Security Act of 2007 ” (a.k.a. the Lieberman-Warner bill). He claims , among many other things, that he opposes the bill because it would “be devastating to the economy” and “impose severe economic constraints on American families and American workers”, and that his main concern is “carbon regulation”, i.e., the big bad government versus the financially strapped energy companies (that last part was sarcasm, by the way).

And then he really gets into it with - you guessed it - the Great Climate Science Plot Against The Energy Companies.

He's very concerned, you see:

More troubling yet is that man-made climate fears are being used to expand the sizes and scope of the federal government in other new and inventive ways. In addition to the proposed Lieberman-Warner bill, we have watched over the past year as liberal special interests have employed hundreds of lawyers to try and convert current environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Clean Air Act into climate laws. Their attempt to list the polar bear as a threatened species is not about protecting the bear but about using the ESA to achieve global warming policy that they cannot otherwise achieve through the legislative process. The implications of such a policy would lead to drastic increases in litigation and employ teams of lawyers ready to find ways to shut down energy production.

We've discussed in detail the pros and cons of the bill, as have other energy and climate bloggers , and we'll continue to discuss it as time goes on. But our opposition has nothing to do with capitalism, which is Inhofe's primary concern (he cites numbers from a study done by an Exxon front group, in fact).

As usual, Inhofe is concerned about his oil and coal company friends.

Our concerns are based on how effective the bill will be in the fight to stop climate change.

We're worried about the future of the planet, which is what Earth Day is all about… and what should be on everyone's mind, every day.


It takes a lot of integrety as a politician to stand up to MSM and the AGW Industry special intrest groups.
Thank you Mr Inhofe.
Like most GW realists I am all in favour of cleaning up the environment and cutting wast.
So in Sen. Inhofe.
We want a better world.
Where we differ is in the use of mythology and fear to drive political agendas.
AGW is all about money, power and control and not at all about the climate.
Sen. Inhofe has the strength of character to point this out in a world that has gone off the deep end with a fad Low carbon diet.
Bravo bravo.

Real environmental progress will be achieved by telling the truth, not by pushing lies and hype.

Just ask any one of the 500+ prominent scientists on the now famous Inhofe list.
Smear them all you want.
Their credentials speak for them selves.

the good news….. The tide is indeed turning.
Stay tuned.

As I was saying, the tide is turning…..

A once staunch AGW propoganda source is now….
Wait for it…….


More …. much more to follow

Approved by the Vatican and written by
Cardinal George Pell
Archbishop of Sydney


I wasn’t expecting the tide to be turning this fast.

Sorry for the very late comment.

That article says that the GISS reported 2007 temperatures down by .7 degrees C.

That seems to be incorrect. This link at NASA


–says that it tied with 1998 for the second hottest year on record behind 2005 (but not 2006). In other words, 2007 was hotter than 2006.

It also notes that 2007 was a solar minimum year and that “…in the current era of rapidly increasing GHGs, such solar variations [as the one suggested in The Autralian story] cannot have a substantial impact on long-term global warming trends.”

If I recall history correctly, it was the deniers and sceptics of their age who challenged the consensus view that the earth was flat. Science is not about consensus. That’s an obvious statement but its meaning seems to be lost on the fans of this PR-firm echo chamber.