Dec 7, 2009

Rogers continues to deny the fact that global warming is a fact on behalf of Big Oil masters

After some nine years of Mike Rogers in Congress, the only thing we know for sure about the Brighton Republican is that he toes the GOP line until its no longer popular to dos so. His press release on the stolen emails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia that critics have dubiously claimed undermine the scientific consensus on climate change is just one more example.

Rogers backed every single Bush position until the approval ratings of the worst president in U.S. history plunged like a rock, and Rogers abandoned him like a rat from a sinking ship. Now, he has sunk to the role of just criticizing and blocking every solution to the problems his party created.

His press release printed almost verbatim in the Livingston County Daily Press & Argus is parroting the rightwing lie that global warming is a hoax. “He joined fellow congressional Republicans who raised questions about leaked e-mails from the researchers.”

First, they were not “leaked e-mails” they were stolen. Global warming deniers are basically taking one word out of context among 13 years of personal emails to prove their point. They ignore all the data from other agencies, like NASA, to make their case.

For years, thousands of scientists working at climate research centers throughout the world have carefully and rigorously reached a consensus on the extent of climate change, the urgency of the problem, and the role of human activity in causing it. A few distorted e-mail exchanges do not change that consensus.

In fact, last month Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, supported that claim: "There's nothing in the e-mails that shows that global warming is a hoax. ... There's no funding by nefarious groups. There's no politics in any of these things; nobody from the [United Nations] telling people what to do. There's nothing hidden, no manipulation. It's just scientists talking about science, and they're talking relatively openly as people in private e-mails generally are freer with their thoughts than they would be in a public forum. The few quotes that are being pulled out [are out] of context. People are using language used in science and interpreting it in a completely different way."

Rogers is a very good friend of big oil, and, in fact, he voted against ending taxpayer-funded subsidies for Big Oil and creating a Strategic Energy and Renewables Reserve. Is it any surprise he is a global warming denier? The right-wing groups leading the charge in attacking the science are the same old Big Oil-backed naysayers and their allies in Congress -like Rogers- who have been attacking climate science and fighting clean energy for decades.

The U.S. Department of Defense and the Central Intelligence Agency have identified climate change as a threat to our national security and have developed specific efforts to combat climate change.

The real indicator is the results of global warming. How to you ignore or lie that away?

According to a recent article by the Associated Press, “Since 1997 climate change has worsened and accelerated – beyond some of the grimmest of warnings made back then.”
The world's oceans have risen by about an inch and a half.

Droughts and wildfires have turned more severe worldwide, from the U.S. West to Australia to the Sahel desert of North Africa. Species now in trouble because of changing climate include, not just the lumbering polar bear which has become a symbol of global warming, but also fragile butterflies, colorful frogs and entire stands of North American pine forests. Temperatures over the past 12 years are 0.4 of a degree warmer than the dozen years leading up to 1997. Even the gloomiest climate models back in the 1990s didn't forecast results quite this bad so fast.

Scientists have uncovered a large expanse of "corrosive" water in the Canadian Arctic due to carbon pollution that is putting the marine food web at risk. "Unprecedented" rainfall in the United Kingdom has led to flooding of "biblical proportions" – a predicted consequence of global warming. "Unprecedented" heat, drought, and winds are causing "catastrophic" wildfires to sweep across eastern Australia – a predicted consequence of global warming.

The 2000s are on track to be nearly 0.2°C warmer than the 1990s. And that temperature jump is especially worrisome since the 1990s were only 0.14°C warmer than the 1980s. The world’s glaciers shrink for the 18th year. According to the University of Zurich ’s World Glacier Monitoring Service report in 2006 and 2007 the world’s glaciers lost 2 meters (2000 mm) of thickness on average. They note, “The new data continues the global trend in accelerated ice loss over the past few decades.” The rate of ice loss is twice as fast as a decade ago. Greenhouse gases, which are believed to be responsible for global warming, reached record highs in the Earth’s atmosphere in 2008, according to the U.N. weather agency.

The simple fact is Global Warming is real, and a few words taken out of context from thousands of stolen emails cannot change that fact. Even if you wanted to impeach the results from the CRU at the University of East Anglia, there are plenty of other respected scientists above reproach who hold the same position reached by independent and undisputed research and data. Here are a few:

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Global warming of the climate system is unequivocal and most of the observed increase in global temperatures since the mid-20th century is due to human-induced greenhouse gas emissions.

National Academy of Sciences: Even if carbon dioxide emissions were halted today, the world would continue warming with “irreversible” effects — including rising temperatures and sea levels—that will last for a millennium.

American Association for the Advancement of Science: The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society.

U.S. Global Change Research Program: Global temperature has increased over the past 50 years. This observed increase is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases.

American Physical Society: Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth’s climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well as methane, nitrous oxide and other gases. They are emitted from fossil fuel combustion and a range of industrial and agricultural processes. The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.

American Meteorological Society: Despite the uncertainties noted above, there is adequate evidence from observations and interpretations of climate simulations to conclude that the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; that humans have significantly contributed to this change; and that further climate change will continue to have important impacts on human societies, on economies, on ecosystems, and on wildlife through the 21st century and beyond.

American Geophysical Union: The Earth’s climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. . . . Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities.

American Quaternary Association: Few credible scientists now doubt that humans have influenced the documented rise in global temperatures since the Industrial Revolution.

The national science academies of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa: It is essential that world leaders agree on the emission reductions needed to combat negative consequences of anthropogenic climate change at the UNFCCC negotiations in Copenhagen in December 2009.

A group of 18 leading scientific organizations recently sent a letter to Senators affirming that climate change is happening.


Republican Michigander said...

Unless you believe the world is 6000 years old, who gives a damn about temperatures over a 10 or 20 year period. (BTW - The hottest year on record was 1988, I remember it well). I even see that they now change "global warming" to "climate change." This is pure political science. It warmed over a 20 year period! We're all gonna die!

There is no consensus. Those that say there is are simply not scientists because they forget the most basic of science, the scientific method taught in 6th grade. Theories are supposed to be tested, peer reviews, and tested further. Science should be free from political correctness, but that's not possible since governments fund most of it. Governments want power, and cap and trade and other measures put power in governments and not in people.

The earth is billions of years old. Climate on earth has been changing for years and years. Scotland was once much warmer than it is today, as is Greenland. They were also much colder than today as well with ice ages about 10,000 years ago, and even a mini ice age that lasted until the mid 1800's where glaciers moved slightly southward.

The biggest cause of climate changes is the sun. The next biggest is volcanoes. Volcanoes that emit tons of ash, sulfer, and other pollutants into the air, blocking the sun. That causes global cooling. Ocean currents, El Nino/La Nina is next.

I am not going to panick over 20 year or 120 year (with different temperature measurements) studies on this issue by the global warming pushers. Unless, I see real credible studies about climates over at least thousand if not millions of years, I will continue to be skeptical over this, and damn well opposed to anything that hampers a real problem. The economy.

Even if there is global warming, I'm not convinced it is a bad thing. More farms and food in Northern Michigan.

Communications guru said...

Sorry, there is a consensus. Those that say there is not global warming are simply not scientists, at least not independent scientists. Scientists all over the world agree, and the only ones that do not, work for oil companies.

Are you seriously going to claim that groups like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the U.S. Global Change Research Program, the American Physical Society, the American Meteorological Society, NASA, the American Geophysical Union, the American Quaternary Association and the national science academies of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa are not scientists who don’t know sixth grade science?

Stop making a fool of yourself.

“Global warming is not a bad thing? Would you consider the world's oceans rising,
more severe droughts and wildfires, the world’s glaciers shrinking and the oceans becoming more acidic because more of the carbon dioxide in the air is being absorbed into the water a band thing? The good news is most of the world does.

bluzie said...

I am so glad we have an adult in the White House. We will now join the rest of the world in solving the climate crisis and begin to tranistion to a clean energy economy. The E.P.A. declared green house gasses harmful and they will be regulated. We will end our dependence on foreign oil and quit blowing up mountains for coal. It is a good thing Dan.

Not Anonymous said...

More than 1200 limos and more than 140 private jets for the "global warming" summit by those that are still crying about the man made global warming hoax.

If those that claim to care about solving the global warming problem can't control themselves, you really have to wonder what their motivation is. Well, that's not true. I know what their motivation is, and it's not to solve the hoax of man made global warming.

Oh, and the polar bear population has been on the rise, not the decline. Oh, and the data you referred to doesn't exist. It was destroyed. I wonder if they used the same dumpster and shredder that ACORN used in San Diego and Oklahoma.

bluzie said...

There is no one saying, you cannot ride in a limo or fly on a jet to Denmark. What is being said is we must transistion to clean energy, for our National Security, to become energy independent and to stop the climate crisis. The fact that you still deny this climate change is unbelievable, why do you with Alaska is losing the perma-frost and chunks of land are falling into the ocean? Why are our glaciers melting and our seas rising? What is wrong with becoming energy independent? What do you have against a clean enery economy and the jobs that it will create?

Communications guru said...

I’ve seen this rightwing talking point about the alleged “More than 1200 limos and more than 140 private jets” all over the righting blogosphere, including the republican Michigander. Exactly what does it mean?

And what is the motivation, anonymous, for the world wanting to save the planet?

What does ACORN have to do with this? I know you hate them for actually having the audacity to empower poor people and helping them have a decent roof over their heads, but they have nothing to do with this debate.

I have no idea what data you are talking about, but there are plenty of scientists that have been collecting data on global warming, and that’s why there is a consensus among the world’s scientists about global warming, and why just today the EPA declared greenhouse gases a danger to public health.

Johnny C said...

The problem with Republican Michigander and Not believes whatever Sean Hannity or Rush tells them not people that actually know science.

Not Anonymous said...

I'm not surprised that you have those questions. After all, you don't seem to understand diddley anyway.

The earth has not warmed since 1997. We're not going to get flooded out.

Chunks of ice are falling off? Gee, did anyone think that maybe the icebergs have grown and are now shedding that added ice? After all, it was just 35 years ago that the US government was backing the idea that we were going into the Ice age and we had to fight global cooling. Let me guess, when the government said we were to fight global cooling you drove an extra ten miles everyday to try to warm it up.

If you have no idea about what I'm talking about when I say that data was destroyed, then I'd have to say that you're even more uninformed than I gave you credit for in the past.

There is no such thing as man made global warming. Even you with all of your hot air cannot generate enough to ruin this earth.

The world now knows it was a hoax. The EPA is a government arm of Obama. Of course they are going to claim it's dangerous so the socialist obama's agenda is furthered.

Cap and Tax is not a job creator, it's a job killer. But I do admire the way you socialist democrats stick to your guns (oh, sorry, guns are bad, I forgot). Obama's numbers are hitting new lows and you're in danger of losign the House and Senate in less than a year.

When you stop driving cars, using your stoves and furnaces, riding buses, flying in planes and so on, I might actually believe that you're serious about man made global warming. But even saying "climate change" now instead of global warming just goes to show that even the socialist democrats are getting nervous because the numbers and the data is not supporting your positions.

bluzie said...

Chunks of earth are falling into the ocean. The perma frost is melting. No Cap and Trade are needed now that the E.P.A. is going to regulate.
I don't see Republicans numbers being better than Democrats so really I am not worried.
There will tens of thousands of new jobs created by clean energy technology. I don't know any Dems against guns, that is just something you all love to say and the your ridiculous fear of your guns being taken away. Now that is something that is dreamed up so the weak of mind can buy more guns, sort of like Cabbage Patch dolls. Nutty Republicans, no one wants your guns, but there are those who want to sell you more!
You applauded an administration that drove this country in the ditch for 8 years and you want to just stay there. Sorry, the grownups are in charge now and you can Tea Party all you want but we are going to join the rest of the world in solving this climate crisis for your kids and ours.

bluzie said...

Isn't being energy independent something we can all wrap our arms around?
Isn't a new clean energy economy with tens of thousands of jobs it will create good for all of us?

This is what the clean energy legislation is all about.

What's not to love?

Republican Michigander said...

Johnny, I have no damn idea what Rush Limbaugh or Hannity said. The 1200 limos came from the London Telegraph which does a good job covering international stories that your leftist media here does not cover.

Bluzie - you again trot out the no democrats are against guns line, but the voting records say otherwise. Stabenow and Levin are 100% against the Second Amendment. Obama was a former board member of the Joyce Foundation ( which is one of the bankrollers of the anti-rights movement.

As far as global warming goes, when I see credible information that says that CO2...which is what we breathe, is the cause and problem of the earth warming, and that it is not due to natural cycles, then I'll start listening. The credible information can't be some bullshit 20 year study, or 150 year study, like every single one I have looked it. I'm not a young earth creationist that believes the world is 6000 years old. 150 years - right after coming out of what some call the mini ice age that lasted until the 1800's - is a drop in the bucket in Earth's history, which has had several periods of warmings and coolings.

I'll look at the information, and make up my own damn mind on it. I don't take someone with a fancy title's word for it. I'll be the judge and the jury based on the evidence.

bluzie said...

I really don't like calling people out on bold faced lies, because I truly believe the person sincerely believes his story, but Dan I will repeat, I make my living working to elect Democrats and your opinion about Dems and guns just is NOT TRUE. Democrats do not have a secret agenda to overturn the Second Ammendment. There is not one ounce of truth to that and the fact that you have to make stuff up about Democrats is stunning, certainly you have the brains and the communication skills to debate your opinions without resorting to wild accusations. Senator Debbie Stabenow and Senator Carl Levin are not against the Second Ammendment. If they were, Democrats would not vote for them. I would hear it when they speak and read it on their literature. Democrats are quite outspoken and free about their opinions. Regulating and being against something are two very different things. You know this, yet it is not how you present it, why?

Not Anonymous said...

THank God for Global Warming. Without it, the six inch snow storm we're expecting this afternoon would have been more like 15 inches.

I do believe in Climate change. For instance, the climate changes when the sun moves closer and higher in the sky. We call that summer. As the sun moves down towards the horizon and further away, we have another climate change. It's called "winter".

Today, we get real climate change. First it's snow, then it warms up and it becomes rain, then it gets cold again and it's called snow again. You can easily identify the two. Rain is clear in color. Snow is white.

Republican Michigander said...

Bluzie, I don't want to hijack this further away from global warming, but I will respond to this.

I know you're paid to elect democrats. As such you want to downplay the democrats who are bad on guns, like Levin and Stabenow. I know not all democrats are bad on guns. Cherry's bad on economics, but he won't harm the second amendment. Granholm's rating has improved on that issue as well, largely I suspect due to Cherry's influence on the issue and the reduction of Mike Duggan's influence.

As far as Carl Levin goes, he's a gun grabber, and his own website spells it out. He's no different than Schumer, Kennedy, or Mike DeWine (an anti republican) on that issue. His floor statements are in the archives.

Stabenow voted on the ugly gun ban, ammo ban, and gun show ban (and McCain was not endorsed by our PAC due to the gun show ban). That's on record. She votes with Levin on the issues. Nothing she says otherwise changes that. If she changes her votes in the future, we'll reexamine her record.

I am one of several members of a state level 2nd Amendment PAC which includes democrats, republicans, and independents. We have our own system and do not look at NRA ratings. We never ask party affiliation, and the only time it is an issue is in primary elections. We've endorsed several democrats in the past. Polidori, LeBlanc, McDowell (in a Republican leaning district), Miller (in a very marginal district), Gonzales, Angerer (another marginal district), and Mayes come to mind immediately.

Some republicans have received unacceptable records as well. Most notably Mitt Romney who talks a good game, but signed a gun ban as Massachusetts governor. Joe Schwarz was our top target, as most of the PAC members are in what was his district.

I don't need to make up what's on Levin's website,, or on the sites. Roll call votes tell the story.

Communications guru said...

I know you’re not the sharpest tool in the shed, anonymous, but there is a big difference between weather and climate. You might want to look it up.

Communications guru said...

How ridiculous. Anyone who supports common sense gun control is a “gun grabber.” There are limits on the most important Amendment un the Billof Rights, the 1st Amendment, but I don’t see irrational screaming about “speech grabbers” from the likes of people like you.

bluzie said...

I went straight to Senator Levin's website ans looked up his position on gun laws. He is very clear and forth coming about his stand on these issues and nowhere does he say he is 100% against the second ammendment. That statement is 100% false, he is for regulation. Regulation is far different from being against the right to bear arms. I rest my case.
Today's topic is clean energy and comprehensive climate protection legislation and I am 100% behind this and jobs it will bring to Michigan. Arguing over stolen emails between friends that we haven't been privy to seems like an excuse to drag your feet to stay in the era of fossil fuels rather than move forward to a clean energy economy.

bluzie said...

Read this and weep all you naysayers and those who refuse to accept the climate crisis:News today: finds claims of climate change deniers in stolen email controversy “unfounded,” writing,

“E-mails being cited as "smoking guns" have been misrepresented. For instance, one e-mail that refers to "hiding the decline" isn’t talking about a decline in actual temperatures as measured at weather stations. These have continued to rise, and 2009 may turn out to be the fifth warmest year ever recorded. The "decline" actually refers to a problem with recent data from tree rings.”

Communications guru said...

Thanks Bluzie. The problem is these people will contie to pass their lies off as fact until we get tired of debunking them.

bluzie said...

We must never get tired of debunking their outrageous lies. It is a disgrace and it is just as digraceful if we let them get away with it. Honestly, I can't think of one lie we say about them. I would be ashamed if I had no policy or issues than to be against anything and everything the Dems stand for.
When they begin loving their families and their country more than they hate the Dems they will finally gain my respect. All I see and here are lies or exaggerations so outrageous that they may as well be called lies.