Friday, January 30, 2009

Inhofe Alarmed About Low Levels of Infrastructure Funding in Stimulus Bills

Posted 1/29/09

WASHINGTON, DC – Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, commented today on the insufficient infrastructure funding in both the House and Senate Stimulus bills. Senator Inhofe also released a letter he sent last week with EPW Chairman Boxer and committee members Sen. Baucus and Sen. Voinovich to Senate Appropriators stressing the importance of robust infrastructure funding.  

"Whenever I hear people talk about the stimulus, the first thing they mention is infrastructure and ready to go projects,” Inhofe said. “Yet I’m concerned that the amounts of money for infrastructure in both House and Senate Appropriations bills are alarmingly low considering the total package is over $800 billion.  I want to make sure that the stimulus bills adequately fund our deteriorating infrastructure. There needs to be truth in advertising. You can't say the stimulus is an infrastructure investment bill when highway improvement makes up less than 4% of both the House and Senate’s proposed packages. I am working with a number of Senators from both sides of the aisle to craft an amendment to dramatically increase the level of highway investment in the Stimulus.”

Background:  

In a letter sent to Senate Appropriators last week by Senator Inhofe, along with EPW Chairman Boxer and committee members Sen. Baucus and Sen. Voinovich, stressed the importance of robust infrastructure funding being provided in any stimulus package that comes from Congress.  The letter was in response to concern over the inadequate $30 billion funding level for the Federal-Aid Highways program included in the House Appropriations Committee stimulus bill released on January 15th.  The Senate Appropriations Committee stimulus bill includes only $27 billion for highways and bridges.       

The following are excerpts from the January 23, 2009, letter addressed to the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Inouye, and Ranking Member Senator Cochran:  

*Transportation infrastructure is one of the best forms of stimulus spending that the government has at its disposal. The economic benefits from transportation investment include both the immediate job creation from construction in addition to the long term economic benefits associated with the completed project. According to economists, every $1 billion spent on infrastructure adds $3.4 billion to the gross domestic product. There is obviously an economic need for a stimulus and infrastructure investment can clearly deliver the needed results. 

*The Department of Transportation recently estimated that for every $1 billion invested in highways and bridges at the Federal level, which is also matched by state funding, 34,800 jobs are created or maintained. We believe that the appropriate level of highway funding in the stimulus should create or maintain at least 2 million American jobs. 

*According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, the backlog of needed projects to simply maintain the current highway and bridge network is $495 billion.  This includes projects that are ready to go as well as those that are not as far along in the process.   

*Given the large number of ready to go highway projects and the economic benefits of highway investment, we believe the level of highway investment should be at least 10 percent of the total stimulus package.  

# # #

 

 

James Hansen's Former NASA Supervisor Declares Himself a Skeptic - Says Hansen "Embarrassed NASA"

Posted 1/27/09

James Hansen’s Former NASA Supervisor Declares Himself a Skeptic 

Says Hansen ‘Embarrassed NASA’ & ‘Was Never Muzzled’ 

Gore Faces More Scientific Blowback  

Also See: Gore’s Inconvenient Astronaut: NASA Moonwalker Defies Gore's Claim That Skeptics Are Akin To Those Who Believe Moon Landing was 'Staged'   

[ See: Senator Inhofe’s YouTube Clip on Hansen’s former supervisor: ]

 

Washington DC: NASA warming scientist James Hansen, one of former Vice President Al Gore’s closest allies in the promotion of man-made global warming fears, is being publicly rebuked by his former supervisor at NASA.

Retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist Dr. John S. Theon, the former supervisor of James Hansen, NASA’s vocal man-made global warming fears soothsayer, has now publicly declared himself a skeptic and declared that Hansen “embarrassed NASA” with his alarming climate claims and said Hansen was “was never muzzled.”  Theon joins the rapidly growing ranks of international scientists abandoning the promotion of anthropogenic global warming fears. [See: U.S. Senate Minority Report Update: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims & See Prominent Scientist Fired By Gore Says Warming Alarm ‘Mistaken’  &  Gore laments global warming efforts: 'I've failed badly' - Washington Post – November 11, 2008  ]

 

“I appreciate the opportunity to add my name to those who disagree that global warming is man-made,” Theon wrote to the Minority Office at the Environment and Public Works Committee on January 15, 2009. “I was, in effect, Hansen's supervisor because I had to justify his funding, allocate his resources, and evaluate his results. I did not have the authority to give him his annual performance evaluation,Theon, the former Chief of the Climate Processes Research Program at NASA Headquarters and former Chief of the Atmospheric Dynamics & Radiation Branch explained. [Note: Here are the results a Google Scholar search on Theon. - Theon's complete written correspondence to EPW reprinted at the end of this report. ]

 

 

“Hansen was never muzzled even though he violated NASA's official agency position on climate forecasting (i.e., we did not know enough to forecast climate change or mankind's effect on it). Hansen thus embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress,” Theon wrote.  [Note: NASA scientist James Hansen who runs NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) has created worldwide media frenzy with his dire climate warnings, his call for trials against those who dissent against man-made global warming fear, and his claims that he was allegedly muzzled by the Bush administration despite doing 1,400 on-the-job media interviews - See: Don’t Panic Over Predictions of Climate Doom - Get the Facts on James Hansen  & UK Guardian: NASA scientist calls for putting oil firm chiefs on trial for 'high crimes against humanity' for spreading doubt about man-made global warming – June 23, 2008 &  NYT's Revkin chides Hansen for promoting sea level claims that are at upper boundary of what is 'even physically possible' (Note: Headline re: Revkin and Hansen corrected) ]

 

Theon declared “climate models are useless.” “My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit,” Theon explained. “Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it. They have resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy,” he added.

 

“As Chief of several of NASA Headquarters’ programs (1982-94), an SES position, I was responsible for all weather and climate research in the entire agency, including the  research work by James Hansen, Roy Spencer, Joanne Simpson, and several hundred other scientists at NASA field centers, in academia, and in the private sector who worked on climate research,” Theon wrote of his career. “This required a thorough understanding of the state of the science. I have kept up with climate science since retiring by reading books and journal articles,” Theon added. (LINK) Theon also co-authored the book Advances in Remote Sensing Retrieval Methods.

 

Hansen 'is a political activist who spreads fear'

Award-winning NASA Astronaut and Physicist Walter Cunningham of NASA’s Apollo 7 also recently chastised Hansen. “Hansen is a political activist who spreads fear even when NASA’s own data contradict him,” Cunningham wrote in an essay in the July/August 2008 issue of Launch Magazine. “NASA should be at the forefront in the collection of scientific evidence and debunking the current hysteria over human-caused, or Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). Unfortunately, it is becoming just another agency caught up in the politics of global warming, or worse, politicized science,” Cunningham wrote.

 

[Note: Theon joins many current and former NASA scientists in dissenting from man-made climate fears. A small sampling includes: Aerospace engineer and physicist Dr. Michael Griffin, the former  top administrator of NASA, Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and is formerly of NASA, Geophysicist Dr. Phil Chapman, an astronautical engineer and former NASA astronaut, Award-Winning NASA Astronaut/Geologist and Moonwalker Jack Schmitt, Chemist and Nuclear Engineer Robert DeFayette was formerly with NASA’s Plum Brook Reactor, Hungarian Ferenc Miskolczi, an atmospheric physicist with 30 years of experience and a former researcher with NASA's Ames Research Center, Climatologist Dr. John Christy, Climatologist Dr. Roy W. Spencer, Atmospheric Scientist Ross Hays of NASA's Columbia Scientific Balloon Facility]

 

 Gore faces a much different scientific climate in 2009 than the one he faced in 2006 when his film An Inconvenient Truth was released. According to satellite data, the Earth has cooled since Gore’s film was released,  Antarctic sea ice extent has grown to record levels, sea level rise has slowed, ocean temperatures have failed to warm, and more and more scientists have publicly declared their dissent from man-made climate fears as peer-reviewed studies continue to man-made counter warming fears. [See: Peer-Reviewed Study challenges 'notion that human emissions are responsible for global warming' & New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears ]

“Vice President Gore's and the other promoters of man-made climate fears' endless claims that the 'debate is over' appear to be ignoring scientific reality,” Senator James Inhofe, Ranking Member of the Environment & Public Works Committee.

A U.S. Senate Minority Report released in December 2008 details over 650 international scientists who are dissenting from man-made global warming fears promoted by the UN. Many of the scientists profiled are former UN IPCC scientists and former believers in man-made climate change that have reversed their views in recent years. The report continues to grow almost daily. We have just received a request from an Italian scientist, and a Czech scientist to join the 650 dissenting scientists report. A chemist from the U.S. Naval Academy is about to be added, and more Japanese scientists are dissenting. Finally, many more meteorologists will be added and another former UN IPCC scientist is about to be included. These scientists are openly rebelling against the climate orthodoxy promoted by Gore and the UN IPCC.

The prestigious International Geological Congress, dubbed the geologists' equivalent of the Olympic Games, was held in Norway in August 2008 and prominently featured the voices of scientists skeptical of man-made global warming fears. Reports from the conference found that Skeptical scientists overwhelmed the meeting, with  '2/3 of presenters and question-askers hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC' ( See full reports here & here ]  In addition, a 2008 canvass of more than 51,000 Canadian scientists revealed 68% disagree that global warming science is “settled.”   A November 25, 2008, article in Politico noted that a “growing accumulation” of science is challenging warming fears, and added that the “science behind global warming may still be too shaky to warrant cap-and-trade legislation.”  More evidence that the global warming fear machine is breaking down. Russian scientists “rejected the very idea that carbon dioxide may be responsible for global warming”. An American Physical Society editor conceded that a “considerable presence” of scientific skeptics exists.  An International team of scientists countered the UN IPCC, declaring: “Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate”.  India Issued a report challenging global warming fears.  International Scientists demanded the UN IPCC “be called to account and cease its deceptive practices.”  

The scientists and peer-reviewed studies countering climate claims are the key reason that the U.S. public has grown ever more skeptical of man-made climate doom predictions. [See: Global warming ranks dead last, 20 out of 20 in new Pew survey. Pew Survey  & Survey finds majority of U.S. Voters - '51% — now believe that humans are not the predominant cause of climate change' - January 20, 2009 - Rasmussen Reports ]  

 

The chorus of skeptical scientific voices grow louder in 2008 as a steady stream of peer-reviewed studies, analyses, real world data and inconvenient developments challenged the UN’s and former Vice President Al Gore's claims that the "science is settled" and there is a "consensus."

On a range of issues, 2008 proved to be challenging for the promoters of man-made climate fears.  Promoters of anthropogenic warming fears endured the following: Global temperatures failing to warm; Peer-reviewed studies predicting a continued lack of warminga failed attempt to revive the discredited “Hockey Stick”; inconvenient developments and studies regarding rising CO2; the Spotless Sun; Clouds; Antarctica; the Arctic; Greenland’s ice; Mount Kilimanjaro; Global sea ice; Causes of Hurricanes; Extreme Storms; Extinctions; Floods; Droughts; Ocean Acidification; Polar Bears; Extreme weather deaths; Frogs; lack of atmospheric dust; Malaria; the failure of oceans to warm and rise as predicted

Theon’s complete written correspondence to EPW reprinted below:  

-----Original Message-----
From: Jtheon [mailto:jtheon@XXXXXXX]
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 10:05 PM
To: Morano, Marc (EPW)

Subject: Climate models are useless 

Marc, First, I sent several e-mails to you with an error in the address and they have been returned to me. So I'm resending them in one combined e-mail. 

Yes, one could say that I was, in effect, Hansen’s supervisor because I had to justify his funding, allocate his resources, and evaluate his results. I did not have the authority to give him his annual performance evaluation. He was never muzzled even though he violated NASA’s official agency position on climate forecasting (i.e., we did not know enough to forecast climate change or mankind's effect on it). He thus embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming in 1988 in his testimony before Congress. 

My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit. Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results. In doing so, they neither explain what they have modified in the observations, nor explain how they did it. They have resisted making their work transparent so that it can be replicated independently by other scientists. This is clearly contrary to how science should be done. Thus there is no rational justification for using climate model forecasts to determine public policy. 

With best wishes, John 

# #  

From: Jtheon [mailto:jtheon@XXXXXX]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 12:50 PM
To: Morano, Marc (EPW)

Subject: Re: Nice seeing you

Marc, Indeed, it was a pleasure to see you again. I appreciate the opportunity to add my name to those who disagree that Global Warming is man made.  A brief bio follows. Use as much or as little of it as you wish. 

John S. Theon Education: B.S. Aero. Engr. (1953-57); Aerodynamicist, Douglas Aircraft Co. (1957-58); As USAF Reserve Officer (1958-60),B.S. Meteorology (1959); Served as Weather Officer 1959-60; M.S, Meteorology (1960-62); NASA Research Scientist, Goddard Space Flight Ctr. (1962-74); Head Meteorology Branch, GSFC (1974-76); Asst. Chief, Lab. for Atmos. Sciences, GSFC (1977-78);  Program Scientist, NASA Global Weather Research Program, NASA Hq. (1978-82); Chief, Atmospheric Dynamics & Radiation Branch NASA Hq., (1982-91); Ph.D.,  Engr. Science & Mech.: course of study and dissertation in atmos. science (1983-85); Chief, Atmospheric Dynamics, Radiation, & Hydrology Branch, NASA Hq. (1991-93); Chief, Climate Processes Research Program, NASA Hq. (1993-94); Senior Scientist, Mission to Planet Earth Office, NASA Hq. (1994-95); Science Consultant, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (1995-99); Science Consultant  Orbital Sciences Corp. (1996-97) and NASA Jet Propulsion Lab., (1997-99).      

As Chief of several NASA Hq. Programs (1982-94), an SES position, I was responsible for all weather and climate research in the entire agency, including the  research work by James Hansen, Roy Spencer, Joanne Simpson, and several hundred other scientists at NASA field centers, in academia, and in the private sector who worked on climate research. This required a thorough understanding of the state of the science. I have kept up with climate  science since retiring by reading books and journal articles. I hope that this is helpful.   

Best wishes, John   

# # #  

 

Inhofe Response to Obama Administration Action on California Waiver

Posted 01/26/09

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, commented today on the Obama Administration’s directive to have EPA revaluate it’s denial of proposed California greenhouse gas tailpipe regulation to control air quality emissions for motor vehicles.  

“It’s unfortunate that the administration believes a patchwork of state regulations is better than a single national fuel economy standard. This is a crippling mandate for the ailing auto industry,” Senator Inhofe said. “Why attempt to bail out the auto industry on one hand and on the other mandate regulations that will further raise costs and result in more job losses in the industry? 

“The potential granting of this waiver could authorize an untested, state-by-state regulatory program that could undermine the national CAFE standard, thus creating a patchwork of regulatory compliance obligations that would provide marginal, if any, benefit from a greenhouse gas reduction standpoint,  but would tremendously increase costs and burdens on interstate commerce and on the automobile industry. It is a political exercise that attempts to address a global issue with a statewide solution that undermines a carefully crafted and newly revised national fuel economy standard.”  

Background: 

Generally, the Clean Air Act (CAA) establishes a uniform, federal standard for the regulation of emissions from motor vehicles.  Section 209 of the CAA does allow California to adopt and enforce air quality emission standards for new motor vehicles in certain limited circumstances; however, all of the waiver requests EPA has received from California in the past refer to smog or to closely related pollution problems that had specific localized effects within the state.  

Related Links:  

Opening Statement: Hearing on “Examining the Case for the California Waiver” – July 26, 2007 

Inhofe Opening Statement: Oversight Hearing on EPA’s Decision to Deny the California Waiver – January 24, 2008  

INHOFE BLASTS CALIFORNIA POLICYMAKERS FOR HYPOCRISY & REVEALS THE STATE HAS BEEN COOLING FOR TWO DECADES – May 22, 2007  

  # # #

NASA Moonwalker Defies Gore's Claim That Climate Skeptics Believe Moon Landing was "Staged"

Posted 01/27/09

Also See: BREAKING: NASA Warming Scientist's Former Boss Declares Himself a Skeptic - Says Climate Fears 'Embarrassed NASA'  

[See Senator Inhofe’s YouTube Clip of “Gore’s Inconvenient Astronaut:]

 

 

Gore’s frequent comparison of global warming skeptics to people who "believe the moon landing was actually staged in a movie lot in Arizona" was delivered a major blow when Moonwalker and Award-Winning

NASA Astronaut/Geologist Jack Schmitt who flew on the Apollo 17 mission declared he was a skeptic. "The ‘global warming scare’ is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making. It has no place in the Society's activities," Schmitt said. See: Astronaut Jack Schmitt Joins Skeptics & For Gore, a very inconvenient moonwalker.

The question looms: How can Gore link skeptics to people who believed the moon landing was "staged" when one of the moonwalkers himself is a man-made global warming skeptic?

Schmitt is featured in the U. S. Senate Minority Report: More Than 650 (and rapidly growing) International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

Below is Schmitt’s full entry in the Senate’s 650 Plus Scientist Report:

Award-Winning NASA Astronaut/Geologist and Moonwalker Jack Schmitt, formerly of the Norwegian Geological Survey and the U.S. Geological Survey, who flew on the Apollo 17 mission, has received numerous awards in his career including the Space Center Superior Achievement Award and the NASA Distinguished Service Medal. Schmitt, a member of the Geological Society of America, American Geophysical Union, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, rejected man-made climate change concerns in 2008. "The ‘global warming scare’ is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making. It has no place in the Society's activities," Schmitt wrote on November 17, 2008. "As a geologist, I love Earth observations. But it is ridiculous to tie this objective to a "consensus" that humans are causing global warming when human experience, geologic data and history, and current cooling can argue otherwise. ‘Consensus,’ as many have said, merely represents the absence of definitive science," Schmitt explained.

 

# #