On Wednesday, U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, stood in support of Whitehouse Amendment #29 to legislation S.1, which read “climate change is real and is not a hoax.” Not only did he request to be a co-sponsor of the amendment, but he urged his party to vote for the amendment. The amendment passed 98-1.
“The climate is changing, as it always has been changing, and always will, there’s archeological evidence of that, there’s biblical evidence of that, there’s historic evidence of that, it will always change,” Inhofe said.
Inhofe went on to explain the term "climate change" and how modern climate change discussions focus on climate trends post-1900. In reality, climate change has occurred since the beginning of time. In the past 2000 years, there was the Medieval Warming Period followed immediately by the Little Ice Age. Both climate events are widely recognized in scientific literature, including National Academy of Science’s 2006 study. In 1975, Newsweek published an article titled “The Cooling World,” which argued that global temperatures were falling. We continue to see climate shifts, including a 17-year hiatus in global temperature increase (source: The Economist and Nature).
As the President seeks to address the far-left’s belief that man is driving the change in climate, Inhofe highlighted a NERA study that estimates the result of their efforts as it pertains to the proposed greenhouse gas regulation on new power plants. The study says the climate mandate would only reduce atmospheric CO2 concentrations by less than 1/2 of a percent, reduce global average temperature by less than 2/100th of a degree, and reduce the rise of sea levels by 1/100th of an inch – or the thickness of three sheets of paper. In the mean time, this same report says that such efforts by the Obama Administration will cost Americans $479 billion in compliance cost and double-digit increase in electricity costs across the nation over the next decade.
As Inhofe asked in his State of the Union response, why the pain for no gain?
Here are what others are saying about the Senate’s vote acknowledging climate change is real
FOX News' Monica Crowley: “Nicely played, Jim Inhofe”
Red State' Erick Erickson: “I agree with the Senate. The climate does change!”
Radio pundit Jamie Dupree: “Inhofe outflanks Democrats on climate change on Senate floor and in committee. In the space of a few hours, the Republican that Democrats hate the most when it comes to climate change had both outfoxed them on the Senate floor and reminded the Obama Administration that a new Climate Sheriff was in town”
Michelle Malkin's Twitchy: “Senate Democrats reject logic in order to paint Inhofe as inconsistent on climate. Watch what the left does to the language. Conflating “climate change” with “man caused climate change” is the epitome of unscientific thinking—see also “stem cell research” vs “embryonic stem cell research” or “anti-immigration” vs anti-illegal immigration.” They treat objectively different concepts as if they were interchangeable. Scientifically speaking, there are only two possible reasons for this. They are either ignorant about the topics, or they are being intentionally deceptive. Either way, their credibility is lacking.”
The Blaze: "But Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) foiled the Democrats’ plot by openly declaring his support for the amendment, and even asking that he be made a cosponsor of the language. When he made that request, Democrats could be heard clapping and hooting in the Senate chamber. But the more important vote came soon after, when the Senate considered language from Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii). His amendment says climate change is happening, and that it is “extremely likely that global increases in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations and global temperatures are caused by human activities.
POLITICO: “Senate Republicans head-faked Democrats on climate change Wednesday, agreeing in a floor vote that the planet’s climate was changing, but blocking language that would have blamed human activity."
Washington Post: “Jim Inhofe flips the script on Democratic climate-change-is-a-hoax vote. When offered the chance to speak on the amendment, Inhofe -- did we detect a twinkle in his eye? -- explained his unexpected argument. The climate changes all the time, he said, citing both scientific and "Biblical evidence." There was a hoax: the idea that man was responsible. Such a position was "arrogant," in his formulation, the idea that people could affect the mechanisms that controlled the globe. With that distinction drawn -- the climate changes, and that change isn't a hoax, even if the role of humans is -- the vote was held.”