GOP Recommends Lamar Smith to head up Science, Space, & Tech Committee

[th'FOOL]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/lamar-smith-global-warming-house-science_n_2200408.html

Smith, like many of his Republican colleagues, has expressed doubt that global warming is caused by human behavior. In 2009, he criticized the media for not airing enough "dissenting opinions" about climate change.

"The [ABC, NBC and CBS television] networks have shown a steady pattern of bias on climate change," Smith said in a statement at the time. "During a six-month period, four out of five network news reports failed to acknowledge any dissenting opinions about global warming, according to a Business and Media Institute study. The networks should tell Americans the truth, rather than hide the facts."

He also referred to environmentalists and others who warn about the seriousness of the issue as "global warming alarmists."

Oh, and he wrote the SOPA bill, too.

[Ironrod]

In fairness to Smith, there was still some non-fringe debate on the magnitude of anthropogenesis in 2009. I wonder if his opinion has come around since the scientific community stopped equivocating on that point.

[Scraper]

Apparently the Republicans in Congress have learned nothing since the beginning of the month.

I imagine Boner's thought process went something like this: "Hey why don't we continue with the GOP status quo and appoint a guy to chair the science committee who actually refuses to believe the scientific community. Americans will love us for it." 

[hepcat]

Smith Gate!

[Isgrimnur]

I prefer Smith Dome.

[msduncan]

Apparently the Republicans in Congress have learned nothing since the beginning of the month.

I imagine Boner's thought process went something like this: "Hey why don't we continue with the GOP status quo and appoint a guy to chair the science committee who actually refuses to believe the scientific community. Americans will love us for it." 

Learned from what?    Nearly 50% of the population shares their views, so why should they automatically drop pants and give in to you supposed 'enlightened' types just because you edged over 50% with an incumbent President?

You *do* realize that the Republicans made up nearly 50% of the voting population of America in November, right?

[Autistic Angel]

Let's all take a moment to appreciate that msduncan believes scientific facts are tested and affirmed in a manner similar to selecting the winner of American Idol.

-Autistic Angel

[th'FOOL]

Apparently the Republicans in Congress have learned nothing since the beginning of the month.

I imagine Boner's thought process went something like this: "Hey why don't we continue with the GOP status quo and appoint a guy to chair the science committee who actually refuses to believe the scientific community. Americans will love us for it." 

Learned from what?    Nearly 50% of the population shares their views, so why should they automatically drop pants and give in to you supposed 'enlightened' types just because you edged over 50% with an incumbent President?

You *do* realize that the Republicans made up nearly 50% of the voting population of America in November, right?

I like to think that the lesson was the electorate doesn't abide the make-believe and clear lack of scientific knowledge that the likes of Todd Akin espoused.

[ATB]

[Calavera]

Yup, we've learned a lot about cancer in the last 35 years. 'The changing science' was a good tagline.

[hepcat]

Apparently the Republicans in Congress have learned nothing since the beginning of the month.

I imagine Boner's thought process went something like this: "Hey why don't we continue with the GOP status quo and appoint a guy to chair the science committee who actually refuses to believe the scientific community. Americans will love us for it."  

Learned from what?    Nearly 50% of the population shares their views, so why should they automatically drop pants and give in to you supposed 'enlightened' types just because you edged over 50% with an incumbent President?

You *do* realize that the Republicans made up nearly 50% of the voting population of America in November, right?   

Which is why it's even MORE important that the enlightened folks help you guys navigate your way in this world.  You folks would still be treating each other with leaches and blaming bad humors for syphilis if the educated weren't watching over you.

[Autistic Angel]

Yup, we've learned a lot about cancer in the last 35 years. 'The changing science' was a good tagline.

Well, I think ATB's point was that in medicine, as in all the sciences, none of the new information gathered since the late 70's counts.  You can tell by how he reliably advises his loved ones to seek antineoplaston therapy over any of those laughably fictional metastasis suppressants.

And really, what is "climate science" except a few decades of meticulously peer-reviewed data used to inform an international consensus?  Consensus!?  Who even knows what that means?

Do they have reviews in your country? If not let me explain how they work: people- known as critics- go and see the movies and then tell us how they are.  When a bunch of critics say the same thing, that's called consensus. The consensus so far is that the movie is boring, drawn out and not very good (just like the consensus was that XCOM has lots and lots of bugs (many of which you never saw, so I understand why you think they didn't exist or that one could not make a judgement on something without actually having seen it first hand).  Thus, I can also say it is boring.  Not that I mentioned before the reviews came out that there's no way the book should be 3 movies or anything...

Thanks so much!

-Autistic Angel

[Ironrod]

Most influential magazine story ever. People did those 51 things, and look what happened.

[ATB]

ATB's astute point, is that today's 'facts' are tomorrow's subject of scorn so there's every reason to doubt the validity of every new 'scientific fact' that comes our way and is championed.

You guys are the same guys who would have been screaming about the impending ice age in the 70s.

That said, I do believe in climate change.  I just don't think you self-righteous folks can lambaste anyone for being dubious about it.  You remember what it means to be skeptical right and not to just take things spoon fed and say yummy?

But, I forgot. This is 'the new' GT of the last few years. A forum that has increasingly become a liberal mob with the mentality to yell down anyone who doesn't agree with it's doctrinal sensitivities in exactly the same way it does...kinda like...OO.

[hepcat]

But, I forgot. This is 'the new' GT of the last few years. A forum that has increasingly become a liberal mob with the mentality to yell down anyone who doesn't agree with it's doctrinal sensitivities in exactly the same way it does...kinda like...OO.

That's one way of trivializing a larger issue, I guess.