Sensenbrenner Pulls an Inhofe, Asserts Global Warming is an "International Conspiracy"

By Chris Mooney | December 11, 2009 12:56 pm

This speaks for itself:

This is really an inconvenient truth.  The President’s science advisor, who is a former Harvard professor named Holdren, is involved in the email scandals and covering up the fact that data has been lost, the fact that contrary opinions to the global warming crowd has been squeezed out of scientific journals – and as a matter of fact – the editor of one scientific journal who published contrary data has been fired.  Now this is an international conspiracy.  Before we end up transferring trillions of dollars from the pocketbook of American ratepayers to China and India – which is what Al Gore’s global warming treaty proposes to do – then we ought to get to the bottom of this and find out whether this is really science or whether this is a bunch of people with a political agenda that’s cooked the books.

[italics added]

I had thought nobody in the GOP was more extreme on climate change than James Inhofe, who dubbed the idea of human-caused global warming the “greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.”

But now, in conspiracy-theory-land, Inhofe has a true competitor.


Comments (13)

  1. Sorbet

    Actually you know what’s the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people? James Inhofe. That charlatan who has passed himself off as a human being for so long is a rogue android who failed the Turing test. They have been looking for him for years. It’s time someone ripped off the carbon fiber back and exposed the circuits.

  2. JJ

    He didn’t assert that global warming is indeed a hoax. He’s simply questioning the authenticity of the current climate data given the circumstances. Anyone with half a brain would question current data when it involves sending billions or trillions of our dollars overseas. These e-mails prove that there’s a political bias in the current data given to the government. How much it affected the data has yet to be determined and won’t be easy given the circumstances.

  3. If you think Sensenbrenner is a fanatic on climate change, just get him going on immigration. If the rabble is aroused on anything, he’ll be there to lead the charge.

    Unfortunately, I see little chance that he has any real opposition in 2010.

  4. Andrew

    It’s no secret that the data is doctored. It’s freely admitted.

    The physics calls for a 0.7 C increase per CO2 doubling with no feedback; there’s no observational evidence that positive feedback occurs.

  5. Andrew,

    Please continue posting. Your ignorance of what you’re posting about continues to show the opposite of your intent. Your first hint that you might not fully comprehend what’s going on should’ve been that you’re finding publicly available information.

    But then, I suspect you won’t understand what I’m referring to either. If you figure it out, you might actually stop making a fool of yourself.

  6. Anthony McCarthy

    Given his family fortune based in personal products made of paper, you’d think he would worry about something that could possibly destroy many forests.

    There is nothing too stupid and too dishonest for the denialists to say, the truth isn’t their object so it frees them from any connection to reality.

  7. Dan Pangburn

    Tens of billions of dollars (grants from the deep pockets of governments) have been spent in futile efforts to prove that added CO2 caused Global Warming while an unpaid engineer with a desk-top computer and using simple engineering analysis has discovered what really determined the average global temperature history since 1895.

    The research, with an eye-opening graph showing predicted and measured temperature anomalies, is in the pdf dated Oct 16 at

    With this discovery, changes to ghg levels have been found to have no significant effect on climate and Natural Climate Change has been verified. This does not show that added ghgs have zero effect. It does show that the temperature anomalies can be accurately calculated by ignoring any effect from changes to the level of ghgs.

  8. Yes, Dan Pangburn, and the same scientist proved radioactive clocks are wrong, the Earth is 1,000 years old, the sun is a giant ball of burning wax, and the speed of light is 100 mph.

  9. Dan Pangburn

    So, Doug Watts, you have no ability to challenge the research so you make up an ad hominem attack on the researcher.

  10. bilbo

    Hmm…Dan Pangburn, does it surprise you that an analysis shows no influence of CO2 when the author himself admitted “It assumes no influence from atmospheric carbon dioxide.” Well Jesus, Dan! Somebody made up an equation that didn’t include atmospheric CO2 and found that it didn’t address atmospheric CO2! What a shocker!

    There are few word to express what a Stupid Little Denialist you are.

  11. Dan Pangburn

    bilbo, and anyone else who misinterpreted the first paragraph of the paper and possibly didn’t get past it. As shown on the graph, the model accurately predicts all average global temperatures since 1895. It does it without needing to include any influence from greenhouse gases.


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

About Chris Mooney

Chris is a science and political journalist and commentator and the author of three books, including the New York Times bestselling The Republican War on Science--dubbed "a landmark in contemporary political reporting" by and a "well-researched, closely argued and amply referenced indictment of the right wing's assault on science and scientists" by Scientific American--Storm World, and Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future, co-authored by Sheril Kirshenbaum. They also write "The Intersection" blog together for Discover blogs. For a longer bio and contact information, see here.


See More

Collapse bottom bar