Posted on 07/02/2009 8:42:20 AM PDT by Titus-Maximus
“Happer has guts, it would be interesting to know what type of backlash he has felt”
And the number of death threats.
Nothing to see here..... move along.
Oh yeah, make sure you buy your squiggly lightbulbs and support green taxes.
Now, move along.
We should inundate Mark Kirk’s office with copies of his comments.
But of course science has NOTHING to do with raising questions or debating, even matters of “scientific consensus”. Just ask Galileo and Einstein, who of course never questioned the scientific consensus of their day.
Ping
My wife could crush Gore (she’s at least got competent degrees - 3 of ‘em - all in science). Even without reading all the latest on the warming joke, she’s able to quickly pick out the “liberal logic” amongst the MSM idiocy.
At Princeton itself,nothing worth speaking of.He's tenured.At the cocktail parties attended by Princeton faculty/administration....well,he's not seen at many of *them* these days.
Yep
CORRECTION: It would appear this testimony was given in 2002.
Bookmarked.
I noticed this too.
This is not a recent report.
The Climate Change crowd has long ignored “science.”
He is indeed great, it will be an interesting day when people realize they have been had.
“This is not a recent report.”
Statement to the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee by William Happer, Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University, made on February 25, 2009
Something is a little weird with the dates. Hurricane Katrina, referenced in the report, occurred in 2005, so it is unlikely that the report is from 3 years prior to that. Also, Boxer is chair of the committee, which would have to make it after 2006 when the Dems won a majority in congress. Also refers to the 2007 British case against Gore. Oh well, this did come out of the Senate, they wouldn’t catch a typo since they evidently have given up reading stuff anyways.
bookmark
It's a statement to the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Work from William Happer, Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Princeton University on February 25, 2009 (although the document headers look like he gave a similar statement in 2002, and neglected to update the headers):
from: Clayton Cramer's BLOG
"Atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) have increased from about 280 to 380 parts per million over past 100 years. The combustion of fossil fuels, coal, oil and natural gas, has contributed to the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. And finally, increasing concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere will cause the earth's surface to warm."
His argument is that on the balance, the warming is desirable:
"The key question is: will the net effect of the warming, and any other effects of the CO2, be good or bad for humanity?"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.