Tulsa World in Tulsa, Oklahoma, has printed statements about man-made climate change from two U.S. senators. One is the well-known climate denier, Oklahoma’s own James Inhofe. The other is the best spokesman for climate action in the U.S. Senate, Rhode Island’s Sheldon Whitehouse.

Inhofe’s entire argument boils down to conspircy theorizing, his belief that the scientific consensus about man-made climate change is a made-up hoax to bring about “global governance.” I’m not exaggerating about that. He appeals to what he calls “Climategate,” saying that “Climate scientists were caught red-handed manipulating data so it supported their global warming objectives.” The truth is just the opposite.

There have been six separate investigations of Inhofe’s allegation. One was done by the Inspector General of NOAA at the request of: James Inhofe. In his report to Inhofe on February 18, 2010 the Inspector General said, “In our review of the CRU e-mails, we did not find any evidence that NOAA inappropriately manipulated data … or failed to adhere to appropriate peer review procedures.” Others who investigated include the Inspector General of the Dept. of Commerce, the National Science Foundation, Penn. State Univeristy, and in the U.K. the University of East Anglia, and no less than the House of Commons (one of the houses of the British Legislature).

But that’s not good enough for Inhofe. Instead he “documents” his allegation of fraud by quoting a newspaper report from the U.K. Independent.

In my opinion, the most revealing thing about Inhofe’s piece is this: he’s got nothing. He had to sink to insane conspiracy theories that have already been investigated many times and found to be groundless. But that’s all he’s got — and it’s nothing but proof that his allegation is false.

The only mentions of actual science are an outright lie: that “In 2008, Al Gore said the north polar ice cap would be “ice-free” by 2013,” and an erroneous reference to “the observed recent warming hiatus.” The one that never happened.

Many papers have been published about what might have brought about a “hiatus” if one happened. But so far, there has not been a single scientific paper — not one — that has provided solid evidence that such a “hiatus” ever happened. However, there have been five papers published which investigated the question of its existence, and all five, without exception, have reached the same conclusion: there’s no real evidence of a “hiatus.” Because it never happened.

The hottest year on record was 2014, but 2015 is well on the way — it’s just about inevitable — to breaking that record and becoming the new hottest year on record. But Inhofe, and Lamar Smith, and WUWT, and all the deniers, are so desperate to cry “hiatus” that they’ve resorted to attacking the data itself. In Inhofe’s case, it amounts to repeating what isn’t true, about scientists “manipulating data so it supported their global warming objectives.”

He resorts to that because that’s all he’s got. In other words, he’s got nothing.

Except, of course, a seat in the U.S. Senate.



Plot idea: 97% of the world’s scientists contrive an environmental crisis, but are exposed by a plucky band of billionaires & oil companies and the politicians they support.

