VP Candidate Paul Ryan: Climatologists “Intentionally Mislead The Public On Climate Change”

We all know that Romney is wishy-washy when it comes climate change science, and that us so-called skeptics were not at ease with that. Well, now you can cast your worries aside.

Over the last hours there’s been a lot of buzz out in the media that Paul Ryan has been chosen as Romney’s running mate. Confirmation of that is still pending. If true, that means we have a VP candidate who is a pretty solid skeptic when it comes to catastrophic manmade global warming. Romney is obviously comfortable with that and is using Ryan to reposition himself on the issue of global warming and energy.

What is Ryan’s position on climate science? Here’s what Paul Ryan wrote less than 3 years ago:

To the detriment of the American people, environmental issues have fallen victim to the hyper-politicization of science. The Journal Times editorial board sensibly cautioned both sides of the political divide against this unfortunate trend (“Science must trump spin,” The Journal Times, 12/3/09). At issue in the Journal Times’ recent editorial and on the minds of many Copenhagen observers are published e-mail exchanges from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU). These e-mails from leading climatologists make clear efforts to use statistical tricks to distort their findings and intentionally mislead the public on the issue of climate change. The CRU e-mail scandal reveals a perversion of the scientific method, where data were manipulated to support a predetermined conclusion. The e-mail scandal has not only forced the resignation of a number of discredited scientists, but it also marks a major step back on the need to preserve the integrity of the scientific community. While interests on both sides of the issue will debate the relevance of the manipulated or otherwise omitted data, these revelations undermine confidence in the scientific data driving the climate change debates.”

Here’s a list of Ryan’s other climate and energy accomplishments:

– voted to eliminate EPA Limits On Greenhouse Gases. [Roll Call 249, 4/7/11].

– voted to block the USDA from implementing its climate raindance. [Roll Call 448, 6/16/11].

– voted to eliminate the assistant to the president for energy and climate change, the special envoy for climate change (Todd Stern), and the special adviser for green jobs, enterprise and innovation. [Roll Call 87, 2/17/11].

– voted to eliminate ARPA-E. [Roll Call 55, 2/17/11].

– voted to eliminate the ban of incandescent light bulbs. [Roll Call 563, 7/12/11]

– voted for Keystone XL. In 2011, Ryan voted for the construction and operation of the Keystone XL pipeline. [Roll Call 650, 7/26/11]

– Paul Ryan’sFY 2013 budget resolution retained a decade’s worth of oil tax breaks worth $40 billion, while slashing subsidies in alternative energy research. The plan called for a $3 billion cut in energy programs in FY 2013 alone. [CAP, 3/20/12].

You can read how Ryan voted on every energy and environment issue here. Expect the debate on climate to gain traction in the campaign in the weeks ahead. We welcome it!

 

33 responses to “VP Candidate Paul Ryan: Climatologists “Intentionally Mislead The Public On Climate Change””

  1. DirkH
  2. Michael Zuck

    Paul Ryan offers us a real chance for a 20-year downward economic spiral PLUS a continuation of the catastrophic degradation of our climate and environment. The man has a diseased mind overshadowed by Ayn Rand’s demented vision of libertarian utopia.

    1. DirkH

      Michael, I’m intrigued. You’re much smarter than Paul Ryan and Ayn Rand, right? What do you propose as optimal future policies?

    2. D Matteson

      We are still suffering from the direction that was put into place when Al Gore was VP almost 20 years ago.
      With Ryan there is a good chance that we can get this global warming idocity out of the way and bring back clear thinking at the federal level of the US government.

    3. Peter

      The theory of potentially catastrophic man caused global warming has been thoroughly debunked by the over 1,000 pages of Climate Change Reconsidered published by the Heartland Institute in 2010 and the follow on Interim Report published in 2011, which provides a comprehensive, calm, dispassionate, reasoned scientific answer to the IPCC’s attempted justification for an historic power grab. Mr. Zuck, I am not interested in name calling ad hominem attacks by amateurs. You believe in catastrophic anthropogenic global warming because you want to believe it is true, because you want to run everyone else’s lives. That is a dishonorable fraud on your part.

      1. Bill

        That is pure crap! Climate change is real and it is caused by human activity. Yes, there are natural cycles, yes, it has been warmer in the past. BUT, in the last 50 years, the climate has warmed rapidly, much too rapidly to be explained by “historic” cycles – there is one, and only one, explanation as put forth by even former skeptics like Richard Muller (see: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-climate-0817-jm-20120817,0,6280945.story)
        This rapid warming is not the “normal” trend that the “reports” you cite speak of and they totally ignore the crucial fact of the speed of the warming. Canadian scientists this week warned the arctic could have at least one totally ice free day within 10 years. That would be the beginning of irreparable damage to the planet’s climate systems. We need to act NOW. Ryan is wrong.

        1. DirkH

          Muller never was a climate skeptic. He is a front for the geo-engineering NOVIM Group and for his own consultancy,
          http://www.mullerandassociates.com/index.php
          which, amongst other services, peddles a program called GreenGov , invented by his daughter.

          He tries to profit from the climate scare.

          Why should he try to dismantle it? And indeed, he never tried.

        2. DirkH

          Muller’s own words (look them up on HuffPo if you must)
          “”It is ironic if some people treat me as a traitor, since I was never a skeptic — only a scientific skeptic,” he said in a recent email exchange with The Huffington Post. “Some people called me a skeptic because in my best-seller ‘Physics for Future Presidents’ I had drawn attention to the numerous scientific errors in the movie ‘An Inconvenient Truth.’ But I never felt that pointing out mistakes qualified me to be called a climate skeptic.””

          See? No climate skeptic. Never was one.

          1. Bill

            Cool- not a “climate skeptic” a “science skeptic” – wow, that convinces me that the whole rest of his warnings must be not worth reading! The whole point is he now believes, as I pointed out, that the global climate is changing very quickly and that human activity must be the cause. To argue otherwise is interesting to me – “I’ll agree that science explains things, but I’ll choose only that science that backs my views”. The overwhelming evidence is that climate change is a. real, b. happening very, very quickly and c. is aggravated by human activity. Paul Rand denies all three of these things because there’s lots of snow in Wisconsin and he can’t seem to convince people that there is indeed global warming going on…

            1. Bill

              Paul Ryan – opps freudian slip there…

            2. DirkH

              You were wrong when you called him a climate skeptic. That tells me that you haven’t followed the BEST shenanigans as I did.

              Muller has yet to produce a peer reviewed paper. BEST only evaluates land surface stations, not the sea surface. He uses the same methodology as Phil Jones and gets the same results.

              This methodology was always suspected to introduce spurious warming due to UHI.

              In my opinion, satellite measurements are better. Unfortunately we have them only since 1979.

              They show no warming over the last 15 years.

            3. Bill

              Yes – I and the LA Times were both incorrect apparently.
              http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-kochfunded-climate-change-skeptic-reverses-course-20120729,0,7372823.story
              Of course, if Koch once funded Muller, the same outfit that promotes Ryan as a champion, that doesn’t mean anything, right?
              Satellite is the ONLY effective measure? How convenient – I guess I’ll get to tell you “I told you so” in what, 100 years when we have the confirming data?

            4. DirkH

              Bill, please read up on the Nyquist/Shannon theorem to understand why I think that a satellite measurement or something equivalent is the only way to approximate the Earth’s temperature to any meaningful degree.

  3. Meet Paul Ryan, who is now running for something | Grist

    [...] Acolyte,” which basically sums it up. If you’d rather hear Ryan in his own words, well, here’s Ryan on “Climategate”: These e-mails from leading climatologists make clear efforts to use statistical tricks to distort [...]

  4. Stephen Richards

    I’ve been watching CNBC for years and Ryan has been a regular contributor. I’ve been impressed by his straight up and down attitude and his economic realities. Certainly, if Obama is returned it will be a disaster not just for the US but also the rest of the developed world.

    I tipped Ryan for greatness some years ago. He is very refreshing. Good luck to the Romney-Ryan compaigne and it’s time to get nasty. Obama has lied so often he has convinced himself of his lies. That is dangerous.

  5. Stephen Richards

    Zuck

    You are and idiot. I would take you on in debate but you are quite clearly incapable of reasoned, cogent argument. A waste of space.

  6. Nonoy Oplas

    Good news Pierre. And this Zuck zucks.

  7. Russell C

    Now, If Ryan has a chance to educate Mitt Romney about the person who advised the governor years back about global warming – current Obama science czar John Holdren – then perhaps Romney can announce that he’d been hoodwinked about the issue for years. Did you guys know Holdren was involved in White House efforts back in 1998 to marginalize skeptic climate scientists? See: White House Involved in Warmist Smear Campaign” http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/white_house_involved_in_warmist_smear_campaign.html

  8. kwik

    Not so sure Romney did a mistake when he presented Ryan as the next president.

    hehe.

  9. pete melov

    Umm, not sure if anyone has been watching, but patterns emerge, in politricks..

    A guy emerges saying what you want to hear, we are being manipulated again, and is anyone watching Germany and Spain..etc?

    The Germans with a much cooler climate than the US and Australia [where I am] are headed for almost a complete dependency opn Solar..”Here comes the Sun”..doco youtube..

    People, its time to stop getting ”exictied” about politricks, and start getting exicted about creating the people we need in ”power” by getting rid of people who are getting into politricks for the… power.

    Where are those people?..the same people that are implementing all the incredible advances away from all these old power structures..[I include the wind ripoff, hydro, etc.]

    Watch for the ”one who promises the world” and as usual, delivers ..nothing, except more benefits for his financial buddies..

    Its a pattern that is so obvious..its painful.[Wheres Tesla, when you need him]

    You might want to look up what ”politic” means in ..Latin..spot on..

  10. John F. Hultquist

    First the ticket has to win.
    Then the P. has to give the V.P. something to do.
    Of recent VPs, only Dick Cheney seemed to be part of a plan.
    Contrast with the current VP. Who, where, what?
    Left to himself, Al Gore seems to have loaded the bureaucracy with warmists – they can’t easily be removed.
    Ryan’s focus is government spending, not climate.
    Still, the CAGW agenda would suffer or stagnate with this team.
    First the ticket has to win.

  11. Robert Holmes

    Only wish we had some climate realists like Ryan to vote for here in Australia!

  12. Romney Veep pick a firm skeptic | Climate Nonconformist

    [...] an outspoken opponent of global warming alarmism, and a much more convincing skeptic than Romney. These e-mails from leading climatologists make clear efforts to use statistical tricks to distort th…. The CRU e-mail scandal reveals a perversion of the scientific method, where data were manipulated [...]

  13. Gai

    This is Using the Delphi Technique to Achieve Consensus in Action. (Also see USDA employing Delphi Technique: Prepare to be Delphi’d! )

    EDUCATION REPORTER: The Delphi Technique and consensus building are both founded in the same principle – the Hegelian dialectic of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, with synthesis becoming the new thesis. The goal is a continual evolution to “oneness of mind” (consensus means solidarity of belief) -the collective mind, the wholistic society, the wholistic earth, etc. In thesis and antithesis, opinions or views are presented on a subject to establish views and opposing views. In synthesis, opposites are brought together to form the new thesis. All participants in the process are then to accept ownership of the new thesis and support it, changing their views to align with the new thesis. Through a continual process of evolution, “oneness of mind” will supposedly occur.

    In group settings, the Delphi Technique is an unethical method of achieving consensus on controversial topics. It requires well-trained professionals, known as “facilitators” or “change agents,” who deliberately escalate tension among group members, pitting one faction against another to make a preordained viewpoint appear “sensible,” while making opposing views appear ridiculous…..

    Knowing that now look at Romney, he is the one who represents the “synthesis”

    Ryan is just a sop tossed at the anti-CAGW part of the voting block but he is not running for President, Romney is. Unless Romney drops dead of a heart attack or gives Ryan something to do Ryan is a cypher treading water.

    Romney is nothing but Obama lite . Do not forget Romneycare in MA and his environmental platform:
    This from his main platform at aboutMittRomney.com (Direct quotes)

    “Unfortunately, some in the Republican Party are embracing the radical environmental ideas of the liberal left. As governor, I found that thoughtful environmentalism need not be anti-growth and anti-jobs. But Kyoto-style sweeping mandates, imposed unilaterally in the United States, would kill jobs, depress growth and shift manufacturing to the dirtiest developing nations.

    “Republicans should never abandon pro-growth conservative principles in an effort to embrace the ideas of Al Gore. Instead of sweeping mandates, we must use America’s power of innovation to develop alternative sources of energy and new technologies that use energy more efficiently.” link

    “I adopt what I call no regrets policies. Policies that will allow us to become energy independent and will have as one of their by-products, reduction of the CO2 that we emit, the greenhouse gases that we emit. So let me tell you the kinds of things that I’d like to do.

    “With regards to our developing more energy, I want to see us use more of our renewable resources: bio-diesel, bio-fuel, ethanol, cellulosic ethanol. I want to see us developing liquefied coal if we can sequester the CO2 properly. I want to see nuclear power. I want to see us develop our own oil off-shore, and in Anwar. Let’s develop all the sources we can to provide for our own energy needs and free ourselves of independence on Ahmadinejad, and Chavez and Putin and others that have that oil today….

    The bankers and energy companies that were behind the CAGW scam from the start must be jumping up and down with glee because we are swallowing the Delphi technique ‘bait’ of Romney & Ryan hook line and sinker. Look at who funded CRU: CRU link and wiki link Think about Robert Watson IPCC chair and World Bank employee.

    The Delphi technique is what we are seeing in action. The “Compromise” or “synthesis” that was all worked out well ahead of time. Obama will not win because the power centers do not want him to win. Obama was the thesis, a return to the time without real power. A return to the 1800’s most intelligent people rejected. Only with the threat of Obama hanging over us would we consider accepting Romney’s version of the “New Economy” as a reasonable “Compromise” If you look at Romney’s “New Economy” objectively without Obama in the background it is anything BUT reasonable. That is because it is based on the broken window fallacy. It is the equivalent of bombing the USA to rubble and rebuilding from scratch.

    Certainly makes you wonder if the strategic release of the Climategate e-mails was a planned move all along to herd us in the direction the power centers wanted.

    1. D Matteson

      “Ryan is a cypher treading water.”
      Not necessiarly.

      The US Senate races coming up this fall are expected to be a tossup as to what party achieves the majority.

      From wikipedia:
      “As President of the Senate, the Vice President has two primary duties: to cast a vote in the event of a Senate deadlock and to preside over and certify the official vote count of the U.S. Electoral College. For example, in the first half of 2001, the Senators were divided 50-50 between Republicans and Democrats and Dick Cheney’s tie-breaking vote gave the Republicans the Senate majority.”

      This is where Ryan can make a difference.

  14. Gai

    To explain a little further as to why we are seeing a collusion among corporations, bankers and politicians on the “Broken Window Fallacy” you have to understand a bit about commerce.

    The Evolution of Commerce
    Originally commerce or trade was simple barter between two people. ‘Money’ a divisible, portable, durable and scarce commodity was used to facilitate barter. For example Hudson’s Bay Blankets were so important to early trade that they were considered a form of currency.

    Merchants, like the Hudson’s Bay Company made money by moving goods from an area of plenty to an area of scarcity. They took a cut of the ‘profits’ by doing so. War Lords/Governments made trade between points easier and safer and also took a cut of the profits otherwise known as taxes.

    The goldsmith guilds got into the act by storing gold and silver, the favorite currencies and issuing a receipt that would be honored by another guild member in a different town. The goldsmiths, not being dummies, figured out
    a) only about 10% of the stored metal was ever called back into use.
    b) the receipts acted as paper currency and they could make additional receipts without actual metal to back them up. These receipts could then be lent out at interest (Fractional reserve banking) so they got a very large cut of the profits.

    The final actor in the play were companies who amassed equipment, workers and raw materials in one building to mass produce products more quickly and easily. Again they got a cut of the profits for their trouble.

    So we have gone from trade as simple barter between two people to a complex system where every trade has multiple chunks taken out of the ‘profit’ by various interested parties.

    The second factor in commerce is a young vs a mature market. In a mature market the number of trades is relatively low. People HAVE their cars, TVs, computers, stoves, frigs, dishwashers and they are not interested in replacing them without a tremendous marketing effort or a major innovation break through. Therefore The Broken Window Fallacy is seen as generating more trades and therefore more total profit for the businesses, banks and taxes for the politicians WITHOUT REAL EFFORT OR VALUE being expended. Customers are forced to buy products they do not want by “Royal Decree” and perfectly usable products are outlawed.

    Far from being “Sustainable” or “Green” the scam is destruction of wealth, breaking the window so to speak, to artificially stimulate trade and therefore increase profits for the interested parties.

    1. DirkH

      You are right insofar as certain regulations are made to enforce certain purchases. In Germany this is mostly new regulations affecting homeowners, forcing them to get a newer better heater, more insulation etc. A homeowner is a sitting duck so you can press money out of him from time to time.

      And these changes are of course lobbied for heavily by the makers of the appliances united with the usual suspects, the green “N”GOs.

      BUT I wouldn’t be so negative about trade. Trade allows me to purchase products from around the globe for prices that are ridiculously low while benefiting the maker at the other end of the globe.

      I buy my headphones locally, though. Sennheiser is only 60 km away. :-)

  15. Warmists Really Upset Over Paul Ryan Pick » Pirate's Cove

    [...] No Tricks Zone points out that Ryan understood Climategate to a tee. [...]

  16. Linda

    Ryan for President; Romney for Vice-President! Paul Ryan is articulate, well-informed, intellectual, and sticks to the facts—-if the American people are ever given a chance to REALLY hear him speak out on the FACTS of all the issues, he will be very, very popular!!!

  17. Paul Ryan: Not Exactly Gunning for the Green Vote

    [...] thinks Climate Gate was an actual scandal: “These e-mails from leading climatologists make clear efforts to use statistical tricks to [...]

  18. PAUL RYAN THE PERFECT ANTI GORE: S. FRED SINGER | RUTHFULLY YOURS

    [...] scientists of “intentionally misleading the public on climate change.” (See full article.) This may be true for perhaps a dozen or so — and we know who they are; their names appear [...]

  19. Romney ticket skeptical of global warming | Frontier Centre

    [...] Looks like the Romney ticket with Paul Ryan as VP candidate will be skeptical on so-called Global Warming.  See http://notrickszone.com/2012/08/11/paul-ryan-climatologists-intentionally-mislead-the-public-on-clim… [...]