In the wake of the world's leading authority on climate change definitively concluding that global warming is happening and caused by humans, professional global warming deniers are flailing, and it's hilarious to watch.
Over at TomPaine.com, Clean Air Watch's Frank O'Donnell finds that Sen. James Inhofe, the "Senate’s resident crackpot on global warming finally seems to have—well, cracked up," after witnessing a bizarre exchange he had on CNN last week.
Not being as unbalanced as Sen. Inhofe, he won't quite say global warming isn't a problem.
All he'll say is fighting it will cost money. So he tries to argue the best strategy for now is to wait:
Frankly, I don't think the trade-off is worth it — yet. The history of capitalism and technology tells us that what starts out expensive and arduous becomes cheap and easy over time. Lewis and Clark took months to do what a truck carrying Tickle-Me Elmos does every week. Technology 10 years from now could solve global warming at a fraction of today's costs. What technologies? I don't know.
In a nod to Democrats seeking to end subsidies for the oil industry, the administration also proposed repealing provisions in the 2005 energy law (PL 109-58) that expanded royalty relief for deep-water oil and gas operations. The House passed a bill (HR 6) last month that would go further.
That's a sign of weakness on the part of the White House, a sign that they don't relish the propsect of vetoing a tough bill, and would prefer a watered down version they can stomach.
This is notable because Senate leaders have yet to say what they will do with the House bill: push it as is, or draft a less ambitious version.
While the Senate should be putting strong legislation on Bush's desk regardless of his posture, this flinch of Bush's should embolden those Senate leaders who appear reluctant to draw vetoes -- and force Bush to deal with a bill the fully reverses Big Oil's undeserved handouts.
And as the NY Times reports, it's "the first time the group asserted with near certainty — more than 90 percent confidence — that carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases from human activities were the main drivers of [global] warming since 1950."
How is the conservative global warming denial community responding?
We learn from The Guardian (via Think Progress) that the ExxonMobil-backed American Enterprise Institute is offering $10,000 to scientists and economists who submit articles attacking the report -- a report wholly based on peer reviewed science.