RSS

Barbara Boxer relied heavily on both the IPCC and Pachauri

24 Feb

Yesterday in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Barbara Boxer made the following statement:

In my opening statement, I didn’t quote one international scientist or IPCC report. … We are quoting the American scientific community here.

This is in response to Sen Inhofe’s minority report about climategate, blasting the IPCC. Boxer doesn’t even attempt to defend the IPCC, she simply says that she used American scientists in her opening statement. This is true, in this particular case, but it certainly hasn’t been historically. Boxer has relied on the IPCC several times as the Chair of the EPW, and she has relied on Pachauri as well. Lets start at the beginning.

When the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report was issued in April 2007, Boxer released a statement. From the statement:

Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, made the following remarks today regarding today’s report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) after she received a briefing by telephone from Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the IPCC:

“This powerful report confirms the very real dangers that global warming poses for us all. The effects of global warming will be felt throughout the world.”

She continues on with all kinds of scary climate claims, and states that she received a briefing by telephone from Pachauri. It doesn’t stop there however, on January 30’th 2008 Pachauri gave a briefing to Senators about the latest global warming science. Boxer gave the introduction, here are her remarks in their entirety:

Good afternoon and welcome.

We are so fortunate today to hear from Dr. Pachauri, the Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC. He also accepted the Nobel Prize on behalf of the IPCC.

Dr. Pachauri, you have been a tremendous leader on this issue. I have spoken to you on several occasions to learn first hand about the recent IPCC reports that summarize the recent science of global warming.

These reports tell us that global warming is unequivocal and with 90% certainty that humans are the cause of most of the recent warming. The reports also warned us of the potential devastating impacts unchecked global warming would have and that addressing global warming is achievable.

First of all, thank you for all of your hard work. I cannot adequately acknowledge how important your work is, we would not be where we are without you.

The IPCC is widely considered the authority in climate science and has been widely embraced, including by the Bush Administration. The contribution of the IPCC is invaluable to our understanding of the issue and to our ability to move forward with great certainty.

I would also like to extend great congratulations to you for the Nobel Prize awarded to the IPCC and Al Gore. It is so wonderful to see the IPCC recognized for it contribution to the issue of global warming. I am very pleased that the Senate passed a Resolution last year that acknowledged and commended the efforts of Vice President Gore, Dr. Pachauri, and the other members of the IPCC.
I would now like to turn to Dr. Pachauri for a presentation on global warming.

That is as clear as it gets. She appreciates Pachauri for all his hard work and his leadership. She mentions that she has “spoken to you [Pachauri] on several occasions to learn first hand about the recent IPCC reports”. Also, that resolution she is talking about is here.

So, she readily accepted the IPCC’s AR4 in 2007, talked to Pachauri about it, then brought Pachauri to Washington to give a presentation to Senators about global warming in January of 2008, lavishing praise upon him in her introduction. However, her reliance on Pachauri continues.

Boxer held a hearing on global warming on July 22, 2008. Boxer entered a statement by Pachauri into the record. In her opening statement she says:

The evidence has long been overwhelming that global warming poses a serious threat to the American people and we must act now to prevent devastating consequences.

In dozens of hearings and briefings in this Committee, including presentations from Nobel Prize winning scientists of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), we have heard repeatedly that global warming endangers public health and welfare.

The IPCC found that global warming is unequivocal, and that most of the recent warming is due to human activities.

In North America, the IPCC warned of risks to public health, including increased frequency and duration of heat waves and heat related illness and death, increased water-borne disease from degraded water quality, and increased respiratory disease, including asthma and other lung diseases, from increased smog. Children and the elderly will be especially vulnerable to these impacts…

We are fortunate to be joined today by an IPCC scientist who will share some of the latest information with us on the dangers posed by global warming. I’d also like to place in the record a statement from Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the IPCC.

Here’s the video of her statement:

There’s more. Boxer holds another hearing on climate change on February 25, 2009. Here are some quotes from the press release:

February 25, 2009

Boxer Opening Statement: “An Update on the Latest Global Warming Science”

In 2007, the Nobel Prize wining Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) painted a stark and sobering picture of the future that awaits us if we fail to act quickly to curb global warming pollution.

The IPCC’s projections for North America include:

· An increase in the frequency and duration of heatwaves and heat related illness;

· An increase in water-borne disease from degraded water quality;

· More respiratory disease, including asthma and other lung diseases, from increased ozone or smog concentrations – particularly dangerous to children and the elderly;

· More winter flooding, reduced summer flows and intensified water shortages in the west, due to reduced snowpack;

· Droughts and insect invasions that will kill crops and forests and will leave forests more susceptible to fire; and

· Intensified storms that will batter coastal communities and habitats, with the damage compounded by erosion.

Since 2007, new studies have confirmed the warnings sounded by the IPCC, and many of the latest findings suggest that the situation is more urgent than previously stated….

I am so pleased to welcome our witnesses today. Dr. Rajendra Pachauri is the Chairman of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.In 2008, Dr. Pachauri accepted the Nobel Prize on behalf of the Panel’s 2,000 participating scientists.

We also have Dr. Christopher Field with us from Stanford University. Dr. Field was the Co Chair of Working Group 2 of the IPCC, which focused on the impacts of global warming. He is an expert on how global warming is already affecting North America, and the additional impacts that are likely to come with increased warming in the future.

Not only did she use the IPCC’s scary projections, she even was ‘so pleased’ to bring along Pachauri and Dr. Field as witnesses. Here is Pachauri’s testimony. I believe this is his presentation also. And here is Field’s testimony. Not surprisingly, they rely entirely on what the IPCC says, and Field even claims:

Over this time, the reports of the IPCC have served as a gold standard for authoritative assessments of the state of scientific knowledge about climate change.

I wonder if Boxer would still agree with that tired ‘gold standard’ claim. Notice that since 2007, she has consistently used the IPCC as a source for her knowledge, and has invited Pachauri to give presentations and testimony multiple times. The question is, why did she make the statement that she only used American scientists yesterday? If they’ve been good enough for the past several years, why aren’t they good enough now?

[wp_campaign_2]

Advertisements
 
8 Comments

Posted by on February 24, 2010 in Climate change legislation, Politicians

 

Tags: , , ,

8 responses to “Barbara Boxer relied heavily on both the IPCC and Pachauri

  1. pharmacy technician

    February 28, 2010 at 3:11 pm

    What a great resource!

     
  2. O Bloody Hell

    March 1, 2010 at 9:40 am

    > If they’ve been good enough for the past several years, why aren’t they good enough now?

    I believe the phrase “complete professional disrepute” might come to mind.

    American scientists, almost certainly just as wrong, however, haven’t yet been publicly embarrassed on the matter.

    In the words of Wednesday Addams, “Wait”.

     
  3. Dumpster Rental Los Angeles

    August 25, 2010 at 4:38 pm

    “In my opening statement, I didn’t quote one international scientist or IPCC report. … We are quoting the American scientific community here.”

    I’m sure some in the American Scientific Community have a differing opinion. For this reason, I think this quote is an unfair generalization.

     
  4. Murray Sandell

    August 18, 2011 at 8:15 pm

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: