Congressman Joe Barton Cites Noah's Flood as Proof People Aren't Causing Climate Change

JoeBarton.jpg
Facebook
Joe Barton, wearing a patriotic shirt.
Joe Barton, the Republican Congressman representing Arlington and its environs, has never been shy about expressing his skepticism about global warming. As chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, he launched an investigation into a pair of studies that documented a dramatic spike in global temperatures, sparred with Al Gore and recently referred to carbon dioxide as a life necessity, not a pollutant.

Even after 2012 clocked in as the hottest year on record and a scorched Texas suffered through a historic drought, Barton wouldn't acknowledge the possibility that humans might have had something to do with it. And why would he? He's got the Bible on his side.

At least, that's what he indicated today during a hearing Wednesday. The bill would give Congress the authority to approve the Keystone pipeline, and as Buzzfeed reports, Barton took the opportunity to once again stake out his position against the mountain of scientific evidence indicating that human beings are heating up the planet.

He doesn't deny that the climate's changing. He just says there's a "divergence of evidence" that leads him to the conclusion that it's all natural. Ordained by God, even.

"I would point out that if you're a believer in in the Bible, one would have to say the great flood is an example of climate change and that certainly wasn't because mankind had overdeveloped hydrocarbon energy."

Keep in mind that this was well before Jesus ever turned those vessels of water into diesel or made a single lump of coal, not to mention his other, lesser known petroleum-related miracles. Also keep in mind that this man is elected to represent a million of you in D.C.

My Voice Nation Help
27 comments
inverse137
inverse137

You see the picture above and you just realize he is the perfect conservative candidate: fat, lazy and dumb.

Terrence Wilsön
Terrence Wilsön

I really want to believe that Texas Republican politicians aren't all dumb as a bowl of mice.....this probably won't help their cause though:)

Alan Huddleston
Alan Huddleston

well hells bells joe if the baaaa ble is the answer why not just take one of them magic loaves of bread and solve world hunger while you're at it.

studonomentonous
studonomentonous

If in fact there even was a flood, all major religions have flood stories. This flood might've been from the end of the iceage. Most of the population lived on the coasts (as we still do today world-wide). As the iceage came to a close and the water levels rose, entire populations that lived on what we now call the "continental shelf" would've been displaced by a hundred miles. Look at a globe, look in the oceans. That shelf around the continents is where ancient people lived. He should worry less about disproving global warming, and more about buying beachfront property near Centerville for his Great-Grandkids. 

Steve Handy
Steve Handy

Oh yay, another pseudo-article to inspire some Christian bashing. He didn't cite the bible as proof, he said "if you believe in the bible...". I'm not arguing for or against climate change, I'm just curious as to why people seem to trip over themselves to have an anti-Christian circle-jerk everytime someone mentions the bible or god.

Adam Silva
Adam Silva

To be fair, there are a lot of religious people (and I'm not one) who back action on climate change. Barton is a particular moron.

Justin 'Dub' Cook
Justin 'Dub' Cook

I think religion as a whole proves that people are gullible.

Kelly Tomlinson
Kelly Tomlinson

I think that story actually proves that people ar gullible.

isla989
isla989

honestly Texas, what the hell??!?? Why WHY?!?? do you insist on sending pinheads like this to Congress??  Forcing our entire country to have to put up with utter nincompoops like this, with all the challenges we have to face in this day and age.. what will it take??

russell.allison1
russell.allison1

"A scientist and author, James Lovelock, who once predicted doomsdaylike fallout from climate change has backtracked, calling his own projections and those of others "alarmist." "  This is from an article (http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/stories/gaia-scientist-takes-back-climate-change-predictions) published in 2012.  Even the scientists who study this issue are not in lockstep agreement. My problem with climate change alarmists is that they approach this issue with a religiosity, to question it becomes heresy. That zealotry is what harms the movement as much or more than those who would completely ignore preventable outcomes.

PersistentID2345
PersistentID2345

"I would point out that people like me who support hydrocarbon development don't deny that climate is changing," he added. "I think you can have an honest difference of opinion of what's causing that change without automatically being either all in that's all because of mankind or it's all just natural. I think there's a divergence of evidence."

Sounds pretty reasonable here from the Buzzfeed article.  Crazy Joe is stating he is for hydrocarbons (he drives a car), does not deny climate change, and notes the divergence of evidence over the cause of climate change falling somewhere in between all man made and all a natural occurrence.

DO needs a serious fact check on this Crazy Joe piece. 

Looks bad when you are just as full of it as the Ellis County Smog man.


PersistentID2345
PersistentID2345

"I would point out that people like me who support hydrocarbon development don't deny that climate is changing," he added. "I think you can have an honest difference of opinion of what's causing that change without automatically being either all in that's all because of mankind or it's all just natural. I think there's a divergence of evidence."

Sounds pretty reasonable here from the Buzzfeed article.  Crazy Joe is stating he is for hydrocarbons (he drives a car), does not deny climate change, and notes the divergence of evidence over the cause of climate change falling somewhere in between all man made and all a natural occurrence.

DO needs a serious fact check to temper this Crazy Joe piece. 

Looks bad when you are just as full of it as the Ellis County Smog man.


d-may
d-may

Ironically, he's right from a certain point of view...


The Bible says that God sent the flood in Genesis to wipe out the evil that man has caused. And that's exactly what's happening with GW. Man's greed and gluttony has brought this catastrophe upon ourselves. 

The metaphor is perfectly applicable. 

robnbc
robnbc

If conservatives want credibility with educated people they need to take science seriously and not regurgitate the talking points provided by the fossil fuel industry. Carbon dioxide has increased about 40 percent in the atmosphere since the 1750s, due to pollution from dirty energy like coal, oil, and gas. The result is a warming climate. http://clmtr.lt/cb/qYE0Eg  The results point to catastrophic changes that will effect our children and grandchildren.  Reality cares nothing for ideology and we all need to start looking for solutions to this problem now.

dfwheathen
dfwheathen

@russell.allison1 Did you even read the article you posted? "Even so, climate scientists stress Lovelock's backtracking doesn't negate the reality of climate change, and in fact, his past predictions highlight some overall misunderstanding about planetary warming." AND "While warming may not have reached Lovelock's expectations, it is clearly happening. Global temperature data shows the world is heating up. The first decade of this century was the warmest on record for more than a century, part of a trend in increasing warmth over the past 50 years, according to the U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. "

d-may
d-may

@PersistentID2345 The problem is that he's not really interested in the debate. It's just a stalling tactic. It is now 100% clear that the climate is changing, so only the absolute most stubborn people would think otherwise. The conservative talking point now is just as you described. "We don't know how much is really caused by people."

The problem is, we do. Virtually every professional scientific organization has adopted statements confirming that humans account for nearly ALL of the climate change since 1900. 

The American Meteorological Society (AMS) statement adopted by their council in 2012 concluded:

"There is unequivocal evidence that Earth’s lower atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; sea level is rising; and snow cover, mountain glaciers, and Arctic sea ice are shrinking. The dominant cause of the warming since the 1950s is human activities. ..."

In fact. as of 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement, no scientific body of national or international standing rejected the findings of human-induced effects on climate change

James_the_P3
James_the_P3

@dallas.l.may Yeah--I was a little bit confused on that point.  I'm admittedly no Old Testament scholar, by my recollection was that human behavior caused God to flood the world and wipe out its inhabitants.

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@robnbc Not denying climate change, and I freely embrace science and the geologic record.  That same geologic record and science which, in fact, points to various periods of dramatic climate change long before mankind made an appearance.  'Divergence of evidence' is a very appropriate way to describe the various schools of thought on climate change.  It is not a 'hard' science at this point.  One of the ways, in the 90's, the global warming alarmists achieved 'nearly unanimous consensus' on human-caused climate change was to have the UN and other sponsoring bodies dismiss any scientist that disputed it.

The great Messiah of climate change alarmists, Al Gore, still drives SUV's and uses private aircraft charters and has a home that consumes as much fossil-fuel generated energy as half a town.  He is heavily invested in one of the brokerages that would have controlled the 'carbon credits' exchange, thus profiting personally from big corporations shuffling money and pollution around the globe.  This doesn't discredit the science, nor the environmentalist movement, but it is a huge flashing warning triangle about this particular man and his motivations.

russell.allison1
russell.allison1

@dfwheathen @russell.allison1 Yes, I did. The point isn't that climate change is happening-climate change has been a continuous process over the life of this planet, but that scientists studying this process are not in complete agreement on the gravity/cause/scope of the situation. Here is yet another link to a study showing incomplete acceptance of the science: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/

If the those studying this are still evolving conclusions then those who are not studying it should probably refrain from commiting it to stone tablets

CornyDoggy
CornyDoggy

@RTGolden1

And I'm assuming you've taken into account those same correlations on the opposing side of the argument?  

CornyDoggy
CornyDoggy

@russell.allison1

How much digging did you do into the survey that article cites?  They surveyed the Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta.  As one comment notes, "That’s like surveying tobacco company CEO’s about the dangers of smoking"


RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@CornyDoggy @RTGolden1 Of course.  Alarmist mentality is not isolated on the left, nor is it restricted to environmental concerns.  The right has their own alarmists and their own little hoard of concocted concerns.  As I tried to make clear in my opening line, I embrace the science behind climate change, and the science, the geological record and history show that this has happened before the industrial age, before the iron age, and before the stone age.  This will happen again after the Ipod epoch and again and again ad infinitum.  Are humans contributing to the current climate change?  Probably.  Is there a solution?  Short of suicide on a global scale, I don't think so.  Not in the near term anyway.  It is, however a great way to generate revenue flows on both sides of the debate without accomplishing anything significant.

Now Trending

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...