Hill Heat: At Science Hearing, Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas) Expresses Confusion on Global Warming and Scientific MethodScience Policy Legislation Actiontag:www.hillheat.com,2005:TypoTypo2014-03-26T21:27:38-04:00Brad Johnsonurn:uuid:055c3571-29ff-4a46-816a-816b4ceaa5592014-03-26T20:56:00-04:002014-03-26T21:27:38-04:00At Science Hearing, Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas) Expresses Confusion on Global Warming and Scientific Method<p>At <a href='http://www.hillheat.com/events/2014/03/26/a-review-of-the-president%E2%80%99s-fiscal-year-2015-budget-request-for-science-agencies'>today’s Science Committee hearing</a> to review the President’s proposed science budget, freshman member Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas) dismissed climate science before expressing his support for the Keystone XL pipeline, which terminates in his district.</p>
<center><iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/fim_TY98kyQ?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></center>
<p>“You scientists start with what they call a postulate or theory and you work forward from that direction, is that right?” Weber asked White House Science Advisor John Holdren, before jesting about the science of manmade global warming.</p>
<blockquote> I was wondering how that related to like, for example, global warming and eventually global cooling. I may want to get your cell phone number because if we do go through a couple of cycles, global warming and then back to global cooling, I need to know when to buy my long coat on sale. You know, so I just don’t know how y’all prove those hypotheses going back fifty, hundred, you know, what you might say is thousands or if not even millions of years and then postulate those forward.</blockquote>
<p>According to Center for Responsive Politics data, Weber has received $45,000 from the energy sector in campaign contributions, the vast majority — $39,000 — coming from the oil and gas industry. Koch Industries has contributed $10,000 to his campaign coffers.</p>
<p>Transcript:</p><p>At <a href='http://www.hillheat.com/events/2014/03/26/a-review-of-the-president%E2%80%99s-fiscal-year-2015-budget-request-for-science-agencies'>today’s Science Committee hearing</a> to review the President’s proposed science budget, freshman member Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas) dismissed climate science before expressing his support for the Keystone XL pipeline, which terminates in his district.</p>
<center><iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/fim_TY98kyQ?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></center>
<p>“You scientists start with what they call a postulate or theory and you work forward from that direction, is that right?” Weber asked White House Science Advisor John Holdren, before jesting about the science of manmade global warming.</p>
<blockquote> I was wondering how that related to like, for example, global warming and eventually global cooling. I may want to get your cell phone number because if we do go through a couple of cycles, global warming and then back to global cooling, I need to know when to buy my long coat on sale. You know, so I just don’t know how y’all prove those hypotheses going back fifty, hundred, you know, what you might say is thousands or if not even millions of years and then postulate those forward.</blockquote>
<p>According to Center for Responsive Politics data, Weber has received $45,000 from the energy sector in campaign contributions, the vast majority — $39,000 — coming from the oil and gas industry. Koch Industries has contributed $10,000 to his campaign coffers.</p>
<p>Transcript:</p>
<blockquote>
<span class="caps">WEBER</span>: Welcome, Dr. Holdren, I appreciate you being back again. I don’t remember if it was Mark Twain, or Will Rogers, or Ambrose Bierce, or someone like that who said, “All scientists are sure only about one thing, it’s that all scientists before them are wrong.” Have you heard that comment?
<p><span class="caps">HOLDREN</span>: I’ve heard versions of that.</p>
<p><span class="caps">WEBER</span>: Who was that who said that? No idea.</p>
<p>You scientists start with what they call a postulate or theory and you work forward from that direction, is that right?</p>
<p><span class="caps">HOLDREN</span>: It depends on what kind of science that you’re talking about. But the notion of posing a hypothesis and then trying to determine whether it is right is one of the tried and true approaches in science, yes.</p>
<p><span class="caps">WEBER</span>: I was wondering how that related to like, for example, global warming and eventually global cooling. I may want to get your cell phone number because if we do go through a couple of cycles, global warming and then back to global cooling, I need to know when to buy my long coat on sale. You know, so I just don’t know how y’all prove those hypotheses going back fifty, hundred, you know, what you might say is thousands or if not even millions of years and then postulate those forward.</p>
<p>But we’ll get to that in a little bit.</p>
<p>The Keystone pipeline, I’m very very interested in because it comes into my district.</blockquote></p>