Now on ScienceBlogs: How light or dark is Barack Obama's skin? Depends on your political stance...

Seed Media Group

Collective Imagination

Search

rss.jpg   Subscribe to RSS feed

Profile

davidog.pngDave Bacon is a theoretical ski bum who is also a pseudo professor. His research is on quantum computing, his scientific passions extend to everything in physics, mathematics, computer science and beyond, and his personal pleasures include making wine, playing poker, skiing, camping, and daydreaming (although not all of those at the same time.) Nothing he says on this blog should be construed as having anything to do with his employer or his dog.


Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Other Information

The use of Occam's razor on this website is strickly prohibited.

Cows are well approximated by a sphere.
rss.jpg   Subscribe to RSS feed

« SciBlogging: A Roundtable Discussion on Science Blogs | Main | Spottings of arXiview in the Wild »

Rep Joe Barton Thinks Oil in Alaska Disproves Global Warming

Category: Off The Deep EndPolitics
Posted on: April 22, 2009 5:57 PM, by Dave Bacon

Share:

Okay, well he didn't exactly say that, but he certainly is a smug son of a gun who asked a grade school question to a Nobel prize winner in physics, apparently expecting a "gotcha" moment (via TPM):

Dudes even so proud of himself that he (or his staff) posted this video on his YouTube page.

BEDEVERE: Exactly. So, logically...
VILLAGER #1: If... she... weighs... the same as a duck,... she's made of wood.
BEDEVERE: And therefore?
VILLAGER #2: A witch!
Then again, what should you expect for someone who produced this:
Wind is God's way of balancing heat. Wind is the way you shift heat from areas where it's hotter to areas where it's cooler. That's what wind is. Wouldn't it be ironic if in the interest of global warming we mandated massive switches to energy, which is a finite resource, which slows the winds down, which causes the temperature to go up? Now, I'm not saying that's going to happen, Mr. Chairman, but that is definitely something on the massive scale. I mean, it does make some sense. You stop something, you can't transfer that heat, and the heat goes up. It's just something to think about.

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/107725

Comments

1
Wind can be explained with Thermodynamics as a consequence of imbalance of temperature. Wind is how heat is shifted from areas where it's hotter to areas where it's cooler. That's what wind is.

Fixed.

Posted by: The Science Pundit | April 22, 2009 6:27 PM

2

Fixed?

Posted by: Dave Bacon | April 22, 2009 6:33 PM

3

So, according to the congresscriter from Texas, if we install too many wind turbines in Texas we’ll stop the wind from transferring heat from the Great Plains to the Gulf of Mexico, and Texas will go up in flames??? And how exactly is this is a bad thing??

I liked the NPR interview a while back with a west Texas farmer who was installing wind turbines on his farm. He thought it was a great way to earn some extra cash on the side. A city gal stopped by one day to ask what all these fans were for. The farmer replied that when the weather got too hot, they would turn on all the fans to keep the crops and cows cool. She seemed happy with that explanation. Perhaps Rep. Barton would also feel better with that explanation. We really don't want to trouble the poor man with actual knowledge.

Posted by: Scott | April 22, 2009 7:08 PM

4

My brain hurts now.


Instead of "shoe throwing" to indicate contempt, I propose "basic geology text throwing" to indicate contempt and either a)educate the idiot or b)render them harmless (via unconciousness).

Posted by: eNeMeE | April 22, 2009 7:08 PM

5

Smug & stupid enough not to know how stupid he is.

Posted by: Rob Jase | April 22, 2009 7:21 PM

6

I think there's also lot of smugness and sloppiness on the part of folks like James Hansen (as well as certain figures in the federal government). It's a serious problem that the global warming debate - about the extent of its likely impact, what should be done, and the government's role in the matter - is so one-sided in terms of scientific literacy and (seemingly) intelligence.

Posted by: Robert | April 22, 2009 8:09 PM

7

Wow. What a dumbass. Oh, but wait, he's from Texas...

Posted by: Ian Durham | April 22, 2009 8:31 PM

8

Barton was trying to get Chu to answer in six seconds a question that takes much longer to answer properly.

Barton was trying to imply that the North Slope of Alaska was not always tundra. This much is true. He then presumably wanted to draw the conclusion that global warming is not a problem. That conclusion does not follow from the above.

The issue is not whether Alaska once had a much warmer climate than it does now. The world's climate in general was quite a bit warmer in the age of the dinosaurs than it is now. The problem is that global food supplies depend on the climate not being vastly different from what we have seen in the last two hundred years or so. That's not a good bet: Consider the fate of the Maya, or the Anasazi, or the Greenland Norse, or Angkor Wat. Now remember that in those days food supplies were entirely regional, not globalized as they are today. That's the problem with global warming.

Posted by: Eric Lund | April 23, 2009 10:51 AM

9

Hello mister Ron... Mister Mo Ron

I'm really starting to think there needs to be test held before anyone runs for office - A no Politician left behind kinda thing...

Posted by: trevinla | April 23, 2009 1:33 PM

10

Phale

Posted by: DAV | April 23, 2009 1:39 PM

11

You have to believe the earth is older than 10,000 years to believe Chu's answer. I doubt Barton believes even that. Chu should have told him God put there, you dumb hick. That would have left Barton f'n speechless.

Posted by: rick | April 23, 2009 1:57 PM

12

It would be interesting to have that Barton fella explain: How come that the North Slope of Alaska has never been covered by a glacier?

Posted by: alfredo | April 23, 2009 2:02 PM

13

PLEASE secede, you moronic half-wits.

Posted by: barrelhse | April 23, 2009 2:10 PM

14

I think wind is created in fact here in New Mexico we know for a fact that Arizona blows and Texas sucks! wind explained in their terms

Posted by: Don | April 23, 2009 2:19 PM

15

Wind is God blowing. Everyone knows that. Jeesh.

Posted by: Lauren | April 23, 2009 4:33 PM

16

What Secretary Chu was trying to explain was that although Alaska now has oil fields; at the time of diagenesis of these deposits Alaska was not at the same longitude/latitude position that it is today. Plate tectonics and about 250 million years of continental drift has moved Alaska from more warmer latitudes to its present position.

Posted by: earthworx | April 23, 2009 5:19 PM

17

I thought there was oil under Alaska because that is where God placed it.

Posted by: Toby | April 23, 2009 6:12 PM

18

I thought there was oil under Alaska because that is where God placed it.

Posted by: Toby | April 23, 2009 6:13 PM

19

Not all Texans are dumbasses, we just have a majority of morons who tend to elect the mental runts to political office. Presumably this is allowed in order to keep the political scene tied up in knots and clear for business. It doesn't take much to be elected to office here, just say you are 'born again' and 'anti-abortion' and you can get elected/appointed to anything, even the presidency.
By the way, God put that oil there like he did gold in California, to give good christians the incentive to go out and spread the 'word' and precious bodily fluids all over the world.

Posted by: sshanks | April 23, 2009 7:37 PM

20

texas should leave the union to raise the countries iq

Posted by: joe | April 24, 2009 4:09 AM

21

Wu should have replied: "God put it there so the polar bears can power their snow machines

Posted by: "ill" duce | April 24, 2009 8:39 AM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Enter to win a free copy of The Monty Hall Problem
Visit the Collective Imagination blog
Advertisement
Collective Imagination

© 2006-2009 Seed Media Group LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of Seed Media Group. All rights reserved.

Sites by Seed Media Group: Seed Media Group | ScienceBlogs | SEEDMAGAZINE.COM