Joe Barton Cites Great Flood To Disprove Human Role In Climate Change

49

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) turned to the Bible on Wednesday during a congressional hearing, using the Great Flood to support his claim that climate change isn't man-made, BuzzFeed Politics reported.


During his remarks on H.R. 3, a bill that would grant Congress the authority tocircumvent President Barack Obama and approve the Keystone XL pipeline, Barton acknowledged the existence of climate change, but argued that it is steered by natural causes.

"I would point out that people like me who support hydrocarbon development don't deny that climate is changing," Barton told his fellow members of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee. "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."

"I would point out that if you're a believer 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," Barton added.

Written By: Chelsea Kiene
continue to source article at huffingtonpost.com

49 COMMENTS

  1. “CO2 is not a pollutant in any normal definition of the term,” Barton said [...]“It’s in your Coca-Cola, your Dr. Pepper and your Perrier water. It’s necessary for human life,” he continued. “It’s odorless, colorless, tasteless, doesn’t cause cancer, doesn’t cause asthma.”

    Same goes for water, but during the Great Flood water was a hot-button issue. I don’t see why he doesn’t get that.

    Also, the rainbow is a promise that God will never flood the world again, so as long as there are rainbows we know the glacier sheet will hold up, and anything else is lies straight from the pit of hell. In the albedo effect we trust.

    • CO2 is also deadly in large enough concentrations. That’s why closed environments like submarines and space craft must have CO2 filters.

      In reply to #3 by This Is Not A Meme:

      “CO2 is not a pollutant in any normal definition of the term,” Barton said [...]“It’s in your Coca-Cola, your Dr. Pepper and your Perrier water. It’s necessary for human life,” he continued. “It’s odorless, colorless, tasteless, doesn’t cause cancer, doesn’t cause asthma.”

      Same goes for water, but during the Great Flood water was a hot-button issue. I don’t see why he doesn’t get that.

      Also, the rainbow is a promise that God will never flood the world again, so as long as there are rainbows we know the glacier sheet will hold up, and anything else is lies straight from the pit of hell. In the albedo effect we trust.

    • And this guy has a degree in engineerng from Texas A & M and in management from Purdue. Why doesn’t he know better? In reply to #5 by Capt. Bloodeye:

      I’ll see your moron and raise you an imbecile.

      • In reply to #6 by wsayeth4:

        And this guy has a degree in engineerng from Texas A & M and in management from Purdue. Why doesn’t he know better?

        From his website: “The battle (for Keystone) is not over”. So he pulls out a bebe gun? Fail. Anyway, if I read between the lines correctly, it’s all about jobs, jobs, jobs for Texas.

      • In reply to #6 by wsayeth4:

        And this guy has a degree in engineerng from Texas A & M and in management from Purdue. Why doesn’t he know better? In reply to #5 by Capt. Bloodeye:

        I’ll see your moron and raise you an imbecile.

        I’ve had to think about this over the years; I know a disproportionate number of born-agains that are in engineering. My theory is that you can learn all about HOW things work and not have to think about why things are this way. Then, because you have a degree, you think you are one of the ones who know how things work. Extrapolate this confidence to include your own superstitions and beliefs, and lo and behold you have engineers who say the universe is 6,000 years old and can now speak with ‘authority’ on almost anything. In my experience, this has been the case a number of times.

        Still baffling, though.

      • In reply to #6 by wsayeth4:

        And this guy has a degree in engineerng from Texas A & M and in management from Purdue. Why doesn’t he know better? In reply to #5 by Capt. Bloodeye:

        I’ll see your moron and raise you an imbecile.

        Yes! You might have thought that engineering students could have learned how to calculate volumes of water, as part of an engineering degree.

        Structural and mechanical engineers might even have studied the materials, transport, structures, and tooling required for building boats and ships! (It is my understanding that at the {alleged} time of Noah, metal nails and saws had not yet been invented!) Noah’s Ark specification.

      • In reply to #6 by wsayeth4:

        And this guy has a degree in engineerng from Texas A & M and in management from Purdue. Why doesn’t he know better? In reply to #5 by Capt. Bloodeye:I’ll see your moron and raise you an imbecile.

        He almost certainly does know better but is a greedy stakeholder vote junky.

        S G

      • In reply to #6 by wsayeth4:

        And this guy has a degree in engineering from Texas A & M and in management from Purdue. Why doesn’t he know better?

        Well let’s see what sort of engineer he is NOT due to cluelessness!

        “CO2 is not a pollutant in any normal definition of the term,” Barton said in an interview on C-SPAN.

        “It’s in your Coca-Cola, your Dr. Pepper and your Perrier water. It’s necessary for human life,” he continued. “It’s odorless, colorless, tasteless, doesn’t cause cancer, doesn’t cause asthma.”

        • Clearly not a chemical engineer ( properties of gases)

        • He is not a ventilation or building engineer. (human respiration in buildings)

        • He is not a vehicle engineer (exhaust management)

        • He is not an aircraft engineer. (exhaust management cabin ventilation)

        • He is not a space craft engineer. (exhaust management cabin ventilation)

        • He is not a diving / submarine engineer. (pressurised gas cylinders respiration mixes)

        • He is not a medical engineer. (respiratory anaesthetic equipment)

        • He is not a heating engineer, ( gas flues?)

        Perhaps that’s why he went into politics!

  2. Yes, because floods happening in an area, aka the Dead Sea, which is the LOWEST place on earth at 1400 meters below sea level, would never be plagued by “floods” right? Meanwhile in the Americas, Europe, Asia, and Africa didn’t seem to have these “floods”..

    And quoting the bible as “evidence” is the dumbest thing I have ever seen.

    • In reply to #8 by Perfect Tommy:

      Yes, because floods happening in an area, aka the Dead Sea, which is the LOWEST place on earth at 1400 meters below sea level, would never be plagued by “floods” right? Meanwhile in the Americas, Europe, Asia, and Africa didn’t seem to have these “floods”..

      There have been many floods from both rivers and from melting ice-caps and ice sheets after ice ages. None of them covered the whole globe, but the seas have risen two hundred or four hundred, feet flooding coasts, valleys, the Black-Sea basin etc. in the last few thousand years.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vostok-Petit-data.svg

      Of course you would have to use data from CLIMATE SCIENTISTS AND GEOLOGISTS to understand that – so Noah-mythologists have no chance of gaining any useful knowledge!
      For a start the number of thousands of years plotted, goes off their scale and most of the flooding was over by 6,000 years ago!

      http://www.fws.gov/slamm/Changes%20in%20Sea%20Level-expanded%20version-template.pdf – (See the “Post-Glacial Sea level Rise graph on page 6 of the link.)

      And quoting the bible as “evidence” is the dumbest thing I have ever seen.

      Wait till the next YECs turn up. They can usually find new levels of dumb!

  3. Sorry have I got this wrong but according to the bible didn’t the big feller drown all those babies and cute kittens because of human activity he didn’t approve of. Surely therefore it is an example of the human role in climate change, if you’re a believer in the bible, that is.

  4. “I would point out that people like me who support hydrocarbon development don’t deny that climate is changing,” Barton told his fellow members of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee. “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.

    To the pig-ignorant who are incapable of forming an evidence based opinion, because they are too stupid to understand any measurement, any differences of expert opinion, facts, or data, are unlikely to register ANY honest connection to reality!!

    I think

    He’s lying!!!!

    there’s a divergence of evidence.”

    He would not know what evidence is!

    Perhaps he should keep his mouth shut and look like a dumb idiot, rather than opening it and removing even the slightest shadow of doubt!

  5. Where do I begin tackling the fractal wrongness? The Great Flood is the single least plausible story, in a whole pile of implausible stories, and no one who has actually thought about it could possibly think it is literally true.

    Lets walk through it.

    God decides that the entire human race is so wicked that he has no choice but to wipe out all life in order to punish them. Surely that’s quite an over reaction considering all the things happening in the world today that go completely unpunished.

    God decides that one man and his family alone in all the world are worthy of being saved. Is it really likely that only one family are worthy and everyone else are totally depraved?

    God decides that the mechanism he will use for punishing humanity is a global flood. Rain comes from evaporation from the sea, so an amount of rain falling necessitates a similar amount of evaporation from the sea, causing the sea level to fall. Therefore God had to create more water in order to flood the entire world. Based on my (admittedly possibly inaccurate) calculations, approximately six times as much water as exists in all the seas, and then make it all disappear again afterwards. If he could create that amount of matter and then make it disappear, why did he simply not make all the people disappear?

    In order that Noah, his family, and every species of animal survive God’s punishment, God instructs Noah to build a ship so that they can evade the flood. This ship is 1- made from unaged timber unfit for shipbuilding, 2- too big to be structurally sound given the materials from which it is constructed, 3- too small to hold the number of species we now know exist. What a great plan this is turning out to be!

    The animals to be taken aboard this ship all have specific habitat and diet requirements many of which mean they cannot even reach the middle east where the ship is being built, even assuming they can cross the intervening seas and oceans, and when the flood happens, the Ark will be at such an altitude that they will all die from oxygen deprivation anyway (along with Noah and his family).

    The animals will all need to be fed for the duration of the flood, necessitating more space on the already too small Ark is taken up by food. A lot of the animals are carnivores and will want to eat the other animals that God/Noah are trying to save. Then Noah and his family will have to clear up all the droppings from all the animals on a daily basis (for more hours than are in a day) to prevent a huge number of terrible diseases from breaking out and killing everything on board.

    Aquatic plants and animals also have strict habitat requirements, and the seas being suddenly diluted by six times their volume of fresh water would kill all life in them.

    So far God has had to: create a vast amount of water; stop the animals on the Ark from killing one another; stop the animals from overwhelming the Ark, each other, and Noah and his family with their faeces; and stop all the aquatic plants and animals from dying because their habitat has been destroyed. This is a complicated series of miracles, just making all the people disappear is not only simpler and less time consuming, but would be equally effective for demonstrating God’s power.

    Lets just step forward to the end of the flood. All that extra water has been slowly removed and the dove returns with an olive sprig. Noah didn’t take plant species aboard the Ark (except as food for the animals), so God had to recreate the plant species on the newly unflooded land. If he was going to do that why didn’t he do it with the animal species as well, and save all the space on the Ark just for Noah and his family and their food.

    The animals are now released from the Ark and are still in the middle east, again in what is for many of them an unsuitable habitat and have to return to their homes across the same seas and oceans they had to traverse to get there in the first place before they die.

    Noah and his family now have to repopulate the world, in spite of which the populations of Europe, the Americas, Africa, Asia, India and Australasia had no cultural memory of the flood, and didn’t worship the Jewish god until later waves of missionaries spread the story. If that isn’t enough, many ancient countries (for example: Egypt) came into existence before, and continued after the alleged time of the flood without so much as mentioning it

    I’ve gone on much longer than I originally intended, but the blatant stupidity of an elected official who certainly has the education and intellect to know better made me very cross.

    Even if the story of the Great Flood was entirely true, just because a worldwide climate changing event in the past was not caused by man, it does not in any way prove that climate change now is not caused by man. We have to look at the evidence (not illogical and preposterous stories), and the evidence indicates that it is.

    • In reply to #18 by N_Ellis:

      Where do I begin tackling the fractal wrongness? The Great Flood is the single least plausible story, in a whole pile of implausible stories, and no one who has actually thought about it could possibly think it is literally true.

      Lets walk through it.

      You’ve just succinctly summed up the problem with arguing with believers. You’ve carefully gone through the available data, analysed it and prepared detailed counter arguments based on observation and evidence. Your opponents will take one look at your work and counter it in 2 seconds…..”god did it”.

    • In reply to #18 by N_Ellis:
      when the flood happens, the Ark will be at such an altitude that they will all die from oxygen deprivation anyway (along with Noah and his family).

      Surely not. The Earth’s atmosphere would be pushed up by the rising water, wouldn’t it? “Altitude” doesn’t mean distance from the centre of the Earth, it means height above sea level.

      • In reply to #30 by CEVA34:

        In reply to #18 by N_Ellis:
        when the flood happens, the Ark will be at such an altitude that they will all die from oxygen deprivation anyway (along with Noah and his family).

        Surely not. The Earth’s atmosphere would be pushed up by the rising water, wouldn’t it? “Altitude” doesn’t mean distance from the centre of the Earth, it means height above sea level.

        True, but the atmosphere would occupy a “shell” of much greater volume owing to the increase in radius. I haven’t done the math(s), but this might be significant.

        But, since it didn’t happen, it’s a moot point.

        Steve

        • In reply to #40 by Agrajag:

          In reply to #30 by CEVA34:

          In reply to #18 by N_Ellis:
          when the flood happens, the Ark will be at such an altitude that they will all die from oxygen deprivation anyway (along with Noah and his family).

          Surely not. The Earth’s atmosphere would be pushed up by the rising water, wouldn’t it? “Altitude” doesn’t mean distance from the centre of the Earth, it means height above sea level.

          True, but the atmosphere would occupy a “shell” of much greater volume owing to the increase in radius. I haven’t done the math(s), but this might be significant.

          But, since it didn’t happen, it’s a moot point.

          Steve
          I’m getting out of my depth here (so to speak!). Would the “shell” of atmosphere have a greater volume, and thus be diluted, if that’s what you mean? Or would it end up the same amount of breathable air, but occupying a shallower shell? If the latter, Noah and Co. could still breathe. But as you imply, it’s a moot point (or, as a sportsman being interviewed on the BBC the other day put it (several times), a “mute” point.

  6. I would point out that if you’re a believer 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,”

    No, he’s right, the flood didn’t happen because of a hydrocarbon economy, it was because it was fictional.

    With regards to AGW, as I recall the evidence suggested that the earth should have cooled 0.6C or so, rather than the 1C warming that has occured. Given the lack of noticeable changes in the sun’s activity against this the only major factor has been CO2 release due to man, predicted by the greenhouse effect. Not to say that that’s automatically correct, but further experiments have so far only reinforced the general predictions with some modifications.

  7. He might not be that dumb- just that dishonest. Get elected to congress, take a week to furnish your office and start running for reelection. And those fossil boys contibute heavily to those who play ball and read from the script.

  8. I’ve always found it exquisitely ironic that these anti-science, anti-evolution, bible-believin’ cretins are the biggest fans of fossil fuel. Their whole world runs on the liquefied remains of plants and creatures dead for hundreds of millions of years, but evolution and an old earth? Why, that’s just plain impossible!

  9. If Barton had been a representative in the congress of anaerobic organisms about 3 billion years ago, he would have promoted the cultivation of cyanobacteria and doubted that the rising concentration of atmospheric free oxygen had anything to do with the policies of the anaerobes or the increasing death rate of his fellow anaerobes.

    Poor man, victim of overexposure to bozo-izing radiation.

  10. “everything’s fine” morlocks assure eloi

    What fascinates me is the way these backward people are only in power because of science. Happily supporting the petroleum industry while managing to never once wonder on what day god created oil

  11. So Mr Barton, CO2 is a completely harmless, natural non-pollutant is it? Please demonstrate that by locking yourself in an airtight chamber and having nothing but CO2 to breathe. Please do it: I’m willing to be persuaded.

  12. “I would point out that if you’re a believer in ASTROLOGY, one would have to say the AGE OF AQUARIUS WITH EARTH IN RETRO CAUSES climate change and that certainly wasn’t because mankind had overdeveloped hydrocarbon energy,” Barton added.

  13. Is he supporting fatalism? If so then it’s kind of scary that one interpretation would make the industry the arbiter of our fate, and the thing we should yield to. He’s implied God here though, but I do wonder…

    • In reply to #35 by Sean_W:

      Is he supporting fatalism? If so then it’s kind of scary that one interpretation would make the industry the arbiter of our fate, and the thing we should yield to.

      For an utterly clueless politician, “fatalism” is a great ally.

      When the clueless make decisions they cause disasters and are then blamed for them. – Better just sit back and avoid responsibility. (- Not their fault! – It just happened naturally! – Act of god!)

      • That wouldn’t surprise me.

        I think he’s nodding to his supporters. It’s so clumsily done that it’s embarrassing. I wonder when they’ll just start dropping God randomly into their sentences?

        —-//—-

        To those who noted our responsibility for the flood, do you think he believes in the wrathful hurricane hypothesis?

        In reply to #37 by Alan4discussion:

        In reply to #35 by SeanW:

        For an utterly clueless politician, “fatalism” is a great ally.

        When the clueless make decisions they cause disasters and are then blamed for them. – Better just sit back and avoid responsibility. (- Not their fault! – It just happened naturally! – Act of god!)

  14. CO2 is not a pollutant in any normal definition of the term,” Barton said [...]“It’s in your Coca-Cola, your Dr. Pepper and your Perrier water.

    Yep! That’s Young Earth Creationist fizzicks! He obviously studied under Eric Hovind!

    It’s necessary for human life,” he continued. “It’s odorless, colorless, tasteless, doesn’t cause cancer, doesn’t cause asthma.”

    Yeah! Take deeeeep breaths! – So that’s how they suffocate their brain cells to achieve YEC thinking!

  15. I think Western society has entered a period of decadence when a moron like this fellow can reach high office, and that makes me extremely concerned. And even worse, the quality of the human factor in these societies, willing to vote clowns like the one above, has dropped considerably. Today’s politicians, and, perhaps, future politicians too, are not up to the standards required to be able to solve the enormous amount of problems that our world has to face, including the climate change. Quoting the Bible to disprove the climate change is like saying that the Lake Ness monster disproves Evolution. Imbeciles like these in high places are likely to create serious problems to the world in the near future. And the problem is that a new wave of morons soon will join in due to the interference of religious politicians with the education system.

  16. Liar. He wants to make his pile of loot in the here and now and as a good christian he has no thought for the morrow and like all bigots doesn’t give a damn about the planet or his fellow humans. Maybe he is like many other wealthy American politicians and is actually a non believer feigning belief to his advantage in a country that has a huge majority of dumbass unthinking god fearing fools who will happily cast their votes in his direction. So he is either a rich fool or a lying money grabbing crook.

Leave a Reply