Jim Inhofe: “to draw to conclusion this debate, let me repeat a couple of things we did last night. I will briefly address the…”

“to draw to conclusion this debate, let me repeat a couple of things we did last night. I will briefly address the science issue. I know there are people out there thinking the science is settled. The science is not settled. Last night I went into detail and I will repeat a couple of significant points. First, Frederick Seitz, the past president of the National Academy of Sciences, compiled the Oregon petition which had 17,800 independently verified signatures--most of those holding degrees of Ph.D. They came to this conclusion: There is no convincing scientific evidence that the human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will in the foreseeable future cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Again, the Heidelberg Appeal, over 4,000 scientists, 70 of whom are Nobel Prize winners, signed this Heidelberg Appeal that says there is no compelling evidence that is existing today to justify controls of anthropogenic--man made--greenhouse gas emissions. Dr. Richard Lindzen, MIT scientist and member of the National Academy of Sciences, said--and I don't think anyone would question his credentials--said there is a definite disconnect between Kyoto and science. Should a catastrophic scenario prove correct, Kyoto would not prevent it.”