NEOAVATARA

Gore...willing to debate anyone, anywhere?

http://www.climatedepot.com/a/429/Report-Democrats-Refuse-to-Allow-Skeptic-to-Testify-Alongside-Gore-At-Congressional-Hearing

Congressional Democrats, preparing for hearing with former Vice President Al Gore, refused to accept an invitation by Republicans to UK’s Lord Christopher Monckton, a former science advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.  Lord Monckton is a well known disbeliever in man made global warming. Democrats rescinded his scheduled joint appearance at the House Energy and Commerce hearing on Friday. Monckton said he was informed that he would not be allowed to testify alongside Gore when his plane landed from England Thursday afternoon.

According to Monckton, House Democrats told the Republican committee staff earlier this week that they would be putting forward an unnamed ‘celebrity’ as their star witness Friday at a multi-panel climate hearing examining the House global warming bill. The “celebrity” witness turned out to be Gore. Monckton said the GOP replied they would respond to the Democrats’ “celebrity” with an unnamed “celebrity” of their own. But Monckton claims that when the Democrats were told who the GOP witness would be, they refused to allow him to testify alongside Gore.

Henry Waxman, Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, refused comment.

Instead, Newt Gingrich has been invited to testify.  As Ed Morrissey of Hotair points out, this is not quite the same, since Gingrich has at least tacitly agreed that man made global warming is real.  Usually, doing an ad with Nancy Pelosi on global warming…not a great move in conservative circles.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6n_-wB154

Again, I have no idea if this Monckton is a reliable source or not; I have never heard of him.  But frankly, if we are going to have open and honest hearings on a subject, shouldn’t a dissenting voice also be heard?  Additionally, Mr. Gore keeps telling us that the evidence is incontrovertable.  If so, then why would he have any hesitancy on debating the information?  He should be easily able to win his argument.

Also, I am no climate change denier.  I guess you could call me an open-minded skeptic.  I am a big fan of green technology, for one.  But whenever someone tries to inhibit free speech and debate on a subject, my skepticism only increases.  Congress should allow for both sides to be discussed and debated, regardless of how much they disdain the opposing view.

UPDATE:  O.K., I am a big enough man to say I am wrong.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNO4NX1W3o8

Newt Gingrich presented testiomony to Congress today, and I have to say, I was impressed.  You can read the entire link here. Above you can see a video from his site, contractwiththeearth.org.

Some excerpts:

In this commitment, I echo the conviction of two great American leaders. The first is President Theodore Roosevelt, who said that “the nation behaves well if it treats the natural resources as assets, which it must turn over to the next generation increased, and not impaired, in value.” The other was then-Governor Ronald Reagan who, upon the occasion of the first Earth Day, affirmed the “absolute necessity of waging all-out war against the debauching of the environment.”

It was in this spirit that I read the bill that is being discussed before this committee and it is in this spirit that I report to you today my conclusion that this is the wrong bill.

This bill is wrong for our national security.

This bill is wrong for our economy.

This bill is wrong for government of, by, and for the people.

What this bill will do is continue to push us along that path to destruction.  Instead of rewarding innovation, this bill punishes Americans into living lives that the government wants them to live.  Instead of recognizing that the energy crisis was and is purely politician-driven, this bill punishes Americans for the faults of politicians and bureaucrats.  Instead of opening up America’s vast resources of oil, natural gas, and coal, this bill guarantees that we will remain reliant upon OPEC if we want to continue to drive cars, heat our homes, and run our appliances.

The fact is we have more energy resources than any other country in the world. Our estimated shale oil resources in the Rocky Mountains alone are three times the size of the Saudi Arabian oil reserves. We have 27 percent of the world‘s coal.  We have huge potential in wind power. We have enormous opportunities in solar power. We have the largest number of scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs of any country in the world.

According to the Heritage Foundation, the cost of cap-and-trade, with even only a small percentage of allocations being auctioned, would be $1.9 trillion.  To put that in perspective the Vietnam War cost only $698 billion, the New Deal cost $500 billion, and NASA since its inception has only cost $851 billion, all amounts adjusted for inflation.

And these costs will be unfairly distributed.

In a recent paper for the Tax Foundation, Andrew Chamberlain concludes that the costs of this energy tax would be “disproportionately borne by low-income households, those under age 25 and over 75 years, those in Southern states, and single parents with dependent children.”

I would urge all conservatives to read the entire transcript.

And as for me…bravo, Mr. Gingrich…sorry I didn’t have faith.

Video below:  #1  Gingrich blasting Rep. Waxman, especially on Waxman’s suggestion that the American people should be punished to achieve reduction in pollution.  #2  Gingrich invalidating much of Al Gore’s testimony.  Must see TV.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44fPSn7VxKs

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7VUg7nG3lw