Rep. Moeller Challenged to Public Climate Debate

by lewwaters

Jim Moeller

Jim Moeller

Democrat 49th legislative district Representative Jim Moeller is well known for his arrogance and “know it all” attitude and loves to portray himself and his fellow Democrats as the only people in the state who care about anything.

Such is the case back on January 8, 2014 when he commented to a Lazy C article, “Republicans on climate panel want more time.”

Moeller said, “Yes regretfully, only the Democrats seem to believe in doing something about climate change. It’s ‘nice’ to try and include the Republicans in the discussion about what to do but they have to look out for those who make money on pollution. The Democrats only have science – and lots of it.”

Besides it being obvious just what the Representative is full of, any thinking person realizes that scientists remain divided over the allegation of man-made climate change. More and more we are seeing scientist recanting their view as they realize how the “discussion” has been limited and data “corrupted,” for lack of a better word.

But, Moeller falls lock-step in anything he realizes will end up costing the middle class more taxes, shown when he joined a lawsuit to invalidate constituent votes over the 5 times passed desire of citizen putting a requirement on the legislature to have a 2/3 majority vote in order to increase our taxes.

Bill Turlay

Bill Turlay

Seeing Moeller’s comment on my facebook page, where I placed it to show the world what a nimrod he can be, Vancouver City Council Member Bill Turlay issued a challenge to Rep. Moeller earlier today to meet for an open debate on the climate.

Turlay said, “Jim Moeller, I challenge you or your team of 3 to a public debate on climate change. Your side defends the Hypothesis that anthropogenic (manmade) CO2 causes ‘climate change’ i.e., global warming. My team will defeat your hypothesis. We can schedule the debate sometime after the forthcoming 60 day legislation session. Looking forward to it.”

I contacted Turlay and verified this is a serious challenge and not just a flippant comment left on facebook.

Turlay came under ridicule some months ago in the Lazy C over a comment on his knowledge of the climate due to his years as a US Navy Fighter Pilot. The ridicule showed the absolute ignorance of the Lazy C on aviation as weather and climate conditions are a big part of a pilot’s duty and ability to properly plan mission and carry out flights, aircraft being very susceptible to the weather.

Be that as it may, Rep. Moeller is now being publicly challenged to openly debate the climate change issue he claims only his party cares about and that “science – and lots of it” he claims is on his side.

When and where would have to be determined and scheduled after the legislative session ends, but I would think Rep. Moeller would be more than willing to “put his money where his mouth is” and accept this challenge by Council Member Turlay.

The ball is in your court, Jim. Will you “man-up” and meet to openly debate your position and “science?”

Or will you Shuck and Jive your way out of defending your claims?

A link to this post and description of it being a challenge has been sent to Rep. Moeller personal and legislative email accounts.

We now wait to see if he responds.

UPDATE: An earlier email copied me from Gordon Fulks that I missed in my inbox reads, “Yes indeed, we would love the opportunity.”

The skeptics are prepared, what will Moeller do?

9 Comments to “Rep. Moeller Challenged to Public Climate Debate”

  1. Not going to happen, Moeller is a coward and will use some lame Libtard excuse not have to display his hubris and ignorance in a setting where he can be challenged immediately.

    Like

  2. That will be publicly noted as well, Joseph.

    But, since he claims they have “science and lots of it,” he should be more than willing to back it up, right? 😉

    Like

  3. I once had a private pilot license. Nearly 1/2 the study work to qualify for the license was understanding weather.

    The “consensus of scientists” agreeing on global warming was a _fake_ study that polled 52 scientists, who were all supportive of the anthropogenic global warming meme.

    The IPCC report is filled with ‘uncertainties” and “equivocations” — but the “Summary” (what the press and politicians read — a few pages, not the thousands of pages of the whole document) is written by politicians to influence other politicians.

    Follow the money. No “climate scientist” can get funding to show that climate change (whatever that is) is benign, but funding is easily found to show dangerous consequences. This is a flaw in the system that funds “big science” — only the negative stuff generates the political interest to receive funding.

    The smear campaign against “deniers” of global warming is a sure sign that there is more politics than science at play. Good scientific research depends on skeptical responses and repeatability of results of experiments. Uh oh, the “climate change hypothesis” (formerly the “anthropogenic global warming hypothesis”) has not been confirmed by any experiments. Indeed, not one of the predictions based on the global warming models has been correct.

    There is some data that suggests that the earth has been warming — but for the past 15 years has not warmed at all (contrary to the predictions of the global warming models). We do know that the earth has gone through several ice ages starting approximately when the continents assumed their current position (witch places a land mass beneath the south pole and traps the north pole in a relatively small ocean with limited circulation to the rest of the earth’s oceans). Thus, it is expected that the climate will warm for 30 or 40 thousand years, and then will cool down over a similar period as a new ice age descends. Some research indicates that this cycle is strongly affected by the energy output of the Sun, which has been found to have rather more variability than many had expected.

    I can suggest finding more at http://www.junkscience.com and at http://climatechange.procon.org

    Like

  4. Man Up! He already lost that argument.

    Like

  5. Apparently some folks are not aware that Climate Change isn’t necessarily measured in long term increments (courtesy National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). It can also be measured in short term increments as well…and yes, there has been strong evidence of shorter-term climatic variations which are caused by El Nino and La Nina variations as well as volcanic eruptions, or other changes in the Earth system. Some of the changes could quite possibly be a result of human causes…the use of aerosols, land use changes (disruption of ecosystem) as two examples. It is also believed that high concentrations of Coal-fired energy generation from regions such as in China have added to the “greenhouse effect” which is believed to be part of the contributory nature of climate change.

    I honestly believe there is no way to absolutely verify anything unless the entire human population of Earth were to move to another planet for 10 years OR MORE in order to take an absolute measurement of climatic change with highly-sophisticated instruments capable of transmitting data to the scientists…

    But I don’t think “Scotty” has the transporter room ready for such a task…8))

    Otherwise, it’s all speculation…or as one would say…it’s one heck of an educated guess.

    Mr. Moeller will definitely have his work cut out trying to prove such a hypothesis as fact. The problem is…not everybody is ready and willing to accept guesswork, even if it is supported by a huge number of scientists globally and all their data they have acquired. Scientists have been proven wrong many times over the centuries.

    Anybody notice how Al Gore isn’t as visible as he once was when he began all this discussion about our global climate and what he called “global warming???”

    Like

  6. Al Gore has been banned in many places in the world as it seems to feel his “climate change” rhetoric is possibly the biggest sham ever perpetrated on the globe. He has had charges filed on him for fraud because of it by countries. These guys are the pawns of Agenda 21 / one world order / the UN groups who wish to have ultimate control in order to line their pockets.
    We do need to beware of our behavior and be good stewards of the land but I believe that was commanded by God in Genesis thousands of years ago… so what’s new?

    Like

  7. Carolyn, am I correct in my assumption that your correlation with regards to Agenda 21/one world order and climate change activists(pawns???) like Al Gore are backed by those who intend to have ultimate global control for their own financial gains? I agree with you that we need to be aware of our behavior and be good stewards of the land, but it might be too little to make any significant impact. Each and every one of us…about the only things we can do is improve on our own micro-climates around our homes and workplaces as well as volunteer in community events which improve our local ecosystem.

    Like

  8. Rep. Moeller has proven himself to be cowardly and dishonest when confronted with facts.
    In a debate on this topic, should he find the courage to accept, he will resort to straw man distractions and ad hominems.
    Icebreakers stuck in record ice sheets, no significant global warming since 1995, the humiliating exposure of East Anglia data manipulation and falsehoods and any objective measurements proving earth’s inhabitants incapable of either raising or lowering global temperatures will all be denied by Moeller.
    Like all progressives/Humanists, his real goal is to use excuses like global warming psuedo-science to grow government, to increase regulations and controls on free citizens, to punish economic success and reward those who provide more reasons to tax and spend.
    Green is the new Red and Moeller’s in it up to his elbows.

    Like

  9. green is the new red… interesting analogy Bob. I hadn’t thought of it that way before.

    Like

%d bloggers like this: