“written for the Hearing before the US Senate …”

The hearing schedule for the Committee does not list a hearing for March 19, 2004, but it does list climate-related hearings on Jan. 8, 2003, on Nov. 16, 2004, on Sept. 15, 2004, on May 6, 2004, and on Mar. 6 3, 2004.[1]
In these hearings, no mention of Jaworowski is to be found.
The Committee’s transcripts and witness lists are searchable. “Jaworowski” appears nowhere.
The Congressional Record as a whole is also searchable; we seek in vain for any hint of Jaworowski. In fact, no matter how fine we weave our net, nor how far we cast it, we just can’t seem to turn up any mention of Jaworowski appearing before the US Senate, or leaving a statement with a committee, or being noticed in any way. Now, is this a problem? After all, the statement only says that it was “written for the Hearing before the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.” It does not claim that anyone at the Senate ever saw it.
Well, yes. In representing the statement as having been given to a governmental body that cares about climate and is in a position to do something about it, Jaworowski claims a credibility that he does not deserve. I could say that I am writing this article for the Pope, but that does not mean that I will get an audience.

[1] Dana’s notice of the correct date is gratefully acknowledged; typo fixed.

2 Responses to ““written for the Hearing before the US Senate …””

  1. Some are Boojums » Blog Archive » Milloy parrots Jaworowski: dog bites man yet again. Says:

    […] I wonder if Milloy would be embarrassed to learn that Jaworowski never testified, or even left a statement, with the US Senate[2], or that the quoted passage has zero credible science to back it up, including even the short paper Jaworowski cites in support, or that Jaworowski’s history of CO2 measurement from ice cores is an egregious and inexcusable distortion of the actual research, or that the atmospheric CO2 argument Milloy quotes so admiringly is a bit of transparent flim-flam, or that the entire “statement” is a tissue of hokum, as dense with falsehood and misdirection as any supposedly scientific document to come down the pike in donkey’s years? […]

  2. Eduardo Ferreyra Says:

    According to replies in this “important” issue, it looks as if very few people read this blog or are interested in the subject –which is no wonder in view of the huge amount of trash this blog carries.

Leave a Reply