I assumed it was a political move to avoid a primary challenge. However, it appears to be a sincere change of heart, saying that he thinks political correctness is driving the scientific arguments. Perhaps he has noticed higher energy bills in his state as well. It is nice to see someone walk back support for a cap and trade bill. Greenland is a minor part of his argument. He is basically saying it was warmer 1000 years ago than now. Looks like he has realized that he was fooled by Mike's Nature Trick and the hockey stick.
I'm hoping that you don't deny AGW, because you've picked an example and a link that just makes one more Republican sound REALLY stupid on the subject. Look at the quotes from him, he apparently thinks that Greeland was not covered in ice at the time of Leif Erikson, about a thousand years ago. That mile or two of ice formed pretty fast, then.
Will the geologist come along to say how stupid a Republican senator is?
I'm not holding my breath.
"Right" may be stretching things a bit.
Greenland could have been green about 120,000 years ago but not when Leif Erikson visited. He is thought to have died around 1000 years ago. It may well have been green-er, though. Human burials took place in areas that you now can't get a spade into.
I heard that calling it "green" was a ploy to get people to relocate from Iceland but I have no idea how true that is.
They have ice cores from Greenland going back about 150,000 years so there must have been ice there for all that time.
No. The scientists we train, educate, and fund to study the climate have reached the polar opposite conclusion to that of some politicians with no training, education, or experimental experience to study the climate.
no.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/rare-sight-gop-senator-walks-back-belief-climate-change
