Recently, with a series of zingers, President Obama chided the GOP as climate deniers. In a specific response to those Republicans who have made the argument that he is not a climate scientist and therefore not qualified to push climate issues, Obama said this: "I mean, I'm not a scientist...but I've got this guy, John Holdren, he's a scientist." Thus referring to his Science Czar, John Holdren.
The problem with Holdren is his credibility.
In 1971, he wrote a paper titled "Global Ecology: Readings Toward a Rational Strategy for Man" in which he predicted a coming ice age due to reduced atmospheric transparency. That reduction, he claimed, was a direct result of all kinds of human and natural pollutants. In arguing his point, he cooked up the theory that pollutants were acting like filters; not allowing heat to reach the surface of the earth. Now, today, he seems to believe just the opposite; with those very same pollutants trapping heat and, thus, causing global warming.
Now, I suppose it's OK for people of science to change their minds. However, this flip flop on such a major issue as to the direction of the earth's temperature brings into question his scientific prowess and, subsequently, his believability.
So, which Holdren are we to believe today? The guy who said we are entering an ice age? Or, the one that Obama says is his climate scientist? A man who appears to have gotten it so wrong in 1971.
Obama Has a Response to Republicans' 'I Am Not a Scientist' Line: http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/obama-has-a-response-to-republicans-i-am-not-a-scientist-line-20140626
Flashback: John Holdren in 1971: ‘New ice age’ likely: http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/01/08/flashback-john-holdren-in-1971-new-ice-age-likely/