Rep. Joe Barton (R-TX) posted this YouTube clip of himself asking a stupid question at a congressional hearing. How stupid? Well, just watch. And consider that Barton finds the Energy Secretary's accurate scientific response bewildering. (Listen to Barton's follow-up: How does he think oil "got to Alaska"?) The accompanying intro reads: "When Rep. Joe Barton asked the Nobel Prize winning Energy Secretary, Dr. Steven Chu, where oil comes from - he got a puzzling answer." Barton surpasses Ted Stevens and his Internet "tubes" on this one. Jon Stewart, it's all yours...
Oh, and Rep. Barton, please read this short Scientific American article. It's only four paragraphs, but I warn you that, if you're really interested in learning the answer to your question, it may take more than six seconds of your time: "Why is oil usually found in deserts and arctic areas?":
The same plate tectonics that provides the locations and conditions for anoxic burial is also responsible for the geologic paths that these sedimentary basins subsequently take. Continental drift, subduction and collision with other continents provide the movement from swamps, river deltas and mild climates--where most organics are deposited--to the poles and deserts, where they have ended up today by coincidence. [...]
Plate tectonics is also responsible for creating the "pressure cooker" that slowly matures the organics into oil and gas. This process usually takes millions of years, giving the oil and gas deposits plenty of time to migrate around the globe on the back of plate movements.
(thanks again, Tim Lloyd!)
Hey Jim, thanks for finding this video for me, I'll make sure to use it on my show.
Hi Jim,
Where does ignorance come from? Um, maybe.... from tectonic plates?
Are we still playing the analogy game? Because Rep. Joe Barton is so Anchorman's Champ Kind.
Also, kudos to Dr. Chu for actually patiently explaining the answer, instead of doing what I probably would have done, which is pointing and laughing for five solid minutes.
Jim, it seems like the congressman made an attempt at humour. Or whatever it was he attempted, it unfortunately fell flat.
JE: Yes, the question is: What did he intend to be funny? And why did his office post this with that set-up?
Why can't Texas have any non-douchey and/or stupid politicians?
Barton came off really condescending and rude, acting as if Dr. Steven Chu had no clue what he was talking about. I think a Nobel Prize winning scientist would know what he's talking about.
At least the senator didn't get to say "but that's just a theory!"
JE: Yes, the question is: What did he intend to be funny? And why did his office post this with that set-up?
I'm not so sure it was his office that posted the video. In all likelihood, the video must have come with the shiftings of tectonic plates. (^_^)
I agree with Diane. It looked to me as though Congressman Barton was making fun of Dr. Chu. He may not have a point other than catch his prey unawares and see if it tumbles. Fortunately, Dr. Chu stood his ground.
P.S. Jim, last night, I posted a comment under your Reality: What a Concept blog. It had something to do with Jon Stewart's question of what America is missing and the subsequent reply of Josh Rushing. I was wondering whether that particular comment of mine got through to you or not. (It had these links on Jackie Chan's recent strayings into Taiwan Straits politics.) If it didn't get through to you, then I'll resend it once I get back home this evening. Best regards.
JE: If you click on the source you'll get Barton's YouTube channel. No reason to believe it's not what it says it is. I found the post you mentioned in the spam folder and have published it. Thanks for alerting me.
Jim, I wasn't listening carefully the first time I saw the video. Now, after listening a second and third time, it strikes me odd that Rep. Barton would say, "... wasn't it obvious that at one time it was warmer in Alaska ... North Pole." (Or something to that effect.) Was he trying to prove that it was once warmer in Alaska? Implications on global warming, maybe? I can only guess.
Sorry Jim, but I can't fully understand Mr. Barton due to his Texan accent. I wish we have a full transcript of that part of the session. You know, this is why I get pissed off when DVDs don't have subtitles.
And the leaders of Texas want to secede from the Union. Good luck with all that!
Where does ignorance come from? It's probably a better question to ask where the toxic combination of ignorance and arrogance comes from. It's bad enough that some adults would flunk high-school science, but then they have to think they're qualified to take a leadership role in national energy policy. And worse yet, he thinks he can grill a real scientist with stupid questions.
Anyone who uses the phrase "there are no stupid questions, only stupid answers" has clearly never seen this video clip.
Barton: So it floated up there?
Chu: That's exactly what happened.
Except that's not what happened:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/01/science/earth/01climate.html
(Granted that same article mentions a prehistoric upwelling of greenhouse gases triggering a tropical Arctic climate, but still, the oil did NOT float up there.)
JE: Barton's question/statement was so vague it's difficult to tell what he was getting at. Chu was simply recycling Barton's word "drifted" (not "float"), applying it to the movement, or "drift," of tectonic plates: "Oil and gas is the result of hundreds of millions of years of geology, and in that time the plates have moved around." From the article to which you link:
It is possible that this dead organic material could have, under eons of heat and pressure, become oil and/or gas. As the Scientific American article referenced in the original post says:
By Mark on April 22, 2009 8:00 PM
Why can't Texas have any non-douchey and/or stupid politicians?
What a wonderful world it would be if Texas did have a monopoly on ignorance. Unfortunately, Frank Zappa may have been correct when he said that he thought hydrogen was not the most common element in the universe because stupidity was even more abundant.
Instead of congress getting another raise they should receive be required to subscribe to the following magazines: Scientific American, Skeptical Inquirer and one of the leading medical research magazines.
JE: Before George W. Bush, Texas had a wonderful governor: Ann Richards.
"Sorry Jim, but I can't fully understand Mr. Barton due to his Texan accent."
There's no such thing as a Texan accent (although the movies consistently insist that there is). Travel around the state and you'll find that people's "accents" are wildly divergent. Barton may have a bit of an accent, but he's hardly unintelligible.
As for Texas politicians, Bush was actually a pretty good governor (so was Richards) and Kay Bailey Hutchison has served the state well as a Senator. There are plenty of bone-head politicians across this country.
According to wikipedia, Joe Barton is a ranking member of the Energy & Commerce committee, and it's the only committee he's a member of that the Energy Secretary might testify to.
It's frightening, but not surprising. I've thought before that the problem with how we run democracy (and by "we", I mean the USA, Canada, Britain and all the other western democracies) is that we reward those who are good at winning votes, not those who are good at running public affairs. So those who get elected are those who commit most of their efforts in getting elected instead of learning what they need to learn to govern well once they get elected.
I think it might be better if we allowed politicians only to represent other individuals who would then be the office holders, i.e., if only press secretaries were allowed to campaign.
Barton is trying to say:
There's oil in Alaska -> therefore Alaska used to be warmer -> therefore global warming is not caused by man but is a natural cycle -> therefore drill baby drill!
I'm assuming he believes the Earth is only 4000 years old so I guess we can give him that as his excuse for not believing in plate tectonics.
This guy has NO business being on the Energy & Commerce committee!