"you wouldn’t know it from its name, but the House Committee on Science has become somewhat of a laughingstock in recent years. Far from being a bastion of scientific literacy and a strong voice for evidence-based programs and education, the Committee has turned into a collective of closed-minded ideologues who, ironically given its name, oppose much of the science they are supposed to be fighting for. In a fantastic article on the subject, Wired magazine refers to the group as the “Anti-Science House Science Committee” without a hint of sarcasm.
The Committee’s white whale is global warming, which the group is almost unanimous in thinking is fictitious. It would be almost comical, if it weren’t such an important issue.
The committee’s [then] chair, Ralph Hall (R-Texas), lumps “global freezing” together with global warming, which he doesn’t believe humans can significantly impact because “I don’t think we can control what God controls.” Dana Rohrbacher (R-CA) thinks cutting down trees reduces levels of greenhouse gases they absorb. Mo Brooks (R-Alabama) still trots out the debunked notion that a scientific consensus existed in the 1970s on “global cooling,” which he portrays as a scare concocted by scientists “in order to generate funds for their pet projects.”
Dan Benishek (R-Michigan) strikes that climate-scientists-as-charlatans note, dismissing contemporary research as “all baloney. I think it’s just some scheme.” Paul Broun (R-Georgia) says that “Scientists all over this world say that the idea of human-induced global climate change is one of the greatest hoaxes perpetrated out of the scientific community.”"