Meanwhile, Outside...(With A Question Or Two For Senator Toomey)

From NOAA:

The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for June 2015 was the highest for June in the 136-year period of record, at 0.88°C (1.58°F) above the 20th century average of 15.5°C (59.9°F), surpassing the previous record set just one year ago by 0.12°C (0.22°F). This was also the fourth highest monthly departure from average for any month on record. The two highest monthly departures from average occurred earlier this year in February and March, both at 0.90°C (1.62°F) above the 20th century average for their respective months, while January 2007 had the third highest, at 0.89°C (1.60°F) above its monthly average.

June 2015 also marks the fourth month this year that has broken its monthly temperature record, along with February, March, and May. The other months of 2015 were not far behind: January was second warmest for its respective month and April was third warmest. These six warm months combined with the previous six months (four of which were also record warm) to make the period July 2014–June 2015 the warmest 12-month period in the 136-year period of record, surpassing the previous record set just last month (June 2014–May 2015).

It's still getting warmer out there and human activity is a significant contributor to that warming (no matter what Senator Toomey says).

This being a political blog and this being a political season with a significant Senate race just starting, let's take a closer look at Senator Toomey's recent interaction with climate science legislation.

From the Sestak campaign, we learn that:

Having already asserted that climate change science is “still very much disputed, and it’s been debated,” it’s no surprise that Toomey voted yesterday against bipartisan legislation that would have created a grant program for school districts to develop climate science curriculum and materials.

This was sent out July 16, 2015.

And the legislation was this Amendment to the Every Child Achieves Act of 2015.

So Senator, why did you vote against this legislation that would have created this grant program to instruct students about climate change?  Could it be that you disagree with some or more of the Amendment's findings?  The Amendment starts with Congress finds that:

(1) carbon pollution is accumulating in the atmosphere, causing global temperatures to rise at a rate that poses a significant threat to the economy and security of the United States, to public health and welfare, and to the global environment;
(2) climate change is already impacting the United States with sea level rise, ocean acidification, and more frequent or intense extreme weather events such as heat waves, heavy rainfalls, droughts, floods, and wildfires;
(3) the scientific evidence for human-induced climate change is overwhelming and undeniable as demonstrated by statements from the National Academy of Sciences, the National Climate Assessment, and numerous other science professional organizations in the United States;
(4) the United States has a responsibility to children and future generations of the United States to address the harmful effects of climate change;
(5) providing clear information about climate change, in a variety of forms, can encourage individuals and communities to take action;
(6) the actions of a single nation cannot solve the climate crisis, so solutions that address both mitigation and adaptation must involve developed and developing nations around the world;
(7) investing in the development of innovative clean energy and energy efficiency technologies will-- (A) enhance the global leadership and competitiveness of the United States; and (B) create and sustain short and long term job growth;
(8) implementation of measures that promote energy efficiency, conservation, and renewable energy will greatly reduce human impact on the environment; and
(9) education about climate change is important to ensure the future generation of leaders is well-informed about the challenges facing our planet in order to make decisions based on science and fact.

Senator, I am a voter and a constituent of yours and I am asking: With what part of that do disagree?  Why vote against the grant program legislation?

Do you still think that there's a significant debate about the validity of the science?