Absolutely no idea. That would be somewhat comical, though.
Look at any average surface temperature vs. time graph.
Call me a skeptic, but Inhofe isn't my top choice for climactic information. And why put documented research in quotations? Inhofe sure never used it in his speech.
Increased temperatures = increased moisture in atmosphere = increased precipitation.
http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006/2006GL026075.shtml
Natural selection is just a mechanism inherent to any environment in which there is life.
Politicians who recieve the majority of their donations from the energy/fossil fuel sector don't count.
CO2 doesn't just condense out of the atmosphere like water. Think about all of the places on Earth that are already at 100% humidity naturally. Furthermore, steam doesn't even
have to be released. Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't it just be condensed on site?
From the scenario you presented, the electricity from above.
Well, you'll have to look into the numbers for nuclear fission. Is there a net gain in energy after the mining/processing/disposal of the Uranium? I don't know.
Nuclear fusion does sound promising, though. I'd like to hear more about it.