Thursday, December 22, 2011

GOP: the “just say ‘no’ TO SCIENCE” party


     Maybe you’ve been following the OC Reg’s series comparing the positions of the Republican Presidential hopefuls on various issues. The latest entry focuses on the “environment” (Presidential candidate comparison: Environment).
     I’ve edited the Reg comparison down to focus on the issue of global climate change in particular.
     Of the seven Republican candidates mentioned by the Reg, all but Huntsman are some sort of “global climate change” skeptic.

Mitt Romney
     …In June 2011 said, “I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that.”
     Now says, “My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet.”….

Newt Gingrich
     …Supported tougher environmental regulation early in congressional career.
     In 2008, Gingrich made an ad with Democrat Nancy Pelosi urging steps to address human contribution to climate change, including cleaner forms of energy. “We do agree our country must take action to address climate change,” Gingrich said.
     Soon after the ad – and criticism from some conservatives – Gingrich said, “I don’t think that we have conclusive proof of global warming. And I don’t think we have conclusive proof that humans are at the center of it.”….

Ron Paul
     In 2008, said “human activity probably does play a role” in global warming and part of the solution should be to stop subsidizing the oil industry and let prices rise until the free market turns to alternate energy sources.
     Now calls the science on manmade global warming a “hoax.”….

Rick Perry
     Manmade global warming is a “scientific theory that has not been proven and from my perspective is more and more being put into question.”
     Proposes repeal of EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases and elimination of all EPA programs to restrict carbon dioxide emissions….

Michele Bachmann
     Open federal lands to economic activity by “repealing radical environmental laws that kill access to natural resources.”
     Voted to bar Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases….

Rick Santorum
     Says the science establishing human activity as a likely contributor to global warming is “patently absurd” and “junk science.”

Jon Huntsman
     End the EPA’s “regulatory reign of terror.”
     Acknowledges the scientific evidence that humans contribute to global warming.
     As Utah governor, supported regional cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and urged Congress to cap them.
     “I will break down barriers to the continued, safe use of fracking,” an environmentally risky technique for extracting natural gas.
[All emphases my own. --BvT]
FOR THOSE WHO NEED A CLUE:
• The position of scientists regarding this issue: see Climate change at the national academies (including the conservative National Academy of Sciences)
• That skepticism is driven by politics, not science: Poles apart: The international reporting of climate skepticism
• Respected scientific magazine takes on the challenge: Seven Answers to Climate Contrarian Nonsense (Scientific American)

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hate to crash your party but, I think GW is all a big scam, IMHO. Who cares what some person at the Reg thinks anyway. Their purpose is to just put the conservative candidates under a microscope, to make them squirm and mislead the public.

This whole “business” about the scientific research is just that; govt. sponsored research, i.e. grants to socialist “scientists.” They aim to “scientifically” prove GW is so, and man-caused so they can give govt. more ways to steal our money, and destroy capitalism, i.e. Al Gore’s BTU tax. It’s all just another pathway to socialism IMHO, “for the collective good.” Ah, the old tragedy of the commons argument once again.

The fact is every time a volcano erupts somewhere, and they often do, it pollutes our atmosphere probably 1,000,000 times moreover than any human could’ve possibly done in the last 150 years of industrialization and the burning of petroleum. Gee, ya think these wallet-grabbing social engineers ever factored that in? Probably not.

Then there’s the world politics of it. What it all boils down to is this; America pays while all others pollute freely. It’s just another means for the UN to redistribute America’s wealth to the rest of the hostile world “community.”

Just my 2 cents… Put that in your pipe and smoke it. Oh, I forgot; the pipe is not a pipe…

Anonymous said...

Heal yourself with prayer and keep antibiotics, surgery and chemo and all the rest out of it - after all, it's all SCIENCE.

Stay out of elevators too. And airplanes.

Anonymous said...

9:20, Just because I reject the junk science, and the political motive behind it that is GW, aka Climate Change (caused my man), does not mean that I reject all science, nor do I believe prayer heals.

Anonymous said...

Ah yes, pick and choose your science and scientists....

B. von Traven said...

8:04, you are crashing the party with—what?—your opinions, unencumbered by argument? You have no understanding of rational discourse. I advise you to get an education.
Your “volcano” point is long discredited. Here’s one among many scientifically respected sites that explain this (see).

Anonymous said...

bvt, you & the Reg consider all this foolishness of GW & Climate Change politics as a means to qualifying GOP candidates? Seriously? Seems like something used to qualify lib candidates.

Anonymous said...

Your little troll is a good representation of the phrase "the banality of evil." He's typical of the minions who do the bidding of the Koch brothers and the extraction business in general--those who value only short term profits over the longevity of the planet.

If they all existed in a vacuum, that would be fine, but unfortunately the rest of us are condemned to circling the drain with them.

Anonymous said...

Climate "science" - the new religion.