Palin denies climate change realities on first day as McCain's running mate
What are the ramifications of a US Vice President that is willing to shrug off the scientific realities of global warming? Guess we'll find out if John McCain takes the White House. In an interview with Newsmax today, McCain's vice-presidential running mate Sarah Palin stated that: "A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made. "
I guess Palin spends her time reviewing climate science as reported on Newsmax and other media outlets (read: Fox News) bent on ignoring and confusing the warnings from top scientists at the nation's most prestigious scientific academies, like NASA and the National Academy of Science.
As the National Academy of Science rightly points out, the link between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change is an age-old scientific finding dating back as far as the 1800's:
"The theoretical realization that human activities could have a global discernible effect on the atmosphere came during the 19th century, and the first conclusive measurements of atmospheric change were made during the last half of the 20th century."And the link between the massive upswing in heat-trapping greenhouse gas, human activity and major disruption to the earth's climate system in the 20th century is also a scientific reality. According to the National Academy of Science:
"The first greenhouse gas demonstrated to be increasing in atmospheric concentration was carbon dioxide, formed as a major end product in the extraction of energy from the burning of the fossil fuels--coal, oil, and natural gas--as well as in the burning of biomass."
Palin's apparent ignorance on the contemporary science of climate change speaks to a much bigger issue about US science policy in general.
If Palin is willing to ignore such robust science concluding catastrophic effects on our climate systems due to our ever-growing over-consumption of fossil fuels like coal and oil, what other scientific realities will a McCain administration be willing to ignore at the behest of its second-in-command?
UPDATE: Here's one other scientific reality it looks like Palin will ignore, courtesy of Brandon Keim at Wired Science.
UPDATE #2: Greenpeace just sent out a comprehensive look at Palin's history on environmental issues (attached to the bottom of this post).
This entry was cross-posted on Huffington Post.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Palin Enviro Backgrounder.pdf | 157.56 KB |
FREE MP3s ON GLOBAL WARMING & CLIMATE CHANGE
FREE MP3 ON GLOBAL WARMING & CLIMATE CHANGE
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=5230894552
MORE FREE MP3s
http://www.sermonaudio.com/go/583
Cut and paste links above into your browser.
Anyone think we cannot
Anyone think we cannot affect the atmosphere of earth, just remind them of the hole in the ozone layer...
... it's still there...
Global Warming....
Evolution = the greatest lie ever told
Global Warming = the second greatest lie ever told
People struggling to label things they cant understand....
and afraid to admit it. Admitting it is the first step....
No one gets thru life without faith, whether you admit it or not. Might as well realize that faith is the answer.
Weird Alaska economy
Are people aware just how odd Alaska’s state economy is? And how totally oil-dependent?
Alaska neither has a state sales tax nor an income tax, and gives a dividend check to each citizen every year (~$1000).
http://www.city-data.com/states/Alaska-Taxation.html :
50% of state revenues come from oil payments.
In addition, at least as of 2001, AK got more from the Federal government than it contributed, i.e., some of the rest of us subsidize AK. it’s not completely obvious why we do that…
http://www.bcnys.org/whatsnew/2001/1211balance.htm
It must be fun to run a state where the government sends checks to the people…
but there are very few governments at any level in the US that work that way...
Non-religious education prevents people like Palin
If Palin had experienced a decent non-religious education, then she could not present the views that she does.
There are lots of bad things about religious education and this is one of them! Religion is indoctrination and indoctrination has no place in school.
Alarmists against indoctrination, except when they're for it
Aardvark wrote:
"There are lots of bad things about religious education and this is one of them! Religion is indoctrination and indoctrination has no place in school."
Except, of course, when it comes to forcing kids to watch "An Inconvenient Truth", a film made not by a scientist, but by a divinity school drop-out.
(Trivia: Did you know Josef Stalin was also a divinity school drop-out? Strange but true.)
Too bad that global warming
Too bad that global warming finished up about 10 years ago and stopped protecting us from these awful hurricanes :)
yeah I'm just bored
....
That, again...
http://www.desmogblog.com/palin-denies-climate-change-realities-on-first-day-as-mccains-running-mate#comment-501824
Are you all for real or is this Comedy?
I really thought this had to be a joke - I can't believe you actually admit to such utter stupidity in public!?!
I can't believe anyone with an IQ above 15 could really fall for all this denial stuff.
Just hang on kids, you are totally right!:
The Earth IS Flat!
And the Earth revolves around the Sun.
And smoking is good for you.
And Bush is a great intellect
And God hates gays
You left out the best one!
The Earth IS Flat!
And the Earth revolves around the Sun.
And smoking is good for you.
And Bush is a great intellect
And God hates gays
and Global Warming is caused by Man's contrubution of a harmless trace gass that is mostly plant food.
The Great Warmist Conspiracy -- again!
tinyurl.com/5f22f7
Actually, Sock, I don't know
Actually, Sock, I don't know any denieralists who think that the AGW religion is a conspiracy. We understand that most of you are too brain-dead to conspire.
The Smug Never Seem to Learn
Spike wrote:
"The Earth IS Flat!
And the Earth revolves around the Sun."
Ironically, this was at one time the scientific "consensus" -- a pointless notion, so cherished by the AGW hysteria-mongers of today. I guess the "deniers" (as you would call them) won that particular argument.
The same type of mind that embraces as an article of faith that human beings have catastrophically altered the weather (and also imagine we can change it BACK again, at will!), should have no trouble accepting that the Earth is, indeed, flat.
Perhaps you are right? Gaia is punishing us for having stolen fire from her?
"And smoking is good for you."
This probably comes as a shock to you, but it actually is possible to believe that smoking is unhealthy, and that human-induced climate change is largely fantasy. I applaud your grasp of the obvious, however, Spike.
"And Bush is a great intellect"
OUCH! A George Bush zinger. Who would have expected that from an AGW cultist? Thanks for illustrating my point about Global Warming nonsense being the realm of tedious leftists, though, Spike.
As a side note, whatever your opinion of Mr. Bush's intellect, it appears to have been sufficiently superior to that of both Al Gore (peace be upon him!), and John Kerry, otherwise one of them would have been elected President of the United States. Sorry, I know how much people like you hate to be reminded of that.
"And God hates gays"
What, exactly, do you have against gays, Spike, to prompt such an ugly homophobic statement? I realise you "progressives" seem to be deeply bitter and conflicted people, but that really crosses the line. You need help.
Well said, ks!
"it actually is possible to believe that smoking is unhealthy, and that human-induced climate change is largely fantasy."
Well said, ks! Even though I'm a staunch libertarian who voted Republican at every election -- except when Gore was a candidate -- and who makes it a point to waste energy, kill polar bears, and dump junk into rivers, I still think that global warming is a very real and very serious problem that deserves our immediate attention! This "us vs. them" mindset must go -- what our country needs is not a Divider, but a Decider.
"What, exactly, do you have against gays, Spike, to prompt such an ugly homophobic statement?"
Please be more open-minded, ks! Again, as a staunch libertarian who voted Republican almost every time, I must agree with Spike that the Politically Correct Leftist Orthodoxy has been trying to shout down good, ordinary folk who think that God Hates Fags. Also, my dad was a POW.
Just say, "no".
bi468 [sock] wrote:
"Well said, ks! Even though I'm a staunch libertarian who voted Republican at every election -- except when Gore was a candidate"
I highly doubt you've ever voted for the Republicans. And in my experience there are two types of people who call themselves "libertarian" -- a small number who actually are libertarians, and the vast majority who don't understand the concept, and imagine being a libertarian involves nothing more than not paying taxes and smoking as much weed as you want. If you are a libertarian, as you claim, and judging from your incoherent web page, I'd pick the former variety. Particularly when it comes to smoking pot. A lot of it.
And since you are probably in too much of a marijuana induced stupor to notice, Al Gore (peace be upon him) was never a Republican candidate.
"Please be more open-minded, ks! Again, as a staunch libertarian who voted Republican almost every time,"
Now why would a self-described "staunch libertarian" vote for the current Republican administration? If anything, Mr. Bush's policies have proven to be far more liberal than libertarian. However, your statement is consistent with that of a chronic dope-smoker. Or an idiot.
I won't bother to address the rest of your obnoxious comment, since it only serves to further confirm the fact that you are a jabbering troll.
Plenty of intelligent and
Plenty of intelligent and highly educated people honestly reject the concept of man made global warming. Calling them dumb doesn't make your case as well as you think it does.
Makes sense. Plenty of
Makes sense.
Plenty of intelligent and highly educated people also honestly reject the concept of germ caused diseases -- it is bad spirits, or hexes -- the controversy exists.
Anyone who is intelligent,
Anyone who is intelligent, honest and educated to interpret evidence objectively will not reject the concept of AGW.
All the smart ones do.
Havn't you been watching lately?
When I think about how the
When I think about how the agw case has been presented to the public, honest isn't the word that springs to mind. It's been put on center stage by hypocritical celebrities and others as a way of enriching themselves and it's been adopted by hypocritical politicians and chanted into everyone's brains by mindless media. Your AGW needs a better PR team.
Remember: Global Warming is not a construct of the far-left.
"This entry was cross-posted on Huffington Post."
No! What? Really?!!!
Nothing to see here. Move along.
I told you so
It's the Phantom Soviet Empire working in cahoots with the Bavarian Climatati. Bwahahahahaha! ( tinyurl.com/5f22f7 )
Misleading
The reality is that climate change is happening and the answer to the 'Why' is our carbon emissions - but Palin and NWS Dan Luna have been misleading the public about the 'Why'.
NWS Dan Luna, Meteorologist in Charge at the National Weather Service office in the Twin Cities told the Minneapolis Star Tribune:
"It would be hard-pressed for anyone to argue that we're not seeing evidence of warming. 'Why?' is another question, ...
misleading headline up there
misleading headline up there - She doesn't deny the reality of climate change. She is merely unconvinced about mankind's role in climate change.
Nice article by David Evans
Nice article by David Evans questioning the impact of carbon on global warming (if there is still such a thing) and also dealing with motives of the alarmists.
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=756766
Lol, David Evans is a Joke.
Heh, fun.
It's David Evans.
He's an Electrical Engineer telling the world he knows best on matters of climate science. (Oh, and that he's secretly a Rocket Scientist)
Where he finds that obvious lies are the the only way to make his argument.
"So when Evans wrote:
The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.
He meant that we had found the signature, but Evans didn't think it should count."
scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/07/david_evans_and_that_missing_s.php
scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/08/more_lazy_and_gullible_reporti.php
And of course the usual BS arguments such as:
"Evans: The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001"
When clearly thats just cherry picking 1998's strong ENSO.
greyfalcon.net/rsstemps.png
greyfalcon.net/elnino
greyfalcon.net/enso
greyfalcon.net/lanina
This guy is just pathetic
there are no observations by anyone that implicate carbon emissions as a significant cause of the recent global warming.
On the contrary, there's no scientific institutions in the entire world that say that carbon emissions aren't a significant cause of recent global warming.
greyfalcon.net/whatwouldittake
_
Lastly, he makes the usual argument that since carbon doesn't cause ALL climatic events throughout the history of the earth. Then it can't possibly be causing ANY thing.
When clearly we're dealing with multiple climatic variables.
greyfalcon.net/lean2005.png
greyfalcon.net/forcing5.png
greyfalcon.net/forcing4.png
greyfalcon.net/forcing3.png
and the primary variable over 10,000+ year time sclaes is changes in the earth's orbit.
greyfalcon.net/milankovitch
He doesn't even possibly consider the factor that we've thrown the natural order of things completely out of whack.
_
This guy is worse than Tim Ball, or James Inhofe.
He doesn't even try to put up anything more than pathetic strawman arguments.
Tanking?
AGW is tanking in all respects?
Can you show me one major science organization and/or association that has changed it's official position on the subject from that of the consensus? I can find a few that have restated to agree, but none to the opposite.
Your Friday morning libertarian coffee klatsch doesn't count.
Here's one
The Geologists that met recently in Oslo.
Oh Sorry, they agree with the Overwhelming concensus.
The more than 35000 that agree that AGW is a crock I mean.
Only 6,000
...not 35,000. You are off by an order of magnitude. Also I know of no polling done at the Oslo convention. There were some hostile-to-IPCC presentations and Q&A, and a 'debate' or two at the end. But there was no polling.
If there were, it would not be scientific, as Geologists are likely to be biased in favor of oil, coal, and other mineral exploration interests. The presentations and Q&A were apparently weighted against the IPCC...but this is not quite the same thing as a Consensus™ among the geologists present.
my source:
http://co2sceptics.com/news.php?id=1722
section 10 and 11 deals with the climate debate.
Off by a few thousand perhaps
31000 on the Orogon petition.
5100 in Alberta
4000 in Coenhagen
400 on the Inhof list
500 at the YC climate convention.
etc
etc
etc
And No I pay no attention to the silly attempts to discredit the orogon petition. It is just so much AGW BS and pretty much everyone knows it.
Liar. There are not 5100
Liar. There are not 5100 climate scientists in Alberta, as I pointed out before when you came up with that dishonest number.
I sincerely doubt...
...that there are 31,000 climate scientists in all of North America, much less Oregon.
As usual VJ is wrong
Nowhere in my post did I use the term “Climate Scientist”.
Since I don’t (And neither does the IPCC) consider AGW the sole domain of climate scientists, I listed scientists that disagree.
AGW is far too broad of a subject for any one discipline to claim full understanding of.
Geologists for example have a much better view of the big picture than people who only study CO2 try desperately to show how it controls everything.
And as for lying, I believe you guys have that covered all too well with your dishonest attempts to discredit the Oregon petition with obvious and completely debunked claims of inaccuracy.
I realize how much you hate it, but the truth is emerging and you can’t stop it.
Lest we forget! The most
Lest we forget!
The most prominent AGW lie circulated regularly by alarmists.
“The IPCC’s Over Whelming consensus of 2500 of the world’s leading climate scientists.”
In Fact there were some 2500 scientists.
Approximately 600 of them were climate scientists.
Of those, Less than 60 were on the team that produced the infamous chapter 9 statement claiming 90% certainty that “half” of the warming in the 20th century was “Mostly” due to man made CO2.
Many of the rest were not in agreement with that political statement but had no infleuence to change it.
Lies, Damn Lies and Political statements!
Signs of sanity
Signs of sanity emerging:
MICHAELS: Record low for climate science
Ever since Soviet and Western climate scientists published the first international compendium on global warming, back in 1985, we have known that scaring people to death is very good for the environmentalist business.
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/31/record-low-for-climate-science/
Look!
I like to think of her as James Inhofe with breasts.
http://www.theocracywatch.org/inhofe.jpg
Let the Smearing Begin!
So predictable.
So irrelevant.
But when that’s all you’ve got, Guess you gotta g with it.
Ray: Earth's climate past?
Ray: Earth's climate past? Although some geologists may have something to contribute, I would think a paleoclimatologist would be more involved in studying ancient climate and factors affecting it.
Until now, if I were a Yank,
Until now, if I were a Yank, I would have been unable to to vote for president. Obama is a "nothing" and McCain has swallowed the AGW glop. Now, with a tough sceptic to balance the ticket, McCain is at least semi-palatable.
Streetcar and Rick C : Are you claiming that Palin is a creationist or merely sufficiently liberal to be willing to give the ID crowd a piece of the podium? Creationist doesn't seem compatible with the rest of her personna. Links? (Other than the Wired hatchet job.)
Palin and 'teach the controversy'
http://scienceblogs.com/afarensis/2006/10/27/intelligent_design_and_the_ala/ has a few other samples linked:
Her father was a public school science teacher.
"My dad did talk a lot about his theories of evolution," she said. "He would show us fossils and say, 'How old do you think these are?' "
Asked for her personal views on evolution, Palin said, "I believe we have a creator."
She would not say whether her belief also allowed her to accept the theory of evolution as fact.
"I'm not going to pretend I know how all this came to be," she said.
Seems creationist, no? At the very least, she obviously believes creationism has the same scientific merit that evolution does and that there's a scientific controversy on it to teach about -- both objectively false.
But that doesn't stop Gary from noticing she rejects AGW and concluding she's well-read. Odd, that.
Spelling blunder...sorry
Spelling blunder...sorry Alex.
Alax, at the very core of
Alax, at the very core of climate change is history, who better to have insight into earths past than geologists?
For how many years?
Ray, since when do we take what geologists say about climatological matters at face value? see #3 and #40 (including the NewScientist link) at Understandit.org
I think its a great choice.
I think its a great choice. As hysteria over AWG climate change tanks in all respects, Obama morphed into everymans political chippy and chose an old sage as a running mate to add credence to a lightweight candidacy, Mcain camp chose a bright attractive tough woman with a reform history who thinks AWG is bunk. The political trajectory looks right...Iraq is cool, fuel costs are high at the hands of liberals. It will be an interesting race.
"As hysteria over AWG
"As hysteria over AWG climate change tanks in all respects ..."
Eliminating your hyperbole by substituting "concern" for "hysteria", what proof do you have that this is "tanking"? All I see are repeated assertions of that claim in the denier blogs. In the real world, concern continues to mount.