Rick Santorum and Science: Bad Combination!

Wed, 2012-01-04 05:49Chris Mooney
Chris Mooney's picture

Rick Santorum and Science: Bad Combination!

As Republican primary season schizophrenia continues, former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum is now in the spotlight, having very nearly beaten Mitt Romney in Iowa. So what do we people who care about science, and global warming in particular, know about Santorum?

Whoa boy.

None of the Republican candidates, with the possible exception of pro-science Tweeter Jon Huntsman, have distinguished themselves as science allies. Even sometime moderate Mitt Romney famously flip-flopped and cast doubt on human caused global warming; Rick Perry, meanwhile, thinks climate researchers are making it all up.

But Santorum? Arguably, his attacks on science surpass all of theirs.

Santorum, let us not forget, not only denies evolution, but has been an active anti-evolutionist in the past. In other words, he has made attacking fundamental scientific knowledge a key priority.

In 2002, Santorum wrote an op-ed calling the doctrine of “intelligent design” (ID) “a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes.” He even pushed an amendment to the 2001 education bill to support ID. For more on Santorum’s anti-evolution advocacy, see here.

On global warming, meanwhile, Santorum isn’t just a science denier. He goes far beyond many climate “skeptics” and actually argued, in a 2008 op-ed, that “global temperatures have actually cooled over the last 10 years and are predicted to continue cooling over the next 10”!

Needless to say, Santorum is also a big opponent of embryonic stem cell research.

Perhaps even more disturbing than these stances however, is a broader way of thinking on Santorum’s part. Consider this passage from the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank, reporting on some completely fact-free remarks by Santorum in Iowa:

In Perry, Santorum gave his opinion that President Obama was more of a divisive figure than Richard Nixon, keeper of the enemies list: “I suspect President Nixon, although I don’t know, would talk and work with people and wouldn’t go out and demonize them as this president has done.” Santorum doesn’t know it, but that doesn’t stop him from asserting it.

At the same stop, he played loose with the facts when contrasting Ronald Reagan’s vacation schedule with Obama’s.

I don’t know if it’s true, but somebody told me this,” he began, “that Ronald Reagan never left the White House at Christmas, and the reason was he wanted all the staff to be able to spend that time at home.”

check of the record would have revealed to Santorum that in 1988, Reagan was in Los Angeles during Christmas, and that he spent the week after nearly every Christmas (and more than a year of his presidency) in Santa Barbara, Calif.

Reading this, I would say at minimum that Santorum would appear to lack accuracy motives.

Pundits are saying that the GOP race may now be down to Santorum and Romney, and speculating that social conservatives may, at last, have found their candidate.

If so, we should probably prepare for regular bursts of unreality, at least up through the New Hampshire primary.

Previous Comments

Romney isn’t the only one to have flip flopped on climate change.

Newt Gingrich:

 February 2007 Interview on PBS’s “Frontline” Gingrich said:
 
“I think if you have mandatory carbon caps combined with a trading system, much like we did with sulfur, and if you have a tax-incentive program for investing in the solutions, that there’s a package there that’s very, very good. And frankly, it’s something I would strongly support.”

This year:  Gingrich said:

“I’ve said publicly, sitting on the couch with Nancy Pelosi is the dumbest single thing I’ve done in the last few years. But if you notice, I’ve never favored cap and trade, and in fact, I actively testified against it. I was at the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee the same day Al Gore was there to testify for it, I testified against it and through American Solutions we fought it in the Senate and played a major role in defeating it.”
 
The Washington Post gave Newt a rare upside down Pinocchio for this one.

Mitt Romney

June 2011 

“I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course, but I believe the world’s getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that….  And so I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and the global warming that you’re seeing”
  

October 2011 

“My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet. And the idea of spending trillions and trillions of dollars to try to reduce CO2 emissions is not the right course for us.”

 

Flip-flops used to just be a kind of rubber sandal.

I admit to knowing little of Santorum, but he shows serious signs of being a bigoted religious idiot, who is woefully ignorant of science and likes to tell others how to live their lives.

Why do people vote for him?

It says a lot about the US Public and what it says isn’t good.

[x]

Life in a prison is probably not the safest environment for a person.  But for prisoners in Pennsylvania, life just got a lot more dangerous.

According to a new report, inmates at State Correctional Institution Fayette in LaBelle, Pennsylvania have been experiencing a significant increase in cancer rates.  The report, which was put together by the Abolitionist Law Center and the Human Rights Coalition,...

read more