The GOP is now a party of know-nothing flat-earthers
One of the greatest crises of our time is climate change, which threatens to create food shortages (as the Russians learned this summer), change geography, eradicate entire eco-systems and even wipe out cities and towns in coastal areas. (NOTE: If you are an anti-science know-nothing, don’t bother to comment. The clear scientific consensus indicates a warming climate caused by human activity.)
But we’ve reached the odd and depressing point in American politics where not a single Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate supports aggressive action to mitigate climate change. The last science literate, Delaware Congressman Mike Castle, was defeated by tea party favorite Christine O’Donnell.
The blog Think Progress did a survey of GOP Senate candidates, and it found that even those who had previously supported policies that would curb carbon emissions have backed away, fearing a backlash from their know-nothing constituents.
Many others have simply chosen to be ignorant anti-science flat-earthers. Alaska’s Joe Miller, who defeated incumbent Lisa Murkowski in the GOP primary, is an example of the latter category. He told an Alaska newspaper,
“We haven’t heard there’s man-made global warming.” [Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, 8/23/10]
Georgia Senator Johnny Isakson is in the more sophisticated category, too smart to deny the science outright but unwilling to buck a tide of flat-earth voters and selfish businesses that don’t want to change their ways. This was Isakson’s response, according to Think Progress:
Science has shown us that there has been a gradual warming of the earth over the last 50 years. What is not as clear is whether the cause for this warming is man-made emissions, a cyclical warming of the planet, or a combination of both. Given the uncertainty in the science behind climate change, I believe that we should take proactive steps, both personally and as a nation, to reduce our emissions. footprint.
Interestingly, though, Isakson doesn’t support any “proactive measures” to combat climate change.
The current GOP represents a step backward from the Bush administration, which acknowledged the threat of climate change. In 2007, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the US was “a major emitter” and was not “above the international community on the issue.” She also said that “all nations should tackle” the “growing problem” of climate change. (h/t The New Civil Rights Movement)
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
679 comments Add your comment
A Lumpkin Resident
September 16th, 2010
12:55 pm
Belief is not an entitlement to be stupid.
…Nor are self-perceived witty comebacks. One either has something valid to say that pertains to the topic or one doesn’t . The stupid and ignorant rely on witty comebacks.
ctucker
September 16th, 2010
12:55 pm
Beelzebubba@12;54, That’s pretty funny
ctucker
September 16th, 2010
12:55 pm
Beelzebubba@12;54, That’s pretty funny
Ivan
September 16th, 2010
12:56 pm
CT’s blog today reminds me of a Ramirez comic I recently saw. It was a Democrat stating the following…..
“Americans only oppose Obama because they are racist.”
“Americans were against the stimulus becaue they’re uneducated.”
“Americans oppose Socialism because they’re greedy.”
“Americans are against ObamaCare because they’re stupid.”
“Americans are opposed to the ground zero mosque because they’re bigots.
“…..I just don’t know why Americans are opposed to US.”
everyday American
September 16th, 2010
12:56 pm
good’ay everyone.. time to go start drilling..
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
12:56 pm
I’m sticking with science too…from what i’ve learned, the earth cools, then warms..whose to say it doesn’t start cooling again in the near future..nobody knows.
And thank you for explaining your deep and profound insights into reality that we have now come to love and expect from the American teabagger.
JM
September 16th, 2010
12:56 pm
i’m sticking with science too…from what i’ve learned
They you’ve learned absolutely nothing. The natural cycles of warming and cooling have been completely disrupted.
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
12:57 pm
My belief systems/convictions are based on the life of Michael Jackson and his make believe side kick TinkerBell. And here is a lil song for all my fans…
“Lovely Spaaam! Wonderful Spaaam!
Lovely Spaaam! Wonderful Spam.
Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am.
Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am.
Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am.
Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am.
Lovely Spaaam! (Lovely Spam!)
Lovely Spaaam! (Lovely Spam!)
Lovely Spaaam!
Spaaam, Spaaam, Spaaam, Spaaaaaam!”
Sammy C
September 16th, 2010
12:57 pm
GOPers do not care about the future unless they are deomonizing the defecit. Which, of course, they have had nothing to do with.
ctucker
September 16th, 2010
12:57 pm
Mark@12:51, As the late great Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said, “You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.” Among scientists who study climate change, there is consensus. Period.
JM
September 16th, 2010
12:58 pm
The stupid and ignorant rely on witty comebacks.
This is a self-refuting statement. Wit is not the same thing as stupidity and ignorance. It’s the opposite.
I reserve the right to mock stupid people. It’s all they’re good for.
barking frog
September 16th, 2010
12:59 pm
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
12:53 pm
I don’t base my beliefs on books,
I find a useful book to be the Los Alamos Arxiv, published nightly.
———————————————————-
o.k.
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
12:59 pm
Look!
I got a standing ovation!
Thanks Namejacker.
Mike K
September 16th, 2010
1:00 pm
@The Nerve
Yeah – you’re probably right. I do think there are honest minded liberals (especially ones who are primarily socially liberal), but a lot of the folks here just hate people on the right.
Thomas Lee Elifritz seems to be one of those guys who is blinded by what I think of as “secular religion”. For some reasons, half of his posts on climate change involve rants about Christianity and the Bible which is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand. However, as seems to be the case with some left wingers, his hatred of religion is so intense and so bereft of logic that he allows it to creep into his comments on all topics. I have a similar problem with Dawkins and Hitchens.
Also, he views science as something to “believe”, when in reality the term “science” refers to a process of inquiry and experimentation – not to a monolithic authority. At least, that’s the way Elifritz characterizes “science” in his comments. The reality of the situation is that blind acceptance of other people’s theories based upon, not information but belief, is the opposite of science.
Azazel
September 16th, 2010
1:00 pm
G.R.L. Gowan — Indeed it was, and also taught in 9th grade science in the ATL public school system in the 1960’s, along with concern for the “end of “oil”
Billybob
September 16th, 2010
1:01 pm
” and then I make my own conclusions, which in terms of cutting edge science, change daily”
Tommyboy,
Thanks for admitting that the so-called “science” of global warming could change tomorrow…..FYI, this same science predicted a NEW ICE AGE back in the 1970’s. Did I just prove a hypothesis that global warming is a theory, not science, that could change tomorrow. When “global warming” was rebranded as “climate change” to encompass everything was I supposed to buy that too….
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:02 pm
Thomas Lee Elifritz seems to be one of those guys who is blinded by what I think of as “secular religion”. For some reasons, half of his posts on climate change involve rants about Christianity and the Bible which is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand.
Dude, the science behind the radiative forcing of greenhouse gases is ROCK SOLID, and nothing you say here is going to change that. You can blab on all you want about ’secular religion’, meanwhile, scientists and engineers will continue to engineer devices using classical mechanics, quantum mechanics and general relativity, that allow you to make a complete fool of yourself on the internet.
Billybob
September 16th, 2010
1:03 pm
Sounds to me like you are the one pushing a problem Professor Tom, not me…..
hind tit
September 16th, 2010
1:04 pm
someone explain to me why about five years ago the headlines on yahoo news told about a melting glacier that left a huge forest lying on the ground. they did a carbon test on the trees that revealed they were 7000 years old.that’s all the proof i needed as i read this with my own eyes and was smart enough with my feeble little mind that things run in cycles. why was there a forest there before the glacier came down on it? there were very few people and no fossil fuel used so you can’t blame it on man. this happened in alaska.
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:04 pm
Here’s some good news….
The Senate FINALLY passed the small business bill.
61-38
Scout
September 16th, 2010
1:04 pm
JM:
I am so depressed. You hurt my feelings.
Dave
September 16th, 2010
1:05 pm
“We don’t need more gamers, we need serious, thoughtful, learned
folks and you just don’t fit that profile”
Still waiting to find any in this blog, including our distinguished author….
But as I have said before, it’s obvious no one’s mind is going to be changed and they’re just gonna cite/quote/beleive whatever fits their opinions….so I’m just here for the entertainment.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:05 pm
Thanks for admitting that the so-called “science” of global warming could change tomorrow….
The science behind global warming isn’t that debatable, I deal with breakthroughs in condensed matter physics that do change on a daily basis -things that allow scientists and engineers to create devices that continue to allow you to make a complete fool of yourself on the internet, and ever increasing efficiency. Greenhouse gases aren’t in that category.
cosby
September 16th, 2010
1:07 pm
Ahhh..a big scam as Al Gore and Company walk away with billions of dollars. The world goes through normal cooling and warming phases. Science is equally split on the actual cause and both sides can be argued. But lets blame one policital party and not the other. Go ahead and pass cap and trade and kill waht is left of jobs. The truth, we all need to be more concerned regarding pollution, but to create histeria and blame one political party is another segment by CT to promote hate, along with tax the rich, appease Muslims, appease illegals ( against the law) and others. It is time the USA and CT to grow up!
Mike K
September 16th, 2010
1:07 pm
@ctucker
Mark@12:51, As the late great Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said, “You are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.” Among scientists who study climate change, there is consensus. Period.
————————————————————-
The fact that a consensus of experts agree with a position does not make it a fact. A consensus of oil industry experts, no doubt, think that the dangers of offshore oil exploration are overstated. A consensus of coal industry executives think that the economic costs of “green” electricity generation are understated. The fact that a belief is commonly held, even among experts, doesn’t make it a fact.
I remember an occasion when I was part of a team helping a Stanford economist prepare for his deposition in legal case. We brought to his attention that the expert witness for the other side had found several citations that cast his analysis in a critical light. This Stanford economist responded by saying, “Yeah, but they’re all wrong. I don’t care how many citations he produces. He’s still wrong and it doesn’t matter how many people say otherwise. Wrong is wrong.”
The fact that a bunch of scientists (who have an economic interest in proving that human activity causes globabl warming) argue that climate change is anthropogenic does not make it a “fact” with which it is illogical to disagree.
South Georgia Farmer
September 16th, 2010
1:07 pm
Cynthia, why do you insist on puting Georgia’s most ignorant on the front porch for the whole world to see. No matter what you blog about their usual refrain is mindless, party driven drivel. An approaching asteroid could be headed toward them, and they would demand to know the party affiliation of the messenger.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:07 pm
someone explain to me why about five years ago the headlines on yahoo
Pillars of science, no doubt.
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:07 pm
Dave
Oft times YOU ARE the entertainment.
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:08 pm
Did you know…
Spam classic was invented in 1937.
Koala bears even enjoy Spam.
Spam helped feed our WWII fighting heros.
Spam has their own Spam Museum.
Yes Spam…a staple of the democratic Americans life.
Lil' Barry Bailout
September 16th, 2010
1:09 pm
ctucker: Among scientists who study climate change, there is consensus. Period.
——————
Apparently that concensus didn’t extend to the Democrat Senate, which had 2 Republicans supporting Obama’s solution to global warming, plus their 60-vote, filibuster-proof majority, and in the face of this most serious of threats did…nothing.
Period.
Jethro Bodeen
September 16th, 2010
1:10 pm
If Al Gore tried to sell those stupid lies back home it wouldn’t fly..the only thing he could sell would be that pretty mouth!
Billybob
September 16th, 2010
1:10 pm
Tom,
” science behind global warning isn’t that debatable”
So the science IS debatable…..now we are getting somewhere. I don’t doubt one bit you know your condensed matter physics, which allows me to expose your liberal biases on the internet…..
Scout
September 16th, 2010
1:12 pm
granny godzilla:
Uh ………….. sorry granny but “Spam helped feed our Vietnam Veterans ……………
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:12 pm
Cynthia, why do you insist on puting Georgia’s most ignorant on the front porch for the whole world to see.
Get used to it; for the next six weeks we are going to continue to present to the world the ignorant American conservative teabagging republicans for what they are – ignorant Americans. I’m pretty sure that will work on November 2, because they refuse to evolve.
Dave
September 16th, 2010
1:12 pm
“Oft times YOU ARE the entertainment”
Wow, I’m flattered….. but considering this is the most I’ve posted on this blog in probably 3 or 4 months (I usually have better things to do), you must have me confused with someone else.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:12 pm
I’m so smart, I post on the AJC all day. If I could only get paid for my brilliance….
Billybob
September 16th, 2010
1:12 pm
Tucker 12:57,
ABSOLUTE OPINION(which you state is your template) PERIOD!!!!
Mike K
September 16th, 2010
1:13 pm
@Thomas Lee Elifritz
What are you talking about? You simply claim that “science” has proven global warming was caused by human activity. You claim that the science of radiative forces is “rock solid” (whatever that means). You’ve offered no evidence for your position (quite frankly, as I explained early, I think that’s because it’s nearly impossible to provide definitive evidence one way or the other on this issue), but you insist that you are correct and that anyone who disagrees with you is irrational and (for some reason) blinded by belief in the Bible.
You’re being wholly irrational. That’s why I said you adhere to a “secular religion”. Your opinion is a faith-based belief; it is not an opinion based observation or empirical analysis. You refuse to debate anyone with whom you disagree, and yet you feel the need to mock them and to bring up (what you believe to be) their belief in Christianity. Basically, you’re acting like religious fundamentalists all over the world.
bible-humping gop moron
September 16th, 2010
1:13 pm
what’s white,sticky and flying across the sky at 1000 miles per hour? The coming of the Lord….
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:14 pm
So the science IS debatable
All science is debatable. It helps of course, if you actually debate it. Evidence would help your case immensely as well. But since you have no evidence to present and refuse to debate it, that generally eliminates your opinions and credible and serious challenges to the science.
Dave
September 16th, 2010
1:14 pm
BUt I always find it entertaining (and ironic) with all the namecalling that the “tolerant” libs on here engage in most of the time. Not surprised though since it’s right out of their playbook (along with denegrating the source of facts/opinions instead of debating the facts/opinions themselves)
Red
September 16th, 2010
1:15 pm
CT – your ignorance never ceases to amaze me. Your bigotry and stereotyping is the worst level of ignorance in humans. Your headline alone proves lunacy. Generalize much? And “consensus”? Is this from the same fraud from doctored results on climate change? Sure, humans have SOME effect. But I guess you are denying the “consensus” on cyclical change as well? Or a simple graph showing this? Odd how Russia has one of the coldest winters in this so-called global warming environment. Also odd how Argentina has its coldest period in modern history, even colder than Antarctica. But yet you regurgitate the debunked science that is so ‘09. Get with the times….and the facts. And do yourself a favor and stop being such a bigot. Broad generalizations are only stated by the ignorant. A simple glance of your posts in the past show you have a history of making such a fool of yourself.
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:16 pm
I am a cab, sucka.
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:16 pm
No Dave…..I do not have you confused. YOY ARE confused.
Scout, you know me well enough to know the real posts – are you the namejacker?
Azazel
September 16th, 2010
1:16 pm
The science is debatable means: How is the phenomena best explained in terms of validity, reliabilty and feasibility so that an accurate model can be produced. It DOES NOT mean that the phenomena IS NOT happening..
barking frog
September 16th, 2010
1:17 pm
Thomas Lee Elifritz 1:12 Now i think i understand.
You’re a masterdebater.
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:17 pm
make that YOU…
Red
September 16th, 2010
1:18 pm
There is no scientific consensus on gays being born that way but yet the ‘voice’ on the matter says it is true. Hmmm. Oh yeah. Even recently the consensus on homosexuality from science said it was a mental health matter. Strange how a scientific consensus was argued over there and the same scientists changed their tune. Amazing how the ‘consensus’ just changes not due to research and facts but moods of the people and a change of the times.
Good Grief
September 16th, 2010
1:18 pm
First it was “global cooling,” then it was “gloabl warming,” now it’s “climate change.” C’mon people, can’t we find a better, more sensitive, politically correct term for this crisis.
Billybob
September 16th, 2010
1:18 pm
Professor Tom,
All I ask is to keep talking Thomas Lee Elifritz. That WILL help Dems this November.