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
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:18 pm
Crazy Taxi, crazy taxi wooooo whoooo Crazy Taxi crazy taxi…MORE SPAM PLEASE!!
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:18 pm
You simply claim that “science” has proven global warming was caused by human activity
I didn’t say that. In fact quite the opposite, anyone who understands science knows full well that science doesn’t prove anything. Mathematics is in the ‘proof’ business. Science demonstrates things, and we have ‘faith’ in science because we are able to construct devices that work and do work. Science is a framework, and just because some morning you went out and your car wouldn’t start doesn’t mean that the entire framework of science has collapsed. I’m sure your mechanic is able to diagnose your problem, using the same methods that a scientist uses. This scenario of scientific evolution is repeated daily across the planet, by people who acknowledge the usefullness and veracity of scientific methods.
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:19 pm
401ST
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:19 pm
Dave
I agree the name calling really can get over the top – but be honest.
It is both sides.
AND..I’m pretty sure my biggest fan the namejacker (thanks again namie….you give me so much more import) is not a leftie.
Charles Siegel
September 16th, 2010
1:20 pm
As always, there are plenty of ignorant right-wingers who apparently have nothing better to do than to post ill-informed comments whenever climate change is mentioned. They do not represent the majority of Americans: they stopped climate legislation only because the Senate requires a 60-vote supermajority. History will judge them harshly, because future history will be written by people who must live with the environmental devastation they are creating.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:21 pm
That WILL help Dems this November.
And I look forward for the great entertainment of a teabagging conservative congress attempting to legislate the laws of physics.
Jon Lester
September 16th, 2010
1:21 pm
Seems to me that even a young-Earth creationist should be alarmed at how much cumulative damage has been done in less than 200 years of industrialization. That is not good stewardship, no matter what else you may believe.
barking frog
September 16th, 2010
1:23 pm
A consensus is based on a population count.
Slorence
September 16th, 2010
1:23 pm
Cynthia,
You are nothing but a parroting moron. It is you who is the flat-earther. Why don’t you take some time to do your own research instead of repeating statements from “the experts.” Science has become a religion…a dogma. Any who dare question the establishment are called charlatans and nut jobs…only to be banished and ridiculed.
As the old saying goes, Cynthia, those with glass houses should not throw stones…
Enjoy your day in the cattle line, moron.
Slorence
paleo-neo-Carlinist
September 16th, 2010
1:24 pm
everyday American, the tea party is the proverbial enigma wrapped inside a riddle. see if you can wrap your head around this; the tea party is both “politician” (think citizen-soldiers) AND special interest. they somehow believe they need to “take back” the United States, but they ARE the United States. they yammer about the Constitution, but the Consitution is why we are in the mess we’re in. they talk about “freedom” but are as insular a crowd as you’ll find. they tend to favor the de riguer red meat stuff like; immigration, birth certificates, and I suppose we can now add masturbation to the “things we need to fear” (there’s a joke in there somewhere). and I suppose I a wrong for using the word “they” because as of 1:21 PM, there really isn’t 1 clear definition of the tea party. I guess like any herd, they are an opportunity for opportunistic politicos to conscript and re-brand. my main beef with the ranting portion of the tea party movement is; we all know things are a mess, how you gonna fix it? now I’m chasing my tail.
Billybob
September 16th, 2010
1:24 pm
The fact that you admit so-called “climate change” is ‘debatable science’ is all I need to know that it IS NOT SCIENCE, but theory. The onus is on you to prove it to people, not me to have to prove that it doesn’t exist. You are losing the debate. I have shown that it is debatable and you have not proven it. I’m done. Thanks for playing Professor Tom, but Mary Ann and Ginger are waiting in the hot tub….gotta go.
Mike
September 16th, 2010
1:26 pm
Cynthia,
I challenge you to state one scientifically-supported fact that supports human-induced global warming.
So far, I have seen none.
Common Sense
September 16th, 2010
1:27 pm
Cynthia,
In your vast knowledge of science and politics, you must have deduced that no GOPers are scientists and that all scientists are Democrats and only believe in one theory of global warming.
Do you ever go back and read your own material and realize how ignorant you sound? All politics aside, all you’re doing is staging the ignorant vs. the ignorant.
Joseph
September 16th, 2010
1:27 pm
Tucker in your ignorance you may call Republicans anti-science all you want but we are simply being realistic. Do you honestly think that making people pay $5 for a gallon of gas in this fading economy will save the planet? Do you honestly think that making people’s electricity bills go up hundreds of dollars a year will save the planet? I realize you belong to the party of fools (dems) but thank goodness we currently have some people running our government that understands the logic behind this global warming hoax. The logic, simply stated is that many of these so-called experts have an agenda. Their agenda along with many many dems is to create policy that will impact the lives of everyday Americans. Hence more control. You can keep your juke science Tucker and all the loony scientists that have made up figures year after year….
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:27 pm
The fact that you admit so-called “climate change” is ‘debatable science’ is all I need to know that it IS NOT SCIENCE, but theory.
All science is theory. That really disturbs you doesn’t it? Better to resort to the absolute inerrant word of God as explained by the bible. That way everything will stay the same forever and America will forever enjoy the ‘good old days’.
Neutrinos! Who ever heard of such a thing!
Jeff
September 16th, 2010
1:27 pm
Ahhh, Cindy, once again you make assumptions that you libs would love us all to believe. You said “The clear scientific consensus indicates a warming climate caused by human activity.”
I’m sorry, there is NO scientific consensus. There is a large percentage of scientists and meteorologists who have done repeated studies and found a lot of inconsistencies in the global warming theory. It’s not consensus until a VAST majority of experts take something as fact… and there are too many questions about the supposed effects of humans on the climate (see Dave’s post at 10:12 a.m.)
The problem with global warming supporters is that they ignore the monetary links to such “noble” crusaders as Al Gore. He and many others have a SUBSTANTIAL financial investment in global-warming-green-related things… would you DOUBT that they champion global warming as fact?
God is sovereign and almighty and wise… I seriously doubt he would allow human beings, which he created, to have more influence on the environment than Him.
And anyway, as a true liberal, you MUST be tolerant of other viewpoints, right? And you MUST challenge the “establishment” to make sure “the man” is telling the truth, right? And money corrupts everybody, right? And you are trained to be skeptical and question authority, right?
In these days, the global-warming-chicken-little-the-sky-is-falling zealots are handicapping our economy and legislating our country to death, all based on some inconclusive and impossible-to-prove theories… shouldn’t you, as a journalist (and a LIBERAL JOURNALIST at that) be questioning these things with every fiber of your being?
If so, you’d be doing your job… if you fail to do so and take Al Gore and his friends at their word, you are a hypocrite.
uga_b
September 16th, 2010
1:28 pm
I thought most people wait til Friday to get lazy. Man-made Climate Change is a scientific theory and not a fact. The climate of the Earth has clearly changed before and will again. This is not disputed. The impact is. Then you have the non sequitur about giving money to third world countries. If you really believe wastful spending cures global warming be thankful we have Obama.
And for the love of all things holy please please please stop claiming economists agree and scientific consensus where there is none. Doctors once had a consensus that doing autopsies before delivering babies had nothing to do with death rates. They started washing hands and were disproved. There is no control to vet the global warming hypothesis against.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:29 pm
Tucker in your ignorance you may call Republicans anti-science all you want but we are simply being realistic.
War is Peace! Love is Hate! Irrationality is Logic! The bible is the inerrant word of Dog!
Jeff
September 16th, 2010
1:29 pm
Joseph at 1:25 p.m. — excellent point my friend. I suppose to the liberal green maniacs, killing a free market economy and bankrupting millions of people and businesses worldwide — all to save a species of little brown bird in Africa in the year 2718 — is worth it.
Mike K
September 16th, 2010
1:30 pm
@Thomas Lee Elifritz
You’re point illustrates what I am saying about your posts. You have just asserted global warming is caused by human activity. You haven’t attempted to defend the position with evidence. On this blog, you haven’t adhered to the framework you just defined; you’ve just mocked people with whom you disagreed and claimed that you understood the issues better than anyone else. You’ve also frequently lambasted Christianity, which is completely irrelevant to this discussion.
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:31 pm
Man-made Climate Change is a scientific theory and not a fact.
And OJ didn’t kill his wife and her friend! It’s a fact!
The universe is static, dontcha know!
And for the love of all things holy
And if you don’t love the bible, you’re ANTI-AMERICAN!
Billybob
September 16th, 2010
1:31 pm
I am completely at peace about this issue Prof Tom. You are projecting about who is ACTUALLY the angry one sir….easy pickings
uga_b
September 16th, 2010
1:32 pm
NOTE: If you are an anti-discussion know-nothing, don’t bother to write a blog. The clear human consensus indicates that be condescending and dismissive is caused by weak arguments.
Jeff
September 16th, 2010
1:34 pm
Mike K — careful now… you’ll upset the liberal way of things… name-call, ridicule, demean and attck with baseless claims. That’s how they operate… it’s what you’re left to do when facts don’t defend your position.
Careful about calling them out on this… they might get mad and take offense!
By the way, isn’t it ironic how liberals — who are supposedly the most loving, tolerant creatures on earth — get SO easily offended when you rip out one of their faulty pillars of non-logic?
barking frog
September 16th, 2010
1:34 pm
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:18 pm
anyone who understands science knows full well that science doesn’t prove anything
people who acknowledge the usefullness and veracity of scientific methods.
————————————————————————–
beliefs based on unprovable formulations by scientific methods…..o.k.
————————————————————————————————
uga_b
September 16th, 2010
1:35 pm
I have also never understood why you even need global warming theory to regulate pollutants. Smog and acid rain are bad enough.
DaveL
September 16th, 2010
1:36 pm
Mike K –
A well-expressed comment on modeling. And I agree, but I’ll also point out that climate science is based on actual science as well. Climatologists aren’t convinced of rapid global warming because they’ve looked at some models. They take measurements, take into account basic physics, and draw conclusions. Most of the people flapping back and forth on this comment stream haven’t the faintest clue about the basic physical process of radiative transfer and CO2/CH4 (and H20 as a feedback). Most simply repeat the talking points they’ve learned from their primary opinion-makers. That’s the great failing of representative democracy: people have to trust representatives. Scientists represent the physical environment, and people in a democracy demand that they predict the future to the best of their ability, because most people don’t have time to learn and do the math.
Unfortunately, we’ve reached the point where taking a side on an issue isn’t based on actually understanding the issue but instead on what serves our interests. If two scientists disagree, we don’t ask for the details and do the math; we instead choose the one who allows us to maintain our world view. That means that learning stops until forced by circumstance.
It would be incredible, in fact, if this comment stream became a debate about the scientific basis of global warming. However, that seems pretty far-fetched, given that most of the people posting seem only to be able to turn a complex situation into a set of simplistic binary opposites (lib/cons, repub/dem, left/right), which I guess is all that is necessary for acting responsibly in the democracy we’ve given ourselves.
And the debate, from a scientific point of view, is all but over. The last year was either tied for the warmest or the warmest on record, depending on which instruments you choose. Global sea ice is rapidly declining. The ocean is acidifying (due to an increasing level of CO2 saturation). Phytoplankton has suffered a 40% decline since 1950. Glaciers are in rapid retreat. The stratosphere is cooling. Sea levels are beginning to creep upward. CO2 levels have been rapidly rising for 120 years. The doubts cast on these findings may be useful to those who need to find doubt, but there are republicans, democrats, leftists, rightists, conservatives, and liberals who have done the math and who know that the earth is experiencing rapid climate change. If you (all) think that climate scientists are willing to bend the truth for the sake of money and power, then surely you must believe that pundits, think tanks, and news programs are capable of doing the same. Who do you trust? Upon what and whom do you base your understanding of climate change?
Steve
September 16th, 2010
1:37 pm
“Wouldn’t there charitable part make sense though. If the poverty level is at 14%, and they all vote democrat, then they probably wont be able to donate to charity.”
Ah, but someone cut-and-pasted the SAME SURVEY over at Bookman’s last week. This part was left out from today’s Reader’s Digest Abridged version today (drum roll please)… liberals earn 6% MORE money than conservatives.
Really liked this post last week regarding the survey:
“Let me see if I’ve got this straight…liberals are poor, elite Ivy League-educated science-respecting latte-drinking Volvo drivers living on welfare in public housing who work 6% harder to earn 6% more than conservatives. They take to heart the words of Jesus, “What you do to the least of these, you do to me” which is pretty tough to do while being hard-core Godless atheists, but there you go. And they do all this mamby-pamby Marxist stuff at the same time as being heartless pr*cks – greedy, money hungry, racist, bigots who are only concerned about making their next dollar.”
Jeff
September 16th, 2010
1:38 pm
uga_b — it’s because common-sense, non-hype, rational environmental improvements would not line Al Gore’s pockets with tens of millions of dollars, which he would reap because he’s invested a ton in new products and technologies that people would be forced to use if green legislation starts taking effect.
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:38 pm
acid rain…..
well that issue was resolved using…..
cap and trade!
Scout
September 16th, 2010
1:38 pm
granny godzilla :
Nope. I don’t participate in that ever. It’s hard enough to keep up with all of the players.
John
September 16th, 2010
1:38 pm
Wow. So, you just offended half the country’s population. What is your deal, CT? How about we just say all blacks are dumb. Is this what our discourse is coming to?
Harry Callahan
September 16th, 2010
1:39 pm
Enter your comments here
Azazel
September 16th, 2010
1:39 pm
Theory — a statement to explain observed phenomena; such as gravity, electromagnatism, and so on.
There are several theories of gravity: Newton, Einstein and Hawking, each with a different expalanation of how gavity works, but do not deny that gravity exist.
So if gravity is only a theory, then it is only a matter of chance that one would receive serious injury or death from a fall out of a 30 story building, without some countermeasure — right.
An since no one has ever really seen an electron, then electricity cannot exist either.
Chris
September 16th, 2010
1:39 pm
So when the data shows that the Earth is cooling again (as it inevitably will, you know that whole natural cycle and ice age thing) will the liberals be telling us to go buy SUVs and drive them day and night and to not car pool for the sake of our children’s future?
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:39 pm
You are projecting about who is ACTUALLY the angry one sir….easy pickings
I’m not angry, I’m LAUGHING MY ASS OFF, at America and Americans.
Seriously, I couldn’t make this stuff up.
Pick away.
barking frog
September 16th, 2010
1:40 pm
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:27 pm
Neutrinos! Who ever heard of such a thing!
———————————-
Protons eat Neutrinos for breakfast.
Jeff
September 16th, 2010
1:41 pm
Dave_L — well-thought out point, but I still say that many opponents and studies that go against the tide of pro-global warming are NOT being heard… the mainstream media isn’t getting that information to people as readily as the Al Gore propaganda.
And when it comes to people we trust… I don’t trust that snake any farther than I can throw him. He’s as slippery as an eel and he’s hiding too many things… I don’t think we as a nation should just take his word on global warming because he’s suddenly a filmmaker.
Cujo Bendi
September 16th, 2010
1:42 pm
GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX YOU F___TARDS!
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:42 pm
Wow. So, you just offended half the country’s population. What is your deal, CT?
Ok, here’s the deal, half of the American population is in need of some serious insulting. And guess what, the United States Constitution gives us the rights and protection to do just that. Since you are obviously opposed to that sort of thing, you need to take over the senate and congress of America and every state in the union, and amend the constitution.
Harry Callahan
September 16th, 2010
1:42 pm
Is refusing to believe in science anything like refusing to acknowledge that socialism has been a complete failure every where it’s ever been tried?
Does anybody remember the first Earth Day, back in 1970, when the scientists and intelligentsia told all of us flat earters that man-made activity was COOLING the earth, and we would all likely die in an impending artificial ice-age? LOL at Cynthia and her mouth-breathing followers…
granny godzilla
September 16th, 2010
1:43 pm
Hi – Hi! We’re your Weather Girls – Ah-huh -
And have we got news for you – You better listen!
Get ready, all you lonely girls
and leave those umbrellas at home. – Alright! -
Humidity is rising – Barometer’s getting low
According to all sources, the street’s the place to go
Cause tonight for the first time
Just about half-past ten
For the first time in history
It’s gonna start raining Spam.
It’s Raining Spam! Hallelujah! – It’s Raining Spam! ASpam!
I’m gonna go out to run and let myself get
Absolutely soaking wet!
It’s Raining Spam! Hallelujah!
It’s Raining Spam! Every Specimen!
Tall, blonde, dark and lean
Rough and tough and strong and mean
uga_b
September 16th, 2010
1:43 pm
John the logic is thus: I believe X; create strawman that all (pick an expert in this field) believe X; Anyone who disagrees with X is dismissed as a know-nothing ad hominem attack; Anyone who does not actively endorse X must not believe any of X; Same attack as above.
Basically the argument is that I am right and anyone who can’t recognize that clearly can’t be trusted to ever be right.
George W
September 16th, 2010
1:44 pm
Tucker could you be any more liberal? Another instance where the news media slams the right. What are you afraid of?
Thomas Lee Elifritz
September 16th, 2010
1:44 pm
Is refusing to believe in science anything like refusing to acknowledge that socialism has been a complete failure every where it’s ever been tried?
Indeed it is. Both or your points are politics, not science.
George W
September 16th, 2010
1:45 pm
Please tell me that no one on this blog still believes that “Global Warming” is caused by man????? Please….
Progress possible at climate talks in Cancun? – Washington Post (blog)
September 16th, 2010
1:48 pm
[...] research needs to be better coordinatedThe Guardian (blog)Yorkshire Post -Farming UK -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)all 188 news [...]
MAC
September 16th, 2010
1:48 pm
There is nothing else to call this but a LIE:
“there is no dispute in the scientific community about two things: the climate is warming and human activity is causing it. There is dispute about how much oceans will rise, which eco-systems will be disrupted, how fast the climate is warming, etc. But those two essential elements are not in dispute.”
There is plenty of dispute. Progressives don’t care about contrary opinions or evidence when it doesn’t fir their narratives and goals.
kevinbgoode
September 16th, 2010
1:48 pm
Bubba sez: “Would MIT professor Richard Lindzen, a member of the National Academy of Sciences, be considered a know-nothing flat-earther?”
——————————————————
Doesn’t Lindzen also strongly believe that there is a very weak link between lung cancer and smoking cigarettes?
CopyandPaste
September 16th, 2010
1:49 pm
CTCTCTCTCTCT….
I just have to roll my eyes at this one. You should just go back to copying and pasting. How do you explain the disappearing ice caps – ON MARS!!! Must be man-made global warming!!!! Science is about being skeptical – not running off the edge of the cliff with the rest of the lemmings… Climate by its very nature is always changing – it is never static…