The Republican War on Science

[SputnikRX]

@JoeJohn90 I would agree however Al Gore is retarded and China isn't communist. (I hate capitalism though.)

[Engineer245]

The republicans are all about the persuit of weath no t knowledge. As with the Vatican and old power chuch,,, they believe knowledge is bad except for the few at the top. It is diffucult for them to control knowledgeble people.

[Desertphile]

Excellent.

[frededison]

The Republicans are _still_ in a war against science and higher intelligence.

There's no Illuminati political control conspiracy and no secret attempt by climate scientists to use global warming to put you in your bankrupt graves. How do you manage to leave your homes while being so delusional and uber-paranoid? Lighten up and take a deep breath. Ah, feel that CO2 in your lungs? There's lots of it for sure, and too much. The warming Earth doesn't care about your vanity and ego. For real.

[anyusmoon1]

LOL So glad the first global-warming conveniently/inconveniently turned CLIMATE CHANGE artists were BUSTED during the Copenhagen fiasco fiesta- Democrat hire pay-per-view 'scientists' to skew 'climate' science deliberately to push their agenda.

Trying to wrap this in a party-paradigm is PATHETIC. Both sides of the bogus two-poopoo-party game going on in D.C. are 'IN ON IT'.

[khyran]

Not very fair from me, but I just had to stop at 3:00 where he said that most scientifics agree with him.

Give debates. This trash talking doesn't really make you look credible (to intelligent people at least)

[perfectbark]

Well, the EU has abandoned Bush, as have most of the people who once subscribed to or believed in his antediluvian policies. In the world I live in, the prevailing thoughts based in science and published in same journals in he aforementioned. Why are you and the conservatives so reactionary to people who wish to leave a healthier planet to our kies. If you had things your way the clean water act would have never been based starting in the 60s and we'd still be flushing raw sewage into rivers.

[perfectbark]

You are hopeless.....stop wasting my time....

[minilemur]

On the contrary perfectbark - YOU are hopeless - and you are the one wasting time with your absurd superstitious nonsense about the "health" of a planet. I expect you believe in propitiating the rain gods with sacrifices consisting of reduced carbon emissions in the form of long life light bulbs. How trivial and pathetic.

[greywolfrider19]

my good dumbshit friend: the term"health" in regards to the status of the planet is a term used to help people understand the idea. A better way of saying it would be, although more wordy would be: The measure of the cycles of climate and ecological change in the planet, and the monitoring for any anomalies that will affect the human race negatively or positively.

Bush is a dedicated fool. his ideals are terrible. The ways he goes about getting them done are ingenious. i.e. The Patriot Act

[minilemur]

greywolfrider the dumbshit is all yours.

The term "health" used to describe the planet is just plain stupid. Individual living organisms can be described as healthy. Planets cannot, since they are not living organisms.

You've been reading too much lovelock gaia bullshit. LOL

Your longer paraphrase is the most idiotic nonsense (and jargon to boot!)

[greywolfrider19]

Its jargon for uneducated "DUMBSHITS" like you.

Understand that by saying health I'm not saying that the planet is alive. Its simply a term. A term is a series of sound waves that people give meaning to. So, the meaning of health is relative. Get over it.

I don't believe the planet is alive. As far as I can think, the planet doesn't carry out all the life functions. The planet Earth is a chunk of solid and molten minerals, with water and organisms on it, and is heated by the Sun.

[minilemur]

greydumbshit you are the uneducated one. And how stupid of you to say that "health" is simply a term. No, the meaning of health is not relative. If you try to make it relative it becomes meaningless. Try that at your doctor some time.

I'm glad you have seen reason, and understand that the planet isn't alive.

As such, we don't need to worry about its "health".

[carlrossi]

Lefties, righties, bunch of crap. This Bush is an idiot and does suck up to oil business and the religious right and looks away from some 'issues'. This Bush put us in a war that is wrong. Doesn't matter what party. It's about the leadership in power at the moment. Time to change.

[minilemur]

Here is another scientific fact. There are many hundreds of peer reviewed articles that between them challenge and rebut the CO2 dogma of dangerous global warming.

So to talk of a Republican war on global warming science is absurd. You just have to compare senators Boxer and Inhofe to see that Inhofe talks sense, has listened to scientists, whereas Boxer talks ideology, doesn't understand the science, indeed rejects it just as readily as Republicans are claimed to do.

[perfectbark]

Please provide citations that support your claim.

[minilemur]

perfectbark you're barking up the wrong tree. Citations can be found on a regular basis in such journals as International Journal of Climatology, Climate Dynamics, Journal of Geophysical Research, Bulleting of the American meteorological Society, Geophysical Research Letters, Journal of Climate, Quaternary Research, etc.

500 characters only allows for the posting of one full citation at a time if its significance is to be explained.

You're plainly not familiar with the scientific literature.

[perfectbark]

sent me a private communication with your citations and I will respond with the same.....

[minilemur]

first I would need to know what you wanted the citations to be about.

In the meantime you could begin by reading Solomons' book "The Deniers" which (written by an environmentalist of some reputation) discusses some of the major scientific figures who between them are skeptics of most of the assumptions of the man-made global warming hysteria.

[junkyardmonkie]

One of the problems I have is how many people will look for someone respectable to completely negate the entire argument.

I don't know if you have studied statistics (not meant as an insult, I'm just letting you know what I am referring to), but I want show a principle of it.

When you take a poll of well educated and well versed people in a certain field and have them come to a consensus on an idea (like global warming), it is more likely to be true than not, & atleast should be prepared for.

[minilemur]

It is not scientific methodology to take polls. Polls are a political instrument - which is the very point we climate rationalists are making: all of the alarmism about global warming is politically driven. The scientific data show that the planet has been cooling since 2001 and that there has been no statistically significant warming since 1995.

[junkyardmonkie]

Ok, well I'm sure that you feel that way about all those points that you made, but do you have any actual articles, provable facts, etc... to show in your defense.

If it were political, why are the politicians and large polluting industries the only major forces pushing against it?

[minilemur]

junkyard, it isn't a feeling I have. All the feelings are yours. The facts and the science are mine. Yes I do have actual articles, provable facts.

For example: fact: the world's temperature has been falling since 2001

Fact: there has now been no statistically significant warming since 1995.

Fact: Antarctic sea ice is at a much greater extent now than in 1980

You are deluded to think that politicians are against it. Many use global warming to shore up their careers, e.g. Gore, Rudd, Brown.

[junkyardmonkie]

OK, well I realize that you believe these to be facts, but just by saying that something is a fact does not prove without evidence.

You can say all day that you have sources, but if you don't show proof, then you could just be bluffing.

You listed three sentences labeled as fact with specific dates and nice clear points. Where are the sources?

That is something that you learn when you do any sort of science article. You MUST list sources, or your paper is not even accepted.

[bigboyvernon]

junkyardmonkie;

Yet, I am sure that you would agree that consensus doesn't prove correctness, although there me be a correlation between the two

[wolfe23]

@bigboyvernon Yet within peer review science (ie science as we know it), consensus is what determines thee model.

[MannySteinerBIeeky]

@wolfe23 - consensus based upon actual science shouldn't be the same as consensus based purely on popular opinion -

science is about people agreeing on ways to measure things and record data, and on how to ensure that data is accurately represented. So consensus there is about consistency, being able to prove something based on given things.

Consensus based on - vague things you heard, but you can't explain why you agree with them, is not the same kind of consensus at all.

[vsaluki]

Here is a scientific fact. There has been no global warming for the past 10 years.

Why is the left making war on science? Because they need it to drive their agenda; raise our taxes; diminish our freedom; regulate every aspect of our behavior and create their brave new insane world. Only science refuses to cooperate.

[perfectbark]

wrong.....name the journal where you found this information

[LikableDesi]

no doubt N.America is lagging behind in science and tech...slowly asia countries are getting ahead of us. And the sad thing is politicians dont care.

[RustyIronloins]

great interview . . . but was there some strange sexual tension throughout? I hope it was just my imagination. LOL!

[mobedro]

Between you and the interviewer, or between you and the interviewee?

[aicheyearaem]

Def a lot of restrained passion on both sides...for the topic. I think Oreskes fuckin' hates that this guy glorifies science with no historical context or mitigation but even more, she fuckin' fuckin' fuckin' doesn't FUX with Bush et al.

[aggiematt86]

The left and the right are both equally guilty in wanting to stop progress. The right is afraid of biological progress because it's "frowned upon by God," and the left is afraid of technological progress because they think the New World Order is coming. The world is getting smaller, we're coming together, and we're becoming more advanced every decade. Both sides need to shut up and let the human race progress.

[nightflyer28]

News flash - the New World Order nuts are extreme right, not left. Robertson and his batch of bozos is one of them.

[aggiematt86]

All the NWO theorists I know are hardcore liberal. My friend Don is nearly a Communist and he believes in it.

[nightflyer28]

Well, that must be pretty much the exception, because from what I've seen, it's the far right. I've met a few here and there, even worked with one who later got canned.

After 9/11, he just chuckled and said, "All part of the plan." Ultra-paranoid about liberals & Democrats.

Militia nuts, "xtian patriots," and so forth. Not exactly representative of the Left.

[perfectbark]

conservative politicians....Michelle Bachmann, Sarah palin don't have the undersstanding to care......even the Bush administration is coming around to recognize that global warming is supported by science...

[Christoffeltje]

THE REPUBLICANS ARE CORRUPT.. they STOLE the ELECTIONS in 2000 and probably in 2004 in Ohio.. HAHAHAHA

[Amille1]

When are people going to learn that there is no stopping science!

[1f3rn]

Come on, teach both sides of the debate of evolution and creation? This is ridiculous. 1 in 5 of Americans still believe the sun revolves around the Earth. This is complete crisis for scientific literacy in education.

[zombie2093]

VOTE RON PAUL TO SAVE AMERICA HE's OUR LAST CHANCE TO RESTORE OUR CONSTITUTION!!!

JOIN THE RON PAUL RevolUTION

RON PAUL 2008!!!

[thiazisagestained]

It's and ad. It's entertainment! It's dialog! It's Youtube!

Some assembly required.

[sSereth]

D'you know what modern-day Republicans seem to follow so closely?

McCarthyism.

[Zeatrix]

Very interesting article!

[CharlieChan007]

Excellent interview!

[samonedo]

intelligent guy