A sane Republican

“I have been to enough college campuses to know if you are 30 or younger this climate issue is not a debate. It’s a value. These young people grew up with recycling and a sensitivity to the environment — and the world will be better off for it. They are not brainwashed. … From a Republican point of view, we should buy into it and embrace it and not belittle them. You can have a genuine debate about the science of climate change, but when you say that those who believe it are buying a hoax and are wacky people you are putting at risk your party’s future with younger people. You can have a legitimate dispute about how to solve immigration, but when you start focusing on the last names of people the demographics will pass you by.”

– Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina

Advertisements

3 Comments »

  1. 1
    DocForesight Says:

    Two strawmen in one statement, thanks Sen. Graham. First, the “deniers’ are not the ones restricting publication in “peer-reviewed” journals (for whatever they are worth now); they are not the ones pressing for wholesale limitations on energy use and quality-of-life choices; they are not the ones who held media domination over the climate debate during the past 20 years (1988 – 2009). That there has been strong push-back by some who are skeptical of mankind’s influence on something as complex as global climate variations is a result of their being called what is akin to Holocaust deniers. The reaction is understandably visceral.

    “Buying into” something is meaningless, if it’s based on incomplete facts or insufficient evidence or group-think or appeals to authority. You don’t embrace something just to appease the promoter of it. You embrace it because the evidence irrefutably supports that decision. That climate models are merely predictions of future events based on what they are programed to assess, they are by definition, unable to consider all variables. That the climate models have failed to account for the lack of warming since 1995 (admitted to by Dr. Phil Jones recently), those models are suspect.

    Immigration isn’t the problem – it’s ILLEGAL immigration that is a problem. When a persons’ first act in a country is to break the most basic of laws, that does not portend well for their future law-abiding-ness. Follow the rules, get in line, wait your turn. If you extenuating circumstances, explain them, plead your case. Sen. Graham knows the difference as he is a JAG.

  2. 2
    DocForesight Says:

    I neglected to mention my support for nuclear power plants as forming the future bulk of our base-load energy needs. Nuclear power can stand on its own merits and doesn’t need to be advanced with alarms of doom and gloom “climate change”.

  3. 3
    Alice Says:

    I would feel better about the belief system of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming if the scientists and publishers at the heart of the movement felt no need to hide their data, intimidate persons with conflicting hypotheses, and pressure publications to refuse publication and refuse access to data to anyone who is not a member of the in group.

    Faith in anthropogenic climate catastrophe is not science. The foundations for that faith are not scientific. Cargo cult science is the appropriate term.


RSS Feed for this entry

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: