Environment

Associated Press Dismisses Perry’s Global Warming Thoughts as Unscientific

See How the Associated Press Played Rick Perrys Global Warming Doubts

GOP presidential hopeful Rick Perry said Wednesday he has doubts about the human contribution to global warming. (AP Photo/Cheryl Senter)

Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry said Wednesday he has major doubts about the human contribution to global warming. And that didn’t sit well with the Associated Press.

“I think we’re seeing it almost weekly or even daily, scientists who are coming forward and questioning the original idea that man-made global warming is what is causing the climate to change,” Perry said at a campaign event in New Hampshire. “Yes, our climates change. They’ve been changing ever since the earth was formed.”

The Texas governor added that the “global cost” of addressing the issue could cost billions or even trillions in taxpayer dollars, and said: “I don’t think from my perspective that I want to be engaged in spending that much money on still a scientific theory that has not been proven and from my perspective is more and more being put into question.”

But while Perry’s comments are newsworthy in themselves, check out the context in which the Associated Press reported them, with these two paragraphs tucked halfway into its article:

But Perry’s opinion runs counter to the view held by an overwhelming majority of scientists that pollution released from the burning of fossil fuels is heating up the planet. Perry’s home state of Texas releases more heat-trapping pollution carbon dioxide — the chief greenhouse gas — than any other state in the country, according to government data.

Global warming has become an issue for contenders for the Republican nomination to run away from, since many conservatives question overwhelming evidence showing climate change is happening and the big government solutions to stem it.

Never mind the fact that one of the leading scientists behind the current global warming movement is being investigated for “scientific misconduct”, or that a new study of NASA data found that the Earth is actually releasing more heat into outer space and thus is not as warm as predicted, or the whacky stories like this one that say cats are the culprits of climate change.

Also never mind this story from last week that said humans have actually helped curb increases in methane gas, or videos like this that outline the purported causes of global warming and debunk them one by one.

No, by slipping in impressive-sounding generalizations like “an overwhelming majority of scientists” and implying that it’s only conservatives who dare question the “overwhelming evidence,” the Associated Press has done an impressive little sleight of hand with Perry’s statement.

Oh, and this isn’t the first time the AP has gone a little global warming trigger-happy. Last month’s heatwave brought us this gem of an alarmist headline: “Northeast braces for temps near boiling point.”

Comments (173)

1 2 3 4
  • Locked
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:21am

    “No, by slipping in impressive-sounding generalizations like “an overwhelming majority of scientists” and implying that it’s only conservatives who dare question the “overwhelming evidence,” the Associated Press has done an impressive little sleight of hand with Perry’s statement.”

    Real question: Does Morgenstern disagree that the majority of climate scientists believe that man-made global warming is true? The articles that were linked are interesting, but don’t actually refute the statement at all. Seems a little odd to get so bent out of shape if it’s true that most climate scientists do believe it.

    Report Post »  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:35am

      Everything they based their science on requires that the heat is trapped NASA recently released data that showed through thermal imagining that the heat is escaping at a much faster rate that any of the scientist climate cell had anticipated……That and that alone should be enough to make every free thinking person question all the results. It’s thye Lynch pin in the global warming theory without heat being trapped any warming that accures must come from outside sources(THE SUN)

      Report Post »  
    • one years food ration like glenn says
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:44am

      Better not tell that to Chris Christie.. He would prove you wrong Mr. Perry, since he is a firm believer in human cause global warming..

      Report Post » one years food ration like glenn says  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:47am

      i really think that most “climate scientists” don’t BELIEVE “man” is creating the climate change.
      the climate change is natural. the however, they will SAY anything for money and funding. it‘s called ’job security’. climate scientists are weathermen. they are the most POINTLESS and unaccurate ‘scientists’ on the planet. you want PROOF that climate scientists are BS? look at the accuracy that their ‘science’ has on predicting the weather. THAT is your proof. weathermen get their data from climate science. FACT: weathermen can be right 84% of the time, in most states, just saying everyday, “It’s going to be sunny”. average rainfall annual in the US is 6%. think about it.

      Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:53am

      @Smith

      But you didn’t answer my question (and unfortunately interpreted the conclusions of the study incorrectly). Does the author of this article disagree that the majority of climate scientists believe in man-made climate change?

      I mean, technically you can’t answer for the author, so it’s not really a fair question to pose to you. But that’s what she picked at, and none of the sources she linked refuted it.

      Report Post »  
    • LittleBigMouth
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 9:39am

      Christie supporting man made global warming…Not true, he came out strong against any such ideas when he stopped the green house program in NJ. Look at what Lord Monkton had to say about the subject… We not only know that the Anglia folks were encouraged to fudge the stats…we have the e mails that prove our global climatologist were concerned about the integral damage done to their word after such a fudge. Lord Monkton clearly makes the case that mans’ contribution is the equivelant of a grain of sand on the beach. This whole thing is a global tax scam, nothing more.

      Report Post » LittleBigMouth  
    • slickmeister
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 9:40am

      I believe Perry also pointed out the MOTIVE behind why most scientists go along with the man-made global warming theory.

      THEY LIKE TO GET PAYCHECKS.

      Get it?

      Report Post » slickmeister  
    • Vixvenom
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:05am

      First….what, or rather who are “most scientist”? Do you seriously think the average physicist or biologist knows more about climate change than the average person? They don’t, it’s not their field or research. They know what we know, that which is printed or professed in the media. As a 15 year veteran of meteorology, I can tell you that MANY working in the field of meteorology have doubts about human-induced climate change, and here are a few reasons:
      1. There are so many variables in atmospheric science, that it is impossible to make an accurate forecast beyond 72 hours, even with thousands of data points and a plethora of components (pressure, temp, humidity, level in atmosphere, etc.). Anything long term and global is a far cry from being statistically accurate.

      2. Anomalous data…..it‘s that stuff that doesn’t fit and gets thrown out…very convenient in research.

      3. Try getting a grant for research proving that the world isn’t being destroyed by man and we need not worry or spend any more money to study or fix it……go ahead try.

      4. Long term…..think ice ages….we have no way of knowing to what degree man has effected the long term trend…..it is impossible…..we don’t have a control planet to compare this one to…can‘t remove us from the equation to test in the real world with all it’s millions of variables. Computers can only do so much…..again, we can’t even forecast 72 hrs out….with the best of information available.

      Report Post »  
    • beullar
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:08am

      @locked..
      “Real question: Does Morgenstern disagree that the majority of climate scientists believe that man-made global warming is true? The articles that were linked are interesting, but don’t actually refute the statement at all. Seems a little odd to get so bent out of shape if it’s true that most climate scientists do believe it”

      Allow me to respond to your question with the petition signed by over 30k scientists.

      http://www.petitionproject.org/

      Please provide any comparable list of QUALIFIED REAL scientists who believe and can in ANY way provide irrefutable evidence of man caused global warming.

      Although there are MANY sites which refute man-made GW, I think this site summed it up well pointing out how scientists had their data and findings changed AFTER their reports were submitted…
      http://www.amlibpub.com/essays/ipcc-global-warming-report.html

      “The last IPCC Global Warming Report “(Fourth Assessment Report of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) )… is a 14 page “Summary for Policymakers” written by political appointees of the 150 countries in the IPCC……”

      “The scientific corruption is provided for by the IPCC in its ”Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work,” which states: “Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group or the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers or the Overvie

      Report Post »  
    • beullar
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:11am

      I really hate it when my message gets truncated and loses it’s full meaning..Anyway, here is the rest of my post above.

      “The last IPCC Global Warming Report “(Fourth Assessment Report of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) )… is a 14 page “Summary for Policymakers” written by political appointees of the 150 countries in the IPCC……”

      “The scientific corruption is provided for by the IPCC in its ”Appendix A to the Principles Governing IPCC Work,” which states: “Changes (other than grammatical or minor editorial changes) made after acceptance by the Working Group or the Panel shall be those necessary to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policymakers or the Overview Chapter.” In other words, the “science” will be adjusted to agree with whatever the politicians and bureaucrats want it to say.”

      Report Post »  
    • michael48
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:22am

      has nothing to with FACTS…as is typical for Lib-Tards …GRANTS…GRANTS…GRANTS…parasites, and they have the Gov. Gumbas at the DEM-COM par-ta along for the KICK-BACKS…FRAUD…pure and simple…

      Report Post »  
    • ltb
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:24am

      There is total consensus among scientists.

      There is total consensus among scientists.

      There is total consensus among scientists.

      There is total consensus among scientists.

      “Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it” – Adolf Hitler

      —–

      ~2,000 U.N. (i.e., communist) funded “scientists” say global warming is caused by man; 32,000+ independent scientists in the U.S. say global warming is caused by the Sun. Why are communists pushing the global warming fraud? Because, they want a one world government that can tax the air we breathe. Keep in mind that the Sun produces more energy in 1 second than all of the energy consumed on Earth since the dawn of man, so saying Man can affect the earth’s climate in any meaningful way is like saying a flea farting on your dog can make him fly across the room.

      Report Post » ltb  
    • Vixvenom
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:31am

      @LTB

      …..exactly. Well stated.

      Report Post »  
    • Firebrand
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:38am

      @vix
      All very good points. I would like to add that the reliable data we do have wouldn’t be a statistically viable sample size, taken the time that climate has existed on the planet. I’ve said this ad nauseum, I just don’t see how there is enough data to make a conclusive statement on whether man-made climate change does or doesn’t exist. Am I off in my assumption?

      Report Post » Firebrand  
    • Locked
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:41am

      “Allow me to respond to your question with the petition signed by over 30k scientists.”

      Ok… everyone knows of the Petition Project, and also knows it contains:
      -Dead scientists
      -Scientists who changed their position after signing
      -Duplicates
      -Fake names (especially celebrity names)
      -Scientists with degrees not even closely related to climatology (ie, informational science, computer science, food science).

      Not to discount the fact that it exists, as it does. It’s just extremely flaky ground.

      I do want to be clear on this though. Your opinion is that among climate scientists, a majority are against the idea of man-made global warming? I’m not asking “Is it real,” I’m not asking “Are they being paid to say this,” I’m asking what the general consensus is.

      I honestly didn’t think there was that much doubt about that portion at least.

      Report Post »  
    • sbleve
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:42am

      AP – appropriate poop. Not a news agency but the USSR version of informational brainwashing. Lets see all of the dictator socialist semi human versions of Ghingus Kan have the privelege of the national news media networks to preach the gospel of tyranny.

      Report Post » sbleve  
    • Vixvenom
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:51am

      @Fire

      No, you’re right. We have ice cores, tree rings and geo-chemistry…rocks. That’s all we have looking back and there is only so much that can be assertained from those sources. The oldest human observations we have are from one spot in Great Britain…200 yrs tops, and guess what….they contradict the Global Warming guys….data actually shows a closer correlation to sun activity (11 year cycle I think)….you’re right…sample size is too small.

      Report Post »  
    • Vixvenom
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 11:06am

      @Fire

      I’d like to add…I did weather for 15 yrs, my wife is still doing it..23yrs now. We have been all over the world, met thousands in the industry. We have never met one single person that thinks we are causing a change to the climate, outside of those who were paid to prove it (students and professors funded by left affiliated organizations). Al Gore isn’t gonna give you 200,000 bucks to prove him wrong…ain’t gonna happen. Real meteorologists laugh at this stuff, seriously.

      Report Post »  
    • Lotus503
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 11:20am

      I sure miss the days when news networks actually reported the news without injecting their own opinions. Were there ever such days?

      Report Post »  
    • Vixvenom
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 11:47am

      @Locked
      The problem is the question. What is a scientist? Is it a person that works in a field of science? Or do you have to be a PhD professor, conducting research? If it’s just a person that works in the field…I have been around meteorologists for most of my life. I can tell you conclusively, most climate scientists DO NOT believe in man-made global warming, at least none of the thousands that I’ve met. If, however, the scientists are only those in academia, or affiliated with left-wing organizations…yes, most of those Climate Scientists believe in man-made global warming. Hard to answer a bad question…..

      Report Post »  
    • Doylehc
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 11:52am

      My problem with this whole global warming, is no scientist has disproven my theory, that we are still warming up from/since the last Ice Age.

      Report Post »  
    • Therightsofbilly
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 11:56am

      @LOCKED

      You make me laugh, locked.

      Still as “transparent” as ever.

      Report Post » Therightsofbilly  
    • JRook
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 12:10pm

      Perry has trouble enough deciding what party to be in and achieving some level of performance as governor. As far as consensus there would seem to be little doubt beyond the scientists paid by the CO2 causing energy companies. http://www.ucsusa.org/ssi/climate-change/scientific-consensus-on.html It is said to see another politician start off with over the top, questionable statements just to get attention. Doesn’t anybody want to hear some specific plans or actions. It is so so easy to be an art or movie critic. His record in Texas is mediocre at best.

      Report Post »  
    • Cheryl Pass
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 12:13pm

      Some people need to read these sites: Climate Depot, Junk Science, Wattsupwiththat, and AL FIN. If you knew what real scientists are reporting, you would not be sucked into the UN global socialist scam game claiming humans are to blame for climate changes on Earth. Perry is smart to realize the scam and has at least said the truth. Bachmann knows the truth as well. Not sure where Romney is on this. Christie is a fool on this issue, or is in on the take, and doesn’t deserve the praise he is getting as a possible presidential contender. It’s tragic that so many Americans have been suckers for the AGW lies. We have already paid a huge price for this insanity and need to erase it from our government (at all levels) regs, grants, subsidies, tax loopholes, etc. fast! It is the single most destructive lie ever brought to this country…and the world.

      Report Post »  
    • BruceyBanner
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 12:16pm

      Oh, I forgot rick Perry was so great at those sciences. http://www.scribd.com/doc/61684192/Rick-Perry-s-Texas-A-M-Transcript Lot of D’s for a person talking about complex systems.

      Might his opinion have more to do with, say, 11 Million dollars from gas and oil?
      http://www.enviroknow.com/2011/08/17/rick-perry-climate-change-denier/

      “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.”

      Report Post »  
    • jkendal
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 12:20pm

      It doesn’t matter what the consensus is – it matters what the FACTS are and we know that the Global Warming Cabal was falsifying their data to try to convince the Western World to place draconian measures on their people and give power for those decisions in the hands of a few elites.

      The whole “consensus = settled science” argument can be destroyed with one question: What was the consensus among Germans in the mid-1930′s concerning the Jews? Answer: that the Jews, as a people, deserve to be exterminated. Did their consensus mean that the holocaust was okay – that the Nazi attempt to wipe out all the Jews was okay just because the majority of Germans thought it was??? Okay, you don’t like that argument, try this: If a consensus of Americans decided, based on manufactured data, that people whose skin color was a certain pigment made them highly inferior to others of a more light complexion – meant that it was okay to enslave them, would that make the consensus correct???

      Consensus is nothing more than 3 wolves and a lamb deciding what’s for dinner. Thank God the Global Warming Cabal was exposed for the evil leftist political agenda that it was…..

      Report Post »  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 12:37pm

      Locked,
      I can’t answer for her I was merely pointing out a big fact that just came to light publicly . A fact all the pig headed global warmist can address and refuse to see. All data based on their “science” and use that term lightly require an x factor of heat retension to bring the over-all temperture up. Well that x factor has been proven wrong through thermal imagining for NASA. Argo if the world is warming and the heat is escaping to only logical answer is the heat is being generate from and outside source….The only outside source short of some evil alien polt is THE SUN.
      What the reporter believes or disbelieves is up to her I’m living in a reality where perception is mere fantasy without the concrete facts to support it. Fact is AUW has none

      Report Post »  
    • chetjet
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 12:37pm

      Aliens cause global warming, the late Dr. Michael Crichton said so., http://s8int.com/crichton.html

      Report Post »  
    • HADEN0UGH
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 12:44pm

      I believe the majority of climate scientists who say they believe in man-man global warming are lying so they can get more money.

      As Chris Tucker pointed out in Rush Hour 2 – “Law of Criminal Investigation: Always follow the rich white man” – ie. Al Gore

      Report Post » HADEN0UGH  
    • Trance
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 1:28pm

      I don’t know that she was specifically talking about “the overwhelming majority of scientists”, since she also mentioned the statement “the overwhelming evidence” as well. Her links called into question the evidence, and said nothing about the number of scientists.

      I‘ve been following the global warming debate since the late 1980’s. The type of reporting she is complaining about has been around since that time. Reporters have always interjected alarmist statements like the ones this article is talking about.

      Up until a couple years ago, it was almost impossible to find the specific scientific evidence being used by scientists to predict global warming. There is some available now, even to the point where I just take their word for the math because it’s so complex.

      I remember the first time I saw anything about “proof” of global warming was an article that said the best evidence we have for global warming is the computer model predictions. At the time I just wrote that off as the reporter being crazy, but I’ve heard a lot more about it recently, so maybe that was the best evidence? (4 or 5 years ago)

      But then I read an article about how NASA was getting lower than expected readings on the ocean temperatures. So they said the readings were wrong and adjusted them. Then I read about how the satellites were reading cooling in the oceans, but that was another mistake, so they adjusted them. Then all of the raw data disappeared. So, I dunno, sho

      Report Post » Trance  
    • HKS
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 1:43pm

      Mother earth wasn’t borne yesterday like most “scientist” If you don’t have say a hundred thousand years of data to compare, you have nothing. Further, one is unbelievably arrogant to think any human is going to make a dent in what mother earth wants to do. All is in balance over time, end of story.

      Report Post » HKS  
    • Rational Man
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 2:19pm

      “Counter to the view held by an overwhelming majority of scientists…”

      Thats a lie! The fact is that more and more scientists are speaking out against ”man caused” globle warming. And it never was an “overwelming majority” in the first place.

      Report Post » Rational Man  
    • Jaycen
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 2:52pm

      Perry is a Progressive just like Bush. I’m not interested in what he thinks on any of the issues. He’ll “think” whatever gets him elected, and then institute laws and regulations that enslave the citizenry.

      Report Post » Jaycen  
    • ozchambers
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:17pm

      I guess the AP is also upset with the majority of people who now question (and with good cause) the man made global warming “consensus”.

      Report Post » ozchambers  
    • ProgressivesAreEvil
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 9:52pm

      Well Locked, my spinning friend here’s the thing, your question was:
      “Real question: Does Morgenstern disagree that the majority of climate scientists believe that man-made global warming is true?”

      No one knows that answer because Morgenstern was talking about a comment that said ‘scientists’, not ‘climate scientists’. That small distinction makes a huge difference…funny how you added the word climate to try to strengthen your argument. Blanket statements like the AP made are meant to bolster their not-so-covert liberal spin without providing any actual substance.

      As someone else said, asking just any scientists opinion on something that is unrelated to their of expertise would be the same as asking a common desk worker their opinion. Opinions don’t matter, facts do so if in fact the statement about the opinions of “scientists” was true it really is just like saying “All Moms think global warming is real”….in other words meaningless when it comes to “proof” of MMGW.

      As for “climate scientists” unless they have hard, RELIABLE, data that is not taken from guesswork about what was going on 1000 years ago, or stats made from inaccurate data ( like the ones NASA revealed), their “opinions” are no more useful than any other persons on this planet.

      Report Post » ProgressivesAreEvil  
    • Shredda11
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:53pm

      @vixvenom

      I am looking for trustworthy empirical research on global warming. Is it possible to find? Lol…I am an avid science reader but am finding it hard to wade through all the bias. One of my college classmates told me her father was a climatologist who is also a skeptic but the semester ended before I could ask her what his name was!

      Report Post »  
    • freeme2742
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 11:05pm

      AUFKM, Global warming is a hoax, the only reason that it is still brought up is there are many rich men that invested in this hoax and they are hoping that Americans are as stupid as they think, and forget about all the reported manipulation and fraud. The rich just cannot believe that if they say there is a consensus then why wont the people believe this hogwash. And people like the above who clearly is in denignal must be a tree hugger that just cannot believe its all just not true, CO2 that which we exhale is responsible, well that and fossil fuels, gee I am sorry that the lie has been exposed. Move on and lets do something about the Communist in the Office of the Presidency.

      Report Post »  
    • glashole
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 11:23pm

      Al Gore is as quiaified as Rick Perry on man caused glogal warming/cooling. Perry has not based his entire identity on what he supports though. If you call yourself, even slightly educated, then you must look at the historical climate data. All 150 yrs or so of it. It is cyclical and that is what you can extrapolate from it, peroid. Either you study the data and draw conclusions based on facts, or you make something up. Al has made a bunch of money from the lemmings. Please follow me, i have to go produce some methane. Oh by the way, what is the largest producer of methane on the planet? Cows, right??????????

      Try termites?????????????? What does that have to do with warming?

      Report Post » glashole  
    • Vixvenom
      Posted on August 19, 2011 at 12:18am

      @Shredda11

      If you happen to come back….good luck with that. Seriously though, I can’t recall his name, but in the late nineties, early 00′s, there was a famous professor from MIT that went on record (60 minutes, discovery channel maybe) against man made climate change. He was very respected and shot holes all in it. Maybe if you dig you can find something…..not sure he’s still there. Most dismiss it based on the data from the studies and large amount of conjecture present. Also, computer models that forecast warming cannot come close to the number of variables in nature…..these studies are dismissed not through research proving them wrong, but on the horrible methods used in the studies themselves…..start with the data in the studies and the methods and conjecture in those studies…..not hard to see the flaws, if you know what to look for.

      Report Post »  
    • Vixvenom
      Posted on August 19, 2011 at 12:29am

      @Shredd11

      Read your question wrong…sorry. That’s gonna be hard….you are looking for a study that says….“I found nothing” or something else people don’t want to hear. Go to a university, in the back of every library is the thesis work conducted on campus…..what you are looking for exists, but isn’t likely to be published, you have to read a lot for this project…..good luck.

      Report Post »  
    • Shredda11
      Posted on August 19, 2011 at 10:07am

      haha I figured I had a lot of reading to do vix. I believe you are talking about Richard Lindzen? Thanks for the tips!

      Report Post »  
    • arslin
      Posted on August 19, 2011 at 4:32pm

      A climate scientist by definition believes in global warming. Thus, it is not surprising that “the majority of climate scientist” believe in man made global warming. It is like saying that, “the majority of Christians believe in Jesus.” If you are a scientist that does not believe in man made global warming, you are simply a crack-pot.

      Report Post »  
    • An Arizonan
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 2:15am

      Someone needs to educate morons like Al Gore, Olberman and Shultz.
      More CO2 was released into the atmosphere with the eruptions of Krakatoa and Pinatubo than all of mankind has produced since the dawn of time.

      Report Post » An Arizonan  
    • Curioso
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 11:31am

      A picture is woth a 1000 words shouldn’t this picture look different if the climate change religion is true.

      http://www.natice.noaa.gov/pub/ims/ims_gif/ARCHIVE/NHem/2011/ims2011231.gif

      Curious about there blue water failure at the north pole?

      Report Post »  
  • Berbel73
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:21am

    “But Perry’s opinion runs counter to the view held by an overwhelming majority of scientists that pollution released from the burning of fossil fuels is heating up the planet.”. An “overwhelming majority”?, according to which data? If you’re going to make a statement in fact like that you had better back it up with facts and numbers. But then again when has a little thing like facts ever stopped the liberal progressives from pushing their agenda?

    Report Post »  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:48am

      you know, the 5 scientists.. they are the majority…

      Report Post »  
    • walkwithme1966
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 9:44am

      OMG – please, please nominate this jerk for GOP candidate for president – he is worse than Bush!! Obama won‘t even have to work hard to win this election as Perry can’t keep his foot out of his mouth!! Don’t you have anyone else that can run???? Well, too bad!!!! http://wp.me/pYLB7-1sY

      Report Post » walkwithme1966  
    • jkendal
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 12:27pm

      “OMG – please, please nominate this jerk for GOP candidate for president – he is worse than Bush!! Obama won‘t even have to work hard to win this election”

      It‘ll be a landslide in Rick Perry’s favor. A VAST MAJORITY of American voters are AGAINST your beloved savior because he and his cronies are destroying our nation’s economy, our nation’s wealth and our very way of life. Rick Perry has the power – and the GUTS – to roll it all back. He’s done a fantastic job as governor of Texas (never lost an election) and will do the same for America!

      Report Post »  
    • HADEN0UGH
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 12:54pm

      Obama may not even be the democrats nominee.

      Report Post » HADEN0UGH  
    • ozchambers
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:19pm

      @WALKWITHME: We’re working on it, bud.

      Report Post » ozchambers  
    • JJ Coolay
      Posted on August 20, 2011 at 12:33am

      Walkwithme is as blind as Hellen Keller

      Report Post » JJ Coolay  
  • country_hick
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:21am

    And Saint Al has what scientific training, done what research and had it peer reviewed? Have the “overwhelming majority” of scientists ascknowleged that most U.S. weather surface stations do NOT meet NWS site requirements and are reporting bad information? Where is the AP’s remarks on last weeks NASA report?

    If the AP is going to call the pot (Perry) black they better start calling the kettle (Gore) black also and admit they are an arm of the Administrations Propoganda Ministry and NOT a news agency.

    Report Post »  
  • Rayblue
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:20am

    In the 60′s, it was the threat of nuclear war that drove people to extremes.
    But that was a very real possibility. Very tangible.
    When the immediate threat was diminished, somebody realized that fear could be profitable.
    So work on the children began. A cult was born and the gospel of environmentalism was made manifest. Now, it insists on being taken seriously. But we’ve grown beyond such nonsense
    and can decide for ourselves what to believe. The press can only show it’s ignorance so many times and then loses what credibility it once had. The media can try its best to program us but overkill has led to incredulity. The baseless claims of social failures has no place in our lives and will fade as all cults formed from falsehood.

    Report Post » Rayblue  
  • Islesfordian
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:18am

    One thing that is definitely warming is my appreciation of his candidacy.

    Report Post » Islesfordian  
  • bettermimi
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:10am

    Here’s got my vote!!!!!

    Report Post »  
  • LadyGOP
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:06am

    GO RICK GO ^

    http://cafenetamerica.blogspot.com/2011/08/video-gov-rick-perry-2012.html

    Report Post » LadyGOP  
    • LittleBigMouth
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 9:56am

      Yea, go get lost so we can have Ron Paul … the guy the people want.

      Report Post » LittleBigMouth  
    • HADEN0UGH
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 12:51pm

      Ron Paul will never be President. To say that Iran should have nuclear weapons because other nations have them is like saying let retarded children run with scissors because other kids are using them.

      Report Post » HADEN0UGH  
    • ImJustAGuy
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 9:13pm

      yeah – an “overwhelming majority” of Americans want Ron Paul for president LOL

      Report Post » ImJustAGuy  
  • starman70
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:00am

    Global warming has already proven to be a lie, created by a group of “Scientists and Liberal college profrssors” using that premise to milk billions of dollars from governments, universities and corporations world wide. The hacked e-mails prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that a conspiracy between these “Researchers” was created, using falsified and skewed data in order to create the panic necessary to justify their existance.

    Yes, there now is a period of global warming. There has and always will be, throughout the geologic column, periods of warming and cooling. These are natural cycles and while intense volcanic activity in past ages may have temporarily caused a warming trend, those periods were short lived.

    The liberal, marxist, communist “Reporters” trained in the far left colleges and universities will never let go of an idea which might suffocate the American capitalist system. Many of them live in fine houses which consume more energy in a week than the average American uses in 6 months. As good Marxists, they believe in the saying, “Don’t do as I do, do as I say do”.

    Report Post »  
    • escape_from_socialism
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:19am

      The same scientists in ‘30 was trying to prove aryan rice being superior and homosexuality is a disease.
      God save us from those “scientists”.

      Report Post »  
    • NSDQ
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:38am

      Aryan rice = white rice lol, sorry that was an ironic misspell, but your point is spot on

      Report Post » NSDQ  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 9:05am

      yeah it is a good point that people really do need to remember.
      i say doctors and scientists. i will admit, doctors and scientist, who hold themselves accountable for their research, are a blessing…

      but there are far too many, today, who don’t care about facts, only outcome. they already have the outcome they desire, they just need to prove it with a chain of “convenient truths” that COULD be linked together if you didn’t fully understand the facts.

      “Trust me, I’m a Doctor” – Dr. Suess. ;)

      Report Post »  
  • tobywil2
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:57am

    To see a cartoon that exposes the objective of the Global Warming Scam click on: http://commonsense21c.com/images/GLOBAL_WARMING_SCAM.jpg

    Report Post » tobywil2  
  • imontou
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:55am

    I remember in the 70s we were taught in school that we were headed into an ice age if we didn’t stop using fossil fuels. It was nut job hippies then. Now those nut jobs run the universities and are elected officials. Same garbage from the same jerks just different outcomes. And why is it when it snows in DC during a global warming march they say “You can’t count one weather pattern” but when we have a hot summer in the mid-west it’s proof of thier madness.

    Report Post » imontou  
    • HorseCrazy
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 11:17am

      dont forget the 80‘s and early 90’s with the hole in the O Zone layer. It must be hard for them being as how they are so much smarter than the rest of us. my eyes roll at the mention of Green or Global Warming. The Upcycled or Recycled more control ideas are maddening.

      Report Post »  
  • jim
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:55am

    Global warming is b.s. Not as much b.s. as the AP dishes out daily. Nobody respects or believes the AP’s crap anymore… since they got their Chosen One elected, they’ve gone downhill ever since. The AP is good for papering bird cages, along with the NYT, Washington Post and LA Times.

    AP = left wing crap.

    Report Post » jim  
  • Grapesofwrath
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:55am

    I am a scientist and a lot of my friends are scientists (in Wisconsin of all places). The majority of scientists that I know realize that “Global Warming by Anthropomorphic Factors” is a bunch of BS. You cannot make presumptions from erroneous data.

    As far a climate change, the world’s climate has been changing for 3.6 billion years and will never stop. The earth is a living and constantly changing system.

    Report Post »  
    • Jack of Hearts
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 9:27am

      You can’t say things like that on here – the earth is only 6,000 years old – see the posts about the flood on Noahworld article.

      Report Post » Jack of Hearts  
  • gmoneytx
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:37am

    I think recently global warming has been contributed to by Barack Obutthead and Moochelle’s hot air!

    Report Post » gmoneytx  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:53am

      Even more suprising is that no of these politicians have addressed the FACT that NASA thermal imagining show that the heat is escaping the earth at a much faster rate than any of the supposed settled(inspite of all the fraud and corruption) science that climate nuts keeping trying to use. And the data is based on controled enviroment and the universe is anything but controled.
      How can anyone with an ouce of logic by into something soooo political and non-scientific.

      Report Post »  
    • TEA4Me
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 11:49am

      I loved Perry’s quote about how Al Gore has been talking so much lately about Global Warming that he is the leading producer of Carbon Dioxide on earth. That’s funny right there.

      Report Post » TEA4Me  
  • CommonSenseChris
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:36am

    Still haven‘t wrapped my head around the fact that everytime I breath out I’m killing the planet……

    Report Post » CommonSenseChris  
    • loriann12
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:44am

      Don’t forget all the liberals in their basements eating cheetos and f a r t ing.

      Report Post »  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:46am

      actually.. everytime you breath out, you are giving life to the tree, who is “breathing out” oxygen for you… lol… the planet has nothing to do with it. there are planets (very much alive) without oxygen on them at all. explain that… LOL

      Report Post »  
    • CommonSenseChris
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 5:47pm

      @JB.KIDS… Aaaaahh I get it, that means if I breath out I’m saving trees. Or uh but the carbon dioxide kills the plant. The left told me so… Oh wait but I can live cause the tree made oxygen…. Crap!! I’M SO CONFUSED!!! LOL!!!! Not…. I can’t believe soooo many people buy into the global warming crap…..

      Report Post » CommonSenseChris  
  • 13th Imam
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:35am

    I am old enough to remember that Man-Made Global Cooling was going to destroy the planet. Al Gwhore couldn’t figure out a way to scam the system, so they changed the scam to MMGW . With the willing assistance of the LSM and the thieving DEMOCRATS.

    Report Post » 13th Imam  
    • loriann12
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:45am

      I remember in the 80′s it was a new ice age. We had one nut in my hometown build an underground house so he could survive the ice flow. Stocked it with survival gear. When it didn’t happen, he opened a gun shop/survivalist shop.

      Report Post »  
    • jb.kibs
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:49am

      yes, wasn’t it the “nuclear winter”? ha. so many people sold all of their stuff in the 70′s because of these political hoaxes.

      Report Post »  
  • jb.kibs
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:35am

    Here is an old phrase for the AP… “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist.”

    Also, scientists… the last time i checked, more CO2 = Larger Plants. Add CO2 to your indoor garden and watch how large your plants get. Ask any botanist on the planet about it.

    Larger Plants = More O2.
    More O2 = Larger Mammals.
    Larger Mammals = More CO2

    It’s a cycle that balances itself. it always has, and always will.
    Pretty much everything that is biologically produced by one organism is consumed by other organism.

    Report Post »  
  • biohazard23
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:31am

    I’ll start taking these global warming freaks seriously when they all decide to forgo each and every convenience of modern life and decide to live as the cavemen did. If they go ahead and live a hand-to-mouth existence, hunting and foraging for food, giving up their computers, Blackberrys, Facebook, hybrid cars, birkenstocks, and soy lattes, and living in a desolate cave somewhere AND MAKE IT WORK, then perhaps they may be taken a little more seriously.

    Oh, and they can’t use fire for cooking and warmth since fires are bad. And they can’t recycle anything that they already have. That wouldn’t be very fair since they would still be utilizing those evil capitalist materials that contributed to the global warming crisis in the first place. So no tools, no clothes or shoes, no creature comforts of any kind. Live off the land, my friends, utilizing all that Mother Nature has to offer and show us how it’s supposed to be done!

    One more thing: no modern farming conveniences to help feed their fellow greenie masses. After all, agriculture is what got the ball rolling as far as some of those folks are concerned. Farming destroyed the land and eliminated bedrooms for beetles, owls, and armadillos, right? So if they mean what they say and they’re willing to put their nasty capitalist dollars where their hypocritical mouths are, then it’s a strictly caveman existence for them. (That goes for you, too, Al Gore.)

    We’ll anxiously be waiting to see how long they last, heh he

    Report Post » biohazard23  
    • Hobbs57
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:01am

      Don’t forget, no windmills either, they kill bats, bald eagles an countless other birds. In Pennsylvania, the kill so many bats a year that now 17 trillion extra insects are living, primarily mosquito’s, and spreading disease. Can’t have that. Funny though, I am very surprised the environmental mental‘s haven’t come out opposing windmills now that it kills so many their flying friends. They usually go “batty” over animals being killed. Instead, I seen them talking about balance i the ecosystem, having to look at the over al good and weighing it out. WHAT ?? They never speak that way. Maybe the lady I saw from California who was talking was only a wanna be environmentalist.

      Report Post » Hobbs57  
    • biohazard23
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:18am

      They’re ALL wannabe environmentalists. They’re all hypocrites, too. Every aspect of their sorry little lives contributes to their “carbon footprint” (see: Al Gore). They don‘t give a crap about the bats because they’re not endangered. Also most people don’t understand the usefulness of these wonderful creatures, plus they don’t find them all that adorable. It’s not like the windmills are killing off polar bears or anything cute like that.

      Oh, and never mind the mosquito-borne diseases because, hey, there are too many folks on this planet anyway. It wouldn’t hurt Mother Gaia to have a few (thousand) killed off by encephalitis, West Nile, or malaria. I mean, come on, where’s your compassion for our Earth Mother? HER rights come first, do they not? Just ask any member of ELF, or virtually any resident of Seattle, and they’ll tell you. And don’t you dare argue with them or they just might throw a silken tofu cream pie at you then run home to tell their mommy/therapist, you dirty, capitalist heathen. :)

      I’m just kidding. They don’t have mommies, only uterine incubators since the whole concept of parenthood is just another wicked manifestation of the white Christian man trying to keep diversity out of the…. something.

      Report Post » biohazard23  
    • Dismayed Veteran
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 9:30am

      I actually feel pity for these folks. Just think how empty their lives are that they have to fill it with nonsense while enabling Gore to make dollar after dollar.

      The end of this world comes to all of us. Its how you handle it that is important. I sometimes think that people without faith in GOD create these scare tactics because they are afraid of what lies beyond.

      Report Post » Dismayed Veteran  
    • biohazard23
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 10:05am

      @Dismayed Veteran, amen to that.

      Report Post » biohazard23  
  • Rockyspoon
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:30am

    They (the Associated Press) lie when they say the “overwhelming majority of scientists”–that is certainly NOT the case.

    And the “chief greenhouse gas” is NOT carbon dioxide. The chief greenhouse gas is water (what, the AP wants you to quit watering your lawn or empty your swimming pool because of water evaporation from these two sources–particularly for those living next to the Pacific or Atlantic oceans?? Does anybody see stupidity built into what the AP says? I do!)

    Report Post »  
  • jens63
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:29am

    Thank-you Rick Perry. If you look at historical data there are climate changes on roughly 20 year, 100 year, and 500 year cycles. The dark ages were cold, the change affected agriculture, there was starvation and disease. The rennasaince was a warming cycle where people and the art thrived. Vikings had vineyards and sheep grazing in Greenland, funny how it got its name, huh? Did our huge industrial complex cause it to turn into a giant glacier? I looked at the past 100 plus years average high temps in Virginia in August and find around 1900 there were average highs comparable to these past few years now. The average seems to vary by 5 degrees or so, an occasional wild one like the 69.3 in 1927! Then there is the study showing carbon increases follow the temperture rising. Not preceding it. (see Scripp’s Inst) So I (scientfically :)) conclude that this is a natural cycle and we have a minimal if any impact on it.

    Report Post »  
  • weneedrubio
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:28am

    The saddest part of this story is the way the education system has used this topic to depress our future leaders and force them to the belief that the future will be full of nothing but hardship and even death and that the leaders of today and yesterday are just greedy war mongers that care nothing for their children or the Earth. Sadder still is that this is all about greed and the subjegation of science and known facts to idealogical manipulation which is based in jealousy and hate. That is why this movement is lead by an angry loser like Al Gore. Ask his wife what he is all about, an earful will come I bet

    Report Post »  
  • Brett Riggs
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:24am

    I guess the thousands of scientist that have come forth to dispute globel warming does not fit the agenda of the news media. Overall, the news media has shown its bias and have been wrong on so many things, who evens listens to them except for a good laugh. Go RIck

    Report Post »  
  • pma_guy
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:24am

    Anyone who believes in global warming, climate change, or whatever velcro attachment they name it next week, is just a fool. One trip across the country in an airplane will verify what we knew all along. Puny mankind, in his arrogance only “thinks” he is so powerful that he could affect the weather. Babel comes to mind.

    Report Post » pma_guy  
    • RLTW
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 8:34am

      Al Gore also believes the sun revolves around the Earth

      Report Post »  
  • dnewton
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:23am

    When did Global Warming get proven? The argument used to be: “We have to act in case it is it is true.”
    This preemptive strike theory was thought to be the smart thing to do even if the economy was wrecked or the actions were ineffective. You can not vote on the truth even if everyone voting is a scientist. The fact that the government has been spending on global warming income transfers to universities for at least ten years gives it more prestige than it deserves. Our government totally bypassed the moral question of spending money on a problem that may not exist or creating a policy that may not be capable of producing a benefit above the cost.

    Report Post »  
  • jb.kibs
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:17am

    Oh, because the AP is the authority on everything, right?

    Report Post »  
    • stinkybisquit
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:23am

      I always thought AP, UPI were supposed to run stories by straight objective facts (ie, ‘Bomb Kills Five’), and not throw in opinion. Silly me.

      Report Post »  
    • HKS
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:57am

      No news media anymore, just news outlets, they outlet what they are told. The media John Kennedy spoke of in his address to the congress is dead. Nothing professional there anymore, just readers like Obama.

      Report Post » HKS  
  • Ron Staiger
    Posted on August 18, 2011 at 7:15am

    Unscientific??? What is scientific about scientists receiving millions of dollars in grants from the left to conclude that all of the world’s problems are of anthropomorphic origin so that they can establish a system of energy trade that will make them rich. Al Gore should be arrested and shipped of to Gitmo for inconveniencing the American people with his drivel. These scientists should be ignored because of their conflict of interest.

    Report Post »  
    • SamIamTwo
      Posted on August 18, 2011 at 9:49am

      Exactly and they fabricated the data…news on that came out what a year ago? Anyhoo, it was a NASA scientist that began this and hopefully the next NASA scientist will slow it down.

      Crazy liberal capitalist fabricate stories to become rich. Amazing.

      Report Post » SamIamTwo  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love