Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
As you may have read here or elsewhere in the past few days, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, one of the Republicans testing the waters for a presidential run in 2016, has made clear he's a climate change denier.
But on Tuesday during a brief exchange at the National Press Club, a member of the audience asked through a moderator what information, reports, studies or otherwise are you relying on to inform and reach your conclusion that human activity is not to blame for climate change? He couldn't name a single source. So, he dodged the question and denied that he is a denier with a hokey mixture of truisms, truths, half-truths and BS.
Totally unnecessary. He could simply have referred to the peer-reviewed research of ExxonMobil, Ph.D., and Dr. David Koch and Dr. Charles Koch, climatologists.
When it comes to climate change, when it comes to food security, we are literally facing a moment of adversity perhaps even dire necessity, Kerry said at a State Department food security award ceremony. Its hard to convince people hard to convince people of a challenge that isnt immediately tangible to everybody particularly, he continued. But it is clear to at least 98, 99 percent of all the scientists in our country that to confront these challenges, we must invent and we must innovate, and most of all, we need to work together and we need to get to work. On several occasions this year Kerry has referred to 97 percent of scientists backing the notion that climate change is happening, and that human activity is to blame or what activists refer to as anthropogenic [that is, human-induced] global warming (AGW).
In a speech in Mexico last month, he spoke of 97 percent of the scientists of the world warning us about the devastating impact of global climate change if we dont take action and take serious action soon. A few days earlier, he told Boston College graduates that 97 percent of the worlds scientists tell us this is urgent. And in a speech in Indonesia in February, Kerry said that 97 percent of climate scientists have confirmed that climate change is happening and that human activity is responsible, adding that these scientists agree on the causes of these changes and they agree on the potential effects. Kerrys latest comments come amid debate over the accuracy of the 97 percent claim, which is based most often on a survey by a team led by an Australian physicist and climate blogger, John Cook, which reported that 97 percent of some 4,000 peer-reviewed studies that declared a position on AGW endorsed the consensus position.
When that survey was published in May 2013, President Obama linked to a wire service report on it on his Twitter account, tweeting, Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous. (In fact neither the published survey nor the wire service report referred to the dangerous claim.) Last month, the Wall Street Journal published an op-ed by Heartland Institute president and CEO Joseph Bast and climate scientist Roy Spencer, charging that the 97 percent claim was a fiction, and challenging the Cook and other studies often cited as sources for the figure. That in turn brought strong and critical responses from several quarters, including the online magazine Salon, and one of the co-collaborators in the Cook study, writing in The Guardian.
After a hearing of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology late last month, committee chairman Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said in a statement that both the latest report by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the White Houses National Climate Assessment documents appear to be designed to spread fear and alarm and provide cover for previously determined government policies. The president and others often claim that 97 percent of scientists believe that global warming is primarily driven by human activity, Smith said. However, the study they cite has been debunked. When asked today whether the science of climate change is settled or if uncertainties remain, witnesses unanimously said that the science is not settled. Witnesses at the hearing included Richard Tol, professor of economics at Britains University of Sussex, and an IPCC report lead author who asked to have his name removed from its latest summary report because he said he found it too alarmist.
Kerry: 'At Least 98, 99% of All Scientists in Our Country? Believe in Climate Change | CNS News
Marco Rubio Can't Name One Source for Idiotic GOP Climate Claim
Most GOP anti-Science folks know where to find the bogus non-peer-reviewed science--how come Rubio is so clueless??
As you may have read here or elsewhere in the past few days, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, one of the Republicans testing the waters for a presidential run in 2016, has made clear he's a climate change denier.
But on Tuesday during a brief exchange at the National Press Club, a member of the audience asked through a moderator what information, reports, studies or otherwise are you relying on to inform and reach your conclusion that human activity is not to blame for climate change? He couldn't name a single source. So, he dodged the question and denied that he is a denier with a hokey mixture of truisms, truths, half-truths and BS.
Totally unnecessary. He could simply have referred to the peer-reviewed research of ExxonMobil, Ph.D., and Dr. David Koch and Dr. Charles Koch, climatologists.
Lets see, frikken POLL after POLL has shown
this "gloBULL warming aka Climate change" is the farthest thing on the American voters minds
yet this is what we get, called names, claim stupid is a virtue they cling to over it, blah blah blah
He needed to provide a source that didn't go along with the cooked temperature numbers of the warmer cult? It's up to them to prove, it isn't up to everyone else to disprove. THAT is what's stupid. Disagreement with the left isn't hate, stupidity, intolerance or uninformed. Sorry.
He needed to provide a source that didn't go along with the cooked temperature numbers of the warmer cult? It's up to them to prove, it isn't up to everyone else to disprove. THAT is what's stupid. Disagreement with the left isn't hate, stupidity, intolerance or uninformed. Sorry.
The Teaparty always picks their leaders with an eye toward demographics. Rubio is one of those, they thought he would bring in Hispanic votes but that didn't and won't happen. He doesn't speak for anyone except maybe the Moron vote.
....which is a moronic point to make. Calling someone else stupid won't deflect the point. You don't even know what the Tea Party is. There isn't a council or committee that brings people in or lets them go.He needed to provide a source that didn't go along with the cooked temperature numbers of the warmer cult? It's up to them to prove, it isn't up to everyone else to disprove. THAT is what's stupid. Disagreement with the left isn't hate, stupidity, intolerance or uninformed. Sorry.
The Teaparty always picks their leaders with an eye toward demographics. Rubio is one of those, they thought he would bring in Hispanic votes but that didn't and won't happen. He doesn't speak for anyone except maybe the Moron vote.
Marco Rubio Can't Name One Source for Idiotic GOP Climate Claim
Most GOP anti-Science folks know where to find the bogus non-peer-reviewed science--how come Rubio is so clueless??
As you may have read here or elsewhere in the past few days, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, one of the Republicans testing the waters for a presidential run in 2016, has made clear he's a climate change denier.
But on Tuesday during a brief exchange at the National Press Club, a member of the audience asked through a moderator what information, reports, studies or otherwise are you relying on to inform and reach your conclusion that human activity is not to blame for climate change? He couldn't name a single source. So, he dodged the question and denied that he is a denier with a hokey mixture of truisms, truths, half-truths and BS.
Totally unnecessary. He could simply have referred to the peer-reviewed research of ExxonMobil, Ph.D., and Dr. David Koch and Dr. Charles Koch, climatologists.
That guy is stupid even at Teaparty standards.
He needed to provide a source that didn't go along with the cooked temperature numbers of the warmer cult? It's up to them to prove, it isn't up to everyone else to disprove. THAT is what's stupid. Disagreement with the left isn't hate, stupidity, intolerance or uninformed. Sorry.
He needed to provide a source that didn't go along with the cooked temperature numbers of the warmer cult? It's up to them to prove, it isn't up to everyone else to disprove. THAT is what's stupid. Disagreement with the left isn't hate, stupidity, intolerance or uninformed. Sorry.
The Teaparty always picks their leaders with an eye toward demographics. Rubio is one of those, they thought he would bring in Hispanic votes but that didn't and won't happen. He doesn't speak for anyone except maybe the Moron vote.
this is FROM the DAILYKOS folks
SHUN SHUN SHUN SHUN SHUN SHUN
nothing but hate in that title and just a repeat of what they did with Mrs. Palin
can't name a newspapers she reads, remember?
I mean one of her parent's were a school teacher so I'm sure she never read one single newspaper or book in her entire life
you all don't see how stupid you look? really
this is FROM the DAILYKOS folks
SHUN SHUN SHUN SHUN SHUN SHUN
nothing but hate in that title and just a repeat of what they did with Mrs. Palin
can't name a newspapers she reads, remember?
I mean one of her parent's were a school teacher so I'm sure she never read one single newspaper or book in her entire life
you all don't see how stupid you look? really
I understand you point but I respectfully disagree. We need not shun the source because that is what the liberal left does. We need to ferret out these sources and expose them to the light of truth. We need to condemn the liberal's base of operations.
this is from the dailykos folks
shun shun shun shun shun shun
nothing but hate in that title and just a repeat of what they did with mrs. Palin
can't name a newspapers she reads, remember?
I mean one of her parent's were a school teacher so i'm sure she never read one single newspaper or book in her entire life
you all don't see how stupid you look? Really
i understand you point but i respectfully disagree. We need not shun the source because that is what the liberal left does. We need to ferret out these sources and expose them to the light of truth. We need to condemn the liberal's base of operations.
that's a waste of time
there are so many of them is useless and the only thing can be done on this board is to shun them
titles like that are not worth responding to or trying to make them see how they are wrong
they will ignore it anyway
when i say shun them, i mean the sites that are linked so people here don't go to them and support their sites...let them survive off their low information members who go there
