Photo via Mudflats
Anyone have any guesses why? C'mon, anyone? Yep, it's because of those emails that prove little except that scientists can be a*&holes; too (or should I say because it provides another opportunity to condemn something our president is doing?). But that hasn't stopped Sarah Palin from joining the rising chorus of blowhards who are now "outraged" that Obama is attending Copenhagen. It's phony outrage, as per usual, though--guys like Beck, Hannity, Inhofe, and now Lou Dobbs and Palin seem to get "outraged" every time Obama sneezes. I'm sure they'd find something to get furious about if he decided to not go to Copenhagen as well. As for Palin, guess she was feeling particularly controversial yesterday, because not only did she lend credence to the unbelievably ridiculous "birthers" movement, but she found fault in Obama attending a global conference for negotiations. Hardly a provocative move on Obama's part--but that didn't stop Palin, according to a report from the Huffington Post:
In addition to her comments that President Obama's citizenship should be questioned, she wrote a statement on her Facebook page that calls for Obama to boycott the climate conference in Copenhagen, specifically due to the recent "ClimateGate" email incident.And that statement is quite the doozie--Palin manages to use just about every cliche that the climate action opponents have dredged up to label climate change a fraud (read: snake oil science, hoaxes, it's a religion, etc). It really would be quite humorous if millions of people didn't take her seriously. Here's a choice cut from her statement: "Policy decisions require real science and real solutions, not junk science and doomsday scare tactics pushed by an environmental priesthood that capitalizes on the public's worry and makes them feel that owning an SUV is a 'sin' against the planet."
And as the Huffington Post aptly points out: "Palin's sudden enthusiasm for science comes as a surprise, since in her book, "Going Rogue," she suggests evolution is not real and proposes teaching creationism in schools."
Keep that in mind as you peruse the statement, which, oh hell, it's too good not to post here (via HuffPo from Palin's FaceBook page):
Note the part about how she saw changing weather patterns firsthand--therefore, she understands what sound climate science. Sort of like being able to see Russia, right? Kindly direct your outrage at Palin--and at me, as I'm sure some will no doubt be compelled to do--to the comments below.
Policy should be based on sound science, not snake oil. I took a stand against such snake oil science when I sued the federal government over its decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species despite the fact that the polar bear population has increased. I've never denied the reality of climate change; in fact, I was the first governor to create a subcabinet position to deal specifically with the issue. I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state. But while we recognize the effects of changing water levels, erosion patterns, and glacial ice melt, we cannot primarily blame man's activities for the earth's cyclical weather changes. The drastic economic measures being pushed by dogmatic environmentalists won't change the weather, but will dramatically change our economy for the worse.
Policy decisions require real science and real solutions, not junk science and doomsday scare tactics pushed by an environmental priesthood that capitalizes on the public's worry and makes them feel that owning an SUV is a "sin" against the planet. In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to "restore science to its rightful place." Boycotting Copenhagen while this scandal is thoroughly investigated would send a strong message that the United States government will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices. Saying no to Copenhagen and cap and tax are first steps in "restoring science to its rightful place."