You all don’t get it, do you?

I have heard Rick Perry described as “Conservative Christian”, “Creationist” and “Anti-Global Warming” where it is intended to be a pejorative. Get a clue: They are labels he wears proudly. That is the exact message he wants to get out and most likely, it will resonate with enough people that are looking for just that kind of candidate to have sitting at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in a few months. If you are so eager to campaign against him, I would at least suggest trying something other than confirming the exact things he is promoting.

Oh, he’s toeing a line alright. It is called the “Big Lie” and it is a very old propaganda technique. Some people will believe something just because it is so outrageous that they cannot believe anyone would tell such a whopper. T-Party propaganda is rife with them.

lff

Wondering whether politicians actually believe the nonsense they spew has almost never been a productive pastime, but with someone like Perry it may not be possible even in theory to separate stupidity from cupidity.

Explain where you stand on evolution-creationism being taught in school.
http://www.gosanangelo.com/news/2010/sep/11/this-series-examines-important-issues-to-texans/

“I am a firm believer in intelligent design as a matter of faith and intellect, and I believe it should be presented in schools alongside the theories of evolution. The State Board of Education has been charged with the task of adopting curriculum requirements for Texas public schools and recently adopted guidelines that call for the examination of all sides of a scientific theory, which will encourage critical thinking in our students, an essential learning skill.”

Perry has appointed Young Earth Creationists to be chairmen of the Texas State Board of Education three times. The first two were not approved by the Texas Senate. We currently have the third.

Steven Schafersman
President, Texas Citizens for Science

I think these beliefs are pretty main stream. Furthermore, having these beliefs, and believing that AGW is real, are not mutually exclusive.

I think these two issues are at the core of the AGW debate, and neither of the extreme sides get it.
A “Denier” will say: Global Warming is ALL politics and ALL scientist are manipulating data.
An “Alarmist” will say: Global Warming has NOTHING to do with politics and ALL scientific data is correct.

A “Realist” will say: The global warming debate has been INFLUENCED by politics and SOME scientist have intentionally manipulated data and/or made statements that are not necessarily backed up by the data. But neither of those points has anything to do with the core argument.

Until both side can agree on those two points it will remain politicized and special interest dollars will go to funding junk science ON BOTH SIDES…

A: briffa_sep98_d.pro. Apply a VERY ARTIFICAL correction for decline!!