US Senate Candidate, Landslide Primary Winner Mourdock: “Debate Is Not Over On Global Climate Change”

The (un)Scientific American has an opinion on the US Senate Republican primary race in Indiana and challenger Richard Mourdock.

So what can we expect from the new GOP candidate when it comes to climate change and science? First note, however, that his Democrat opponent is also no stooge of the warmists’ hoax.

According to (un)Scientific American, Mourdock holds a Master’s degree in geology from Ball State University and worked in the energy sector for more than 30 years. I like him already.

Many accuse the Republicans of waging war on science. Geologist Mourdock scoffs at the notion that conservatives are doing this.

I think that’s silly. Galileo was attacked. Darwin was attacked. I don’t know that this is a political attack so much as a societal attack,” says Mourdock. “If it’s political, it’s because so much in our lives, and I’m not just talking science here anymore, seems to require involvement of government.”

On global warming climate change, the (un)Scientific American writes:

Mourdock says the debate is not over on global climate change. He says that in science the debate never ends. ‘That is the most anti-scientific stance that you can take,’ says Mourdock.

‘It’s never over. One question leads to another, leads to another, leads to another.’

Mourdock says there will be a consensus of a majority on climate change, but his preference is that it be based on science that is questioned.

‘Politicians are always going to do a horrible job of assessing science when there is no clear, obvious outcome,” says Mourdock, “because science is being used to drive a political outcome.’

And it doesn’t take a rocket scientists to see that.

 

13 thoughts on “US Senate Candidate, Landslide Primary Winner Mourdock: “Debate Is Not Over On Global Climate Change””

  1. I must have fallen through a transdimensional wormhole into Bizarroworld. CSU (Bavarian conservatives) guy Gauweiler praises Stalinist Sarah Wagenknecht’s (half-Iranian, half East German Rosa Luxemburg lookalike and spouse of communist party boss LaFontaine) latest book, especially her suggestions for solving the Greek debt crisis which seem to amount to giving them a free ride.

  2. The debate is finally starting!
    Yesterday, I bought (and finished) Donna Laframboise’s book “The Delinquent Teenager….”. For those that have been hiding under a rock, that’s the book about the World Wildlife Fund’s front group, the IPCC. Today I will buy Montford’s pamphlet on the latest info on the hockey stick(s). Then I will get back to work on my own book.

    1. Can you give us an idea as to when the book will be completed? I(#m anxious to feature it here.

    1. I dropped (un)Scientific (un)American last year, after subscribing since 1964. I got tired of gagging every time I opened an issue. At one time, all the articles were written by Scientists. Now, nearly all are written by “science writers,” activists mostly.

  3. Lower Saxony’s president, McAllister, is nominally a conservative but sounds like the craziest of the Greens when it’s about wind power.
    http://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/deutschland/mcallister-im-interview-wir-muessen-unbedingt-handeln/6579354.html

    Well, destroying the German economy is a tough nut but it looks like we have great people doing their best to crack it. I think I’ll take a day off during the next election. I’m not represented anyway.

    Noteworthy: Not one of all these “We must achieve the Energiewende!” guys EVER mentions global warming… It has become the reason whose name must not be spoken. This is becoming spooky.

  4. “Global warming” has become the skeleton in the closet to these folks – the equation CO2 = AGW is, at long last, fixed in everyone’s mind, and they can’t risk saying out loud that it’s flat-out impossible to keep the lights burning without throwing the “reduction vows” they have sworn by for the last 15 years under the bus. Even German voters might be tempted to ask: “Have you just realized that and chose to shut up because you thought we were too daft to notice? Or were you lying from the start?”

  5. WWF — World Wildlife Fund — in US, Canada, UK

    WWF — World Wide Fund for Nature — otherwise since 1986

    Or by any other name would smell as (un)sweet!

Comments are closed.