Skip to main content

Speaker of the House John Boehner speaking at the Values Voter Summit in Washington, DC.
"... but I did spend a day chatting with the fine people at Exxon Mobil."
Are we seeing an intentional rhetoric shift in climate change inaction, a move by Republicans from we do not believe the science, so we should not do anything to we are ignorant of the science, so we still should not do anything? I wonder:
House Speaker John Boehner became the latest top Republican to try that tack Thursday, seeking to deflect an issue that has given Democrats an opening to brand the GOP as “anti-science.”

“Listen, I’m not qualified to debate the science over climate change,” Boehner told reporters when asked about the science behind climate change. “But I am astute to understand that every proposal that has come out of this administration to deal with climate change involves hurting our economy and killing American jobs.”

That is not what the word astute means, or how you use it. You do not generally get to say you are astute to an asinine theory, which you then proceed to state outright due to your abject lack of shame, that not turning the Earth into a planet-sized barbecue spit is an anti-jobs plot. There are a million fortunes to be made in Not Fucking Up The Planet, which is why other industrialized nations have eagerly embraced and promoted new technology sectors that we ourselves cannot because it would make our current crop of Rich People and their preferred Rich People Family Industries too sad. If you want to see something hurting our economy, take a look at the crop forecasts for various of the American states as climate change steadily begins to pick up speed. And nothing will kill your beachfront hotel business like having four feet of water in the lobby. Tourists are generally not keen on having to wear hipwaders to get to the vending machines.

Please read below the fold for more on this story.

Similarly, Republican Florida Gov. Rick Scott has offered the response “I am not a scientist” on multiple occasions when the topic has come up lately.
To which the nation's scientists give an earnest thank you, because science does not need money-grubbing swindlers. Politics is really the only profession in which being a professional crook is a resume booster; scientists who fake their numbers generally don't get much work again. Not unless Mary Rosh is around to stick up for them, anyway.
“We are not experts on climate change,” Koch spokeswoman Melissa Cohlmia said in an email to The Wichita Eagle this month. She added, “The debate should take place among the scientific community, examining all points of view and void of politics, personal attacks and partisan agendas.”
Which is why they and other fossil-fuel tycoons have been bankrolling the supposed "opposition," consisting mostly of people who themselves are not scientists and whose remarks on Fox News are not subject to the rigors of peer review, for a good long time now. To keep agendas out of it.

So is "we are not scientists" a new strategy, or is this just "I am not a scientist" month and none of the rest of us saw the honorary Google doodle celebrating that? Politicians generally only fess up to being ignorant when they think confessing ignorance is the best approach; at least in Boehner's case, he seems to be saying that since he does not understand climate science and does not want to, he simply doesn't want to deal with the issue anymore. Like a drunkard standing on the railroad tracks, he's pretty sure that if he just keeps his eyes closed the train won't hit him.

Originally posted to Hunter on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:32 PM PDT.

Also republished by Climate Change SOS and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  yes. next? (4+ / 0-)

    Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility. uid 52583 lol

    by terrypinder on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:34:31 PM PDT

  •  but they play aspirin peddlers on TV /nt (5+ / 0-)

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "If we appear to seek the unattainable, then let it be known that we do so to avoid the unimaginable." (@eState4Column5)

    by annieli on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:36:32 PM PDT

    •  it means they're starting to move on this issue. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CwV, Calamity Jean, Matt Z

      Yesterday:  Climate change isn't real.

      Today:  I don't know, I'm not a scientist.

      Tomorrow:  Hmm, the scientists seem to think it's real.  (This is the most important step, and the place where we have to be strategically prepared to capture the agenda.)

      The next day:  OK, what are we going to do about this?

      And the day after that:  How can my cronies make a killing on this?  (If we wait until they get to this step before we recognize that they're changing, we'll get screwed again.)

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Fri May 30, 2014 at 01:21:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And the day after (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ellamenta, Matt Z

        It's Obama's fault for not leading and being so mean that he could not forge a bipartisan consensus

        •  Great Diary! (5+ / 0-)

          Thank  you, Hunter. As always your astutement amazes me.

          This is huge for me  and I appreciate you  writing about it. I live in an area where so much damage has been done to the surroundings, it's hard to miss it.

          I have a Republican sister and she doesn't believe that global warming is happening. However her husband who is out and about tells me about the changes that he sees in the woods. He agrees that we need to do something now.

          "Just when you think you've lost everything, you find out you can lose a little more." Bob Dylan

          by weezilgirl on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:37:51 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  It's Not That Simple (4+ / 0-)

        There are myriad ways to "fiddle while Rome burns." The circular regression goes something like this:

        START
        1) Is "climate change" the same as "global warming?"
        2) Go to Step 3.
        3) "Climate change" and "global warming" may refer in general to the same thing, but neither is occurring.
        4) Go to Step 1 or 5.
        5) Global warming may be occurring, but it is not anthropogenic.
        6) Go to Step 1, 3, or 7.
        7) Part of global warming may be anthropogenic, but it is not really significant.
        8) Go to Step 1, 3, 5, or 9.
        9) Human activity is a significant part of global warming, but it is not major.
        10) Go to Step 1, 3, 5, 7, or 11.
        11) Human activity is a major part of global warming, but there is nothing we can do about it.
        12) Go to Step 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, or 13.
        13) It may be possible to do something about global warming, but we cannot afford even to try.
        14) Go to Step 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, or 15.
        15) The Earth will survive with or without you.
        END

        "A famous person once said, 'You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.' But as I once said, "If you don't teach them to read, you can fool them whenever you like." – Max Headroom

        by midnight lurker on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:32:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I think you've got the order wrong. The "which ... (0+ / 0-)

        I think you've got the order wrong. The "which cronies can make a killing on this" step is the next step, before the one where they are satisfied with the scientific proof.

        The actual science is irrelevant to the equation. That we're this deep into the crisis, with this much scientific study already, and this much consensus, and yet are as entrenched into inaction as our politicians are only proves that.

        The political skepticism act will magically evaporate when the laughter and handshakes spill out of the nicest jets. Once the magnates figure out how they can get the biggest slice of that action, they'll align their boys* in Washington to push the green agenda--in their direction.

        [*And the few GOP women (it still saddens me that there are ANY, that any woman would diminish herself by accepting that platform/agenda) like Marsha Blackburn.]

    •  but, it should be understood as such. No? (0+ / 0-)
  •  If you don't have to be a lawyer to understand (9+ / 0-)

    your job as an elected offal, why would you have to be a scientist to understand science?

    "To live in a world where truth matters and justice, however late, really happens, that world would be heaven enough for us all." - Rubin "Hurricane" Carter

    by blueoregon on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:37:11 PM PDT

  •  Let's unpack this a bit, shall we? (6+ / 0-)
    But I am astute to understand that every proposal that has come out of this administration to deal with climate change involves hurting our economy and killing American jobs.
    It's a word salad - but only with a couple of ingredients...

    OK - so your beef with the administration is that any proposal that comes from them involves hurting the economy and killing jobs - right?

    So, does that mean you believe that global warming is a real crisis - but Obama's proposals would make the world situation worse?  Is it a matter of degree?

    And, if you do believe there is a crisis - then were the fuck is your plan?  Pretty typical - sit back and take pot-shots at the President while putting no skin in the game.

    “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” - John Steinbeck (Disputed)

    by RichM on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:39:44 PM PDT

    •  I am not sure (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RichM

      how, if you accept that global warming is a real crisis, "maybe a few jobs in the fossil-fuel industry go bye-bye" is worse than "some of our major cities being underwater and large swaths of the country becoming completely uninhabitable."

      30, white male, TX-07 (current), TN-09 (born), TN-08 (where parents live now)

      by TDDVandy on Fri May 30, 2014 at 01:56:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Unpack it easier than this.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ellamenta

      If they're not a scientist and therefore cannot delve into the science, then they cannot claim that it hurts the economy unless they have a degree in economics.

      Just ask them if they are an economist.

      Nothing to see here, move along

      by Jeff Seemann on Fri May 30, 2014 at 03:19:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Boehner is neither a scientist... (8+ / 0-)

        ...or an economist.

        He's not much of a Speaker, either.

        Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

        by JeffW on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:50:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hey, you don't have to be a scientist (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Calamity Jean

          to see the connections here. Dealing with climate change is a job killer because climate change is a job creator. It'll be a boon for so many industries:

          Companies who pump out basements
          Furniture makers and furniture stores who provide replacements for the soggy ruined stuff that will go into landfills
          Ditto for clothing retailers and appliance manufacturers and really anyone who sells anything
          Just about anyone in the rescue business- they'll need boats in a lot of instances so boat makers will really clean up
          Hospitals- a bonanza for them!  and of course
          Morgues, Funeral Parlors, Crematoria- anything related to death is the real growth industry. Tell your kids!

        •  But he's an excellent, world-class (0+ / 0-)

          drunk.  

          "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." -- Sen Carl Schurz 1872

          by Calamity Jean on Tue Jun 03, 2014 at 12:05:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  The only jobs that are being killed (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RichM, cocinero

      are in the coal industry, and coal is dying anyway.  Those towns in Eastern KY are going to disappear without federal assistance, as has been the case since the 1930's.  Bailing out Appalachia indefinitely requires a federal government, not free enterprise.  

      But anyway, the whole thing is BS.  KY coal collapses as ND natural gas expands.  And the Republicans blame Obama for killing coal in KY and take all the credit for natural gas in the Dakotas.  

      “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

      by ivorybill on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:20:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm Looking for a Word . . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RichM

      that covers disingenuousness and sophistry at the same time.

      "A famous person once said, 'You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.' But as I once said, "If you don't teach them to read, you can fool them whenever you like." – Max Headroom

      by midnight lurker on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:39:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I am not a religious scholar (0+ / 0-)

      But I am astute enough to understand that every religion has one purpose.  I have many stories of organized crime, terrorists, and average drug dealers using churches and the like to launder money.  Even the average otherwise law abiding citizen pays the church to provide basic services, services that no tax is paid, and money that is deducted from income.

      The effect is that honest workers are not paid for similar services, and our deficit goes up because religious people still want governement services.

  •  There is a phrase missing. (11+ / 0-)

    "... and so I'm willing to listen to those who are, and accept what they agree on".

  •  Code For "Shut Up." Like "I Accept Responsibility" (5+ / 0-)

    Now that the data are becoming too broadly supported, they first shift the connection to the data over to the highly suspect nerds, and theyll be gradually increasing emphasis on the unaffordability of any kind of preventative response.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:41:08 PM PDT

  •  It is a transistional phrase (13+ / 0-)

    in between,

    "It is a hoax"

    and

    "It is too late to do anything about it"

    the equivalent of this new transitional statement is,

    "I don't know, but surely the medicine is worse than the disease".

    Be the change that you want to see in the world

    by New Minas on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:45:25 PM PDT

  •  Yes, it seems to be the new pivot point after (9+ / 0-)

    climate change-denier saw Senator Marco Rubio shreded last week and John Oliver mock and deride the 97% to 3% ratio of credible scientist supporting the assertions that climate change is real, now, and caused be human.

    Earlier this week, I created a tag for Governor Rick Scott's new "climate mutism," and yesterday in a post on Boehner's new pivot also noted that he omits any mention of the tremendously greater devastating impact doing nothing about global warming would have on both the economy and jobs.

    Speaker Boehner says he not a scientist announces he is not a scientist so not qualified to comment on the global warming debate but then does not hesitate for a second to dive right in to comment on how the Presidents modest efforts to mitigate carbon emissions by 20% would cost too many jobs and hurt the economy.

    Thereby, offering us proof that he is not an economist either.

    Real economist Paul Krugman refuted the Chamber of Commerce's study on carbons regulations impact on the economy and jobs which I just reviewed about an hour ago.

    He found the economic cost was surprisingly trivial, even in this study which almost certainly overestimates it.

    Science-denier, science-mutes, economic-deniers and other
    right-wing Luddites will soon learn that no matter how they try to repackage their ignorance, the public is increasingly recognizing that ignorance is ignorance and if we want to remain a leading economic powerhouse and leader of other nations, it will not come from pursing ignorance but rather science, education, math, engineering, and rejecting dummies in favor of smarter leaders who can comprehend at least High School level science and and economics.

    John Boehner proves he either can not or will not do either.  

    Humor Alert! No statement from this UID is intended to be true, including this one. Comments and Posts intended for recreational purposes only. Unauthorized interpretations may lead to unexpected results. This waiver void where prohibited.

    by HoundDog on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:50:01 PM PDT

  •  Just another way of saying... (5+ / 0-)
    I'm ignorant just like you...we understand each other, we connect...vote for me!
    Sadly, that is a tactic that works for alot of people.

    The more you learn, the less you know.

    by quiet in NC on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:52:21 PM PDT

    •  I am not a scientist is code for: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DocDawg

      You can trust me, I am not one of those snobby educated people all full of facts, rather I am a common Joe who knows the Bible is the literal word of god, evolution is clearly bull, and this global warming stuff is inconvenient, Obama is concerned about it and so it must be bull too.

      I think he wears his ignorance as a badge. The ignorant feel secure in their common ignorance. It is better to have a beer with W than some smarty pants like Gore.

      Sad and scary.

      •  You beat me to it. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        too many people

        I actually am a scientist (although not a climate scientist), and over a lifetime I've observed that the more conservative a new acquaintance is, the more likely he or she is to be turned off when conversation turns to "so, what do you do?" and I answer. [dead silence, look around, 'oh look at the time! gotta go!] It's like saying "I'm a leper!" It's the darndest thing. Exactly the opposite tends to be true of liberals...long and interesting conversations frequently ensue.

        I think these people wear "I am not a scientist" as some kind-of a badge of honor.

        Gun rights? OK, let's start this discussion with the same words the 2nd Amendment does: "well regulated"

        by DocDawg on Fri May 30, 2014 at 04:55:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Some really believe (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gooserock

     they're not qualified to comment on it.  First off there are real scientists who happen to be on the other side.  And some readers are lay people who have too much on their plate to even dip into this issue further.  I wouldn't call them deniers though - they don't know enough to deny or accept.

    Best Scientist Ever Predicts Bacon Will Be Element 119 On The Periodic Table

    by dov12348 on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:55:26 PM PDT

    •  It Doesn't Matter That THere Are RFeal Scientists (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dov12348, too many people, TDDVandy

      on the other side, the overwhelming consensus of the field and the professional associations is settled.

      There simply aren't enough qualified scientists on the other side to find without dishonest promotional schemes.

      There also isn't an issue for lay people to dip into absent dishonest promotion. This is like dipping into neurosurgery or piano tuning.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Fri May 30, 2014 at 01:33:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There are no credible scientists (0+ / 0-)

      who deny the objective data that CO2 concentrations are increasing in relation to human consumption of fossil fuels.  

      There are no credible scientists who deny that there is a correlation between CO2 concentration and atmospheric/oceanic temperatures.  

      There are no credible scientists who deny that increased CO2 eventually leads to ocean acidification - which is the huge elephant in the room that most people don't even think about.  

      The only thing people disagree about is the rate and the degree of the effects, and perhaps the capacity of the biosphere to absorb carbon. The rest is pretty much settled science.

      “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

      by ivorybill on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:27:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I see what (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean, newpioneer

    you did there,

    Like a drunkard standing on the railroad tracks, he's

    Ceiling Cat rules....srsly.

    by side pocket on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:58:26 PM PDT

  •  Check out what Nobel Prize-winning Op-Ed (3+ / 0-)

    columnist and professional economist Dr. Paul Krugman has to say about the impact of coal mitigation regulation on our economy and jobs. And, his comments and analysis here do not even include consideration of what will happen to jobs and our economy if we do nothing - something ecnomics-denier John Boehner fails to mentiton:

    Cutting back on carbon emissions not all that expensive according to critic's own study says Krugman

    From yesterday:
    John Boehner says "I'm not qualified to debate the science over climate change" but then slams plan

    From May 27

    Rick Scott's evolves to 'climate change-mutism,' refusing to take a position, he used to be a denier

    Humor Alert! No statement from this UID is intended to be true, including this one. Comments and Posts intended for recreational purposes only. Unauthorized interpretations may lead to unexpected results. This waiver void where prohibited.

    by HoundDog on Fri May 30, 2014 at 12:59:41 PM PDT

    •  Guv Scott Smirks His Way Through Every "Interview" (0+ / 0-)

      Because, ya know, librul media.  And that freedomy thing.  And of course, only one-percenters like Scott, backstopped by an army of political consultants, can understand that what happened to his fellow Rethug Rubio is because of the librul media's lack of initiative.  The corrupt libruls just publish what 99.9% of scientists say without consulting the Kochs or the Hannity.  

      So now that they have to actually campaign for re-election ("How annoying - haven't we figured out how to keep ALL Dems from voting yet?"), he and the other Rethugs think they have figured out a way to Benghazi their way through the china shop of delicate voters. As another commenter noted, it's part of their coded disingenuity.  "I'm not a scientist" is code for "Fuck You and the Obama Train you rode in on."

       

  •  I wish Boehner had had (6+ / 0-)

    a few pops of Johnny Walker and said:

    “Listen, I’m not qualified to debate the science over women's reproductive rights,  but I am astute to understand that every proposal that has come out of this House and the GOP in general to deal with women's reproductive issues involves hurting our daughters, mothers, wives and killing lots of them to boot.”
    That would have been really honest.

    " My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total." Barbara Jordan, 1974

    by gchaucer2 on Fri May 30, 2014 at 01:01:47 PM PDT

  •  Is Boehner an economist? A doctor? An engineer? (4+ / 0-)

    A police officer? A firefighter? A Marine?

    He votes on policy related to all of these professions.

    "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

    by We Shall Overcome on Fri May 30, 2014 at 01:08:38 PM PDT

    •  Exactly (0+ / 0-)

      That is the asshole's job description, to make laws based on his best, honest assessment of reality.  Based on an honest assessment of the judgment of those who are experts in the relevent fields.

      After years of denying inconvenient reality, as it becomes impossible to deny, now he hides behind "I'm not qualified to figure out what is real."  Then you're not qualified for your job, asshole.

      There is so much that can be said on this, but I'll throw out one more:  Remember when the Commander-in-Chief was supposed to defer to the judgment of the military experts in all things war?  Not so much in all things science.

  •  He is saying (4+ / 0-)

    that he IS a policy expert. I say, make him prove that claim.

  •  Only used to stop the questions on climate change (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean

    …because the "I can't debate on climate change" people then have no problem VOTING on it against 97% of the scientific community!

  •  Boehner is two heartbeats away from the presidency (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    too many people, newpioneer

    After Obama, comes Biden.  After Biden, comes Boehner.  It's true, I looked it up.

    The man is incredibly close to being the LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD, and he publicly admits that he is "not qualified to debate the science" over climate change. Here's a crazy idea, Mr. Speaker: why don't you get someone on your staff (or several someones) who IS qualified?

    Did you know that Nero fiddled while Rome burned, good sir?  Is that who you aspire to emulate?

    And I snarkily love the line "every proposal that has come out of this administration to deal with climate change involves hurting our economy and killing American jobs".  I teach my daugher not to use words such as "every" or "never", because sentences that include them are rarely true.  Every proposal?  Really?  Of course not.  

    And for some reason I'm imagining an asteroid on track to hit our planet, and Boehner not wanting to take action because doing so would arguably "hurt our economy and kill American jobs."  

    When our planet will no longer sustain human life, what will that do to our economy and American jobs, Mr. Speaker?  Or do you really and truly not give a fig, because you and your cronies will all be dead by then?

    “Now folks, by going on that web show, Barack Obama undermined the authority of the presidency. And that is Fox News' job.” - Stephen Colbert

    by Older and Wiser Now on Fri May 30, 2014 at 01:48:34 PM PDT

  •  They're not scientists? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    newpioneer, FG

    Holy shit.  I never would have believed that.  What a stunning revelation.

    30, white male, TX-07 (current), TN-09 (born), TN-08 (where parents live now)

    by TDDVandy on Fri May 30, 2014 at 01:52:23 PM PDT

  •  Earth will be a great archeological find ... (0+ / 0-)

    for some visiting civilization.


    The collapse of civilization will be preceded by the extinction of the thankless job.

    by glb3 on Fri May 30, 2014 at 02:27:53 PM PDT

  •  "I am not a scientist" is a dog-whistle tactic (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    newpioneer, Older and Wiser Now

    On the one hand, it sounds like an admission of lack of qualifications, a kind of humility.

    It's not.

    There's an old cartoon at which a preacher in the pulpit is thundering down at a member of the congregation who has come forward seeking redemption and has been cataloging his sins at length. The preacher's response? "Brother, you aren't confessing - you're bragging!"

    For the kind of people Boehner and those like him are really speaking to, "I'm not a scientist" is statement of tribal identity and a boast of pride. The deliberate anti-intellectualism of the Republican Party is on full display here, as part of the politics of resentment. "How dare those smart people try to tell ME what to think!" is the implicit message. In the words of the inimitable Pierce:

    Idiot America is not the place where people say silly things. It's not the place where people believe in silly things. It is not the place where people go to profit from the fact that people believe in silly things. Idiot America is not even those people who believe that Adam named the dinosaurs. Those people pay attention. They take notes. They take the time and the considerable mental effort to construct a worldview that is round and complete.

    The rise of Idiot America is essentially a war on expertise. It's not so much antimodernism or the distrust of intellectual elites that Richard Hofstadter deftly teased out of the national DNA forty years ago. Both of those things are part of it. However, the rise of Idiot America today represents -- for profit mainly, but also, and more cynically, for political advantage and in the pursuit of power -- the breakdown of a consensus that the pursuit of knowledge is a good. It also represents the ascendancy of the notion that the people whom we should trust the least are the people who best know what they're talking about. In the new media age, everybody is a historian, or a preacher, or a scientist, or a sage. And if everyone is an expert, then nobody is, and the worst thing you can be in a society where everybody is an expert is, well, an actual expert.

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Fri May 30, 2014 at 02:50:06 PM PDT

  •  “Listen, I’m not qualified..." (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    newpioneer, FG, Older and Wiser Now

    ...should have stop'd right there, John.

    ...and answer all questions put to you with those 4.5 words.

    Everything Right is Wrong Again - TMBG (lyrics)

    by GreenPA on Fri May 30, 2014 at 02:56:58 PM PDT

  •  I'm not a scientist so (0+ / 0-)

    I'll just wash my hands of this whole topic. Consult the scientists to help create policy? Preposterous!  Why that may strain some very important relationships of mine...I wouldn't want to lose my credibility or campaign funding...SIGH

  •  From the desk of congressman Don Young regardin... (0+ / 0-)

    From the desk of congressman Don Young regarding the EPA, climate change and emissions I give you all this nugget from his correspondence.

    "While I have serious doubts as to the validity of man-made global warming, at the very least, Congress should be responsible for imposing such potentially life altering regulations rather than a few nameless and faceless bureaucrats within a federal agency. An action such as this circumvents our Constitution by marginalizing the U.S. Congress and the system of representational democracy it created. "

    I hope you all enjoy it as much as I have.

  •  --- (0+ / 0-)

    ”I am not a scientist, therefore, I don't believe in science.”


    The collapse of civilization will be preceded by the extinction of the thankless job.

    by glb3 on Fri May 30, 2014 at 06:26:25 PM PDT

  •  i'm not a scientist (0+ / 0-)

    and never the twain shall meet.

    hope springs eternal and DAMN is she getting tired!

    by alguien on Fri May 30, 2014 at 07:34:51 PM PDT

  •  I am not a scientist (0+ / 0-)

    Which is why I am grateful for those who are and have studied the problem and have made numerous suggestions about how to cope with the problem. That is why you hire experts, to fix problems you don't know how to fix. duh.

  •  I'm not a scientist, but I am an asshole, so that (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Oh Mary Oh

    must get me off the hook somehow.

    "And all I ask is a merry yarn from a laughing fellow-rover, And quiet sleep and a sweet dream when the long trick’s over." - John Masefield

    by mungley on Sat May 31, 2014 at 12:29:46 AM PDT

  •  They're not economists, either (6+ / 0-)

    in case anyone hadn't noticed.

    "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" — Upton Sinclair

    by Greg Dworkin on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:24:21 AM PDT

  •  Is the economy more important than the planet? (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ivorybill, JeffW, Tim DeLaney, Yonit, Akskeptic

    "But I am astute to understand that every proposal that has come out of this administration to deal with climate change involves hurting our economy and killing American jobs"

    Such a narrow-minded approach from Speaker John.

  •  Boehner is not a scientist ........, but he did (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, ivorybill

    stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

    And it feels like I'm livin'in the wasteland of the free ~ Iris DeMent, 1996

    by MrJersey on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:27:46 AM PDT

  •  But why are they on the TV, non-experts need (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tim DeLaney, Gooserock, JeffW

    equal time to lie oops talk over experts.

    I voted Tuesday, May 6, 2014 because it is my right, my responsibility and because my parents moved from Alabama to Ohio to vote. Unfortunately, the republicons want to turn Ohio into Alabama.

    by a2nite on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:28:54 AM PDT

  •  Then how can he or any Republican (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, Yonit, Akskeptic

    Say tax cuts increase jobs and reduce the deficit (they are not economists), say when life begins (they are not God), or make any other policy decision for which they are not experts?

    The real questions should be: whose advice are you listening to and why? And are those people really experts or just hacks who will say anything for the right price?

  •  "I am not a legislator." (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon, JeffW, Yonit, Wildthumb, peptabysmal

    "I am a legislation blocker."

    "Bob Johnson doesn't have special privileges, because really, why would I entrust that guy with ANYTHING?" - kos, November 9, 2013

    by Bob Johnson on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:36:00 AM PDT

  •  I am a scientist! (6+ / 0-)

    I spent over nine years getting the credentials at accredited state universities.  This does not make me a plumber, an auto mechanic, or a banker, but I do know a fair amount about evolution, ecology and animal behavior, because I've spent not just the nine years, but a total of about 50 years, gaining expertise in those areas.

    I am not a climate scientist or a geologist either, but what I have seen in the ecological makeup of the planet brings me to the conclusion that the climate is indeed changing and that human activity is the main cause. I may not be able to change my spark plugs, but I do know my field. Mister Boehner please give me as much respect in that area as you give your house painter in his or hers.

  •  Astute= (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon, JeffW

    Ass-toot. So yes, he is very much an ass toot.

  •  When Republicans are all repeating the same (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, Yonit, ivorybill, Gorette, peptabysmal

    thing, it's obvious they've all been given their talking point for the day or the issue or whatever.  Easy to spot.  Not as easy to dismiss, since the corporate media helps them repeat it on a daily basis.

    You don't have to be a climate scientist to realize the world around you is experiencing unprecedented climate disasters on a much too regular basis or that, in your own backyard, things that should bloom in June bloomed in March because March was too damn HOT.  

    In order to deny the obvious tragic changes around us we have to close our eyes and ears and repeat the lies over and over again, certain they will come true just by repetition.  I actually envy deniers.  Ignorance is bliss in this case for sure.  I wake up every morning grateful the forest around me isn't on fire, since it's 20 degrees hotter during the day than it should be this time of year and with 5% (seriously!) humidity day after day and no rain in sight, it's just luck it's still standing.  I'm in Southern CA and climate change/global warming is real real up in the mountains.  Too bad it can't really be honestly denied, at least for me.

    Best. President. Ever.

    by Little Lulu on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:44:32 AM PDT

  •  I'm nearing the end of my career (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, AllanTBG, Yonit, DMentalist, ivorybill

    But I can't help but note the parallels to this discussion and the discussion that occurred in the late 1970s and early to mid-1980s.

    Back then, nobody knew how bad the nation's hazardous waste and environmental contamination problem was, how to clean it up, or what the best ways to manage and pay for it might be. There were true gaps in technology and fundamental science.

    But Congress passed the Superfund law and EPA wrote regulations, the states wrote regulations (and passed their own laws in many cases) and an entire industry started.

    Many many thousands of scientists and engineers found steady, challenging (and well-paid) employment addressing a pressing need and their work benefited society. Many equipment manufacturers, service providers, and, yes, lawyers found good solid careers dealing with this reality that was created by passing bold environmental legislation.

    Yes, some marginal companies went bankrupt (and even some not-so-marginal ones did as well, because they had created too big a problem to afford to address).  But most didn't. Most learned to live within the new regulatory structure and -- if you were to ask them today -- I think most informed, senior corporate managers would agree operating under the current system is better in the long run (both for their liability management and for the environment) than the previous system that existed up to the late 1970s.

    I see parallels here and I would encourage young scientists and engineers in training to watch these developments carefully. It's possible an entire industry may be on the verge of being created; one that could spawn technologies and job opportunities that could have a world-wide reach.

    •  Exactly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Gorette

      Climate change mitigation, development of green energy and even carbon sequestration create jobs!

      Economies change.  Why is it that the GOP is so eager to justify "creative destruction" when it comes to the loss of the textile industry in the South, or the collapse of manufacturing in the Midwest, and when it comes to the inevitable collapse of the coal industry in Appalachia, suddenly they freak out? Funding and major donors.

      “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

      by ivorybill on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:34:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  nice "defer" comment Boner. Your really not (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, AllanTBG, JML9999, Yonit, Gorette

    qualified, for ANYTHING, really!

  •  Even the right wing "scientists" (0+ / 0-)

    Are scienticians at best.

    "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery. None but us can free our minds." - Bob Marley

    by nightsweat on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:48:57 AM PDT

  •  the tide is turning (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Yonit

    The tide is turning for the better on awareness/acknowledgment of the problem. Unfortunately, the umm you know, actual tide is changing for the worse.

  •  Not a scientist? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Yonit

    Don't worry, nobody thought you were scientists, guys.

    But ... if you are not a scientist, maybe you should shut up and actually listen to the actual scientists on these issues then?

  •  Well see Karl Rove and Traumatic Brain Injury nt (0+ / 0-)

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:52:17 AM PDT

  •  I'm not a doctor (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, Yonit

    But I'm pretty keenly aware stabbing yourself repeatedly is bad for your health.

    Again, I'm not a doctor, so if you'd like to ignore that advice..

    Gandhi's Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principle

    by Chris Reeves on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:52:18 AM PDT

  •  Well, I'm not a doctor either (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, Yonit

    but I play one on the internets. And my diagnosis is that Boehner and his ilk are sociopaths.

    America is a COUNTRY, not a CORPORATION. She doesn't need a CEO. Vote Obama.

    by manneckdesign on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 08:53:54 AM PDT

  •  He will not be denying the amount of money (0+ / 0-)

    That congress will be  paying out for Hurricane season this year

  •  I am not a scientist, but I can read! (0+ / 0-)

    I can read what the scientists have said over and over and over again about climate change.  Matter of fact I just saw on the tee-vee a show called Cosmos where a scientist explained how scientists have been talking about this very thing since the 1890s.

    Using Boehner's logic he isn't an economist either.  Maybe he should stop talking about the economy.  He isn't a doctor or even an insurance executive.  Will he stop trying to repeal ObamaCare?  Matter of fact unless he's overseeing bar tabs I believe we have found the depth of his expertise.

  •  If you aren't qualified to debate the science, (0+ / 0-)

    then stop trying to debate the science. Sheesh.

    Republican Health Care Plan: marry a Canadian.

    by shoeless on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:01:10 AM PDT

  •  Science is not opinion. (0+ / 0-)

    Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one but they think each others stink.

  •  He is right that he is not a scientist. (0+ / 0-)

    But, because most legislatures are not, Congress specifically commissioned and paid for a series of periodic scientific assessments to be delivered to Congress in language they can understand to allow them to debate and legislate with accurate scientific information.

    The latest such report was released last month and a copy is likely in Boehners office, and, he likely read it.

    It is not that he does not know the science; it is he does not like what the science says, for ideological reasons. Therefore he just rejects it.

    Read the report yourself and tell me how he can still claim ignorance with a straight face.

    2014 National Climate Assessment

  •  I think he meanto say he's "a stupe" (0+ / 0-)

    they probably just misquoted him.

  •  I'm not orange... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette

    but I don't think this strategy is gonna work.

  •  I am still skeptical (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ivorybill

    that this represents movement in the Republican viewpoint on climate change. Although Hunter's comments on beachfront hotels losing business are humorous and point to real difficulties, the fact of the matter is that businesses with enough money will be able to move ahead of the rising tides, while those of us with less resources will be left to fend for ourselves. Remember, climate change is also a social justice issue, because its effects are disproportionately felt by the poor and vulnerable.

    It may not matter whether the GOP message is "climate science is bunk" or "we're not scientists". As long as the only people they truly represent are the super wealthy, they will never support mitigation, because if you have enough money you can move when the seas rise, buy an air conditioner when it gets too hot, and even install a private power system to keep your tablets charged at your mansion. The main reason to prevent climate change is to prevent the devastating effects it will have on those who did not contribute to the problem and those who have no resources to cope.

  •  Well said here. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GITuck, Gorette

    I am also not a scientist.  But, I rely on science to let us know when something's not right.

    Scientists are more trustworthy than politicians.

    The purpose of live is to live a life of purpose...and serve your neighbors with joy and love and make a positive difference in their lives.

    by MinervainNH on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:07:08 AM PDT

  •  People who study propaganda have a name for this. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DMentalist, Gorette, peptabysmal

    It's called the "Plain Folks Appeal".

    Yeah, it's transparently stupid for the Speaker of the House to present himself as just an Average Joe, but don't underestimate the diabolical persuasiveness of this gambit. It simultaneously appeals to distrust of the elites and the desire for someone you can trust to tell you what to think.

    If it seems a little inconsistent to you to distrust elites but want a leader who will tell you what to think, well...

    I've lost my faith in nihilism

    by grumpynerd on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:07:48 AM PDT

  •  He could have stopped at "I am not qualified." n/t (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette, DrTerwilliker

    "Life is short, but long enough to get what's coming to you." --John Alton

    by Palafox on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:09:26 AM PDT

  •  I'd love to here a Democratic Congressman ... (0+ / 0-)

    ... respond with, "I am not an oil company executive" ...

  •  "I am not a scientist." Boehner No Brainer. (0+ / 0-)
    Boehner, in a little after hours interview:
    My brain it's real perspicacious, dat's why I can talk right but nah, I not one of doze brainiacs. Just a plain dishonest bloke. You guys, you taught I was eddicated but nah, I nevah really studied anyting. Heh, just a dope in school. My dad, da bartender, let me booze my way true. Yeah. Duh, I here in Congress, me leader, coz I know one ting. How to protect assets of da rich guys. Oh, geezz. Was I supposed to be able to think, too? Ooops.

    "extreme concentration of income is incompatible with real democracy.... the truth is that the whole nature of our society is at stake." Paul Krugman

    by Gorette on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:12:20 AM PDT

  •  Dear Speaker Boehner: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette

    May I ask a few questions about your expertise?

    a. What do you know about astrophysics? Are you aware of the problems reconciling gravity with quantum physics? Can you explain why the Big Bang may have created gravity waves, and why the initial universal expansion was unimaginably faster than the speed of light?

    If not, WHY THE HELL DO YOU HAVE ANY REASON TO VOTE ON SCIENCE FUNDING?

    b. Let me ask you about Escherichia coli, a rather common gram negative facultative anaerobic critter that lives in everyone's lower intestine. Normally, it is harmless, but, when it infects open wounds, or is transferred through its preferred fecal-oral pathway, it can become deadly. Even worse, some bacteria are becoming penicillin resistant and may soon be impossible to treat with normal medicines.

    HOW THE HELL CAN YOU VOTE ON ANY MEDICAL BILL, OR MORE IMPORTANTLY, WITHOUT KNOWING JUST HOW BADLY  WIDESPREAD USE OF ANTIBIOTICS IN THE COMMERCIAL FARMING INDUSTRY IS DESTROYING MODERN MEDICINE'S ABILITY TO TREAT OR PREVENT INFECTIONS, HOW DARE YOU SET ANY VOTES ON ANY AG BILLS?

    c. Mental health funding was destroyed by Reagan, and the field of mental health has suffered ever since. Our prisons have become dumping grounds for mentally ill people, who are unmedicated, undiagnosed, and often not capable of understanding why they act like they do.

    HOW THE HELL CAN YOU VOTE ON ANY BILL DEALING WITH PTSD SUFFERING VETERANS, MENTALLY ILL, OR ABUSE AND MISTREATMENT IN PRISONS?   OH WAIT. I KNOW. YOU ARE A REPUBLICAN, THEREFORE, YOU HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE WITH THE MENTALLY ILL. ESPECIALLY AMONG YOUR MAJORITY IN CONGRESS.

    What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

    by agnostic on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:14:25 AM PDT

  •  Environmental disaster is inherently anti-job (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette
    •  Have you written this in diary form, or would you? (0+ / 0-)

      Excellent form and content!!

      "extreme concentration of income is incompatible with real democracy.... the truth is that the whole nature of our society is at stake." Paul Krugman

      by Gorette on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:49:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Saying "I'm not a scientist... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DMentalist, eggplantfl, Gorette

    so I just don't know about climate change" is a lot like saying "I'm not a plumber, so I don't know whether or not that pipe should be leaking."

    Gun rights? OK, let's start this discussion with the same words the 2nd Amendment does: "well regulated"

    by DocDawg on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:15:23 AM PDT

  •  Finally, A grain of Truth (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette

    "I am Not a Scientist".

    I NEVER thought that I would live to see the day that a few
    Honest words Escaped from John Boehner's Mouth.

    It's either a Certifiable Miracle or a Complete Accident.

    I'm betting on Complete Accident because those few Honest
    words were Immediately buried in Worthless Bullshit.

    On Giving Advice: Smart People Don't Need It and Stupid People Don't Listen

    by Brian76239 on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:18:38 AM PDT

  •  the debate about tobacco followed same pattern (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette

        For years, politicians in the pocket of the tobacco lobby would cite the bogus scientific research of tobacco companies as proof that tobacco wasn't really killing people.  The scientific evidence was there, but politicians relied on public ignorance to allow them to say "No, it's not."

          After the Surgeon General imposed a requirement that tobacco products and advertisements must be labeled with a warning that essentially says: "The Surgeon General has determined that Yes, there's a good chance that this product will KILL you," those same politicians continued to equivocate with statements like "Well, there's still some debate about that," or "We really can't be certain", or "We just don't have all the facts yet, we need to do more research."  When asked if tobacco is harmful, the politicians couldn't get away with saying "No", anymore, so they settled for "Well....Maybe...but on the other hand, Maybe not..."

         And when it became common knowledge that tobacco kills people, to the degree that denying it only makes you look like a moron, politicians like Bob Dole who still didn't want to piss off the tobacco lobby with the truth, but also didn't want to sound like total fools, simply gave up on trying to answer with "Yes", "No", or "Maybe", and just avoided the question altogether, with statements like "I'm not a doctor," or "I'm not a scientist."  

         About the only argument they have left now is the Libertarian one: "Yes, tobacco will kill you, but anyone who tells you that you shouldn't smoke is infringing on your Freedom.  It's your God-given right to destroy the lungs that God gave you, and don't let any of those socialist, atheist, nanny-state-loving, anti-Constitutional, freedom-haters tell you different!"

         So I suppose soon the argument against addressing climate change will be based on property rights.  "Yes, maybe we're destroying the earth, but the government has no business violating the property rights of the people who OWN that earth.  If property owners don't have the right to destroy their own land, that's just like socialism!"

         Or maybe they'll go with the religious freedom argument: "Yes, it looks like the world might come to an end, but on the other hand, there are many people of faith throughout the world who are EXPECTING that to happen.  Any attempt by the government to impose secular scientific values in order to prevent the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy  is a clear violation of the First Amendment!"

  •  When they say, "I'm not a scientist," the next (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette

    question to ask them is, "OK, what scientist(s) do you go to for guidance on this?"

    When it's clear that most of the climate change deniers use the same few "experts" for cover, and when it becomes clear that those "experts" are a tiny minority of the scientific community (if not a reviled handful of whores), the picture clears up.  

    I realize that process takes longer than the attention span of most TV newscasters, but there ought to be enough opinion leaders who can stay focused around that the news-stenographers ought to be shamed into doing some homework.

    We're all pretty strange one way or another; some of us just hide it better. "Normal" is a dryer setting.

    by david78209 on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:26:20 AM PDT

  •  I am not a scientist (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skralyx, Gorette

    but I am an expert on human conception
    but I KNOW the earth is less than 6,000 years old
    but I willing to legislate/vote based on my beliefs rather than FUCKING LEARNING SOMETHING.

    We do not forgive. We do not forget. The whole world is watching.

    by Tracker on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:27:52 AM PDT

  •  "I'm am not a scientist" (0+ / 0-)

    No, you sure aren't.
    Are you a paid corporate shill, political hack and liar who couldn't give a shit about America's future as long as you get yours?
    .....Yeah, I thought so.

  •  "Not a Scientist" Don't understand sciency stuff (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gorette

    Time for a glass of wine and a smoke.

  •  New cheap magic formula to stop all debates (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peptabysmal

    Because these people go on and keep voting on climate change related issues without having to bother being grilled on it OR having to debate about it with people in the know, both of which only end up making them look stupid (see Rubio, Marco)

  •  Well, sort of (0+ / 0-)

    "I am not a scientist" = "I am willfully ignorant and proud of it."

    Being "pro-life" means believing that every child born has a right to food, education, and access to health care.

    by Jilly W on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 09:49:51 AM PDT

  •  "I am not a scientist," (0+ / 0-)

    "so I really can't discuss the theory of gravity.  However, I do know that when I hit a golf ball, it eventually comes back to earth."

    "The truest measure of compassion lies not in our service of those on the margins, but in our willingness to see ourselves in kinship with them." Father Gregory Boyle, Homeboy Industries

    by Mr MadAsHell on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 10:05:58 AM PDT

  •  Well, I'm not a scientist either (0+ / 0-)

    but I do notice my car gets real hot inside on a sunny day if you leave the windows up.  Even if it's cold out. 'Course I'm not a theologian either, so it might be Jesus.

  •  Is he an economist? (0+ / 0-)

    If not, he'd better leave all that for the professionals, too.

  •  "I am not a scientist..." (0+ / 0-)

    has become the latest opening line to any comments on the subject because the climate deniers have been openly challenged to assert their support for the 3% (the deniers) at the expense of the 97% and the planet.

    Since the questions now lead with "97% of scientists agree..." the deniers feel that, somehow, approaching the problem from an economic (business) standpoint, or a philosophical standpoint, or perhaps a religious standpoint (God will take care of us), can and will justify their position.

    They now recognize they've lost the "science" argument and are grasping for an apology that doesn't cast them as merely supporters of Big Oil or Big Industry.

  •  You don't have to be an expert on everything (0+ / 0-)

    But you have to recognize who the experts are, and at least listen to them -- whether it's listening to educators before making policy on school reform, or listening to scientists before making policy on science issues, or listening to the military and diplomats with long experience in that part of the world before invading some country.

    Your other option is to crack the books and study up on what you need to know more about.

  •  PS. Can we hope... (0+ / 0-)

    ...that the train hits him?

  •  It's (imo) simply (0+ / 0-)

    a ploy-newest response handed down by ___, in order to hopefully shut down Our interest in them to even Have a discussion...and I call bullshit.
    I believe we should use that moment to actually ignore their ignorance and give them an education about that which they claim to have no knowledge.  
    Most of us are Not scientists yet can SEE Global Warming and the Crises that has already begun.
    So, yep-"I'm not a scientist" is not going to work.

  •  Hey Dumbass (0+ / 0-)

    If you aren't a scientist, why do you think you have the smarts to disagree with 97% of all scientists???  Seems a lot like Rethug double-talk to me.  John, you guys have got nothing but lies and hypocritical BS to sell. How do you even look at yourself in the mirror???

  •  Will the GOP ever stop being proud to be dumb? (0+ / 0-)

    “Listen, I’m not qualified to debate the science over climate change,” Boehner told reporters ... So, why do they keep listening?

    “We are not experts on climate change,” Koch spokeswoman ... So, leave everything up to scientists and wait until the 90-plus% prove to the less than 10% that climate change is real, happening and somewhat reversible if we act soon enough?

    But for now, Republicans and their experts have no proposals except Obama & Co. is wrong and we should do nothing.

    Our grade school kids - well, those who aren't going to schools in Texas, at least - know better.

    2014 is HERE. Build up the Senate. Win back the House : 17 seats. Plus!

    by TRPChicago on Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 11:19:11 AM PDT

  •  Not astute (0+ / 0-)

    Is the nicest, non-profane description of this asshole I have heard in a while. May he be swept into the dustbin of history soon.

  •  Thy claim they are not scientists when question... (0+ / 0-)

    Thy claim they are not scientists when questioned about global warming. But in matters of procreation and obstetrics, they all claim to have advanced scientific knowledge. Then they they claim to understand all about when eggs and sperm become little people, and the various methods of preventing it. They also claim advanced knowledge on the psychology of sexuality, and the theories of homosexuality.

  •  Not economists (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    belinda ridgewood

    Last time I checked, none of them were economists, either.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site