As Santorum Surges, Sound Science Sags

authordefault
on

This is a guest post by Bill Walker, originally published at Climate Central.

Thereโ€™s a new ringleader of the skeptics’ circus โ€” otherwise known as the 2012 field of Republican presidentialย candidates.

Rick Santorumโ€™s out-of-nowhere surge to a virtual tie for first place in the Iowa caucuses may not boost him to frontrunner status in next weekโ€™s New Hampshire primary and the states beyond. But in the contest to see which GOP candidate can be the biggest doubter of the science of climate change, Santorum is the unchallenged leader of theย pack.

Santorum not only denies that manmade global warming is a growing concern, he denies its very existence.ย โ€œThere is no such thing as global warming,โ€ย he once said on Glenn Beckโ€™s show, adding that itโ€™s โ€œpatently absurdโ€ to think a naturally occurring substance like CO2 โ€“ โ€œa trace gas in the atmosphere, and the man-made part of that trace gas is itself a trace gas โ€œ โ€“ is warming the planet. (Well, not if you understand the greenhouse effect.) He told Rush Limbaugh: โ€œIโ€™ve never โ€ฆ accepted the junk science behind thatย narrative.โ€

But itโ€™s not really about โ€œjunkโ€ science. Santorum simply doesnโ€™t accept science. A devout evangelical Catholic, Santorum also rejects evolution and tried to amend federal law to require the teaching of โ€œintelligent designโ€ in public schools. After his fellow candidate, Jon Huntsman, affirmed his belief in evolution, Santorum said: โ€œIf Governor Huntsman wants to believe that he is the descendant of a monkey, then he has the right to believeย that.โ€

Santorum lost Iowa by only eight votes; you have to wonder if coming out against the germ theory of disease would have put him over theย top.

And itโ€™s not just Santorum. For a long time, Congressional Republicans insisted there must be โ€œsound scienceโ€ behind environmental regulations. Now Republican politicians at all levels are rejecting sound science, either as a matter of faith or in a transparent bid for the votes of the partyโ€™s anti-science wing. Trust in science has become an electoralย liability.

Four years ago, GOP nominee John McCain said without reservation that people are warming the planet and itโ€™s time to act. This year the GOP debates have sounded like a panel discussion at a convention of the American Petroleum Institute. With one exception, all the candidates have embraced positions that run counter to facts the overwhelming majority of scientists agree on. As New York Times columnistย Paul Krugmanย wrote:

So itโ€™s now highly likely that the presidential candidate of one of our two major political parties will either be a man who believes what he wants to believe, even in the teeth of scientific evidence, or a man who pretends to believe whatever he thinks the partyโ€™s base wants him toย believe.

The Republican presidential candidates participating in the Iowa GOP/Fox News Debate in August. Credit:ย Iowa Politics/flickr.ย 

In one corner, the flip-floppers. Mitt Romney has reversed course on climate change so dramatically heย seems to be debating himself.ย In 2008 Newt Gingrich taped anย ad with Nancy Pelosiย urging action on global warming. Now he says it was โ€œthe dumbest thing Iโ€™ve done.โ€ Ron Paul has also done an about-face. He once acknowledged that โ€œsomething (is) afootโ€ and that human activity had something to do with it, but later called the idea of manmade climate changeย โ€œthe greatest hoax (in) โ€ฆ hundreds ofย years.โ€

In the other itโ€™s the hard-core deniers, Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman (formerly) and Santorum. Perryโ€™s skepticism is particularly harsh โ€” he believes climate scientists have manipulated data to pull in research money โ€” and self-righteous. He likened current global warming skepticism toย Galileoโ€™sย 17thย century stand against the notion that the sun orbits theย Earth.

The one candidate unafraid to publicly affirm global warming science is Huntsman, who (perhaps as a result) barely registers in the polls. Just months ago heย tweeted:

โ€œTo be clear, I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call meย crazy.โ€

Itโ€™s tempting to instead apply that label to his rivals. But whatโ€™s really behind the candidatesโ€™ race to the scientificย bottom?

Dr. Larry Hamilton, a sociologist and pollster at the University of New Hampshire, told Climate Central some Republicans are skeptical of climate change science because they donโ€™t like the proposed solutions to the problem, such as cap and trade, which they view as oppressive government regulation. But he also said among the partyโ€™s rank-and-file, especially the evangelical faction with outsize influence in the primaries, there is an alarming level of distrust of scienceย itself.

โ€œIn national surveys,โ€ Hamilton said, โ€œRepublicans are much more likely than Democrats to say they donโ€™t trust scientists as a source of information about environmentalย issues.โ€

A Public Policy Pollingย surveyย found that only 21 percent of Republican caucus voters in Iowa believe in global warming and only 35 percent accept evolution. Hamilton said itโ€™s not that different in New Hampshire, where the Granite State Poll found that 31 percent of Republicans accept manmade climate change as aย fact.

So whatโ€™s a rational Republican who trusts science and is concerned about climate change toย do?

Farrell Seiler, chairman of New Hampshire Republicans for Climate, said he and his members will vote for Huntsman (although the more theyโ€™ve looked at his energy policy the less impressed they are). Seiler attributed the relatively greater acceptance of science among New Hampshire Republicans to the fact that the state is in โ€œthe direct line of fireโ€ of extreme weather, particularly on itsย coast.

ย In November, Seilerโ€™s group sponsored a New Hampshireย town hall meetingย on climate change and invited all the GOP candidates. They realized the frontrunners wouldnโ€™t come, but they made a special effort to reach out to Huntsman. They wanted to know why, after his โ€œcall me crazyโ€ tweet, heย seemed to back offย hisย position.

ย โ€œWe wanted to send a message that there are Republicans who get it on climate,โ€ Seiler said. โ€œWe hoped Jon Huntsman would be willing to make a strong statement in front of a climate-friendly audience. But he didnโ€™tย show.โ€

This is a guest post by Bill Walker,ย originally published at Climateย Central

Bill Walker, a writer and columnist for Climate Central, is a former newspaper correspondent and for more than 20 years aย communications strategistย for leading environmental organizations. He lives in Berkeley,ย Calif.

authordefault

Related Posts

Analysis
on

Right wing YouTuber Tim Pool is the latest to own โ€˜climate peopleโ€™ with fake facts spouted by a grizzled TV oilman.

Right wing YouTuber Tim Pool is the latest to own โ€˜climate peopleโ€™ with fake facts spouted by a grizzled TV oilman.
on

Critics say the controversial GWP* method โ€“ which New Zealand appears close to adopting โ€“ is โ€œopen to significant abuseโ€.

Critics say the controversial GWP* method โ€“ which New Zealand appears close to adopting โ€“ is โ€œopen to significant abuseโ€.
on

Lord Moynihan of Chelsea, who holds shares in Shell and TotalEnergies, called the green transition a โ€œchildrenโ€™s crusadeโ€.

Lord Moynihan of Chelsea, who holds shares in Shell and TotalEnergies, called the green transition a โ€œchildrenโ€™s crusadeโ€.
on

Carrboro, N.C., accuses Duke of knowingly fueling the climate crisis for decades with harmful emissions, deception, delay, and "greenwashing."

Carrboro, N.C., accuses Duke of knowingly fueling the climate crisis for decades with harmful emissions, deception, delay, and "greenwashing."