But that simple truth has escaped Newsweek’s Eleanor Clift.
On the Nov. 29 edition of “The McLaughlin Group,” host John McLaughlin asked about the prospects of a Copenhagen climate change treaty and its possible impact on the U.S. economy. MSNBC and “The McLaughlin Group” regular Pat Buchanan gave some spot-on analysis on global warming alarmist about former Vice President Al Gore and how it pertains to the climate change issue.
“Well, I don’t think it’s going to have any impact, John, because I don’t think it’s going to get through the United States Senate,” Buchanan said. “And there’s a reason for that John, and that’s Al Gore’s moment has come and gone. The truth is they’re changing the name to climate change rather than global warming for a reason.”
“It was warming, John,” Buchanan said. “It’s not been warming since ’98. Secondly, there’s no known proof it’s because of man and there’s no known proof it’s a great danger.”
However, Clift felt inclined to responded, rather emphatically. She said she believes U.S. policy should be proactive toward the issue. Her view is arguably indicative of the mainstream media’s sentiment on the debate, and she equated it to blind faith when she told Buchanan there’s no proof there’s a God either, which didn’t mean global warming wasn’t a danger.
“It’s no known proof there’s God, either. How much proof do you need, Pat?” Clift replied. “Oh, it is a danger. It’s a danger in many places.”
I believe there’s a God. I can’t prove that; my belief is faith-based. I’m comfortable with that. That’s how religion works.
Science, on the other hand, should never be faith-based. It should be rooted in things like data and observation and testing your hypothesis and other science-y stuff. That what makes it different from religion.
Clift makes a serious logical error by arguing that belief in global warming can somehow be equated with belief in God.
Unless global warming is your religion.