Perry and Romney split on global warming

A sharp divide has emerged between two leading Republican presidential candidates on the issue of climate change. While apparent front-runner Mitt Romney believes the world is getting warmer and that humans are contributing to that pattern, Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Wednesday called that “a scientific theory that has not been proven.” Taking questions at the storied Politics and Eggs breakfast in Bedford, N.H., Perry was asked about a passage in his ... Full Story »

Posted by Fabrice Florin - via Memeorandum, Google News (Climate Change), Thanh Tran (t), Salvador Sala (t)
Tags Help
Stats Help
# Diggs: 0 (as of 2011-08-17)
# Tweets: 16 (as of 2011-08-17)
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Fabrice Florin - Aug 17, 2011 - 9:24 AM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Fabrice Florin - Aug 17, 2011 - 12:50 PM PDT
Lynn R. Willis
4.6
by Lynn R. Willis - Aug. 17, 2011

This is excellent journalism. In something around 600 words this article concisely summarizes the positions on global warming of 3 Republican candidates. In the same journalistic breath, the article shows how these candidates differ with regard to their understanding of how science and scientists work at answering questions. Romney and Huntsman both emerge as men who can put what science tells us about climate change into a credible world view that doesn't necessarily put self-interest ahead of what the data indicate. Perry, on the other hand, clearly has an agenda that doesn't suffer scientific data well. What is most telling here is how he insists on discounting the mounds of data that support the notion that the climate is ... More »

I suspect that were I to go looking I would find Perry using the same quote, i.e., "...a scientific theory that has not been proven" when he expresses his views on evolution, too. The author cites Huntsman as viewing Perry as "outside the mainstream" on this issue. One can only hope, but there are lots of folks out there who seem content to get their scientific information from the likes of Rush Limbaugh. More's the pity.

See Full Review » (20 answers)
Sirajul Islam
3.8
by Sirajul Islam - Aug. 21, 2011

Well, a good analytical piece on the positions of the GOP presidential candidates on clmate change. Readers can have an impression who thinks what regardless of the fact that who strategise how.

See Full Review » (19 answers)
Gary Clark
2.8
by Gary Clark - Aug. 17, 2011

To its credit, the article does devote one paragraph to the "scientific consensus" supporting AGW and vindicating the scientists accused of distortions, but the rest is follows the "he said, she said" formula for so-called balanced reportage. It fails to review any salient data to show how absurd Mr. Perry's posture is, or relate it to the right wing corporate funded backers of such pap. The Limbaugh quote was the only link to irresponsible media propagandizing that could've been explored. Huntsman's strategist deserved more extensive coverage due to his unequivocal endorsement of science as the only reality we have to trust.

The media is derelict in its duty to unflinchingly present what is true as opposed to what (very important) people's opinions of what is true are. I'd love to see Mr. Perry's views reported as Molly Ivans might have treated them, calling his views as...well, crazy, but popular in Texas and other right wing geopolitical areas.

“Huntsman’s chief strategist, said in an interview Wednesday. “The American people are looking for someone who lives in reality and is a truth teller because ... More »

See Full Review » (21 answers)
Dwight Rousu
3.1
by Dwight Rousu - Aug. 20, 2011

This is fairly well written in exposing the positions of the republican candidates, but unfortunately could be taken by true believers on either side as reason to follow their pre-conceived convictions.

The excess carbon injected into the atmosphere is very definitely causing acidification of the oceans, and threatening major changes in the food chain. Animals, plants, and bugs are moving up in altitude or toward the poles due to climate change. They do not listen to rushed limburger cheesy comments.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Fabrice Florin
3.8
by Fabrice Florin - Aug. 17, 2011
See Full Review » (10 answers)
Josh Machleder
3.3
by Josh Machleder - Aug. 24, 2011

Though this article tells the story of the Republican candidates' interpretation of science, like the candidates themselves, there is actually no real reference to the actual science that is being done. These guys aren't scientists, and there are likely all kinds of economic and political agendas behind their interpretation of the science that has nothing to do with the science itself. Unfortunately, a reader of the article that isn't familiar with the science and the debates in the scientific community might actually *mistakenly* think that Perry or Romney were the experts, the scientists.

See Full Review » (4 answers)
Frank Whitman
4.1
by Frank Whitman - Aug. 24, 2011

THE SPLIT IS THERE FOR EVERYONE TO SEE TEA PARTY AND PERRY SAID THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARNING,AT LEAST ROMNEYS NOT A MORON

See Full Review » (6 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.6

Good
from 9 reviews (50% confidence)
Quality
3.6
Facts
3.9
Fairness
4.2
Information
3.7
Insight
3.3
Sourcing
3.3
Style
3.8
Accuracy
4.3
Balance
4.0
Context
3.6
Depth
3.0
Enterprise
3.0
Expertise
3.0
Originality
3.3
Relevance
3.8
Transparency
3.7
Responsibility
4.0
Popularity
3.7
Recommendation
3.9
Credibility
3.8
# Reviews
4.5
# Views
5.0
# Likes
2.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!