Top Seven Ridiculous Global Warming Hoax Quotes From Climate Change Deniers

Tuesday, April 30th, 2013

Has our list of  anti-gay quotes left you drooling, stomach growling with a low moan, signifying your growing hunger for more stupidity? Rejoice! We have for you an all-you-can-eat buffet of slack-jawed skull-fuckery, led by some of our nation’s most vocal, professionally dishonest politicians, writers, and personalities. These “people” not only set the bar for corruption, but are true masters in the art of word murder.

And we should know. We’re Verbicide.

Is global warming an elaborate myth created by an ultra-left wing conspiracy, which has spread misinformation, faked melting icecaps, fabricated rising ocean levels, made up Hurricane Sandy, Hurricane Katrina, and a host of other severe weather swings, and paid off a vast majority of the impartial scientific community to lie, all in a grand scheme to…sell more board shorts and mittens? If you ask some of the people below, they might say yes, and that is as sad as it is frightening.

Ready to meet the enemies of science? Read below for the best of the worst.

Glenn Beck

“Al Gore’s not going to be rounding up Jews and exterminating them. It is the same tactic, however. The goal is different. The goal is globalization… and you must silence all dissenting voices. That’s what Hitler did. That’s what Al Gore, the U.N., and everybody on the global warming bandwagon [are doing].”

Glenn Beck, comparing former Vice President Al Gore’s fight against global warming to Adolf Hitler’s use of eugenics as justification for exterminating six million European Jews, on his syndicated radio show, April 30, 2007.

 

Richard D. North

“It is deeply pejorative to call someone a ‘climate change denier.’ This is because it is a phrase designedly reminiscent of the idea of ‘Holocaust Denial.'”

Richard D. North, author of The Right-wing Guide to Nearly Everything, making an unequal comparison and suggesting a conspiracy against the more sensitive constituents of his community, June 30, 2005.

 
Joe Barton
 

“When it’s hot, we get shade.”

Rep. “Smokey Joe” Barton (R-TX), in a hearing on adapting to climate change, March 25, 2009.

 

Sarah Palin

“These global warming studies [are] a bunch of snake oil science.”

Governor Sarah Palin, at a logging conference in Redding, California, February 8, 2010.

 

Michele Bachmann

“[Nancy Pelosi] is committed to her global warming fanaticism to the point where she has said she’s just trying to save the planet. We all know that someone did that over 2,000 years ago, they saved the planet — we didn’t need Nancy Pelosi to do that.”

Senator Michele Bachmann, telling OneNewsNow that the US doesn’t need environmental advocates because Jesus already has got that covered, August 2008.

 

Donald Trump

“[Al] Gore wants us to clean up our factories…when China and other countries couldn’t care less. China, Japan, and India are laughing at America’s stupidity.”

Donald Trump, ranting to a crowd at the Trump National Golf Club in Westchester, New York, February 2010.

 

George F. Will

“According to the University of Illinois’ Arctic Climate Research Center, global sea ice levels now equal those of 1979.”

George F. Will, columnist of The Washington Post, supporting his claims that glacial retreat caused by global warming is a myth, February 15, 2009. The “University of Illinois’ Arctic Climate Research Center” does not exist, and the scientists at the university who conduct Arctic research reprimanded both Will and the Post for publishing non-factual claims.

  • Matt Edmund

    While this piece aims to simply call out Republicans for questioning and denying the connections between humans and global warming / climate change, I see the actions and ideals of those on the left who are willing hype the issue for various reasons…including many of which are profit driven (especially under taxation, which does nothing to “solve” the problem”).

    Michael Crichton had a very common sense approach to this issue…

    “If you just look at the science, I, at least, am underwhelmed. This may or
    may not be a problem, but it is far from the most serious problem. If
    you want to do something, [limiting emissions] is not what to do. We
    don’t at this moment have good technology to do this, if, in fact, it’s
    necessary to do it.”

    Simply the issue, while it needs attention, isn’t worthy of freaking out about (as people like Al Gore, who makes a TON of money off of the fear-mongering, would want you to be doing). It sure isn’t worth giving up more of your income or choices when living your life…

    Now, the chemtrails lining the skies…the ones that contain toxins like Barium and Aluminum…I would like to see the public start to question those, rather than allowing themselves to be intimidated by being called “kooks” or “conspiracy theorists” when questioning such things. Google the film “What In The World Are They Spraying?”… If you really care about the health of this planet, you would study up on GeoEngineering…not the fake environmental movement trying to convince you the Polar Bear is stuck on a sliver of ice because of human’s (hey, Polar Bears can swim great distances and long lengths of time!)

    • OlaPola

      “Polar Bears can swim great distances and long lengths of time!”

      *stops caring about the environment*

      • Matt Edmund

        My point being that the image of polar bears on slivers of ice with somber music playing is no more than BS propaganda used to play people’s emotions rather than use rational thought.

        • And the grizzly/polar bear cross breeding due to mate shortage? Suppose those tear-jerker tigers are just propaganda, too?

          I am sick of the counter-argument that the left has the same or greater propaganda power as the right, when every single institution in place supports the perpetuation of the status quo, paints the denier belief arguments as if they are of equal scientific merit, and casts weak liberals on tv as whiny tree-hugging nut jobs… Or fascists…

          And don’t get me started on Michael Crichton.

          Kee-rist.

          • Matt Edmund

            And what do you suggest humans do to stop this cross breeding? And furthermore, how do you place sole blame on humans? Are you to tell me that this couldn’t happen naturally? Who are you to say?…Perhaps you should read Greg Graffin’s book “Anarchy Evolution”.

            I think we as humans should be more concerned with cross breeding of GMOS, you know, the ones from Monsanto – who Obama just signed off immunity against any legal actions against the company due to their seeds. How about the fact that Obama put Michael Taylor in a high position in the FDA (he was VP of Public Policy at Monsanto). We should be concerned with the vaccinations forced upon us. We should be concerned with the fluoridation of the water supply.

            Both parties ./ sides (Democrat / Republican / Left / Right) are in bed with various big businesses in order to make money. I simply stated that the fear-mongering of the world ending due to massive floods, hurricanes, and other natural disasters – triggered by climate change – is done at the hands of a few with a lot of money to make. If we are worried about the human impact on the environment (including the atmosphere), why is it taboo to study up or even talk about HAARP?

            Lastly, If you’re stuck (as it seems so many are, on both sides) in this mindset that “the right are evil, the left is good” and vice versa, you are living in fantasy land. Both parties are corrupt. Both parties have no interest in protecting this earth or humanity. Both are controlled by corporate elite.

        • OlaPola

          Doesn’t justify the poles melting, now does it?

          • Matt Edmund

            So allowing more governmental control and taxation is going to stop it from happening?

          • OlaPola

            Did I say that? I can’t remember typing it out.

            But yeah, higher taxes to better funding of the environmental issues. Americans knows nothing, in Norway we pay almost 40% of our salary as tax.

          • Matt Edmund

            Not sure if you know this, but the US government isn’t really good at using tax dollars wisely. Did you hear about Solyandra? Government gave the company a shitload of money (knowing it was in danger of going out of business) and guess what? The company went under!

            The answer isn’t more statism. The government is a failing institution. Time to progress and start relying on ourselves…not corporatist bureaucrats.

            And while you may be taxed 40 percent, I’m struggling to live paycheck to paycheck due to the cost of living continuing to rise do to inflation of the US Dollar…

          • OlaPola

            As far as I know, US citizens struggles more than Norwegian. I’m not gonna get over my head based on a comment about the swimming speed of polar bear, you should have just shrugged it off and moved on, man :p

          • Matt Edmund

            Don’t think I was “over my head” with my comment about the emotionally based pictures and videos of polar bears standing on slivers of ice used as propaganda…nor do I think most people understand that polar bears spend most of their time swimming great distances. I think I got that point across…as well as the point that there is money to be made of the hype of man made climate change by a handful of corporate elite.

          • OlaPola

            Shrug, Matt. Shrug,

          • Matt Edmund

            I mean don’t get me wrong…I believe in real environmental conservationism. I believe in recycling, being self-sustainable, and being overall conscientious about destroying our planet…but do I feel the need to be forced to pay 10 cents for a paper bag because they no longer provide plastic bags in the city where I live? It’s the idea of FORCING people (by way of laws / taxation / regulation) but it shouldn’t come at the hand of governmental intervention. It should come from voluntary actions that come from a will to actually make change. And if your heart goes out to those polar bears…do something to make change, but don’t force your agenda down the throats of others who may not agree with you. Could humans be a contributing factor to the earth’s climate change? YES. Of course. But I also think the earth has it’s natural way of changing itself – regardless of human contribution. Rather than going after Republicans (as the author of this piece has done so), let’s address the real issues that are effecting the climate and our planet…one that remains nonpartisan.

            For example, it’s known that the US Navy dumps toxic waste into the world’s oceans. Where is the outrage over this? This is an issue immune to the “Left vs Right” paradigm since it’s BOTH parties who are essentially approving of these actions.

            It’s funny, the left wants to bitch and moan about how the right attacks them on a daily basis, yet the left do the exact same thing…

            Sorry, I have no time for pissing contests. I call it how I see it…and I call bullshit.

  • As a practicing scientist, I find it simply stunning that the AGW crowd keeps trying to pedal their nonsense. I suppose as long as they get attention, invitations, grant money, and faculty promotions, they will keep it up. Sad but true that the Academo-tainment industry is now among the most corrupt on earth. Sigh. Perhaps another 10 years without any of their predictions coming true will finally send them off to the next “big scarie.” Personally, I kinda miss some of the old Big Scaries, such as the DDT-kills birds, ozone hole, Coming Ice Age, Y2K, and the Population Bomb. At least those authors had the courage to predict the direction of the “change” they “miss-predicted.”

    • Matt Edmund

      Population Bomb…Ha, I own a first pressing of that book. What a crock!

      • Kenn S

        actually, we are living right inside the explosion of that bomb. The damage is being done every day. It will get much worse.

        • Matt

          Really? I mean, the book claimed that there was going to be a lack of food due to population increasing beyond sustainability. Ehrich’s claims are far from true, although there could be enough toxins in the drinking water to possibly sterilize people today. We’re experiencing damaging effects to our planet, including all life, mostly from toxins in the food we eat (GMO), water we drink and the air we breath (chemtrails). Slow kill weaponry to ensure we all develop physical and psychological aliments, so big pharma (and those who profit from it) continue to make money off of us sick “common folk”. The problem with those looking to government to solve all of this is the fact they are blind to the reality that government allows it to continue (CORPORATISM). The sooner we realize that it’s the state and corporate power, working hand in hand, the better. The idea that government has any interest in saving us from big corporate interests is a pipe dream.

          • Kenn S

            There are almost a billion starving and undernourished people in the world this decade. Natural resources are being depleted rapidly by over 7 billion people. Forest clearing continues, and many species are being driven to extinction. The fraction of the world that is forested, or in a relatively natural state has declined enormously. Most coastal fish populations in the ocean are now a tiny fraction of what they were, or could be. The chemistry of the oceans has been changed in a way that will further reduce marine resources. And yes, pollution is pervasive and affects health of humans and other species. So, the explosion is slower than predicted – but it is happening. I expect the effects will be much worse over the rest of this century.

          • Kenn S

            As world population has doubled since the 1960s, the actual number of undernourished people has stayed fairly level, and is now only about 12% of world population. In 1965 it was around 30%. This all sounds positive, but since 1900 the number of undernourished people in the world has doubled, with a four+ fold population increase. As resources become more limiting, the percentage is not likely to stay as low as 12%, and could increase rapidly.

          • Matt

            So what are you suggesting we do? Perhaps enforce a one child policy like in China? Are you a believer in the Bill Gates agenda of bringing drought resistant seeds to Africa (Monsanto seeds)?

          • Kenn S

            I favor voluntary population reduction, and it is happening in Europe now for example. I also favor helping those in the worst impacted areas, and that would include modified crops. I agree we can’t rely on govt to fix this. Basically, if we don’t get the human population to a sustainable size, the alternative will be population reduction by famine, disease, war over resources, or government edict. Look at some of the ‘peak oil’ or ‘peak everything’ articles. Most of those predict a declining human population as energy resources run out, but they don’t say how it will happen. Energy is needed to produce food at the rate we do now, so food production will decline.

          • Matt

            So you feel it’s fine to feed those impoverished areas GMO’s known to kill lab rats? The same GMO manufacturers that are getting immunity from our government?

            Perhaps you should petition the government to cease the relationships they have formed with those responsible for essentially killing the planet and human beings? Afterall, it is with our government’s help that fluoride is added to the water supply, GMO’s are taking over the American crop yield, and the skies are toxic with Geo-Engineering. People are opting to be self-sustainable, yet the government is cracking down on those who opt-out of the slow kill weapons approved by the FDA.

            If us humans were allowed to provide our brothers and sisters with organic supplies of food and water, perhaps we’d have a chance…but when you have the government working hand in hand with these corporations who are giving us toxins, it’s a losing battle.

          • Matt

            I don’t dispute much of what you said. True that human’s impact on the environment has negative effects, but my point is that we’re looking to government and the faux-green movement to implement changes rather than looking to things we can do as people. Problem with looking to government is that they have no real interest in making real change, simply by looking at who they are working with and what practices these entities are using. The idea issuing a carbon tax will really do anything to combat man made climate change is lunacy. The idea you have the government cracking down on those who choose to be self-sustainable with organic and non-FDA regulated goods (like drinking raw milk) is extremely dangerous. So again, not saying that humans are not contributing to the damage against the environment…but I’m also not convinced we need to be pushing the government and those with profit driven motives to be the leading people in the “stop climate change” movement.

  • david selvers

    Thank God for the global warming/climate change initiative…now I see just how many stupid people there are on the face of this planet.
    I won’t even socialize with people who are sucked into this hoax. I have a polar bear hunt planned for the very near future and I’ve been informed that there is plenty of sea ice (15′ thick) to support my 2 guides, myself and my 375H&H Browning Magnum.
    This perpetual myth has dangerously misinformed those who lack the ability to rationalize between fact and fiction. Ethical conduct dictates that the superior segment of society should not take advantage of the weak minded yet the very (small) crowd that advocates this out of one side of their mouth preys upon imbecilic dolts by disseminating propaganda with the other side of their mouth. It’s been the coldest Dec. on record with very little relief in the near future and still the fools speak of impending doom due to melting glaciers and scorching temps.
    The stupid fools who side with these soothsayers are the reason for our grotesque increase in hydro costs, bankrupting regulations and worst of all an ignorant future population because kids are being indoctrinated into this scam by an educational system that is supposed to be teaching them how to read, write and mathematically equate.
    At one time society tried to educate it’s people out of darkness now it strives to bring back the dark age.
    This is one Canadian Capitalist who sees right through the idiots who pedal their koolaid.
    To the global whiners…SHUT THE F% £ K UP?

  • John Murray

    I don’t understand why the Republicans went anti-enviroment. In the 70’s Nixon signed into Law a Senate Bill with 73-0 non partisan vote ‘The Clean Air Act of 1970″ Which changed the the Federal Governments thought on Air Pollution. The Government wanted to be able to regulate the emmisons from Industrial Buildings and Mobile sources of emissions. George H.W. Bush signed an Amendment in 1980, to control”Acid Rain” in the air.
    Now they are anti-enviroment, some say it changed during the primaries, when christian values were used heavily and pandering to them. God will fix it Inholfe, Bachman, Perry, Santorum, Broun,Cruz,Gohmert also 2010 was the Citizen’s United ruling that brought Big Money up for grabs.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!