Sarah Palin calls climate research "snake oil" and demands President Obama boycott Copenhagen conference. Are you serious lady?

The president’s decision to attend the international climate conference in Copenhagen needs to be reconsidered in light of the unfolding Climategate scandal. (This is a "scandal" only in the minds of those whose agenda is to undermine the research being done by climatologists. As Media Matters has pointed out the e-mails are being taken out of context and misinterpreted. This is NOT accidental.)The leaked e-mails involved in Climategate expose the unscientific behavior of leading climate scientists who deliberately destroyed records to block information requests, manipulated data to “hide the decline” in global temperatures, and conspired to silence the critics of man-made global warming. I support Senator James Inhofe’s call for a full investigation into this scandal. Because it involves many of the same personalities and entities behind the Copenhagen conference, Climategate calls into question many of the proposals being pushed there, including anything that would lead to a cap and tax plan.

Climategate? Does Sarah Palin REALLY want to have her name attached to a post that supports some kind of "gate"? Does she really want to open THAT can of worms? Well if THAT is fair game then perhaps we should revisit some of Sarah's multiple "gates". Such as "Dairygate", or "Religiongate", or "Prisongate", or " Troopergate", or how about a personal favorite of mine, "Babygate"? Oops did you forget about those Sarah? Well guess what. We haven't!

And speaking of "opening a can of worms" Palin is now "palling around" with the last "flat-earther" in the Senate. Senator Inhofe's crazy rantings against climate change has caused him to be marginalized, and in some instances ostracised, by his fellow senators, and yet Palin has no problem citing him as a credible critic of the work done by these scientists. Good choice Sarah.

Policy should be based on sound science, not snake oil. (Did she really refer to the decades of peer reviewed scientific research into climate change as "snake oil"? Isn't this the scientific wizard who claims the earth is only 10,000 years old? And did she not write THIS passage in her new book? “But I didn’t believe in the theory that human beings—thinking, loving beings—originated from fish that sprouted legs and crawled out of the sea. Or that human beings began as single-celled organisms that developed into monkeys who eventually swung down from trees; I believed we came about not through a random process, but were created by God.” Is THAT the scientifically inquisitive mind we want to trust when it comes to defining the difference between "snake oil" science and "real" science? I am just asking.) I took a stand against such snake oil science when I sued the federal government over its decision to list the polar bear as an endangered species despite the fact that the polar bear population has increased. (This is a story that has been debunked repeatedly and yet Sarah still uses it as if it were factual.)I’ve never denied the reality of climate change; (No, just the science that determined the source of that climate change: “A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.”) in fact, I was the first governor to create a subcabinet position to deal specifically with the issue. I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state. But while we recognize the effects of changing water levels, erosion patterns, and glacial ice melt, we cannot primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes. The drastic economic measures being pushed by dogmatic environmentalists won’t change the weather, but will dramatically change our economy for the worse.

In other words ANY science which keeps oil companies from accessing that sweet, sweet bubbly crude, under the pristine Alaska tundra, is at loggerheads with Sarah "drill baby, drill" Palin's acceptable definition of "real" science. She classifies it as "snake oil" if it does not allow her to safely retain her beliefs, or to get her way. "What? Eating piles of Atkins bars and washing them down with Red Bull is not a nutritionally sound diet for a middle aged woman? Well by God, I hereby declare that "snake oil" science. Hand me another one of those Chocolate Coconut bars will you Piper?

Policy decisions require real science and real solutions, not junk science and doomsday scare tactics (Yeah don't you just hate all of those "doomsday scare tactics"? Like that whole Rapture, End of Days, idea. How crazy is that?) pushed by an environmental priesthood that capitalizes on the public’s worry and makes them feel that owning an SUV is a “sin” against the planet. (I agree with sister Sarah on this point. Owning an SUV is NOT a sin. A sin would be breaking one of the Ten Commandments, like...oh I don't know..."Thou shalt not commit adultery", like when Sarah was banging Brad Hanson. And "Thou shalt not steal", like when she is always taking money from the people who donate to SarahPAC and not doing anything for them in return. Or "Thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbor", like when Sarah accused Obama of "palling around" with terrorists. Remember that? So no, owning an SUV is not a sin, however listening to Sarah Palin MIGHT be.)In his inaugural address, President Obama declared his intention to “restore science to its rightful place.” Boycotting Copenhagen while this scandal is thoroughly investigated would send a strong message that the United States government will not be a party to fraudulent scientific practices. Saying no to Copenhagen and cap and tax are first steps in “restoring science to its rightful place.”

- Sarah Palin

This is almost too stupid to address, but since it is expected let me make this short.

Wrong, wrong, wrong you fucking imbecile! The effects of climate change have been studied by numerous scientist, of all nationalities and scientific disciplines for over two hundred years. The facts are in, and the findings are conclusive, climate change is real and humans have definitely contributed to it. The idea that a handful of e-mails, taken out of context and used to smear decades of scientific research, should signal an end to the United States participation in this important event is insane. Only a person with a serious ment....oh yeah, I almost forgot who I was talking about.

Well anyway, once again Palin has demonstrated an incredible lack of intelligence married to an out of control ego. I cannot believe people are still taking this woman seriously.

Update: Here is a little more information on the tactics being utilized by the climate change deniers: For thirty years, defenders of a pollution-based economy have intimidated, smeared, and suppressed climate science, using a playbook perfected by the tobacco industry and Karl Rove. Now — as the United States, led by President Barack Obama, finally appears ready to join the world in the fight against global warming — the opponents of reform are resorting to criminal desperation, harkening back to the paranoia-fueled extremes of Richard Nixon.

Interesting no?

(H/T to Gail.)