Rush Limbaugh: Hurricanes are a liberal conspiracy for promoting climate change

[Darth Executor]

I freely admit I haven't read any of the posts in this thread.

But the title reminds me of a girl I knew in college. She honestly believed that Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld had a "hurricane machine" (probably cloud seeding) that created Hurricane Katrina as a pretense to declare martial law in New Orleans. I couldn't stop laughing at her when she told me.

She's now a lawyer and has a lot more money than I do.

BSing IS an important skill for a lawyer.

[Mountain Man]

It's not unheard of for otherwise intelligent people to believe some really dumb things.

[NorrinRadd]

That's not the smell I'm thinking of...

Perhaps equine-processed straw?

[Darth Ovious]

You ignorant fool. Global warming is no more in doubt than Darwinian Evolution is in doubt. "Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position."

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

I like to point out to everyone that Dr Roy Spencer considers himself one of these 97% but has wrote a book about how Al Gore has twisted the science to fit a political agenda. He was also interviewed on Louder With Crowder recently too, although I won't link to that because I'm not sure if the language is OK as I can't remember if any swear words were used or not.

https://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-.../dp/B074XG6KX1

[Tassman]

Oh my goodness, you're still falling for the "97% consensus" lie, and you call me an ignorant fool? Let me pause for a moment to soberly consider the irony...

When confronted with the choice between scientific evidence or Creationist denialism, I'll go for the scientific evidence every time.

As for Darwinian evolution, the next time someone tells you it's "settled science", you'd better check for your wallet, because he's conning you. Even from a strictly scientific perspective, there's good reason to question many of the basic assumptions needed for Darwinian evolution to be true.

https://creation.com/young-universe-evidence

Ah yes, Creation Ministries will put us right. It's not as though they begin their "research" with a closed mind or anything.

[Tassman]

And now here's actress Jennifer Lawrence saying that these recent hurricanes are nature's way of punishing the US for electing Donald Trump.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...-donald-trump/

And here's TV 'has-been' Kirk Cameron assuring us that: "God sent the incredibly destructive and devastating Hurricane Harvey and Hurricane Irma as divine punishment for our collective sins and to teach us humility".

http://www.avclub.com/kirk-cameron-s...s-a-1802927710

But of course he did.

[Mountain Man]

You won't get any argument from me if you call Kirk Cameron an idiot.

[Mountain Man]

Unless I'm totally misreading this, radar seems to indicate that Irma is heading west and will almost completely miss Florida...

https://www.windy.com/?radar,24.532,-80.145,7,m:em3ad2u

[Adrift]

You won't get any argument from me if you call Kirk Cameron an idiot.

I didn't really have that big an issue with what he said in the video. First of all, I'm not sure who Tassman is quoting, because, unless I completely missed it, Kirk Cameron did not say what Tassman quoted him saying. Not in the article or the video as far as I can tell. Maybe he's citing from something else though. Essentially what Cameron did say was that he believes nothing in this universe is random, and that God is the Lord of the wind and the waves and can demonstrate his power and majesty to us through great acts of nature, and that we should see those demonstrations as opportunities to turn to God in humility, awe, and repentance, but that he also provides peace, security and strength in the midst of the storm. He doesn't mention "divine punishment". Doesn't even say the word "sin" as far as I can tell (though, obviously "repentance" would require something to repent of). I don't know. While I don't believe that God causes natural disasters, I agree that out of these sorts of natural phenomena we can be humbled, and find peace in him. That great good can come out of even these circumstances.



Oh, for the record, I'm on the side that thinks that Global Warming or Climate Change or AGW or whatever it's called this week, is most likely a thing. I think the idea that scientists would lie about something like this is...strange. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't know if these recent hurricanes are a part of all that or not. Limbaugh is an entertainer, so I don't think he believes half of what comes out of his mouth, but at the same time, politics being what they are, people on the other side will always see the other side in the worst light.

[KingsGambit]

There's no doubt storms are humbling. We should just be careful not to ascribe motivations to God that God has not specifically revealed.

[hedrick]

Unless I'm totally misreading this, radar seems to indicate that Irma is heading west and will almost completely miss Florida...

https://www.windy.com/?radar,24.532,-80.145,7,m:em3ad2u

Nope. It turned north, just as the models said it would. It also went back to cat 4 when it was over water, as the models said it would. It's going to go up the west coast. Admittedly the eye will be a few miles off the coast for most of it, but in a storm that wide that's a technicality.

If I read the map right, the good thing about the current track is that unlike the East Coast, the biggest population is in St Petersburgh and Tampa, which is further north than Miami. By the time it gets there it should be down to category 3 or maybe below. Miami should be outside the area of hurricane force winds, but will still see quite a storm.

The results, at least as of 6:30 am Sunday, look pretty close to the original models. West coast rather than east coast, but the original east coast, and later path up the center, were just the most probable of a range of possibilities. The west coast path was well within that range.

[Mountain Man]

Which "original model"? There were about a dozen different predictions where the storm would go.

[demi-conservative]

Infamous conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh told his viewers this week that the hurricanes we're seeing this month are part of a liberal conspiracy to promote liberals' climate change political agenda...

You should cut down on Reddit, also stupid youtube videos like this one!!!

[Mountain Man]

I didn't really have that big an issue with what he said in the video. First of all, I'm not sure who Tassman is quoting, because, unless I completely missed it, Kirk Cameron did not say what Tassman quoted him saying. Not in the article or the video as far as I can tell. Maybe he's citing from something else though. Essentially what Cameron did say was that he believes nothing in this universe is random, and that God is the Lord of the wind and the waves and can demonstrate his power and majesty to us through great acts of nature, and that we should see those demonstrations as opportunities to turn to God in humility, awe, and repentance, but that he also provides peace, security and strength in the midst of the storm. He doesn't mention "divine punishment". Doesn't even say the word "sin" as far as I can tell (though, obviously "repentance" would require something to repent of). I don't know. While I don't believe that God causes natural disasters, I agree that out of these sorts of natural phenomena we can be humbled, and find peace in him. That great good can come out of even these circumstances.

Fair enough. Probably should have checked the source myself. That said, I know Cameron along with Ray Comfort have said howlers in the past, and their whole "bypass the intellect and speak to the heart" approach to evangelism is misguided at best.

Oh, for the record, I'm on the side that thinks that Global Warming or Climate Change or AGW or whatever it's called this week, is most likely a thing. I think the idea that scientists would lie about something like this is...strange. It doesn't make sense to me. I don't know if these recent hurricanes are a part of all that or not. Limbaugh is an entertainer, so I don't think he believes half of what comes out of his mouth, but at the same time, politics being what they are, people on the other side will always see the other side in the worst light.

"Climate change" is where the money and prestige is. You're not going to get your name in the journals, or hold a job at a major university, or have access to grant money unless you tow the line. It's the same for anyone who questions evolution, even if they make a prediction that turns out to be true, like when Dr. Humphreys correctly predicted the existence and strength of planetary magnetic fields based on the assumption that the universe is only several thousand years old. It was a startling discovery for anyone who promotes the old universe theory, but it was all but ignored by mainstream science.

http://creationresearch.org/crsq/art...21_3/21_3.html

Anyway, there's your motivation for lying, or at least not looking closely at the numbers to see if they really add up -- and people who have taken a critical look at the data have discovered that it really doesn't add up, but you won't see their names in the pages of peer reviewed publications because the gatekeepers won't let them in.

[EvoUK]

It's the same for anyone who questions evolution, even if they make a prediction that turns out to be true, like when Dr. Humphreys correctly predicted the existence and strength of planetary magnetic fields based on the assumption that the universe is only several thousand years old. It was a startling discovery for anyone who promotes the old universe theory, but it was all but ignored by mainstream science.

http://creationresearch.org/crsq/art...21_3/21_3.html

Anyway, there's your motivation for lying, or at least not looking closely at the numbers to see if they really add up -- and people who have taken a critical look at the data have discovered that it really doesn't add up, but you won't see their names in the pages of peer reviewed publications because the gatekeepers won't let them in.

Wait... You're a YEC? Really?! Well that renders your opinion on anything relating to empirical or scientific evidence irrelevant. No wonder you're a climate change denialist.

... 'Creation Research Society'... LOL