Warmist Links Angelina Jolie’s Double Mastectomy To GOP Coming Around On “Climate Change”

I’d love to say this is parody, but, alas, no, this is how wackadoodle the New Climate Deniers are (via Junk Science)

Will Angelina Jolie Help End Climate-Change Denial, And Help The Republican Party?

File this one under unintended consequences. Angelina Jolie, by announcing her preventative double masectomy, will likely have significant influence well beyond women’s health. By modeling how to think with data when data do not tell us what we would otherwise want them to say, she displayed a level of decision-making courage that business and political leaders should strive to emulate. For example, her leadership just may end up helping those fighting in the Republican Party to end ongoing anti-science climate-change denial.

What do I mean by decision-making courage? Jolie started with the data, however imperfect and probabilistic scientific data are. On the basis of this data she embarked on an inconvenient (at times painful) course of action so as to significantly lower the chances of experiencing an absolutely catastrophic outcome. She choose preventive surgery to increase the chances of staying cancer-free.

There’s a hell of a difference between Jolie voluntarily deciding that, because she had the gene which significantly increased her chances to get breast cancer, she’d have a double mastectomy, all based on long term science, versus believing in something that doesn’t even start with a proper scientific term. They call it climate change instead of anthropogenic global warming for several reasons, one of which is to blame any and all happenings on mankind’s modern lifestyle, especially fossil fuels. Which the New Science Deniers refuse to give up themselves.

What would be truly courageous would be Warmists looking at the actual hard data. Looking at the history. Understanding the history of “climate change”, particularly over the past 40 years….oh, see, that’s where it breaks down, because it is not about science, it’s about Progressive policy prescriptions, bigger government, control of people and the private sector.

Also, it would be courageous if they practiced what they preached. Won’t happen.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

12 Responses to “Warmist Links Angelina Jolie’s Double Mastectomy To GOP Coming Around On “Climate Change””

  1. Kevin says:

    I don’t even agree with Jolie, much less that goofy guy’s premise that Republicans are anti-science. Most scientists I know, and I know a lot of them since my job is chemical engineering, are conservatives. Our house Democrats all work in HR. That’s not a particularly sciency part of the company. I don’t know what the sales guys politics are.

    And Jolie made a big mistake, imo. You don’t chop off body parts because of a possibility of trouble down the road. Instead, you get checked by the doc more often than you otherwise would have. What she did is akin to not flying in a certain type of airplane because it has a slightly higher history of crashing.

  2. Kevin says:

    Or never entering a trailer home because if a tornado came buy, trailer homes get ripped apart like tissue paper. Or not eating shellfish because sometimes they can kill you (if picked in a red tide, for example).

  3. john says:

    Republicans ARE coming around to believing that the climate is changing. Farmers see it. Kevin are you a memebr of teh American Chemical Society? they believe.
    As for “scientists” not believing in well science these are some of the scientific organizations that have come out for AGW
    AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES
    Statement on climate change from 18 scientific associations
    “Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver.” (2009)2

    American Association for the Advancement of Science
    “The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society.” (2006)3

    American Chemical Society
    “Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem.” (2004)4

    American Geophysical Union
    “The Earth’s climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system — including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons — are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century.” (Adopted 2003, revised and reaffirmed 2007)5

    American Medical Association
    “Our AMA … supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant.” (2013)6

    American Meteorological Society
    “It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide.” (2012)7

    American Physical Society
    “The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.” (2007)8

    The Geological Society of America
    “The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s.” (2006; revised 2010)9

    SCIENCE ACADEMIES
    International academies: Joint statement
    “Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001).” (2005, 11 international science academies)10

    U.S. National Academy of Sciences
    “The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.” (2005)
    C&EN also has many many articles in support of AGW

  4. McGehee says:

    There might be a parallel if Jolie were demanding a law requiring every woman with her risk factors to have a double mastectomy.

    Just wait, though — someone will make that argument. Probably Bloomberg.

  5. Consensus is neither scientific nor proof, John.

    If you Warmists really believed, you’d practice what you preach. I bet the people involved in those polls have given up their fossil fueled vehicles, right?

  6. mojo says:

    Seriously, you guys?

    C’mon: she had a BOOB JOB. Like every other Hollyweird female star over 40.

  7. john says:

    No Teach that would be a very extreme thing to do. Instead what should be done is what is already happening. Cars with better fuel mileage. CFLs and LEDs that use less energy.A general move away from the dirties of fossil fuels, coal. No one expects perfection in this world, just an effort to change. And if .001% of Americans want to stockpile incandescence, well I say go ahead.
    Thank you for agreeing that there is a “consensus” on this matter.
    Saying that if warmists really believed they would give up fossil fueled cars is like saying that if people really believed in the 2nd Amendment they would openly carry at all times. Or that if they really believed that abortion was murder they would kill doctors that do abortions. Or, if people believed innthe iraq war they would have gone over and fought, especially after the enlistment age was raised to 42.
    There is also not 100% agreement on anything; age of Earth, arrival of humans, evolution, and many other things. There will always be people who believe things that scientists do not. But I think I will go with the 97% of scientists, not the 3%.
    Teach conservatives are always behind the curve on issues. Civil rights, women’s rights, gay rights,Jaybus they were even against mandatory seat belt use !!

  8. Kevin says:

    Hippiejohn says, “Republicans ARE coming around to believing that the climate is changing.”

    I don’t know much about Republicans. That’s a big tent. Speaking for conservatives though… Of COURSE the climate is changing. It always has, and always will… well for ~5 billion years anyway. And there are only two things we can do about it. Diddly, and Squat. Man is not potent enough to demand things from nature. Yet. Hopefully that will change soon, but until then, quit whining and deal with the fact that the climate changes regardless of whether you live or die. You are completely powerless to stop it.

    What non-scientists seem to be unable to comprehend is that when the climate warms, it’s very good for mankind in terms of food production. When the climate cools, we get famine. My advice, as a scientist, is to stop trying to cool the planet. In a miraculous worst-case scenario, you’d be successful. The dead bodies you’d create, hippiejohn, would be incredible.

  9. david7134 says:

    john,
    I am glad that you have the AMA as one on the organizations that are in this debate. I know about the AMA and suspect that the other organizations have a similar pattern of “interest”. You see, the AMA represents on about 20% of less of physicians. The AMA has long been seen as a lefest organization that does not have physicians or patients interest at heart. Now, what the AMA does is produce codes. That is the main source of their money and that money is share with the executive officers. The executive officers are the ones who come up with stupid statements like the one that was made and also the ones that supported Obamacare, despite the fact that the majority of doctors despise it. Now who pays for the codes, the federal government and anyone doing business with the federal government, medicare and medicaid. So there you have hit the nail on the head. The people who support this pseudoscience are supported by the feds. Why do the feds support the concept of global warming? So they can manipulte us in yet other ways with carbon exchange units. If you can’t understand this, then consider the best way to eliminate CO2 production is to reduce the number of people on earth, or stop the volcanos from working. But you can contribute by eliminating your respiratory exchange.

  10. dumbfounded_Gumballs says:

    holy sweet bejezus… john!!?!? really?
    When people wonder why we call john our own little troll, point to this post. Mark this one down as the perfect example how trolls infest and corrupt good blogs.

    But then, this is the whole reason for the blog post wasn’t it Teach? Stupid libtards have to make this personal medical decision and make it political.

  11. You really make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this matter to be really something
    that I think I would never understand. It
    seems too complex and very broad for me. I’m looking forward for your next post, I’ll try to get the hang of it!

  12. dumbfounded_Gumballs says:

    Dang Teach, you really attract teh crazies.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8600 access attempts in the last 7 days.