Fox News Host Attacks Corrupt Business: Climate Science

Fox News Host Attacks Corrupt Business: Climate Science


s lee bryant kilometers out his name trying to media fry and kill me one of the fox and friends has a radio show i mean you know that i
had no idea must be very popular show uh… now a lot of people say to me all the time
sam one brian tell me it is on fox and
friends is he pretending to be that more on it but is that part of the big lake she’s sort of um… again and the other
guys steve do she is sort of just like goofy uh… handed brian kill me disease
possibly later of very aggressively moronic he’s at just the rolled that
he’s playing and uh… hike cats if it is a role he’s actually is like
one of those method actors because he’s kisi he’s maintaining it
first radio show he’s a really good at it now he’s really good at it listen that the state of phone call that
someone talking about that climate change and brian kill me has apparently not
done any of the reading on the seven was at seven or five independent uh…
investigations of the so-called email gate that he references here um… maybe he should listen to our
interview with uh… michael man that we did last year it get it straight but uh… listen to
this guy you got your appreciate someone who is fly-in in his uh… more on the collars
so strong john in florida hey john i was glad to hear the president talking
about climate change democrats the most important thing we need to the accident about its
destroying a play and right and jump on that uh… done uh… said
it didn’t even need to just right i think the d_a_ these
destroying this morning it’s known on the because does pollution in china
are pad so uh… there’s you know brian kill me
d coming up with that dumbest response to uh… the global
climate change it’s snowed out in my backyard today that’s about as stupid as it gets but
let’s see if we can get you to be fair to brian kill me that is the usual
response from these people are maintaining debunk climate change in
their heads that we had precipitation and it was below
freezing its either don’t believe in the fired just ten
ninety eight percent of the time to talk about him in a corrupt ones the middle of the ones who admitted they screwed up there that they started
their findings i wish you could read mine ninety eight percent of the
climatologist your ninety-eight adding killing
climatologist telling everyone courier industry pass
to be addressed people leave me for anyone i’ve never really was a kid now i don’t think it there brian kill me
understand what a climatologist days does does brian kill me and think that if climatologists say that there’s
global warming that they’re gonna they also just happen to have like um…
a corner on the market of like a solar power or something and they want how does a climatologist make more money uh… if there is blob or war means like kandavelan
nothing to do if they were reporting on global warming
as opposed to just say like just studying the climate like somehow you
get more money if you if you add our stand on his work
and what about that one scientist who ran the epa coca brothers funded uh… uh… test on global warming and you can
add instead all my god i was wrong all along global
warming exists and its ninety nine percent man-made well of course because that way
everybody knows that the uh… the sierra club or whatever it is a dead
data bill mckibben has a skewed slush fund in which to up a off these people
it so it was it you know just the back for a second i was really funny the
whole premise those everything else is euro spots is that that never happens businesses never corrupting people
theirs never distorts the facts right what do i
said i was at her except for climate science that’s about as
preferable but money at the that they get settled science is a huge week anuar u_n_ rush limbaugh are more on his
limbaugh and neighbor all yeah so ok go ahead john thank you they go it’s limbaugh by uh… eidos ass i get
the kids are on their i’ve ever he corrected him on a limb by writer right
after saying is or bozo follower of the area have a
lot prevent his name unbelievable

You May Also Like

About the Author: Oren Garnes

100 Comments

  1. But there has been no temperature increase. With only thirty years of data, the temperature has been shown to increase only 1 degree in the last hundred years.
    "Please assume that when one dedicates…"
    No thanks. For you to believe that industrialists are overwhelmingly closed and sinister, but the same could not be true about the scientific community is absurd. There are plenty of stories of professors being ostracized from their community for taking a stance against the narrative.

  2. They may have thought of those, but they do not consider that 'they' are the reason for climate change … or solar flares which are infinitely more probable.

  3. "Like everything else conservatives got this wrong too…"
    That is a fallacious argument. First you must demonstrate how conseratives get 'everything else wrong' and then actually demonstrate how they are wrong. But no matter, I was not making an argument that conservatives are right because the majority of us are against global warming.
    "CO2 creates a green house effect…"
    Possibly, but that has a negligible effect. May I remind you, that plants breath CO2.

  4. "…that we have passed the peak temperatures in the last millennium…"
    That's one thousand years! How can you make a statement for the last 1000 years, when we didn't even have the technology to measure the temperature past the last fifty years!
    "That nine of the ten hottest years on record happened in the past decade…"
    Right. Just like some believe a few thousand of the coldest years occurred millions of years ago.

  5. You are going to have to deny the large body of science…"
    What science? Once again (and I correct) that we have only recorded weather consistently for the last fifty years! Correlation certainly does not equal causation.
    "Do you deny…"
    Probably not if I actually saw the data … but correlation does not equal causation.
    "What do you think of insurance companies…"
    You mean the very same people you mistrust?! Maybe they're trying to CASH IN on the global warming scam?!

  6. So there has been no temperature increase, but the world has increased 1 degree in the last hundred years. That is contradictory. This is enlightening to the neurology of the typical conservative.

    I don't believe industrialists are overwhelmingly closed and sinister, in fact I applaud the Koch research committee for supporting research that showed the opposite of what they expected/wanted. They did not try to hide it or smear the researcher, and openly supported him.

  7. "'they' are the reason for climate change"

    Sorry, 'they' what? The scientists themselves or the Milankovitch cycles?

    "or solar flares which are infinitely more probable"

    Yes, climatologists have studied and documented solar activity and have come to the conclusion that CO2 emissions fit modern temperature increase better than any other climate phenomenon. This is documented in 13,950 peer-reviewed articles in climate literature, with only 24 proposing otherwise. They've done due diligence.

  8. I am curious, as an aside — do you try this hard to denounce most things? What is it about global warming that is so hard for conservatives to accept? I myself have no "liberal desire" to accept it, it is just backed by research that would be near-impossible to fake among thousands of scientists in dozens of countries who would love more than anything to disprove it and set their name in history. I've looked at the temperature readings/CO2 ppm myself and verified it myself. No bias, just facts.

  9. It is a fallacious argument, it was just a bit of political humor. Conservatives have reasonable goals but I don't understand some of their denial.

    Plants breath CO2; I myself have heard this one half a dozen times the past couple weeks, do you think professional climatologists have not considered this? What happens when deforestation meets with artificial increases in atmospheric CO2 such that we have less plants and more carbon dioxide?

  10. At any rate, if "plants breathing CO2" was enough to curb global warming then the globe wouldn't be warming and we would not be measuring a constant increase in CO2 saturation in the troposphere. "Negligable" is a value statement, it is what it is. I don't think global warming is going to end our species but I accept the *history* of rising sea levels and melting ice (yes Antarctica is gaining ice in portions but the Arctic and mountain glaciers melt even faster) and believe it will impact us.

  11. There have been various independent studies done on this, verifying it, using temperature proxies (tree ring widths comes to mind as one such proxy, some trees live for a few thousand years). If you are interested in the details I recommend you do some research. Without much research, I don't see any reason to disbelieve beyond ideological emotions.

  12. When did I say I distrust insurance companies? You're floundering, showing yourself as a conservative ideologue who no longer wishes to even discuss data and contingencies. You are searching through your brain for possible alternatives to anthropogenic global warming with a biased fervor and, having exhausted them, remind yourself that all you need to do is prop up the "Conservative Good Liberal Bad" mindset you have bathed in for who knows how long.

  13. No one is keeping you from "seeing the data" except yourself. You know how to use Google, and I have taught you some concepts you clearly did not know about. Research both sides like I have and come up with your own conclusion. But also know that whatever news or family members or college clique has gotten your brain so saturated in political ideology is preventing you from growing as wise as you could be.

  14. Brian Kilmeade, and the rest of his luddites, will be pushed aside in the long run. Just as the flat-earthers have been put into dust bin of history.

  15. your ideas are backward and anti-progressive. You were rather bury your head in the sand and hope the problem goes away but I'm sorry most of you are too ignorant to be allowed to hamper those who do know what they are talking about.

  16. "May I remind you, that plants breath CO2."

    Are you five years old?

    Anytime a conservative brings up CO2, they always go back to their grade school lessons on geology and biology. Step back a second and think for a minute. The C02 levels are related to world carbon dioxide outputs over the last 100 years. This increases as new industrial nations have risen. It does not relate to the effect that man has on the earth. It relates to the effect it will have on earth that effects humans.

  17. "…Plants breath CO2."

    You need to go to a University, stand up in class, in front of your peers and say that to the professor. I would love for someone to record it, then post it on YouTube.

  18. Avey Owens is a loon. I'm convinced that she's mentally handicapped and devoid of basic cognitive abilities outside of parroting conservative talking points. Every attempt I've made to reason with her has devolved into her deflecting questions with non-sequiturs and rhetoric. She's like a pull string toy programmed by Fox News. Seriously, she isn't worth the time or effort.

  19. Why would gas prices drop?

    1. the government subsidizes the oil industries.
    2. The government takes land from owners in order to give to the corporations
    3. we use our military to safeguard resources-essentially socializing the means to get resources while privatizing the resources.
    4. i think part of a "free-market" is if you do damage to someone elsese property, you have to pay for it. The oil industries don't have to pay for the oil spills- if they had to pay, we would feel it on the botline

  20. And if you look back at my reply to the other poster, the reason that I brought up CO2 is because she was claiming that scientist were claiming that the CO2 is the causation of harm to the animals and plants. It's not. Drastic shifts in weather to temperate zones are what affect habitats and human survivability (rain frequency and water). Plants might be happy with more CO2. But not without water or soil, that then provide for the herbivores. U don't see this because u only view your own area.

  21. "evolution theory"

    Please don't use words that you don't understand. Words like "theory" and "hypothesis" are scientific terms. They are not words you should throw around as if you were hanging out with your buddies, drinking beers, and you decide to look up into the sky and say, "You know? I have a theory about space…"

    Please stop watching Faux. Murdoch is an scrupulous business man, with no ethics, that feeds off your ignorance.

  22. Science is from the pit hell, so why do rethugs and libertards use cell phones and computers since quantum mechanics and electron tunnelling is a lie from the pit of hell. Demons power cell phones, computers, and modern electronics

  23. Do not have to admit anything of the kind as it is not true. How did it fail. You literally have no clue what you are talking about.

  24. I have unfortunately found that even NPR has been becoming more conservative after the mental midgets at Fixed Noise and the Republican party threatened to cut both NPRs and PBS funding last year. The conservatives know that NPR and PBS give out facts, which dont align to the Republican parties idiot strategy to confuse the non thinking masses of this country into voting for them and fucking themselves in the ass in the process.

  25. The local talk radio shows pretty much parrot Limbow and the others so it's really boring if you drive a lot and like intelligent discussion. NPR programming is varied too and not all political and current events talk like the others.

  26. Go watch this TERRIFYING video:
    'The Twin Sides of the Fossil Fuel Coin – Guy MacPherson ' on youtube
    Now, is this Fox cunt one of the most despicable fuckers on the planet? Denying global warming this late in the game should, AS JIM HANSEN has said, be tried as a crime against humanity. BILLIONS of peoples lives are at stake – THIS ISN'T A FUCKING GAME…. Yes am angry me and my family (and YOU) will likely die as a result of this and Brian Kilmeade needs to be severely chastised for toadying

  27. Kilmeade is so stupid. I think he may be the dumbest man on Fox News. He's dumber than Doocy. He's dumber than Gutfield. It's only fitting he should have his own show.

  28. While your anger is understandable, you are quite wrong on us being in danger. Its going to be a generation or two(50-100 years depending on which scientist you listen to) before climate change can actually effect people in large countries like the US as we have the resources to manage the slide. And that is what these morons are playing on, they know they can deny it because it wont have any effect on them. They are watching a storm from a distance and saying its not there.

  29. I know how you feel. You've capture the culture in Arkansas ( and the other dark red states) perfectly. There just isn't a big enough shovel to do the job, ha, ha.

  30. Killmeade is not communist (I know you are being sarcastic). He's just a denier. Plain and simple. He'll grow old, and the new generation will just push him aside just like Bill O'Reilly. Two angry old men that will yell at clouds for being too "puffy." Ha! 😛

  31. That everything related, directly and indirectly regarding climate change in sea temp, ice caps, temperate zones, habitats both plant and animal are all just conspiracy or scams made up by liberal scientist just looking to cash in (his internal projection and conflict on the world). He's just a closed minded, angry, selfish prick who as as much clout talking science as a fictional Tony Soprano. Hey sweet toots! Bada Bing, Bada Boom!

  32. His legacy will be the same as Glenn Beck, Rush and Michael Savage. Pushed off to the edges of radical angry radio.

  33. The irony of a Fox News commentator implying the people who disagree with him are just paid to have their opinions is delicious.

  34. Totally agree, NPR use to just report the news now they are forced to do opinion pieces. As Colbert say "Reality has a well-known liberal bias".

  35. Anything in over abundance is detrimental. Water is what allows life on earth to exist, yet water is the greatest killer.
    Too much O2 in not healthy either, resulting in hyperoxia. Co2 in over abundance in the atmosphere increases temperature.

  36. Tell you what DONT watch that VERY important video and just assume you know whats going on. GW kills around 200,000 a year is driving up food prices NOW and causing massive insurance damage. Every year delayed costs 1/2 trillion more to counter it. And it is now on course to fuck over the entire planet in less than 50 years. The whole point of increased security and decreased rights is so that the psychopaths can do as you claim and drive the world off the cliff unopposed. THEY DO HAVE KIDS!

  37. Annual water related deaths 7 million not to mention the 4 million children that die from polluted water every year
    vehicle deaths world wide 1.7
    Malaria kills 1.2 million

    Prof Mark Maslin of University College London said: “This new study should put to rest once and for all to the false claim that the rise in carbon dioxide was a passive response to increased global temperatures.”
    climate emergency news .blogspot . com / 2012 / 04 / study-suggests – rising – co2 -in – past . h t m l

  38. Gravity can be tested; we can see the effects and we can test the claims we make about it. The same is NOT true for global-warming.

  39. LOL … I don't watch Fox News … I don't even have a television.
    But what you say is EXACTLY what every other liberal says when faced with a conservative. YOU are the one parroting talking points.

  40. "How much research have you done…"
    How much have you?
    "…because your conservative ideology demands it of you."
    Demonstrate how conservatism demands that conservatives deny global warming.

  41. "So there has been no temperature increase…"
    I'm not writing a scientific paper. Learn the complexities of the english language and stop capitalizing on equivocations. One degree in temperature increase might as well be nothing.
    "I don't believe industrialists are overwhelmingly closed and sinister…"
    Right, and bears do not shit in the woods.

  42. The scientists do not consider that 'they' (the things you listed) are the reasons for climate change.
    "Have come to the conclusion that CO2."
    They came to that conclusion years ago.
    "This is documented in 13 950 peer…"
    It is documented that the CO2 increases correlate with temperature rising, or that CO2, the most necessary gas for life to exist, is the cause of global warming?
    Once again, science is not a consensus.

  43. I think it's time you get off your high-horse. Don't presume to repeatedly tell me that I'm making assumptions about you because I'm conservative, when those are assumptions you make because you are Liberal.

  44. "If plants breathing CO2…"
    …based on the presupposition that CO2 causes global warming.
    "History of rising sea levels and melting ice…"
    There is a history of that going back thousands of years. The Vikings were able to colonize Iceland during a warming period and soon after, the earth cooled and the land there turned back to ice."

  45. "Do you think professional climatologists have not considered this?"
    …of course they have, and I'm certain that those who do have reservations about Global Warming.
    "What happens when deforestation…"
    More lies. There are more trees in America than there were a 100 years ago. What's worse, algae is what breaths most of the CO2 (and provides most of the oxygen) for this planet.

  46. "It's near impossible to fake…"
    Only, reasearchers have been caught 'faking it' over and over.
    The graphs used to show an upshot of global temperatures are throughoughly debunked not only by careful examinations but the by the fact that the earth's temperatures have been rising and falling for its entire existence. Even Al Gore's movie was shown to have nine significant errors by the UK courts … but it's still shown in schools all over the world anyway.

  47. "The large body of science…"
    There is no 'large body of science!' For goodness sake, the biggest proponent of global warming had only claimed that the world was COOLING a few decades ago with the same fervour of Global warming.
    I do not deny the increase in CO2, the gas that trees breath. I do deny that it is the cause of global warming.

  48. And 2012 was the hottest year on record… in America. But we're not talking about America, we're talking about the world.

    wikipedia[dot]org/wiki/Deforestation#Rates

    "Earth's total forest area continues to decrease at about 13 million hectares per year"

    Regarding algae, you are the one that brought up plants. Algae is being used to curb GHG emissions — though why would companies be concerned with that if it wasn't harmful in the first place?

  49. For what it's worth, I'm fine with planting more trees, engineering algae, and balancing our emissions. Or emitting more if there was a cooling trend to combat. I'm just not fine with unjustified denial of the base mechanics of green house gasses.

  50. That is due largely to Milankovitch cycles and other well-understood phenomenon. Does the earth's temperature need to be constant for AGW to be possible? These are orthogonal issues

  51. I do not need to defend "An Inconvenient Truth", that is a red herring (I will in a second, but let me explain). AIT is a movie made by a director working with a politician, it does not represent the entirety of the scientific field of climatology. If I made a movie praising free market economies but included 9 errors among 100s of correct facts, does that say anything about the economists or does it speak to my research skills?

  52. Now regarding those 9 errors (against hundreds if not thousands of facts), they are errors in that they do not align with scientific consensus and represent alarmism. I detest alarmism the same way I detest denialism. At any rate, a judge ruled that schools that show this film must include an explanation of the nine errors.

    If we're concerned with brain-washing our children, why do we still mandate "One nation under God" in schools when God has far less evidence than global warming?

  53. wikipedia[dot]org/wiki/Inconvenient_Truth#Scientific_basis

    "The Associated Press contacted more than 100 climate researchers and questioned them about the film's veracity. All 19 climate scientists who had seen the movie said that Gore accurately conveyed the science, with few errors."

    I'm not going to downplay the errors that Gore made or the theatrical alarmism, but that is tangential to the validity of climate research and the CO2-warming link.

  54. Oh right, let me get back to Milankovitch cycles. To understand the human signature in warming you have to understand that it affects a baseline. That baseline does not have to be linear or simple. And scientists have understood the change in orbital behavior of the earth based on gravitational interactions with other solar system planets and how this affects Earth's climate for decades. Why do you think this is some scientific mystery just because YOU have yet to learn of it?

  55. That's 0 for 2. Try again: where have researchers successfully faked the link between CO2 and Earth's mean temperature (successful being it got past peer review, not just that it tricked some idiotic reporter looking for a scoop).

  56. "claimed that the world was COOLING a few decades ago "

    False.

    skepticalscience[cot]com/What-1970s-science-said-about-
    global-cooling.html

    "They find very few papers (7 in total) predict global cooling. This isn't surprising. What surprises is that even in the 1970s, on the back of 3 decades of cooling, more papers (42 in total) predict global warming due to CO2 than cooling."

  57. No, EVERY climatologist in the field have considered the elementary school tidbit of knowledge that plants consume CO2. That is not a blind spot in the field. Why do you assume thousands of experts over several decades would not think of something that occurred to you?

  58. Yes, and if a boulder falls on someone's head they may bleed to death. If I drop a boulder on someone's head they may bleed to death. Just because nature can cause something does not mean man can not cause it.

    And I have explained several times that the glacial cycle is well understood and that there is a distinct human signature ON TOP OF the combined effects of the sun, earth's orbit, ENSO, volcanic activity, etc. Your main blindness is that you don't understand how knowledgeable experts are.

  59. This is just more of the left-wing media's War On Idiocy. They use deceptive tools like facts and science to take away our freedom to believe whatever bullshit makes us feel good.

  60. You're a loon, Avey. You don't need recorded weather patterns to know that global warming is man made. Scientists have taken core samples of ice that was formed long before man even existed on the planet and have discovered that CO2 levels in that ice show that we are presently in a period of unprecedented rising levels of said greenhouse gas. So laugh your ass off, Avey, and keep buying whatever bullshit you're being sold. Wouldn't want to inconvenience you with the truth.

  61. Sarcasm just doesn't translate well to short, written commentary and personally I don't see the point, it's not funny.

  62. Brian Kilameade is one of the best in the Business. That's why he is on the # 1 Morning Show in America.

    Unlike Sam Seader

  63. never mind that there is surely more money for them if they 'work' for the oil industry and 'prove' that fossil fuel is just nice and actually help the planet..

  64. The science is already in and that you ignore it in favor of fossil fuel propaganda means nothing. You are wrong, wrong on the facts and just plain wrong about our how much the average temperature has gone up. I have 98% of all climate scientists behind me you have the ones who were paid by the groups who have a direct financial interest in not cleaning up our emissions. We have plenty of proof that there is an issue and that you do not understand that marks as ignorant of the facts.

  65. It does not, you just buy what you are sold and never ask anything of it. Conservatism does not demand this of you but you are part of a brand of conservative who parrots what what ever is being shouted inside their ignorant fact free bubble and this is we see you repeating. There is no thought in what you say, you do no research into the subject beyond what is being said by people you "agree" with, sadly in the end I think you mostly do it to belong. You are tool of propaganda, nothing more.

  66. No one hates you, you are just wrong and are going to cost us many lives down the road if we let those like you hold us back. You will be like the clowns who demanded the earth was flat or that bad air caused disease. People like you are simpletons that are eventually and consistently bypassed by history. It is OK you and those like you are losing this debate as facts will trump ignorant spin every time no matter how skillfully your corporate masters craft it for you.

  67. Yes I did. What questions did your oil company cronies ask you to ask.

    I agree it is tiresome, the right wing is famous for not only disparaging science but simply ignoring any it that does not agree with. That there is a difference of opinion is business as usual but when the vast majority call goes in one direction it gives selected the idea credibility, that is how it it works. That you think there is any real support for the the fossil fuel spin means you are out of touch or are a shill.

  68. Let me phrase this in way that does not allow you to mince words. Scientific consensus is that global warming is being driven by CO2 emissions driven by man. Could it be something else, yes. Are there other ideas, yes. Do they have the evidence to refute the general consensus, nothing of note. Evidence is what should drive this process and the "Consensus" is built on very sound unrefuted evidence, that is a fact. That addressing the issue will be expensive means nothing to the truth of it.

  69. "More CO2 increase our food production."

    Oh dear. Didn't you even read what I said about CO2 production? That is not causation for disaster. The effects of more CO2 erodes other ecos that affects temperate zones. Most of which will only affect the poorest nations. This what happens when you listen to talk radio "experts" instead of the actually scientists themselves; which can be boring and monotonous. Your problem is that you've gotten the shaft in life and think everything is a conspiracy. 😀

  70. I do know the difference but the truth is facts are not on your side. You count on a simply non existent conspiracy convince the public that climate change is being driven by our actions to defend a side who has undeniable bias and greatly profits by the inaction caused by the misinformation spread by people like you. Climatologists the world over agree because of consistent verifiable evidence gathered. It is no coincidence everything you appeal too is paid for by special interest dollars.

  71. alot of amrican diplomatic debate has the atmosphere of a kid covering his ears and going LALALA at the other kid. i.e. guns, climate, god, socialism, etc

  72. Yes it is true, gravity can be tested. You can even chart the effect that gravity has on a ball when that ball is in free fall. We also have charts that show the average temperature of the planet, and the average amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. Guess what? They rise and fall together, perfectly predictable, just as gravity is. Please do /some/ research and think for yourself. At least on occasion. If you can't do that, than just shut up around your children, don't pass this stupidity to them.

  73. Lol what is it that they are parroting? All these "facts" and science bologna? Yeah you are right, we shouldn't listen to the smartest people in the world, we should listen to politicians and our ignorant friends about it. While we are at it, let's do no research into it ourselves, as that would be wasted effort. We already know what is going on so why waste our time, right? You are fucking moronic.

  74. What is this TYT wanabes? They reply to TYT videos for views to make money? Typical liberal thieves.

    Anyways, you need to lie a LOT more to be TYT.

  75. Actually, the CO2 and temperature do rise in unison. First temperatures rise, then hundreds of years later, CO2 rises. Do your homework.

  76. You are no better! you re looking for ratings. I will give you a rating. just like all you guys . you are making a buck off of the decline in morality. you have no consideration to what  our god has instructed us to follow. So you will live your life, and then you will die. No suffering. just death. As we all will that do not follow the will of God.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *