Gina McCarthy on Bill Maher: “All Out Attack on Science”

March 24, 2018

There’s good news and bad news..

15 Responses to “Gina McCarthy on Bill Maher: “All Out Attack on Science””

  1. Glenn Parry Says:

    My ego is not big enough to believe that man is causing change. However, it would take a fool not to see that the climate is changing. The climate has been changing for eons, as any one with a modicum of education well knows. I do not believe that man has the power to alter climate change, but we must do all in our power to mitigate its consequences. As noted in the comment above, we cannot eat money, nor can we breathe it or drink it. However, the pursuit of more and more money, fancier cars, bigger houses and more of everything seems to be universal even among the loudest proponents of man’s need to alter the universe.

    • greenman3610 Says:

      but you do have a big enough ego to assert that you know more than the combined scientific societies over the whole
      you’re a really humble guy!

  2. Lizard Breath Says:

    That was pretty awful. Maher was full of misconceptions. Regulations are generally cost-effective (environmental regulations tend to be VERY cost-effective). The vast majority of cancers are lifestyle related – only a small number can be linked to environmental pollutants. McCarthy did a good job of deflecting Maher’s inanities back to the real issues but even she went for the cheap laughs at the end.

    • funslinger62 Says:

      Regulations are often not cost effective. While certain regulations are necessary to protect consumers and the general populous, many less visible regulations should be replaced with prosecution of violators instead.

      When a problem is rare enough implementing cumbersome regulations unnecessarily burdens most who would never commit those violations. In those situations prosecution is much more cost effective than regulations.

      • J4Zonian Says:

        Regulations are the things that say what people and corporations have to do and not do, to protect health–human and non. Prosecution is what should happen when they fail to obey the regulations, but it rarely does because of the deep, deep corruption embedded in our society. Regulation and prosecution are step 1 and 2 of protecting health from psychopaths, not 2 choices.

        Regulations aren’t nearly strong enough. They need to be based on the precautionary principle; you can’t do anything with public land, public water, or public health, until you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that what you want to do won’t hurt any of those.

        Maher can sometimes be an ass; he’s been exposed to too much lead, mercury, endocrine disruptors and other pollutants as well as too much right wing propaganda about individualism.

        And fur chrissake, the EPA doesn’t regulate garage door openers. Stop blaming the brilliant combination of scientists, activists and public servants for the idiocy of a few overzealous, bored, corrupt LOCAL officials. My guess is Maher’s door inspectors were pushing for a bribe.

    • rhymeswithgoalie Says:

      Maher thinks there were hardly any cancers in ancient times, but we have plenty of evidence that there was (e.g. Egyptian mummies), it’s just that a lot of cancer wasn’t visible, and many people died from contagion, infected wounds, spoiled food, parasites, starvation, war, animal attacks and hypothermia before they had a chance to succumb to a cancer. There are inherited propensities to some cancers, and many are triggered by endemic viruses. If you go beyond humans, we know that dinosaurs and other fossilized creatures had cancers.

      As for regulation, it’s important that they be regularly reviewed and the *reasoning* behind them remains relevant.

    • J4Zonian Says:

      Sorry but that’s deceptive. About a third of cancers are caused by tobacco, which is an addictive product pushed mostly on young and uneducated people by corporate advertising and continued resistance to effective education and countermeasures. About a third are caused by diet, similarly a result of lobbying, (aka legalized bribery) gerrymandered control of state and federal governments by agro-chemical corporations and the resulting subsidies of an extremely unhealthy SAD–Standard American Diet. Another 20% are caused by infections–made much more common and untreatable by agro-chemical corporation and industrial farm overuse of antibiotics. The rest are caused directly by pollutants, from burning fossil fuels, agricultural waste, industrial and household chemicals, etc.

      In other words, almost all cancers are caused by corporations and the essentially identical anti-regulation right wing, (the oligarchy and their government and media handmaidens) and the substances they distribute to a public that’s been systematically rendered vulnerable politically, socially, cognitively, and psychologically to corporate/right wing lies and the oligarchy’s short-term misperceived self-interest.

      But yes, the regulations, especially environmental regulations and switch to clean safe renewable energy, are very cost-effective ways to save lives, productivity and social well-being. Nationalizing the fossil fuel, agro-chemical, chemical, banking and other industries would be at least as cost-effective.

  3. Sir Charles Says:

    The Mercer Family Foundation, led by Rebekah Mercer, has sunk millions of dollars into Breitbart, climate-denying politicians, and a host of climate denial organizations such as Heartland Institute, Co2 Coalition and the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide.

    Rebekah Mercer sits on the board of one of our nation’s largest and most respected natural history museums — the American Museum of Natural History — while she bankrolls groups that deny climate science.

    More than 200 top climate and Earth scientists have signed a letter urging the museum to cut ties to Mercer. Add your voice to theirs.

    Sign this petition to the American Museum of Natural History: It’s time to get science deniers out of science museums. Kick Mercer off the board!

    => Sign the Petition: Kick Climate Deniers out of Science Museums

    • rhymeswithgoalie Says:

      “By signing this form, you are agreeing to receive occasional emails on this and related campaigns from Daily Kos and some of the participating organizations listed on this page (no more than four). You may of course unsubscribe at any time.”

      I might start signing petitions if I knew I could opt out of mailing lists up front.

      • Sir Charles Says:

        Why don’t you write your complaint to Daily Kos? You are too lazy to just hit the unsubscribe button when the first mail arrives. But you have the time to write your complaint in a comment here. Doesn’t really make sense to me.

  4. Sir Charles Says:

    Deep Sea Mining Decisions: Approaching the Point of No Return

    Researchers recently concluded that most mining-induced loss of biodiversity in the deep sea is likely to last forever on human timescales, given the very slow natural rates of recovery in affected ecosystems.

    Yet the ISA has recently rejected the establishment of an environmental committee to better include environmental considerations in its functioning, and key environmental information is not public. Its Legal and Technical Commission meets mostly behind closed doors, and its composition is such that biological and ecological considerations are underrepresented.

    Despite all the arguments against this unnecessary pillaging of our planet’s seabed, so far the ISA has approved 28 exploration contracts in the Pacific, Indian, and Atlantic oceans—covering more than 1.4 million square kilometers (approximately 540,000 square miles), roughly four times the size of Germany—to companies like Lockheed Martin.

  5. redskylite Says:

    Well I’m glad to see that the well respected lady has moved on and is in a worthwhile position. Her wisdom is missed I’m sure, only unethical companies want to be completely self-regulated, putting profit way above health and safety concerns. Sure those companies want to dismantle the Environmental authority.

    Just read this interesting article from another respected lady, maybe Gina is right in her “cheap laugh at the end” (with the exception of dear Judith Curry).

    Storm of climate change evidence piling up

    If we continue to burn fossil fuels, cut down forests, waste food and destroy natural systems, the problems facing our children will be even bigger than they already are. Stronger nor’easters, coastal flooding, more acidic oceans: These are symptoms of a disease that is still in our power to treat, but only if we administer strong medicine – and soon.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: