Jeb Bush is a climate change skeptic: I’m ‘light green.’
Filed Under: Global Warming
By on Apr 24th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Jeb Bush is a climate change skeptic: I’m ‘light green.’
Yesterday at a speech in Dallas, former Florida governor Jeb Bush said that he is skeptical humans are causing global warming, stating he is “light green” on the environment. According to the AP, Bush said that global warming activists “are acting out of something like religious zeal.” “I don’t think our policies should be based on emotion; they should be based on sound science,” said Bush. Recognizing that some of his remarks were controversial, Bush later remarked, “Is this open to the press?”
Featured Comment: geoffdmiller Says: "Ummm, Jeb? I know you, your family and your party are the foremost authority on sound science but what is unsound about hundreds of IPCC scientists stating that the current climate trends are ‘very likely’ (> 90% chance) a result of anthropogenic contributions. Or the thousands of scientists concluding the same in peer-reviewed journals.
Scientists are trained to be unemotional, and most are. Politicians, on the other hand, are not."
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
63 Responses to “Jeb Bush is a climate change skeptic: I’m ‘light green.’”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register
RSSLogin
View Most Popular
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Beck
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Clinton
Drudge
Earmarks
Economy
Environment
Ethics
Feith
Fox News
GI Bill
Global Warming
Gore
Graham
Hagee
Health Care
Housing
Immigration
Impeachment
Iran
Iraq
Israel
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Hanlon
O'Reilly
Obama
Petraeus
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Rove
Siegelman
Sports
Third Bush Term
Torture
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Nope, Jeb, you’re toxic as all get out now, due to your surname.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:48 pmWho cares about JethroJeb?
April 24th, 2008 at 2:50 pmWe know you don’t care: it’s almost impossible to breath in Florida in the summer.
take care
tony and guidedog Lido
“I don’t think our policies should be based on emotion; they should be based on sound science”
It is, which is exactly why the so-called “religious zeal” is completely justified.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:50 pmNo science behind global warming predictions. Nope, none at all.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:50 pmBush said that global warming activists “are acting out of something like religious zeal.”
Maybe because they recognize that the future of the fu(king species is at stake, and they sense an urgency toward the need to find real solutions. Idiot.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:51 pm“I don’t think our policies should be based on emotion; they should be based on sound science,” said Bush.
“Sound science” agrees global warming is the direct result of man , you typically stupid Bush Family clod……..
April 24th, 2008 at 2:51 pmNext TPWet post: Jeb Bush is a light-terrorist!
April 24th, 2008 at 2:52 pmsound science to this nitwit is to agree with whatever developer lined his pockets the fullest
April 24th, 2008 at 2:53 pmNahh, Jeb. You’re yellow, like all the Bushies.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:53 pmDonkeyface Says:
——————————————————————————–
Yeah, Jeb, Stop thinking with your brain, do like Progressives and let the wind of emotion guide your policies.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
As if someone named “Bush” even possesses a brain ………Pipe down , you GOP nut hugging twerp.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:54 pmJeb it’s called reading. You should do it every once in awhile you might learn something.
Activists for global warming are not acting out of religious zeal, it is based on facts. Religious zeal is something Pastor Hagee pretends to have.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:54 pm“I don’t think our policies should be based on emotion; they should be based on sound science.”
Too bad his brother in the White House doesn’t share this philosophy. We’d never have invaded Iraq if that were the case.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:55 pmNot a single one of this family would recognize sound science even if it was biting them in the butt.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:55 pmUmmm, Jeb? I know you, your family and your party are the foremost authority on sound science but what is unsound about hundreds of IPCC scientists stating that the current climate trends are ‘very likely’ (> 90% chance) a result of anthropogenic contributions. Or the thousands of scientists concluding the same in peer-reviewed journals.
Scientists are trained to be unemotional, and most are. Politicians, on the other hand, are not.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:55 pmDonkeyface Says:
Yeah, Jeb, Stop thinking with your brain, do like Progressives and let the wind of emotion guide your policies.
Not unlike Shrub did in invading Iraq, eh? Or was protecting Daddy “thinking with [his] brain?”
April 24th, 2008 at 2:55 pmDonkeyface Says:
Stop thinking with your brain
Yeah, start thinking with your AssFace.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:56 pm“I don’t think our policies should be based on emotion; they should be based on sound science,”
But yet I’m sure he believes that gays should not get married and women shouldn’t be allowed to get abortions because there is no emotion or religious zeal involved in those decisions.
April 24th, 2008 at 2:59 pmJeb Bush is a climate change skeptic: I’m ‘light green.’
And seeing as how you come from a family that has such a long and distinguished line of scientists/great thinkers ………..
April 24th, 2008 at 3:00 pmTerry Schiavo.
Need one say more?
April 24th, 2008 at 3:01 pmBush said that global warming activists “are acting out of something like religious zeal.” “I don’t think our policies should be based on emotion; they should be based on sound science,”
WTF? Bush’s ‘Faith based initiatives’ have scored millions upon millions of dollars as religious zealots. Bush IS a religious zealot.
As for me, I’d much rather hear passion about the Planet than passion about a bearded man living on a cloud.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:01 pmFunny, the current Administration has been run by religious zealots (PNAC, Zionists etc) it’s entire tenure. Bush/Cheney propel theire policies based on emotion (striking terruh into the hearts of it’s citizens to further their executive powers, Patriot Act, telecom immunity etc).
p.s. the words “Bush” and “sound science” should never be used in the same sentence.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:02 pmBush later remarked, “Is this open to the press?”
- - What part of the modern media landscape do the Republicans not understand? Wait, it’d be easier to asky which part they DO understand.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:06 pmCan’t congress pass a law that states as of January ‘09 anyone named bush MUST shut their collective pieholes?
April 24th, 2008 at 3:07 pmDo Jebbediah the Bush and the Rev Hagee believe that God is punishing the planet for being so wicked ,(or wiccan?).
April 24th, 2008 at 3:08 pmIsn’t there a shade of light green associated with Linda Blair?
April 24th, 2008 at 3:10 pmYesterday at a speech in Dallas, former Florida governor Jeb Bush said that he is skeptical humans are causing global warming, stating he is “light green” on the environment. According to the AP, Bush said that global warming activists “are acting out of something like religious zeal.” “I don’t think our policies should be based on emotion; they should be based on sound science,” said Bush.
Ummm , Jebedopey
All of the modern “sound science” community agrees that humans are the cause of global warming ; put down the White House memos and redacted studies by every government group that is controlled by your stupid brother and get out and get some real info on the subject ……….
April 24th, 2008 at 3:12 pm“Sound science” is usually what the right-wing calls ideologically motivated junk science shaped to support their world view. As compared to the real neutral climate science which they call “religion” or “junk science”
April 24th, 2008 at 3:13 pmWhy should questioning the premise of climate change be controversial?
If people shy away from the subject because it’s controversial, are we going to get an accurate assessment or understanding?
People that question climate change may be wrong. But, a full, unrestrained debate of the issue is the quickest way to a more complete understanding. Pulling your punches because you’re afraid of what people may think, is a recipe for a compromised and less than full understanding.
If we foster an environment that dissuades people from voicing their opinions, we aren’t changing minds, we’re only repressing them.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:13 pmRUCerious Says:
——————————————————————————–
Isn’t there a shade of light green associated with Linda Blair?
April 24th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Yeah
The park grass that I tackled her on …………
April 24th, 2008 at 3:14 pmbackup
April 24th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Jeb is catapulting the propaganda, that’s why he stated it that way. Get it?
April 24th, 2008 at 3:17 pmIf Jeb or Donkeydickface were to appear on “Who Wants To Be A Millionaire” and they asked the audience for advice on a question, they would disregard the 90%+ of the audience that says “D” is the correct answer and pick A, B or C.
At which point they would leave the stage to derision, laughter and finger pointing from the audience yelling “what kind of f***ing moron would….”, oh, never mind.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:18 pmRUCerious Says:
I believe that would be “Pea Soup Green?”
April 24th, 2008 at 3:18 pmbentley1 Says:
sound science to this nitwit is to agree with whatever developer lined his pockets the fullest
Florida resident here, and this is a FACT!!
April 24th, 2008 at 3:18 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
Recognizing that some of his remarks were controversial
Why should questioning the premise of climate change be controversial?
If people shy away from the subject because it’s controversial, are we going to get an accurate assessment or understanding?
People that question climate change may be wrong. But, a full, unrestrained debate of the issue is the quickest way to a more complete understanding. Pulling your punches because you’re afraid of what people may think, is a recipe for a compromised and less than full understanding.
If we foster an environment that dissuades people from voicing their opinions, we aren’t changing minds, we’re only repressing them.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Jebedopey is attempting to question the validity of global warming off a false/dishonest premise ; and is attempting to degrade the majority that believes global warming to be real at the same time by trying to tie them into behavior that is not only inapplicable , it is the basis of his stupid older brother’s entire presidency.
Sound science has already agreed on the reality of global warming , and it’s cause ; the Chimpy presidency is a useless litany of “faith based” programs and initiatives that were monumentally ineffective , and were already known to have been as such.
Typical Shrub behavior , and not a surprise that your ignorant GOP ass would try to back it…………
April 24th, 2008 at 3:22 pmWowser, these are the word of the smarter of the Bush boys?!?
April 24th, 2008 at 3:22 pmJust remember two things Jebbie: (1)If policies were based no science and reason there would be no Republican Party and (2) there are always cameras around. Ask George Allen.
Light green? No, light yellow I think.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:32 pmI’m tired of people being passionate about something that’s important –whatever that might be– being automatically labeled as crazy.
God forbid anyone is frenetic or radical about something as important as the only planet we live on.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:34 pmThis from the governor of a state that allowed individual districts to decide whether to teach evolution or intelligent design. And that pushed abstinence only over birth control information to the point where young Florida teenagers believe that drinking an ounce of bleach or Mountain Dew will prevent pregnancy. In short your opinion of science should mean zero to any thinking person on the planet assbrain.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:36 pmI believe that the planet is probably warming and man’s activities have an effect on that warming.
But, I think it’s possible that some of the environmental alarmism (massive coastal flooding, more frequent and more severe storms, droughts, vanishing ice shelves, etc) although well intentioned to promote responsible environmentalism, may make it more likely we make hasty or poor economic decisions in response.
The urgency created could be compared to the urgent need (or alarmism) used by neo-cons to take action against the global threat of Islamic terrorism.
Additionally, ethanol promotion was originally sold as a renewable energy source, that produced less carbon emissions (better for global warming). It appears more likely that the more significant consequence was to push up world food prices as we switched to the less effective energy source.
Let’s not let alarmism lead us to poor decision making.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:36 pmKeep blubbering Jebster, we’ll all take notes for when you decide to run for Preznit in 4 years.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:38 pmJeb Bush is whatever colour, in its deepest tone ‘Criminal’!
April 24th, 2008 at 3:40 pmbackup,
Read and understand this, then decide if alarm is a suitable word.
April 24th, 2008 at 3:43 pmEric Contestant: “I’ll take ‘Sound Science’ for the price of a Happy Meal, Alex!
Alex Trebek: “And it’s a Daily Double! Well Done! Answer; The phenomena that allow aeroplanes to fly.”
Eric Contestant: “What are Newton’s Third Law of Motion, Newton’s Second law of Motion as applied to fluid dynamics, boundary layer control, and the Coanda effect?”
Alex Trebek: ” Oooh. I’m sorry Eric, so close!…The answer is of course ‘flights of angels’. Angels, Eric.
I suspect you studied Wikipedia instead of Conservipedia, and got a little confused there, Eric.
So you lose a living wage and because its a Daily Double, you are damned to hell as well. Alright then…Monica Goodling, your choice!”
Monica Goodling: “Ethics please Alex, for 80K plus benefits.”
Alex: “Good choice!Let’s see how well you do…”
April 24th, 2008 at 3:46 pmThe local ReichRadio station is discussing this very issue. The host just said, “I’m suspicious because we only see the data that supports the Global Warming hoax”!
Has this assnugget considered that, maybe, that’s because all the data supports the contention that global climate change is real? How do we fight rigid stupidity like that?
April 24th, 2008 at 4:00 pm“I don’t think our policies should be based on emotion; they should be based on sound science,” said Bush.
Heh. This coming from a man that Governed a State that doesn’t allow the “E” word to be said in the schools. Heh. Yeah, right.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:00 pmbackup:
Just because “the debate is over” doesnt mean there’s no scientific debate or skepticism in climate science.
That debate is very much alive and its driven by scientific skepticism and human curiosity but its a debate which like most scientific debates eludes the public eye. But the pseudo scientific debate, about if anthropogenic global warming is real or not is an issue which was basically settled by science around 3 decades ago. Some of the “skeptic” arguments making the rounds on the Internet today are so ridiculous a late 19th climate scientist would laugh out loud if he heard them
This fake skeptic debate only started in the nineties when the oil- and coal industry realized the world community were discussing agreements to curb carbon dioxide emissions which could threaten their economic interests.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:01 pmrobbez/McMetal ~ I was thinking more like projectile vomit green…
April 24th, 2008 at 4:03 pmpete ~ Either lobotomies, or Dr. Marvin Monroe’s guaranteed shock treatments.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:04 pmbackup:
the promotion of plant-derived ethanol has indeed been promoted by some enthusiatic individuals from the ‘lay’ enviromentalist community, but the professional scientific community from botanitsts to technologists to economists have long argued that the idea it doesn’t even past muster as a temporary reductive measure in practice, let alone a long term solution.
It is the industrial farming interests who have promoted ethanol as an oil alternative with complete diregard to its overall economics (oil provides the necessary crop feralization and the processing energy of the plants. Roughly twice as much energy goes into ethanol production as is extracted–resulting in a comparitve net loss of fuel and an increase in consumption.
It is the industial farming combines who are SELLING plant-derived ethanol as an alternative to oil, for short-term financil advantage, and have already successfully lobbied for tax-payer funded subsidies for R$D.
That influx of low-interest or no-interest funding has encouraged stock specualtion, which encourages the agricultural combines acquire more money from the government that simply adds value to their stock and does nothing for production efeciency because the entire process is demonstrably inefficient and impractical.
It isn’t the envriomentalists who are pushing ethanol, its the industrialists adn capitalists, and THET are the ones who are making hasty decisions based on a percieved short term market assesment, not soberly considered scinece, and it is THEY who are making poor economic decisions that will enrich them in the short term but impoverish the rest of us–becasue they have the real power to do so, and not some bunch of well meaning, commonly derided ineffectual lefty hippies.
I suggest you do a bit more research, read some papers or articles on macro-economics, revisit basic biology. botany and the food cycle (if you ever studied or were taught that). read up on the agricultural and industrial revolutions and review the poltics of those times and then ponder all the connections.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:19 pmisnt it funny how these f-wads zealously pander to the religious and hold up “faith” and being zealously religious as “good things” but then turn around use religious zeal as an insult - you credulous morons - when it comes to believing in facts?
April 24th, 2008 at 4:21 pmRUCerious Says:
pete ~ Either lobotomies, or Dr. Marvin Monroe’s guaranteed shock treatments.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
That’s it! We need to throw a giant pool party complete with LOTS of, ungrounded, lighting and stereo equipment. During a thunderstorm.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:22 pmIt was assumed that Jeb Bush was the “thinker” of Bush clan, now that theory has been disproved, we can put the Bush’s away forever, and start rebuilding this country.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:34 pmPETE ~ promise kegs of kool-aid! Then get somebody to channel Jimmy Jones for the recipe.
April 24th, 2008 at 4:36 pmI don’t know, RUC. I find the Kool-aid gambit to be unsubtle. Besides which, they can get Kool-aid anywhere. Perhaps we could include some “candid shots” of cabana boys to boost attendance? I hear that Republicriminals have a fondness for young men they can “instruct in the ways of the world. Sticking with the shock treatment theme how about “bug-lights”, stuffed with $100.00 bills, in the fountain?
April 24th, 2008 at 4:51 pmgalmud. That’s reasonable.
5th estate. I agree the ethanol was just pork for the farm lobby. I was trying to get at the idea that even though the climate change information may be valid, the issue can (and has been) used for other (non-environmental) agendas.
The alarmism is valid if the environmentalist apocalype that Gore predicts is accurate. But, if the situation is not that dire, I am concerned that hasty policy may pose more problems then solutions.
April 24th, 2008 at 5:34 pmZooey. Thanks for the link. I did read the highlights of the 2007 summary. I cannot deny that the IPCC report is very powerful argument for supporting the idea of climate change.
I don’t really have a problem believeing the world is getting warmer. I think I am possibly jaded by the prophecies of doom from other issues of the past, that turned out to be overblown. (ie. killing our planet with chemicals (60s - silent spring), overpopulation scares (70)s, Japanese economic dominance (80s), Y2K, bird flu, etc)
The planet is getting warmer and has been for some time. You used to be able to walk from France to England. Water levels rose and now you have to cross the English Channel. I’m not sure how devastating the water level rise was, as it happened gradually. (I imagine that future coastal flooding will also happen much more gradually than ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ would lead you to believe). More importantly, I’ll bet scientists don’t chalk it up to CO2 emissions. And even if we had wanted to stop that sea level rise, we wouldn’t have been able to do anything about it.
I believe Gore and the proponents of climate change have provided a valuable platform for discussing and focusing on our environment. I support conservation and even toughening emission standards.
I just resist the alarmism. Maybe I’m jaded, but it seems like a tried and true method for the powerful in motivating people to make rash decisions, maybe the wouldn’t otherwise make, if the deliberation were conducted in an atmosphere free from fear.
April 24th, 2008 at 5:53 pmThat was supposed to be the pre-historic filling of the English Channel, obviously not the predicted future coastal flooding. My bad.
April 24th, 2008 at 6:01 pmBush said that global warming activists “are acting out of something like religious zeal.”
Does Jebbo have a prob with persons acting out of religious zeal?
April 24th, 2008 at 7:54 pmI know that no one here will bother to read this article since it dares to say that Global Warming could be a hoax but I’ll post the link anyway. I think its rather interesting: Anthropogenic Global Warming - Fact or Hoax?
April 24th, 2008 at 11:04 pmRUCerious Says:
——————————————————————————–
robbez/McMetal ~ I was thinking more like projectile vomit green…
April 24th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Ummm , so was I ; I was part of my statement……..Thus the “projectile vomit green” was part of the equation/story………
April 24th, 2008 at 11:28 pmbackup Says:
——————————————————————————–
More importantly, I’ll bet scientists don’t chalk it up to CO2 emissions.
That was supposed to be the pre-historic filling of the English Channel, obviously not the predicted future coastal flooding. My bad.
April 24th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Have you ever had a physics class ?
There are no “absolutes” in science ; there are variables.
In fact , I do not recall any “absolute” available to us , the human species.
Stop playing stupid games ; we can only relate to/rely on , what is within our power to grasp and or as we know it.
And , at this point in our existence ; is it so “wrong” to take care of the planet that houses all of us ???????????
April 24th, 2008 at 11:34 pmKinda sorta off topic, but the “light green” brought to mind a story about a bus-driver who claimed not to be prejudiced. He said there were no whites or blacks and that all his passengers were green. So when people started boarding his bus, he yelled out, “All you dark greens to the back of the bus, you light greens to the front.”
Not that I’m saying Jeb Bush is bigotted, but………….
April 25th, 2008 at 8:10 amNice to see that the rest of the country is getting to know Jeb. We had to live with this moron for what seems like forever here in Florida. He says global warming activists are like zealots acting on emotion? Yeah Jeb, they’re emotional. Know why? Because they know the future and they’re scared. They see the evidence right in front of their faces. Glaciers melting. Sealife dying. Temperatures rising. What’s causing all this, Jeb? The wind? Some supernatural, mystic “bump in the night?” Or, could it just be US? He says, “Policies shouldn’t be based on emotion, but sound science.” What the hell has this guy been reading? Oh, I know. Nothing. He reads nothing. Must run in the family. Now I know why his education plan here in Florida was and continues to be a complete mess. He really doesn’t care about children being education with facts. Just educated with religion. The man was all for vouchers and relagating money to private schools. Public education? He ran away from it like the plague. The man is a traitor to education. Biblically speaking, just to make him comfortable, “A pox on your house.”
April 25th, 2008 at 2:36 pm