Dana Perino’s Climate Denial Past

10/25/07, 4:15 pm EST

Think Progress is taking Dana Perino to task for talking up the health benefits of global warming.

But we shouldn’t be surprised. How do you think Perino got this spin job in the first place.

Perino cut her teeth in the White House’s global warming denial unit as director of communications for the Council on Environmental Quality.

It was Perino, don’t forget, who told America that Phil Cooney, the infamous neuterer of federal global warming docs, “did a great job.”

The FOIA record also reveals Perino seeking friendship and enviro-tutelage at the arch-denialist think tank CEI. As well as forwarding talking points to Cooney from the denial group George C. Marshall Institute. And coordinating with Scott McClellan how to limit damage from a New York Times article on climate change censorship.

This is just Dana doing what Dana does best.


Comments

Leftybydesign | 11/20/2007, 2:10 pm EST

But she is a babe and so I guess that I can overlook the lies and deceit for a few hours anyway.

zmovn bqczvy | 11/19/2007, 4:52 pm EST

kosmn bhdnq hkblapx lfqu klresbtpm gipbozfc vtfseyz

blood for oil of olay | 10/30/2007, 11:49 pm EST

The debate about temperatures would be a bit more informative, if you folks started from some baseline. Go to Wikipedia and search ‘geologic temperature record’. Go to the ‘An Overall View’ section. You will note that the change in temperature during the period of time that life has been most visible in the fossil record (Phanerozoic) only fluctuates by approximately 10 deg C. If humans released all of presently-sequestered CO2 thru combustion of fossil sources, we would not be exceeding CO2 levels that existed during the Phanerozoic. If you don’t understand why this is the case, then think about how the carbon-cycle works for a while. This is not really a matter of debate - except among far-right morons who think that we exist in a steady-state equilibrium mandated by God. While this 10 deg C fluctuation can lead to a wide range of possibilities for global climate, none of these possibilities includes something like a global haulocaust and, although theories of global icehouse consitions have gained recent popularity, it is still a fairly new and largely unvalidated theory.
This is not to say that the repurcussions of climate change are not manifold and a pressing concern. My aim is to provide some much needed perspective in a discussion that usually tends towards extreme points of view.

Jed Clampett | 10/30/2007, 4:29 pm EST

life forms on earth have never been destroyed by fire… in the way of an extinction that is, fire consumes completely, while ice/cold tends to conserve.
seeds frozen in the ground for decades if not centuries will germinate when conditions become appropiate. A seed touched by heat and flame will never germinate. Heat and fire consume totally. An ice age, to me, is 1000000 times more acceptable than a extinction driven by the fire of global temperature rise caused by the senseless mismanagement of our bioenergetic water resources.

me | 10/28/2007, 1:44 am EST

What joke? Facts baby, cold hard facts… This planet’s life forms have been wiped out four times by cold and never by heat.

Wrong. 6 million Jews were wiped out because of excessive heat in Nazi ovens (human created). Countless trillions were wiped out due to drought, fever, fires, bad crop yields and whatever else you might want to cite that follows from a bump in the temperature. And that’s only talking about humans…

The fact that this “doctor” is American makes me want to go to Thailand for treatment: cheaper and

Bender | 10/27/2007, 11:05 am EST

Let it go Blood.

blood for oil of olay | 10/26/2007, 10:51 pm EST

Bender -

Did you learn that on the Discovery Channel?

Bender | 10/26/2007, 4:27 pm EST

Oily Olay: Thank you for the ever supportive observation.

It was in response to this: “This planet’s life forms have been wiped out four times by cold and never by heat.” from Dr? Ralph.

It was TRYING to explain that the earth’s rising temperature causes it to react in an equally opposite way. Hot, then ice….ice covers the earth and allows the core to cool………….you know the drill.

But, I appreciate the sarcasm. I’ll be sure and use it quite a bit myself.

blood for oil of olay | 10/26/2007, 3:29 pm EST

“[The earth] is a living organism just like us”

What a brilliant summation. Now that we’ve established that little tid-bit, how does this inform the discussion?

Bender | 10/26/2007, 11:30 am EST

Ralph: No way in this lifetime you could be serious.

BTW: The planet cools itself after it get too hot. Pretty simple. So, yes, it will get cool because we’ve raised the temp…..the earth heals itself. It’s a living organism just like us.

moondancer | 10/26/2007, 11:10 am EST

I’m surprised she didn’t espouse the health benefits of tobacco, and maybe window shopping in Baghdad. I bet plants wilt as she walks by them.
All of which make her perfect for the chimps inner circle.

blood for oil of olay | 10/26/2007, 9:19 am EST

Dr. Ralph -

Please elaborate on your theory of mass extinction. This should be good.

Alien Billie | 10/26/2007, 8:52 am EST

Oh, right. Four times in four billion years, huh? Then number five must be due any minute now.

DirtyDennis | 10/26/2007, 8:48 am EST

Dr,

Whilst that may be true, are you asserting that it couldn’t happen? Nobody had ever been killed by a nuclear device UNTIL we used it. What’s your point?

Dr. Ralph | 10/26/2007, 8:37 am EST

What joke? Facts baby, cold hard facts… This planet’s life forms have been wiped out four times by cold and never by heat.

Alien Billie | 10/26/2007, 6:22 am EST

Mind you, maybe we should focus more on some of the things that WERE said in the press conference:

“We know that the Earth is warming. We believe that humans are largely responsible.”

On the IPCC report: “we embrace its conclusions”.

So we’re all agreed now?

Alien Billie | 10/26/2007, 6:07 am EST

Ralph, that joke just keeps getting funnier every time you post it.

Dr. Ralph | 10/25/2007, 7:39 pm EST

Just delaying the next ice age… thank us later.

Jed Clampett | 10/25/2007, 6:32 pm EST

it was done for security reasons. secure a prosperous future for the oil companies.

It should, at the very least, professional malpractice. Being that these are documents prepared for the people and paid for by the people, the charge should be defamation of the constitution by usurping the will of the people. Off with her political head, should never be allowed to hold a public office or allowed to run for elected office.

Coach | 10/25/2007, 5:43 pm EST

Isn’t editing a scientific report a form of fascism???? Just curious.

Post A Comment

Caution: Off-topic comments will be deleted

Name:

Comments:



Advertisement

Advertisement