“Let’s Just Say That’s True”. The “Weird Science” of Climate Crashes Debate Party

JD Vance: “If you believe that…”

It took a generational catastrophe to do it, but Climate finally appeared as something other than an afterthought in a national political debate, as a steadily unfolding horror in a newly politically relevant state forces the issue.

As deeply disturbing headlines continue to, moderators must have felt, grudgingly, compelled to mention the issue.

Republican JD Vance, who one-time acknowledged climate as an issue, but then back tracked into the “it’s a hoax” line, was willing to go so far as “Let’s just say that’s true.”

Demonstrators before the debate goaded CBS to treat climate change as if it was real

The Hill:

Republican vice presidential candidate Sen. JD Vance (Ohio) expressed skepticism about the scientific consensus behind climate change in response to a question during Tuesday’s debate.

“One of the things that I’ve noticed some of our Democratic friends talking a lot about is a concern about carbon emissions — this idea that carbon emissions drive all the climate change,” Vance said.

“Let’s just say that’s true, just for the sake of argument, so we’re not arguing about weird science. Let’s just say that’s true,” Vance continued.

There is a scientific consensus that climate change is occurring and is primarily being driven by human activity — largely carbon emissions stemming from the burning of fossil fuels.

Vance, in his answer, said the Trump administration’s climate policy would be to bring more energy production and manufacturing to the U.S. “because we’re the cleanest economy in the entire world.”

The U.S. is currently the second-largest emitter of planet-warming gases, behind only China, and is the largest historic emitter.

Moderator Norah O’Donnell fact-checked Vance’s response, saying, “The overwhelming consensus among scientists is that the Earth’s climate is warming at an unprecedented rate.”

New York Times:

The devastation that Hurricane Helene wreaked across the South last week thrust the issue of climate change to the forefront of the vice-presidential debate early in its first hour, quickly demonstrating how the two major parties diverge when it comes to the threat posed by climate change.

Senator JD Vance of Ohio, former President Donald J. Trump’s running mate, said that people were “justifiably worried about all these crazy weather patterns,” a position that might seem at odds with his running mate, who recently called the focus on the environment “one of the greatest scams.” But Mr. Vance dismissed as “weird science” those who say that carbon emissions are causing climate change.

He added that he and Mr. Trump wanted “the environment to be cleaner and safer.” And he said the climate crisis would be solved by growing American manufacturing.

“You’d want to reassure as much American manufacturing as possible, and you’d want to produce as much energy as possible in the United States of America, because we’re the cleanest economy in the entire world,” Mr. Vance said, asserting that overseas manufacturing and energy production had a greater carbon footprint.

The United Nations has said that “the manufacturing industry is one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions worldwide.”

Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, Vice President Kamala Harris’s running mate, responded by noting that in the past Mr. Trump had called climate change a “hoax,” before pivoting to policies passed by the Biden administration.

Mr. Walz called Mr. Vance’s depiction of manufacturing a “false choice” and pointed to the Inflation Reduction Act, saying that investments in electric vehicles and solar energy had resulted in new U.S. jobs.

“We are seeing us becoming an energy superpower for the future, not just the current,” Mr. Walz said. “And that’s what absolutely makes sense.”

FWIW

2 thoughts on ““Let’s Just Say That’s True”. The “Weird Science” of Climate Crashes Debate Party”


  1. A nit:
    “The overwhelming consensus among relevant scientists is that the Earth’s climate is warming at an unprecedented rate.”

    In the Creation vs. Evolution debate, Creationists would cite religious scientists in unrelated fields as a challenge to evolution. An expert in iron alloys has no relevant standing in challenging evolution, and a neurologist has no relevant standing for evaluating climate change.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from This is Not Cool

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading