RUSH: McLean, Virginia. Mike, welcome to the program, sir. Great to have you.
CALLER: Hi, Mr. Limbaugh. Last time I called you mocked me as part of the liberal castrati, and I guess I still haven't learned -- learned my lesson because I'm still struck by the implausible and self-contradictory nature of your arguments. I've got two examples from what you've talked about today. On climate change, I don't know how all these scientists from the National Academy of Sciences -- people that brought us cell phones and the Internet and sent us into space -- can be engaged in a 25-year plot to take away our freedom. I mean, if they're that smart, you would have thought they would have changed the topic by now. But I called to talk about --
RUSH: I'll be glad to explain it to you if you like.
RUSH: It's about scoring money from government, number one. It's about getting money from government, and it's about growing government and making it bigger so you could bleed off of it and get rich.
CALLER: That's what everybody wants. You know, all liberals want to be controlled by our government.
RUSH: Well, the people you're talking about -- the scientists and all these so-called people joining this "consensus" that exists out there -- that's how they get their living.
CALLER: (snickering) By inventing cell phones and sending us into space and bringing us the Internet and stuff like that? They've increased more freedom... They've given us more freedom, they've given us more independence from the government than they ever could take away from us.
RUSH: Inventing the cell phone doesn't mean that they are not little skulls full of mush when it comes to political matters --
CALLER: That's exactly right! That's exactly right!
RUSH: -- and are malleable and bendable and shapable and formable and flakable.
CALLER: You're exactly right on that. They are not political. They just do the science and tell us what the science says. You are the one that's political. Al Gore says it best. You got all these --
RUSH: There isn't any science in it! That's the whole point. It's nothing but computer models. There's no science in it.
CALLER: Let's change the subject to --
RUSH: You know what? Why do you not reject it? Why do you automatically accept it? Just because you're told it's a bunch of scientists, people that invented cell phones?
CALLER: Because I went to engineering school and I know what the scientific method is. I know what peer review is.
RUSH: They can't prove it!
CALLER: It's that 25 years there's not a huge plot.
RUSH: There's no proof to it, Mike. It's all computer models. There's no empirical evidence of anything they're saying. That's why it's always 10 years from now, 25 years from now, a hundred years from now, 'cause it isn't happening now, Mike.
CALLER: That's what the talk radio show hosts tell us. That's what you tell us.
RUSH: (sigh) No, it's what it is.
CALLER: The scientists say there's all sorts of proof. The scientists are running around --
RUSH: It's what is.
CALLER: And they are not political! You are, Rush.
RUSH: Did climate scientists invent the cell phone? I'm still confused about that.
CALLER: They -- they... Uh, what I'm saying is these are people, members of the National Academy of Sciences. Uh, uh, you don't get there unless you're --
RUSH: They are corruptible political bunch, just like the IPCC is a political bunch! Everything you're citing has a political agenda to it, and you're part of it. Why don't you just admit it? You're having great success with it.
RUSH: If you are an avowed member of the New Castrati, that means you're a liberal, and you are part of the agenda, and you're advancing it by hook and by crook. Why don't you admit what it is?
CALLER: Rush, I went to engineering school and I went to law school. So I do both. I'm... I've done science, and I've done politics.
RUSH: Well, tell me something. Why is global warming political? Why is it a political issue at all?
CALLER: Because Republicans are intent on protecting the fossil industry (sic) because ExxonMobil just signed a deal worth $900 billion.
RUSH: Protecting the "fossil industry"?
CALLER: ExxonMobil has a deal worth $900 billion with Russia to drill for oil in the arctic -- $900 billion!
CALLER: You know what? The sequester was $900 billion.
RUSH: So what? We're gonna need oil, Mike! There is no replacement for it. There's not one drop of anything we can replace it with.
RUSH: Did you hear? "They're drilling for oil. The Russians are partnering with Exxon, they're drilling for oil in the arctic." So what? That's where it happens to be. There isn't anything, we're not close to replacing oil, not even close. It's going to be, I don't know how long it's gonna be, but to these people oil is the modern evil. There's no thinking. All of this is political. They never address the fact that there's no evidence. They never address that the only concern for any of this is predictions in computer models.
Let me ask you, if you're watching TV tonight, and your local weatherman told you what the weather was gonna be 25 years from today, would you believe it? No! So why do people believe what a computer model says is gonna be the climate all over the world 25 years from now? And the only way some people could be forced to believe it is if they politicize it and tailor the message to already existing political sensibilities and opinions. And then get people in groups that liberals happen to be approve of, like world bodies like the UN or the IPCC or the National Academy of Sciences, every corrupt liberal interest group you can, get them endorsing the idea, and bammo, you turn it into a political issue, and it is unequivocally true.
You leave it as a science issue and it doesn't exist, it falls apart, there isn't any evidence whatsoever. And of course my big question that nobody, no liberal has ever called here to try to explain to me, and the invitation's there every day, would somebody please explain to me how you know that the climate at this moment is what is natural, normal, was intended by God, or Gaia, or whoever. If you can explain that to me, then maybe we can talk about why any change from what it is now is a crisis. But why, who says, how do you know that whatever the climate's doing now is what is normal? Why is this the baseline?
And then after you explain that, you can tell me what caused any of the ice ages. And then after you explain that to me, you can then tell me why those ice ages ended, permitting us to live. And then after you explain that, I'll give you something else I'm confused about that you can explain. The point is, you can't, none of you advocates of global warming can explain any of this. You cannot answer any of these questions. So it has to be framed as a political issue, and you have to use the usual liberal ingredients of fearmongering and scare tactics and fascism and totalitarianism and force people, all your buddies, to accept the premise of something that isn't happening.
You start young. You infect and infiltrate the minds of young, impressionable kids. You get them scared to death that their world isn't gonna exist by the time they become adults. You got your own little army out there advancing your political agenda, and we're not even talking about science, and that's all this is. Next you can tell me why in 1979 Newsweek's cover was The Coming Ice Age, and then five years later all of a sudden I'm watching This Week with David Brinkley, and to hell with the ice age, now we're talking global warming, in 1985. We only had 20 years back then in 1985. We only had 20 years. If we didn't deal with it the next 20 years, which have come and gone, we weren't gonna be here.
You can explain to me how in 1988, I was told we only had 10 years to save the oceans. Last I looked, they're still there, and there's an airplane in 'em that CNN can't find. So everything that you people on the left have been saying politically or quasi-scientifically about this is just a bunch of BS, un-provable, and only survivable if you turn it into a political issue, as you have, and tailor it to fit your already prejudiced, bigoted notions of your enemies: corporations, conservatives, religions. Anything that has to do with God cancels out everything you believe, right? So you gotta get rid of that, too.
It just burns me up that they've got so many young people scared to death that the world's not gonna be here when they grow up. They're traumatized over this, and they're using fraudulent pictures of polar bears on little pieces of ice that were just made up, which has been proven, by the way, uncovered.
Look, I'm gonna stick with the phones here 'cause if I don't get back to the phones I could do the rest of this program and tomorrow's with what I just have here. I told you it might be awhile before we get to your favorite news story. So stick with the phones to be polite to people who've called at my invitation, they're holding on.
RUSH: Fred in Memphis. It's great to have you, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Hello, Rush. Long-term listener. It really is a pleasure to speak with you. How are you?
RUSH: Very well, sir. Thank you.
CALLER: Good, good. I'm calling in response to the fellow who called about 20 minutes ago who claimed to be an engineer and familiar with the scientific method.
RUSH: Well, the scary thing is he may well be. That's the scary thing. He might be an engineer.
CALLER: I'm not disputing it. But if he truly is, my background is electrical engineering, and if he's familiar with the scientific method there are two issues that I think need to be brought up. First of all, is the accuracy of the data set that they're working from. I'm not talking about in the recent years in the environmental changes or the slight changes associated with an individual temperature measurement.
I'm talking about the measuring devices themselves and their ability to be read accurately. Now, that may seem a little be esoteric to the nontechnical, so I'm not gonna get into all that gibberish. But going back to the days before digital readouts, you actually had to measure temperature off of an analog gauge.
You've got inaccuracy in the gauge itself, and on top of that you have inaccuracy in taking the actual readings by eye. If you don't have a consistent, reliable data set, then you have a handicap to begin with. So that's the first issue. But again, that may seem too nontechnical.
RUSH: They don't even deal with it. See, this is where we're getting caught. You're trying to refute something that's not even scientific. I get into arguments with scientists all the time. "You're dealing with a political issue, and you're trying to refute these people on the basis of their science. They're not using science."
They would say what you just said. They would say, "It doesn't matter. Our models are telling us that in the next 15 or 20 years, X will happen. We can't afford not to trust it!" It's a total, total political issue, and until our side starts dealing with them politically we're gonna be playing on their turf if we try to refute them scientifically.
That's just my humble opinion.
RUSH: Bill in Huntsville, Alabama, you're next. It's great to have you with us, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Hey. Thank you, Rush.
RUSH: You bet.
CALLER: First I want to say how much I enjoy your show. Never called in, but I miss your old TV show. I used to watch it when I was in college and we got a lot of laughs out of it.
RUSH: Thank you. That was the intention. That's great.
CALLER: It was fun. I hated to see it go, and it's better than a lot of TV that's on today, let me tell you. It probably took a lot of time. But, listen, I'm calling in response to this guy who called about global warming and, you know, he really acted like he knew a lot about it because he has a master's degree in engineering. It kind of irked me the wrong way. I heard him use a couple of terms, and I guess I was rushing to your defense even though you don't need it. And let me preface this by saying I'm not a scientist. I'm a financial planner. I meet a lot of interesting people. I was at lunch with three scientists, all three of them used to work for NASA. They went in and started doing their own thing, so they're pretty smart guys, and one of them came up with this hurricane prediction model, and the topic of global warming came up.
And I said, "Well, hey, I've been reading that global warming has a lot to do with hurricanes in the newspaper, no increased hurricane activity's tied to global warming." And these guys start laughing about it. And, now, these are scientists, you know, smarter than I am. I don't know anything about it, but they start laughing about it, and they said, "Bill, no, we don't believe in global warming." They said, "But if you want to get a two, three, five, 10 million-dollar government grant, you believe in global warming."
CALLER: They said just follow the money.
CALLER: But they laugh about it, you know, and I hear these people talking about there's no money in it, and I'm thinking, you know, it is, it's just whatever government --
RUSH: Let me tell you something. This is another thing, Bill. After Hurricane Katrina, the global warming scaremonger crowd predicted Katrinas all the time now. Every hurricane was gonna be one, and it was all because of global warming. And I remember the guy, Max, whatever his name was, couldn't remember his last name, running the hurricane center kept saying, "No, it has nothing to do with global warming." And nobody was paying any attention to him 'cause he wasn't following suit.
There haven't been any major hurricanes in two or three years that impacted the continental United States. Every prediction they make blows up in their faces. When Algore shows up someplace to talk about how hot it's getting, it snows. It's just incredible. Everything blows up on 'em, and yet they just keep going because it's the way a lot of them are earning their living. It's how Algore got rich. It's how a lot of people are getting rich.
CALLER: This really smart guy, he's back-tested his hurricane prediction model and he's like 98% accurate over the last -- I don't know however old the satellite data is, and like I say, they just laughed about it. And I did want to respond, too, because I heard you talking about what news reports. And there again, me being a financial planner, you're probably aware, you're a knowledgeable guy, but what they need to report is the US is in danger of losing their world reserve currency status and also this AIDS wave coming on us. But anyway, I enjoy listening to your show, and thanks for taking my call.
RUSH: Now, wait, before you go, Bill, what did these guys -- one of them had hurricane forecasting models? Is that what you said he did?
CALLER: Yeah. He sure does.
RUSH: Did he have one for this summer? What's it gonna be?
CALLER: I'd have to ask him. But this guy is --
RUSH: See, that's the difference. If you lived in Florida, you would have asked. You got a guy predicting hurricanes, you would have asked him.
CALLER: That's how I met the guy. He came to me trying to buy some futures on commodities and, you know, trying to make some money off it but, yeah, he's one of the smartest guys I've ever met.
RUSH: Okay, so you had lunch with three scientists today, none of whom believe in global warming. You tell the left that, "Well, they don't count, 'cause the consensus is settled, and the science is settled." And of course that's not even possible. It was Max Mayfield that used to run the National Hurricane Center. During Katrina, after Katrina, even up to congressional hearings, poor Max (imitating Mayfield), "I'm sorry to tell you, but global warming, there's no evidence, has anything to do with this hurricane or any other."
"What about sea surface temperatures, Max?"
"No evidence whatsoever." And he just got blown off, and then he quit. He hasn't been heard from. Probably over in Naples wherever they're trying to figure out the Asian carp situation.