Political Animal

Blog

September 08, 2011 11:20 AM ‘Galileo got outvoted for a spell’

By Steve Benen

Perhaps the most quoted line from last night’s Republican debate referenced, of all people, Galileo Galilei.

Q: Gov. Perry, Gov. Huntsman was not specific about names, but the two of you do have a difference of opinion about climate change. Just recently in New Hampshire, you said that weekly and even daily scientists are coming forward to question the idea that human activity is behind climate change. Which scientists have you found most credible on this subject?

PERRY: Well, I do agree that there is — the science is — is not settled on this. The idea that we would put Americans’ economy at — at — at jeopardy based on scientific theory that’s not settled yet, to me, is just — is nonsense. I mean, it — I mean — and I tell somebody, I said, just because you have a group of scientists that have stood up and said here is the fact, Galileo got outvoted for a spell.

Putting aside Rick Perry’s confusion about the consensus on climate science, I’m still not sure what the Galileo reference is even supposed to mean.

He “got outvoted”? If by “outvoted,” Perry means “deemed a heretic by the Inquisition for proving heliocentrism,” then sure, Galileo “got outvoted.”

But in context, what is it, exactly, that Perry is trying to say? Galileo was, after all, correct. His ideas were controversial and inconvenient for society’s most powerful leaders of the day, but the facts were on his side.

Does Perry think Galileo’s experience bolsters the case against climate science? Maybe someone can translate this one for me; I can’t find my far-right decoder ring this morning.

Steve Benen is a contributing writer to the Washington Monthly, joining the publication in August, 2008 as chief blogger for the Washington Monthly blog, Political Animal.

Comments

Post a comment
  • wvng on September 08, 2011 11:24 AM:

    He is clearly casting himself in the role of Galileo. He is the one who is right and not believed.

  • FlipYrWhig on September 08, 2011 11:27 AM:

    I think it's supposed to be like this: Galileo went against the expert opinions of _his_ time (he was "outvoted," Perry says, because his views were in the minority), and was deemed a heretic by the establishment, but turned out to be right. Similarly, climate-change deniers are on the wrong side of the expert opinions of their time, but they will themselves be vindicated.

  • Kevin Ray on September 08, 2011 11:27 AM:

    I've been seeing this awhile now. I'm assuming it means that the majority of scientific consensus said Galileo was wrong, yet he was vindicated, as will the climate change deniers.

  • threegoal on September 08, 2011 11:31 AM:

    I think Perry, not a bit to my surprise, missed the train on this. He got "outvoted" by religious dogma, almost as if we let someone like Pat Robertson or the kind of people who put together creationist them parks outvote real science.

    Rick, it's the 21st Century, and religion has less power relative to science than it did in medieval days, and I'm sure that scares you a little bit.

  • Rochester on September 08, 2011 11:31 AM:

    I've been waiting for someone to bring this up, because the Galileo comment defies explanation.

    Galileo was a scientist persecuted by ignorant politicians because he accurately interpreted natural evidence as scientific fact. How in the world does that have anything to do with Rick Perry's interpretation of science and history and his goofy self-image?

  • SYSPROG on September 08, 2011 11:32 AM:

    MAYBE he thinks he's one of those that 'outvoted for a spell' Galileo...but by that time he will have served his term and it will take yet ANOTHER Dem to come in and clean up his mess. Then he can just say 'oh darn, I was wrong'...

  • DAY on September 08, 2011 11:33 AM:

    Bigger point is this was really a "follow up question' about an earlier Perry statement. And he blew it big time.

    -and this isn't the first instance when Perry Does Kramden: "hummina hummina hummina".

  • hells littlest angel on September 08, 2011 11:33 AM:

    I believe Perry was indulging in what is known as "bullshit" (see, Frankfurt, Harry G.).

  • c u n d gulag on September 08, 2011 11:33 AM:

    "Maybe someone can translate this one for me; I can’t find my far-right decoder ring this morning."

    Yeah, and I misplaced my Gibberish-English/English-Gibberish dictionary, so I can't help you out!

  • SecularAnimist on September 08, 2011 11:34 AM:

    It's incoherent babbling. That's what happens when a stooge like Perry fails to memorize all of his scripted talking points. He's lucky he managed to remember the name "Galileo".

    And by the way, Galileo did not "go against" the "expert opinions" or "majority of scientific consensus" of his time. Galileo went against the Catholic Church, which saw his scientific discoveries as a threat to that institution's wealth and power.

    The correct historical analogy would be to equate today's fossil fuel corporations with the Catholic Church of Galileo's time, and the world's climate scientists with Galileo.

    Of course, the fossil fuel corporations are the ones who are paying Perry to spout this incoherent nonsense.

  • Unstable Isotope on September 08, 2011 11:35 AM:

    I find it interesting how the science-bashers try to invoke the authority of science (here's a scientist who agrees with me!) while bashing it at the same time.

  • sick-n-effn-tired. on September 08, 2011 11:37 AM:

    Galileo = something we learned about in school or maybe it was a Disney cartoon. He did something scientific or something.. we don't exactly remember. We'll wait for Gretchen Carlson to look it up for us.

  • internet tough guy on September 08, 2011 11:38 AM:

    You know who else was outvoted for a spell...

  • June on September 08, 2011 11:38 AM:

    And the Best Comment award goes to: @hells littlest angel. Excellent, lol!

  • James Laing on September 08, 2011 11:40 AM:

    Well, Rick, back then the theocratic powers thought Galileo was wrong. there wasn't a scientific establishment at the time.

  • Brenna on September 08, 2011 11:54 AM:

    Yep, Perry sees himself as Galileo who was persecuted for his beliefs. It's upside down thinking though on Perry's part. He's a total goof. He spouted word salads constantly throughout the debate, just like Sarah does. Ugh!

    Oh please say he won't be our next president!

  • Marko on September 08, 2011 11:55 AM:

    If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.

    -Baffled

  • Josef K on September 08, 2011 11:56 AM:

    "Galileo was outvoted for a spell".

    Words fail.

    I've tried a half-dozen times now to comment on this, but there's simply no way to respond to that, at least coherently and calmly.

  • rea on September 08, 2011 11:57 AM:

    Perry had better be careful citing Galileo--the Republican base is geocentric, just like the Bible.

  • OKDem on September 08, 2011 12:02 PM:

    That pesky, liberal biased reality is that the _scientists_ did support Gailleo but did not want to burned as heretics, so they stayed quiet.

    What the Koch's and Fundamentalists want is to go back to burning pesky scientists.

    Of course, like the tobacco companies, they will keep their pet "scientist" prostitutes who rationalize whatever is needed for profits.

  • Josef K on September 08, 2011 12:04 PM:

    Has there ever been a Presidential contest where the frontrunner is this consciously, clearly ignorant of even basic grammar?

  • Keith Woosley on September 08, 2011 12:07 PM:

    I found the only way I can read any of Perry's comments is to do it with a Foghorn Leghorn impression. Then they all make sense. Try it.

  • Anonymous on September 08, 2011 12:12 PM:

    This is the problem with being only half-smart, half-educated. In his muddled head, he sort of remembers that "Galileo stood alone! Like a ... like a Texan!"

    And this had something to do with science. And something to do with religion.

    He has no clue about the context, that Galileo was defending scientific inquiry against a religious monolith, rationalism against faith. To him, Galileo is, you know, John Galt, only religious, only not Catholic/Religious (that would be bad to a Baptist), but "Christian".

    Where did he go to college? What did he major in?

  • just bill on September 08, 2011 12:14 PM:

    i don't know june, i think keith woodley may have won the award. that "i said....i said..." is going to go through my brain the rest of the day.

  • alix on September 08, 2011 12:14 PM:

    Also gave him a chance to say "for a spell" which is one of those folksy locutions that make him seem like A Real Guy (tm).

  • FlipYrWhig on September 08, 2011 12:19 PM:

    @ SecularAnimist: Are you interested in understanding what Perry means, or are you interested in calling him out for being wrong? Because it was rather obvious that this thread's first few comments, including mine, were about the former. Perry thinks climate-change deniers are being treated as heretics, but the example of Galileo shows -- HE THINKS BECAUSE HE'S NOT TOO BRIGHT -- that sometimes the heretics turn out to be right. Treating the scientific consensus as dogmatic in a way that compares to the Catholic Church also pushes any number of evangelical hot buttons: science as secular religion, Catholicism as "Whore of Babylon," etc. In case there's any question, I DO NOT THINK THESE THINGS MYSELF AND FIND IT TO BE AN OBNOXIOUS COMPARISON. There.

  • Anonymous on September 08, 2011 12:22 PM:

    @ Anonymous: Perry went to Texas A&M and is very proud of it. I don't know about his major.

  • Jon on September 08, 2011 12:23 PM:

    This is a common denialist trope based on the anachronistic notion that science as we know it already existed in early 17th C. Europe. They believe there were a lot of lab-coated "scientists" running around with whom Galileo disagreed. In their abject ignorance of both history and science, they are utterly and blissfully unaware that any mention of the name "Galileo" can only undermine the irrational prejudices they confuse with skepticism.

  • Anonymous on September 08, 2011 12:25 PM:


    I found the only way I can read any of Perry's comments is to do it with a Foghorn Leghorn impression. Then they all make sense. Try it.

    Actually, Foghorn Leghorn would be a better presidential candidate (And certainly a better President) than Perry could ever be. At least Foghorn would have the bookish, Egghead Jr. as a scientific adviser.

  • Johnny Canuck on September 08, 2011 12:27 PM:

    SYSPROG on September 08, 2011 11:32 AM:

    MAYBE he thinks he's one of those that 'outvoted for a spell' Galileo...but by that time he will have served his term and it will take yet ANOTHER Dem to come in and clean up his mess. Then he can just say 'oh darn, I was wrong'...


    I think this is the most probable interpretation. It really didn't matter that Galileo was adjudged wrong, eventually everybody got it right. So to with climate change, if we ignore it -at least for the next eight years- then it may be clearer who was right.

    Perry probably is too ignorant to know that it was actually example of religious dogma overruling scientific method.

  • LaFollette Progressive on September 08, 2011 12:27 PM:

    Galileo did not "go against" the "expert opinions" or "majority of scientific consensus" of his time. Galileo went against the Catholic Church, which saw his scientific discoveries as a threat to that institution's wealth and power. The correct historical analogy would be to equate today's fossil fuel corporations with the Catholic Church of Galileo's time, and the world's climate scientists with Galileo.

    This is correct, and unfortunately beside the point. Racist Southern descendants of slave-owners who oppose abortion rights see themselves as analogous to Dred Scott. People who support an unprovoked military assault on another country see themselves as analogous to the Polish in 1939. Ignorant, theocratic deniers of scientific evidence who feel oppressed by actual experts see themselves an analogous to Galileo.

    People, no matter how belligerent and ignorant and selfish, want to see themselves as the good guys. Conservatives are absolutely brilliant at one thing -- telling stories to people that help them see themselves as the good guys. Truth values are beside the point.

  • Giant Kid on September 08, 2011 12:33 PM:

    In light of last night’s debate, Perry’s reference to Galileo could be due to his belief that the “jury is still out” on this whole earth-revolves-around-the-sun gibberish.

  • T2 on September 08, 2011 12:35 PM:

    Anonymous, Perry's grades at A&M are public record, so you can find them. To save you the trouble, he was a poor student, getting lots of C's and D's. His claim to fame was that he was an Aggie Yell Leader (cheerleader). You may remember George W. Bush was also a cheerleader at Yale. He also was a mediocre student. Lots of similarities with those two. Lets hope it ends there.

  • T2 on September 08, 2011 12:40 PM:

    ....yes Canuck....how interesting that Perry, who had a Evangelical "Response" prayer meeting a month ago now singles out a genius, Galileo, who's findings resulted in him being ridiculed by the same type of people Perry is now counting on to vote him into the presidency. Where, once in, he'll condemn the same kind of people Galileo was.
    Perry's stupidity is equaled only by his hypocracy.

  • DisgustedWithItAll on September 08, 2011 12:41 PM:

    This is a stunner, folks. It's clearly the case that Perry has been reincarnated. In a previous life he was a political power in the Catholic church and was instrumental in the treatment of Galileo.

    Hard to believe he'd slip up like this. When the evangelical base finds out he's was a Catholic so many hundred years ago, he's finished.

  • c u n d gulag on September 08, 2011 12:41 PM:

    I read this at another site and loved it, so I'm "liberating" it:

    "Read my lips - NO NEW TEXANS!"

  • DisgustedWithItAll on September 08, 2011 12:43 PM:

    Hey gulag, you're stealing my stuff. Been saying it for years.

  • Ohioan on September 08, 2011 12:45 PM:

    The middle finger from Galileo's right hand, is currently on exhibition at the Museo Galileo in Florence, Italy... (broken during a move in the Basilica of Santa Croce)

    I would dare say that after yesterday's debate, Galileo's middle finger would have squarely lifted itself against Rick Perry...

  • Danny on September 08, 2011 12:57 PM:

    It means that the vast majority of scientists who say that global warming is real are akin to the vast majority of people who believed that the earth was the center of the universe, and that global warming deniers like Perry are like the few brave souls who insisted that the earth orbits the sun.

  • Grumpy on September 08, 2011 1:00 PM:

    Galileo observed sunspots -> sunspots cause global warming (which isn't happening anyway) -> shut the hell up.

    No, seriously. Sunspots cause global warming. Particle physicists in Europe are totally just about to prove it. I saw it on FOX News. http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201109080011

  • sams on September 08, 2011 1:01 PM:

    what are you going to believe? my bull s h i t t i n g lips or science?

  • Anonymous on September 08, 2011 1:05 PM:

    That's great! I'm almost hoping Perry wins the nomination, so I can have a couple NO NEW TEXANS! bumper strips.

  • Anonymous on September 08, 2011 1:09 PM:

    DisgustedWithItAll,
    Sorry!
    Oooops!
    That's probably where heard it.

    But give me credit - at least I didn't say I thought it up myself. :-)

  • SecularAnimist on September 08, 2011 1:09 PM:

    FlpYrWhig wrote: "Are you interested in understanding what Perry means ..."

    No, because Perry doesn't "mean" anything, any more than Talking Tina "means" what she "says" when you pull the string in her back. Perry is just reciting the scripted talking points that he has been spoon-fed by his programmers -- and he's garbling them at that.

  • c u n d gulag on September 08, 2011 1:11 PM:

    Anonymous at 1:09 was me - gulag.

    I was so focused on getting CRAPTCHA right, I forgot to include my moniker.

  • Pete on September 08, 2011 1:11 PM:

    Since Galileo was the science guy of the time and the Catholic Church was out to stop him, that puts the climate change-deniers on the side of the church and so Perry must be the Pope!

  • cmdicely on September 08, 2011 1:21 PM:

    Does Perry think Galileo’s experience bolsters the case against climate science?

    Perry is attempting to suggest (and this is completely false) that there was an active scientific community in Galileo's day as there is today, and that the consensus of that community through the scientific method in results published in peer reviewed journals was against Galileo's conclusions, which are now generally accepted as, if not correct, more correct than that consensus was.

    Alternatively, he is attempting to suggest (equally falsely), that the modern consensus on the issue of anthropogenic climate change is not scientific, but is parallel to the defense of religious institutional power (and personal offense with the way in which his personal ideas were presented in Galileo's work, on the part of the Pope) that got Galileo in trouble.

    In either case, he is drawing a false analogy between the modern scientific community and the Renaissance-era Catholic Church.

  • jpeckjr on September 08, 2011 1:24 PM:

    I think it is further evidence the Rick Perry doesn't give a damn about evidence -- climate change, death penalty, health care outcomes, asking people to pray for rain to fall in Texas. "My mind is made up," said Perry, "and nothing, not even the truth, will make be change it!

  • Name on September 08, 2011 1:32 PM:

    Galileo was actually put on trial for mocking the Pope in one of his dialogues- a Pope who had previously been a friend of Galileo's and had lavished him with praise and gifts. Galileo's adherence to the Copernican model was tolerated, even thought Tycho Brahe's geocentric model was created after the Copernican model and did a better job of mathematically calculating the motions of the planets. When Galileo wanted to publish a book expounding on the Copernican model, the Pope supported him, and simply asked that he mention that the Copernican system was merely a hypothesis. Galileo did so, but in a way that ridiculed the Pope personally. That doesn't excuse the Pope's subsequent behavior, but it does explain what happened a bit better than the abridged-to-the-point-of-utter-inaccuracy version we're traditionally told.

    Considering that a) the Copernican model is factually erroneous (Kepler's model, which existed at the time, is far superior to the Copernican model, but even the geocentric model of Tycho Brahe explained things better than the Copernican model using then-existing astronomy), b) what Galileo was really put on trial for was personally slandering the Pope, c) the Jesuit priests handling Galileo's trial were basically just asking him for evidence to support the Copernican model being superior to the model of Tycho Brahe- which he couldn't do because the Copernican model he'd dogmatically attached himself to was mathematically inferior, and d) after his trial Galileo was allowed to retire to a fancy villa and live a life of luxury, it's hard to understand why he's treated like a martyr of scientific inquiry.

  • Meanie-meanie, tickle a person on September 08, 2011 1:35 PM:

    But in context, what is it, exactly, that Perry is trying to say?

    Day has it right, "Hummina-hummina", and he said it very well.
    I mean, seriously, why try to attach meaning to a politician's every syllable, when you know perfectly well most of it is just random laryngeal vibrations and warm, moist air? He was asked a question requiring a specific answer, "name a name", the equivalent of a yes/no answer, another one politicians hate, and are frequently unprepared to deal with.
    "Which scientists have you found most credible on this subject?" requires Perry to give you something he does not actually possess; the name of a scientist. Any scientist. Put a gun to his head, and maybe he'll squeak out "Mr Wizard!?"...

    Oh, and another thing an actual answer would have required him to do is provide a real-world basis for his anti-GW beliefs, as if the work of a scientist somewhere had informed his opinions. This is not the case, but he can't say that outside of a locked room full of preachers.

  • Kathie on September 08, 2011 1:49 PM:

    I can't add anything to the many gems you guys have already posted, grazie! The intelligence and insight of Mr. Benen and the commenters give me some hope that America is not one giant boatload of maroons.

  • DisgustedWithItAll on September 08, 2011 1:51 PM:

    @gulag: I didn't come up with it, either. It's been around for a long time, almost certainly right after GHWB yammered it. I heard it about 9 years ago from a colleague in Seattle who had lived in Dallas for about 5 years surrounding the '88 election. Like you, I loved it. I embarrass myself saying it so much. Just have to be careful only to say it around new audiences.

  • c u n d gulag on September 08, 2011 1:56 PM:

    DisgustedWithItAll,
    Well, that makes us both honest people.

  • DisgustedWithItAll on September 08, 2011 1:58 PM:

    No way either one of us would win the Republican nomination.

  • Marko on September 08, 2011 2:01 PM:

    ...give me some hope that America is not one giant boatload of maroons.

    Um, well, the jury is still out on that.

  • rrk1 on September 08, 2011 2:02 PM:

    Perry' comment is absolutely incoherent. He's basically saying what I encountered with my weakest students who would dismiss any science they found inconvenient or challenging as a matter of opinion. Perry sees Science as purely a matter of referendum. How democratic! Truth by majority vote.

    It's highly doubtful he has any idea who Galileo was, let alone what that famous fight was all about. In 1616, partially because of Galileo's hubris, the Vatican banned all books that claimed Earth was in motion. By the early 1630s, when the Inquisition summoned an aging, ailing Galileo to come before it because he had been denounced by the Pope, he had the overwhelming evidence that Earth moved. Much as the climate scientists of today have the overwhelming evidence for global climate change. However, for Catholics of the day (about a century after the Reformation) a stationary Earth and geocentric solar system was a matter of religious dogma. To question or deny it made you a heretic, and that could be fatal.

    It's a fascinating story in all the details, but more a clash of religious politics than it was about scientific uncertainty. Galileo knew he was right. The church knew he was right, and was planning to let the new astronomy infuse itself into its teachings slowly. Galileo jumped the shark. To the extent Galileo was "outvoted" it was a stacked court of decidedly non-scientists - the Inquisition - that judged him a heretic, and made him retract his heresy to save his life. The 'vote' was not a consensus of his peers. It was a political hit job to silence him, and not incidentally a vindictive Pope wanting to humble his erstwhile friend. Galileo was sentenced to a life of strict house arrest, which lasted for nine years.

    It would be instructive to know what candidate Perry actually knows about the whole matter. My guess is nothing.

  • Berkeleian on September 08, 2011 2:02 PM:

    The amount of misinformation about Galileo floating around is not limited to Rick Perry. I just want to point out one thing. It is not the case that there were no scientists nor a scientific community at Galileo's time, although they would have said they were studying natural philosophy and taken a rather broader view of their subject than is common today. The dominant members of this community, largely based in universities followed a loosely scholastic paradigm which failed to cohere in a number of respects with the view Galileo was putting forward and so they tended to reject Galileo's ideas on what would be seen as fully scientific grounds, raising questions like, if the earth is moving, why does a ball thrown straight up in the air fall straight back down again. So Perry, perhaps inadvertantly, may not have been not so far off in his Galileo example, although I admit my first reaction was the more common one--what on earth was that?

  • DisgustedWithItAll on September 08, 2011 2:10 PM:

    @Berkeleian: Look at Perry. He's a blustering, chest-puffing alpha male who denies evolution and is completely ignorant on AGW. Giving him the benefit of the doubt by allowing the possibility he's so deep in the weeds wonkish on Galileo and the workings of the scientific community in Galileo's time is just too incredulous to fathom.

  • tamiasmin on September 08, 2011 2:37 PM:

    Galileo was in the vanguard of an emerging scientific consensus that would ultimately overthrow the psychologically satisfying view, based in Aristotle and sanctioned by religion, that human beings are at the center of all things and therefore the object of God's special care. To anyone who is not hopelessly confused, Galileo is the analogue of the modern emerging consensus on global warming, which has been challenging very powerful vested interests and which for the present has been "outvoted for a spell."

    Perry might consider switching from Galilieo to someone like Samuel George Morton, one of the leading lights in the exciting new field of craniometry in the nineteenth century, which sought to measure the relative intelligence of human races (and genders) by measuring the volume of deceased owners' skulls, and which perhaps unsurprisingly found that the measurers' group was always the smartest. Such a promising line of inquiry, but alas (or not), it seems to have been pretty much permanently outvoted.

  • Johnny Canuck on September 08, 2011 2:39 PM:

    DisgustedWithItAll on September 08, 2011 2:10 PM,

    Just to be pedantic: you mean too "incredible" to fathom.
    I think you may be accusing Berkeleian of being "incredulous".

    The erudite comments above make me think of alexander Pope's line: A little learning is a dangerous thing.

    I think it probable that Perry lacks even a "little".

    I do hope some journalist is inquisitive enough to tease further explanations out of the Perry camp.

  • toowearyforoutrage on September 08, 2011 2:45 PM:

    wow.

    Governor Perry = Galileo

    Arrogant much?

    Given the "Climategate" coverage on the "liberal media" outlets and the crickets chirping when the science itself was vindicated, isn't it climate science that's being outvoted?

    How are the climate deniers losing the battle at the moment. There's no carbon tax. even cap and trade is being attacked.

    If anything is awaiting for truth to prevail, it's climate science.

  • Kevin (not the famous one) on September 08, 2011 3:40 PM:

    Has there ever been a Presidential contest where the frontrunner is this consciously, clearly ignorant of even basic grammar? - Josef K @ 12:04

    Who funds this insatiable need to pollute the political stream of candidates from the big state that wants to secede? Pick one of the more intellectual states for a change, OK!

    Q: If you put a camera and microphone in front of a presidential candidate from Texas, would the blather emitted be sufficient evidence to pull the trap door under his feet?

    regroupp the

  • berkeleian on September 08, 2011 4:15 PM:

    @Disgustedwithitall: Let me make clear that my remarks were addressed to some earlier comments on this thread, and I was not attributing to Rick Perry a deep understanding of the nature of scientific communities in 1633. I agree with James Fallows that Perry didn't do himself any favors with his fumbling and incoherent remark.

  • ed on September 08, 2011 4:57 PM:

    Galileo was shouted down by a bunch of know-nothing, power-crazed, batshit insane religious nut-jobs who opposed the very idea of empirical evidence and The Scientific Method.

    So remind me, how does this compare with the current Global Warming "debate" we have today again?

  • Tom Dibble on September 08, 2011 7:25 PM:

    Well, not to bring history into the mix or anything, but Galileo was challenging the widely-held (but not unanimously-held) idea that the earth is the center of everything. He overstepped a few times in doing so (doing some extraordinarily bad science trying to prove that the existence of tides proved his theory, and politically by perhaps inadvertently insulting the Jesuits in on missive and his friend the Pope in another), but was clearly promoting an idea which had not ever been accepted based on evidence he had gathered.

    In contrast, climate-change denialists are promoting a widely-held idea which has mounting evidence against it (that the earth's climate is immutable by man). I suppose the similarity is that they both have used extraordinarily bad science at times, but in Galileo's case that was the exception, not the rule.

  • David Forbus on November 28, 2011 5:34 PM:

    What Perry is saying is that they know Global Warming is a fact, but they want to suppress that knowledge to the general public. Changing the status quot will cost them money. Perry represents the rich and powerful, he represents the Church. The Scientists are Galileo, bringing the fact of Global Warming to light. They are going to lie about Global Warming as long as they can get away with it.

  • David Forbus on November 28, 2011 5:35 PM:

    What Perry is saying is that they know Global Warming is a fact, but they want to suppress that knowledge to the general public. Changing the status quot will cost them money. Perry represents the rich and powerful, he represents the Church. The Scientists are Galileo, bringing the fact of Global Warming to light. They are going to lie about Global Warming as long as they can get away with it.

  •  
  •  
  •