×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Raises Campaign Funds For Climate Change Denier

Soulskill posted about 9 months ago | from the pi-is-exactly-3 dept.

Earth 365

HonorPoncaCityDotCom writes "Alex Altman reports at Time Magazine that Google recently hosted a fundraiser for Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe, one of the Senate's most conservative Republicans and a staunch opponent of EPA regulations. Inhofe authored a treatise called 'The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future,' thinks the Bible disproves global warming, and once denounced the 'arrogance' of scientists who suggest that 'we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate.' What prompted Google to host a fund raiser where attendees shelled out up to $2,500 for lunch with Inhofe? A data center that Google operates in Pryor, Oklahoma. 'Google runs a significant operation that provides around 100 jobs,' says Rusty Appleton, Inhofe's campaign manager. 'The Senator had an opportunity to tour the facilities in May of last year, and is committed to ensuring that Oklahoma remains a great place to do business.' A Google spokesperson says the company regularly hosts fundraisers for candidates of all stripes, even when Google disagrees with some of their policies — as it does with Inhofe on climate change. This explanation didn't wash with the activists outside Google's D.C. headquarters near K Street. "

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

365 comments

So happy (-1, Flamebait)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | about 9 months ago | (#44262629)

This pretty much solves that whole iOS v. Android question that many have. If someone ever tells me that Climate Change exists with their Android device in hand, now I can call them a hypocrite.

Re:So happy (4, Insightful)

fightinfilipino (1449273) | about 9 months ago | (#44262699)

manufacturers of iOS devices, Android devices, Windows Phone devices, even Blackberries that still exist in the wild all do at least some of their manufacturing in China, where labor and environmental abuses are not just a daily occurrence but an accepted part of "doing business."

calling one side hypocritical is naïve, flame baiting, and ultimately pointless.

Re:So happy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262907)

Mod parent up. GP is so naïve that I feel like I'm becoming more naïve by association.

Re:So happy (2, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | about 9 months ago | (#44262705)

And you think Apple and Microsoft are any less evil?? How many wind and solar farms [mercurynews.com] are they bankrolling? What kind of phone are YOU using, hypocrite?

I have two words for you -- bribery and extortion. It's how politics work in the US.

Re:So happy (1, Troll)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | about 9 months ago | (#44262733)

I don't believe in global warming, so I do not care what kind of phone I use.

Re:So happy (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 9 months ago | (#44262877)

What about round earth?
Or the earth being very old?

Fun fact, reality does not care if you believe in it or not.

Re:So happy (1)

BemoanAndMoan (1008829) | about 9 months ago | (#44263125)

And you think Apple and Microsoft are any less evil?? How many wind and solar farms [mercurynews.com] are they bankrolling? What kind of phone are YOU using, hypocrite?

I have two words for you -- bribery and extortion. It's how politics work in the US.

To be fair, neither of the companies you cited actually have (had?) the mandate "Do No Evil" plastered next to their names. It's pretty ballsy to come out with that statement and yet then crap like this, especially when they just shrug their shoulders and say "um, yea, dude gives us tax breaks" when you call them on it.

Can't say I disagree about the rest, though. Corporations hijacked American democracy decades ago, everything they do is just smoke and mirrors to hide their unabashed self-interest.

-------

"Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something." ... Man In Black

Re:So happy (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44263237)

Apple: http://gigaom.com/2012/09/13/behold-apples-massive-solar-farm-from-the-sky-photos/

MS: Nothing (Quick Google search)

Re:So happy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262709)

This pretty much solves that whole iOS v. Android question that many have. If someone ever tells me that Climate Change exists with their Android device in hand, now I can call them a hypocrite.

... yes, because Apple has never done anything unseemly, ever...

Re:So happy (2)

ThorGod (456163) | about 9 months ago | (#44262721)

This pretty much solves that whole iOS v. Android question that many have. If someone ever tells me that Climate Change exists with their Android device in hand, now I can call them a hypocrite.

No you can't. It's a phone, not a carte blanche agreement with whatever google does.

For that matter, it sucks how most manufacturing companies don't hire much US labor. 100 employees here and there just doesn't instill confidence.

So happy and realistic (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262739)

I consider all climate change data, even the unpopular data showing the earth has been cooling the past decade even though carbon emissions are at the highest ever!

LOLZ

Re:So happy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262749)

One of the great things about having giant corporations in bed with corrupt politicians is that most things you buy supports policies you disdain.
 
It's almost as encouraging as my friends who say the whole spying-on-all-of-your-own-citizens thing is terrible but I know if they had the chance to change their 2012 votes, they'd still vote for Obama because, hey, at least he's not a Republican (and all the other people on the ballot for president don't... count?... I guess.)

Re:So happy (1)

Sqr(twg) (2126054) | about 9 months ago | (#44262753)

Bah. I'm pretty sure that Apple also buys senators of every kind (just like every big company in the U.S.) The data is mostly public. I can't think of any company that pays only senators of a certain conviction.

Re:So happy (4, Informative)

Cenan (1892902) | about 9 months ago | (#44262847)

I can think of some [campaignmoney.org]

Between his campaign and the main super PAC supporting him, Restore Our Future, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has received $9.6 million in contributions from the oil and gas industry. In contrast, President Obama has received about five percent of that total, or just under $500,000 from oil and gas donors

Re:So happy (1)

Sqr(twg) (2126054) | about 9 months ago | (#44262973)

Good point. I should, of course, have said: I can't think of any company that buys senators of only one conviction except when that conviction is to further said company's interests.

Re:So happy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44263173)

Good point. I should, of course, have said: I can't think of any company that buys senators of only one conviction except when that conviction is to further said company's interests.

That is the ONLY REASON a company has to spend money on political campaigns. You've just said companies don't spend money on particular political platforms except that they always do.

Re:So happy (1)

poetmatt (793785) | about 9 months ago | (#44263089)

yeah, because that has a lot to do with their focus which is getting support with their data center plans. yeah, that must be it.

the amount of this article that has to do with android is somewhere around 0%.

Stay out of politics! (5, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | about 9 months ago | (#44263169)

Ok here is the lowdown!
Everyone has their good and bad parts about them. It is not productive to ignore and not work with people just because of their bad points. It is productive to work with these people because of their good points.

If you fully agree with everything the Republican or Democratic party says, then you are most likely a mindless shill who really should get out of politics because you are too stupid. You will tend to use most of your mental skills, trying to justify any inconsistencies in ideologies. Most likely you are not running for office, and you do not have anything at stake for not being Conservative or Liberal enough.

If you are going to protest google, protest the policy/ideology/action that google does that you do not like. Not the fact they worked with a politician that you wouldn't vote for, because they liked something unrelated to the policy you're fighting against.

Unless you are actually opposed to a Datacenter in Oklahoma.

In today's news... (4, Interesting)

crashcy (2839507) | about 9 months ago | (#44262633)

Corporation places self-interest over popular hot-button issue. Stay tuned for more.

Re:In today's news... (-1, Troll)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | about 9 months ago | (#44262697)

But SHARKNADO! We have to stop it!

Re:In today's news... (0)

mcgrew (92797) | about 9 months ago | (#44262789)

STFU with the stupid offtopic blather, ok? You've posted that same stupid comment more than once. [slashdot.org]

Someone please mod this guy down.

Re:In today's news... (-1, Troll)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | about 9 months ago | (#44262885)

Awesome, I have a stalker.

And FYI,

Napolitano is heading out there to ensure that the Sharknado [imdb.com] does not come to pass. She's going to take flying lessons so she can hover a helicopter 50 feet away from the up-coming EF4 tornado and "blow it up".

!=

But SHARKNADO! We have to stop it!

No matter how you parse it.

Re:In today's news... (2)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | about 9 months ago | (#44263035)

Yeah but this has been a problem for social libertarians and social justice advocates.

Money talks.

And for James Mountain Inhofe(Yes, his real middle name; never forget it), money talks loudly.

Oh No!!!! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44263231)

Google dares aid to the campaign of one GOPer and it makes new. Meanwhile, they aid Democats by a 4:1 margin, and there isn't a peep.

Just goes to show how the media is in the bag for democrats. Journolist anyone?

In other news, a whore will fuck anyone who has $$ (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262635)

OOOOOklahoma where the hypocrites come whistlin across the plains....

Imagine that (4, Insightful)

Lithdren (605362) | about 9 months ago | (#44262639)

Company acts in own self-interest, news at 11.

Re:Imagine that (3, Insightful)

Zordak (123132) | about 9 months ago | (#44262763)

Seriously, how is this news? A large company is schmoozing politicians. It's fine to think it's evil and corrupt and whatever. But news is generally something that you didn't already know. And the title is just trolling for True Believers who think that "Global Warming" is a single monolithic issue, with exactly one meaning and with exactly two sides ("Evangelist" and "Denier"), with no nuance or discussion possible. (As evidence, watch the flood of comments that will follow labeling me a "denier" because I used the words "nuance" and "discussion" in connection with Global Warming.)

Re:Imagine that (1)

Freshly Exhumed (105597) | about 9 months ago | (#44262817)

Seriously, how is this news?

It is news because the good 'ol days of handing politicians $5,000 in an envelope are clearly gone.

Re:Imagine that (1)

Salgak1 (20136) | about 9 months ago | (#44262859)

It is news because the good 'ol days of handing politicians $5,000 in an envelope are clearly gone.

. . . which is why I gave up on politics ~20 years ago. Waay too much work for too little graft !!!!

Re:Imagine that (3, Funny)

Cenan (1892902) | about 9 months ago | (#44262935)

Denier! Nuance is for pussies. Besides, the title says "Climate Change" (as in, we know it's changing), that's completely different from "Global Warming" (as in, we know it is changing, and we know it is becoming warmer). Since I have now proven you wrong, Slashtiquette allows me to make fun of your spelling, grammar, lack of paragraphs and, perhaps if cocky, make fun of the way you sleep wrapped in a Soviet flag.

Re:Imagine that (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44263003)

Since I have now proven you wrong, Slashtiquette allows me to make fun of your spelling, grammar, lack of paragraphs

You're way out of touch with Slashtiquette. Making fun of his spelling and grammar allows you to claim he's wrong, not the other way around. Try again, and this time focus.

Re:Imagine that (1)

plover (150551) | about 9 months ago | (#44262809)

They'd be better off acting honestly than entering politics. If OK won't give them what they need, move next door to TX or somewhere they'll get the concessions they seek.

Jumping in bed with a politician can only give you the venereal diseases they have - it can't cure any problems you started with.

Re:Imagine that (1)

Lithdren (605362) | about 9 months ago | (#44262993)

Because we all know a massive global company like Google will never need to operate in a place like Oklahoma, right?

Sorry, being in business sometimes requires you work with people you really dont like. I dont see Google as supporting anything this idiot says, they're just stuck dealing with the idiot because the morons who live there keep voting for him. Clearly they like the guy, so what can you do? You cant just move everything because the current blow-hard in congress has some loonie ideas. Geez if thats how it worked we'd all be slapping rocks togeather trying to apease the rain gods.

And you can be sure this guy would be right there, insisting we're using the wrong rocks and that there isn't a rain problem, we can water our crops with the blood of heathen children from the next tribe over.

Re:Imagine that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262827)

don't be evil, amiright?

Re:Imagine that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262841)

Or more accurately: Company acts in own short term self interest at the expense of own, and everyone else's, long term interest.

Re:Imagine that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262869)

Yep. It's not news if it agrees with my views. However, If you dare hold a difference of opinion, you're bad, nothing but bad.

Because (2)

future assassin (639396) | about 9 months ago | (#44263279)

the company has a huge impact on our daily lives. This isn't some manufacturer no one ever heard off outside of small town USA. This company is intertwined into our daily lives and its in our interest to know about their ethics and political support/interference.

Change the climate? Ha! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262641)

The climate is piddly.

Humans have changed the rotational speed of the earth:

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/03/news/dams-for-water-supply-are-altering-earth-s-orbit-expert-says.html [nytimes.com]

Re:Change the climate? Ha! (2)

mbone (558574) | about 9 months ago | (#44262943)

You do realize that when you go into the kitchen to get a beer, you change either the rotation rate of the Earth, or its polar motion, or (more likely) both?

The question is not whether or not it happens, the question is whether it is big enough to be detected observationally. Today, with GPS and VLBI, pretty small changes can be detected (although, I will grant, not you going into the kitchen). (Yet.)

I did calculate once the rotational effect of everyone going back and forth to work in LA; maybe it's time to redo those calculations.

Don't be evil... (5, Insightful)

TWX (665546) | about 9 months ago | (#44262649)

...is starting to either redefine "evil" or "don't"... Haven't figured out which yet...

I know that politics makes for strange bedfellows, but this seems to head a little out of the norm.

Re:Don't be evil... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262985)

Anyone who has to tell you that they're not evil, is.

Re:Don't be evil... (1)

khallow (566160) | about 9 months ago | (#44263033)

I know that politics makes for strange bedfellows, but this seems to head a little out of the norm.

They want something in Oklahoma and he's an Oklahoma politician. I think the chain of custody is clear.

Re:Don't be evil... (1)

Cl1mh4224rd (265427) | about 9 months ago | (#44263055)

...is starting to either redefine "evil" or "don't"... Haven't figured out which yet...

The definition of "evil" has always been relative. For example, I'm sure Mr. Inhofe sees nothing evil at all about what Google did for him.

Re:Don't be evil... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44263057)

You missed the actual answer, they're redefining "be"... it's best for them to stretch that definition to allow them to become two-faced.

Re:Don't be evil... (1)

SirGarlon (845873) | about 9 months ago | (#44263175)

Has it crossed your mind that Senator Inhofe might be the lesser of two evils? (I can't believe I am defending Google and a bible-thumper at the same time!)

Re:Don't be evil... (2)

grasshoppa (657393) | about 9 months ago | (#44263191)

Not that I'm defending google here, but which strategy do you think is more effective in getting what you want?

- Fight against "the system" and "the man", making their lives as difficult as possible.
- Play the game.

Re:Don't be evil... (1)

jellomizer (103300) | about 9 months ago | (#44263287)

Evil is rather subjective term.

My favorite definition of evil is using all the good steps to accomplish a short sighted goal.
Others have doing thing with a malicious intent.

But most don't cover I Disagree with someone, so they must be evil.

Do No Evil... (3, Insightful)

wazzzup (172351) | about 9 months ago | (#44262671)

...up until that point in which it becomes advantageous to do evil.

Instead of Do No Evil... (1)

MiniMike (234881) | about 9 months ago | (#44262913)

Maybe they're taken an idea from their Energy conservation efforts, and are now Net Zero Evil? Do a little good when the light is shining on them, and then spread a little evil when it's dark?

As long as it all evens out, they're ok with it.

Re:Do No Evil... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44263163)

Nah, they simply...

1. redefine "evil" to mean a more evil "evil" than theirs.
2. change the definition of "evil" to something completely different.
3. say "We'll always been like that.".
4. launch a committee to reassess their "core values".
5. visit Kim Jong Un, Auschwitz and Dick Cheney's man-sized safe, to find out how others are evil.
6. raise the quality standards for being evil.
7. create a Task Force to un-evil themselves.
8. book corporate training for everyone, to learn how to be better at not being good.
9. compare companies that are all kinds of evil.
10. change the criteria that make somebody "good".
11. outsource the evil to a offshore subsidy.
12. fuse with other evil companies, to consolidate evilness.
13. declare "No company can be so evil, that there can't still be a little good inside. (Just look at Hitler. He loved dogs!)".
14. raise the budget.
15. create a study, to find out if there are cheap evilness consultants.
16. buy something to make evil companies more efficient.
17. declare that "our company is better, cheaper and faster evil".
18. create a quality circle to find a use for their evilness.
19. revise the performance conditions for good companies.
20. install a independent cost center for evilness. ...

Buying congress makes sense (4, Insightful)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | about 9 months ago | (#44262695)

Buying congress makes sense. If they're outspokenly against you, when you buy them, they stop doing that. It'll be fun to see if this congressman does a 180 once Google's money is up his sock hole, and starts spouting Google's corporate values as his new platform.

Re:Buying congress makes sense (0)

twistedcubic (577194) | about 9 months ago | (#44262759)

At least in a state where the US senate representative is guaranteed to be Republican, it makes sense to bribe him.

Re:Buying congress makes sense (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44263071)

up his sock hole

Where the hell are you wearing your socks???

Sounds Credible to Me (4, Insightful)

Bob9113 (14996) | about 9 months ago | (#44262713)

A Google spokesperson says the company regularly hosts fundraisers for candidates of all stripes, even when Google disagrees with some of their policies â" as it does with Inhofe on climate change. This explanation didn't wash with the activists outside Google's D.C. headquarters near K Street.

Why would that explanation lack credibility? It sounds a lot more forthright than I would expect. Let's frame it a little differently and I think it will ring quite true:

"Google doesn't care about the policies of the politicians it supports, or whether those policies harm the nation, the planet, or the American people. Google will happily help channel money to any politician who can help us pay a little less taxes to maintain the system we benefit from, or who can influence laws so that we are not held responsible for our stalking or the government stalking we facilitate. Oligarchy rules!"

Re:Sounds Credible to Me (4, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about 9 months ago | (#44262845)

Basically if you're going to wait for a candidate that matches all your beliefs, you're never going to get it, even if you become a senator yourself. So you have to decide what priorities you think are most important. Google chose theirs, which are different than the activists, which annoys the activists.

And honestly I'm not sure they made the wrong priority decision. Whether they support climate change politicians or not, little is going to change in that area.

Re:Sounds Credible to Me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262999)

Basically if you're going to wait for a candidate that matches all your beliefs, you're never going to get it

I already got mine in Russ Feingold. Sadly, I moved and John Cornyn represents me now.

Isn't this how it works? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262717)

When a politician doesn't agree with you views, you raise as much campaign money as possible to convince him or her to look at your position again. I thought this was how things were done?

It's just business (4, Informative)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 9 months ago | (#44262725)

Q: How do you change the world?
A: With money.

Q: How do you get more money?
A: Make sure you have influence with those in power.

Q: What do you when you have enough money?
A: Anything you want, including discarding the trash you used to get to the top.

Q: Isn't that dishonest?
A: This is business, not kindergarten.

Wars are won one battle at a time. You must choose how to win each battle if you ever hope to prevail in the war.

Re:It's just business (0)

Mike Frett (2811077) | about 9 months ago | (#44262969)

That kind of Business is non-sustainable, Future wise. Inhofe masquerades as a Bible Thumper, yet I guess he missed the part where Jesus trashed the Roman market because he saw how Money was was the true evil. When the Bible talks about the whole 'Mark of the Beast' and '666' in the Forehead and Palms, you don't take that stuff literally, the mark of the Beast is Money; Money is the Antichrist.

Again, think Future here. Business and Money as it exists now is not a sustainable empire and will inevitably lead the end of Human life as we know it and the end of everything Green, that is the Earth. Money makes pollution, Drugs, Corruption and has taken the lives of both Human Beings and Extinct Creatures to name a few of the monstrosities Money has created and destroyed.

No, I'm convinced at this point. Only Karl Marx's vision of Communism can save us now. And no, It has never been applied the way it was intended; only in half-breeds that were incompatible with each other. The people of Star Trek work to better Humanity, not for money, and everyone is equal. If you are a Star Trek fan, then you are also a fan of Communism. In a sense, Open Source has these values also.

Taking care of our Planet and each other is the only future that can possibly exist. The future I speak of will never exist however, we will have long scorched the lands and brought about our extinction before we come to the realization that our path cannot be sustained. It's always too late, we have such a short-sighted vision and have barely left our caves, time-line wise. It's like your first Toy or first Computer, you broke it before you learned anything; twenty years later you still break it because you forgot that lessons of the past are rarely remembered.

Re:It's just business (2)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 9 months ago | (#44262975)

Q: What do you when you have enough money?
A: Anything you want, including discarding the trash you used to get to the top.

That can be read at least two different ways:

(a) trash = scummy politicians who took your bribes
(b) trash = idealists who believed your promises

I think that the closer you get to having "enough money" the more the definition of "trash" changes from (a) to (b).

Re:It's just business (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44263017)

Q: What happens if you give money to people in power that oppose your views?
A: They gain more influence and rally more people to the opposition.

Q: What happens when your enemy becomes the majority?
A: You take solace in your giant pile of money and abandon plans to change the world.

Re:It's just business (2)

Xyrus (755017) | about 9 months ago | (#44263127)

Wars are won one battle at a time. You must choose how to win each battle if you ever hope to prevail in the war.

No they aren't. Wars are won by being smart enough to avoid them in the first place.

The ends do not justify the means. Buying those in power ensure they stay in power. By the time you eventually get enough money and power to actually undo all the damage they have done, you have either become them or so much damage has been done that it is nigh impossible to fix it.

He's right! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262741)

"'we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate.'"

True. Same for floods, terrorists, hurricanes, wars, forest fires, plane crashes, volcanoes, and industrial accidents. It's all What God Wants. Humans should not oppose His will.

May as well just sit in your basement and pray. Oh, except for attending $2500/plate dinners. We'll let you out for that.

From the "Greatest Hoax" website:

"JAMES INHOFE is a life-long conservative who has consistently fought for the values of greater freedom, smaller government, stronger national defense, and less government intrusion into the lives of the American people"

Har. I guess he doesn't realize that "stronger national defense" often contradicts "smaller government" and "less government intrusion into the lives of the American people". The US already invests more money in "national defense" than all the other militaries in the world. It's roughly quadruple the next highest. Just how much bigger does he want that part of the government to get?

Re:He's right! (1)

sjames (1099) | about 9 months ago | (#44263029)

Most of the GOP claims those values, but I notice none of them oppose the TSA, NSA, war on drugs, or restrictions on abortions. None seem to support free trade when it comes to people who can't afford their prescriptions wanting to buy from Canada.

Out of touch much? (3, Interesting)

siphonophore (158996) | about 9 months ago | (#44262743)

When Google lobbies one right winger, it's news to Slashdot? Is anyone here aware that his views are shared with a significant portion of the population? This isn't David Duke's final term, this guy is mainstream.

He's probably wrong about Global Warming, I'll grant that. But I daydream about one day when the coin is flipped and Google's lobbying of a left winger (who's antipathy toward free enterprise and economic globalism lead to more human suffering around the world than that of a global warming denier) is shocking news.

Re:Out of touch much? (2, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 9 months ago | (#44263045)

I don't think the issue here is right wing vs left wing, it is that he accepts myths over observable fact. I don't think magical thinking is a political thing.

It is a sad fact that a significant number of Americans share that view. I still would not call that mainstream, unless you are in the bible belt.

Re:Out of touch much? (2)

BergZ (1680594) | about 9 months ago | (#44263181)

I think XKCD summarizes the topic pretty well:
http://xkcd.com/154/ [xkcd.com]

"A million people can call the mountains a fiction, yet it need not trouble you as you stand atop them"
"But he's a US Senator!"
"Ah. Then yes, we do have a bit of a situation."

Re:Out of touch much? (1)

PhxBlue (562201) | about 9 months ago | (#44263067)

This isn't David Duke's final term, this guy is mainstream.

That's probably part of the problem.

Would you expect any less... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262771)

...From an analytics company? Surely a company full of computer scientists and mathematicians understand that you can't ignore the last 12 years of readings, then scream about the apocalypse. When current data is included, we see that global warming fits more with the model of natural ebb and tide of temperatures, rather than a one way ticket to hell.

Stop blindly ingesting bro-science.

Any more proof of corruption. (1)

davydagger (2566757) | about 9 months ago | (#44262807)

Can you say it any plainer, that large companies have to do favors for politicians to make sure the state remains a "friendly place to do business".

Is this any plainer than politicians shaking down business for bribes? Or is google doing something even more shady that they need his silence on?

some really creepy quid pro quo here, blatantly obvious quid pro quo.

a Google spokesperson said it: (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262821)

"We regularly host fundraisers for candidates,... but that doesn’t mean we endorse all of their positions,”

You can't debate with religious people (1, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 9 months ago | (#44262853)

When someone thinks a book written by people can refute data, their can be no discussion.

Who do we contact at google to bitch about this?

Biblical Tax Codes (1)

Kagato (116051) | about 9 months ago | (#44262857)

My guess is the bible also says it's your right to transfer your patents to Ireland so you can squirrel away your money without paying US Corporate Taxes. Do no evil meets the bottom line.

Causes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262865)

It seems that, for many activitists, their pet issue is the only important issue, and they will support or oppose any candidate based solely on that issue. If you oppose giving money to anyone who disagrees with you on some critical issue, then you're left with just Ron Wyden or Rand Paul or nobody, depending on your leanings. Focusing on this guy's nutty positions, which he probably has to maintain in order to continue to win a seat in the state, is silly. Google is just being pragmatic; please stop the witch hunt.

Global Warmers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262867)

Don't agree with something. No one gives a shit. News at 11.

the truth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#44262891)

Climate probably is changing.
God is just.
God causes rain on one field and not another.
Let me emphasize -- that's not to say do nothing.

God says...
no_you_cant thats_right the money wazz_up_with_that lifes_like_chocolates
IMHO rocket_science application rubbish radio pardon_the_french
stoked One_finger_salute ahh_thats_much_better I_veto_that
by_the_way incredibly like_like I_could_be_wrong quite
look_on_the_brightside mission_from_God

surprised? Not really (2)

bkr1_2k (237627) | about 9 months ago | (#44262945)

Google is a big corporation. As such they are going to hold varying views and will play both sides (if you actually consider there to be only two) of the political fence. This is business as usual.

Investment (3, Insightful)

FellowConspirator (882908) | about 9 months ago | (#44262963)

Buying the good graces of a member of congress is a good investment. Rates have never been lower, and congress has never bee more corruptible. Even if you're not evil, the purchase of congressional support means that they tend to watch your back when they're screwing the little guy. It's just good business.

One thing I don't get about Inhofe and the other climate change deniers is this: why say the hoax is costing you millions when the hoax could just as easily be a business opportunity. I mean, real or not, it just means an opportunity for companies to cash in on environmental friendliness, sell people cures (whether they need them or not), etc. Even if you suppose Inhofe is receiving carnal pleasures from the petrochemical industry in exchange for his obedience, those same companies could turn around and make megabucks on carbon sequestration schemes, higher-priced fuel formulations that reduce emissions 1-2%, etc. People already swimming in cash are in a unique position to jump on opportunities of this sort. Hell, Exxon and GM ought to be able to get huge grants for "research" in making more carbon-neutral petro-fueled vehicles -- we're talking free money!

That's the problem with corrupt politicians these days... They miss the bigger money-grubbing picture.

It's not the science (4, Insightful)

bryanandaimee (2454338) | about 9 months ago | (#44263019)

Inhofe sounds like a bit of a nut, but for me it's not about the science. I think the science of global warming is pretty well understood. But when it comes to political policy, the science of global warming is only ever used to promote thinly veiled marxism and anti-business, and even anti-human policies. If the global warming crowd ever got behind nuclear power, or ever admitted that technology is quickly erasing polution in our day, or ever even showed a small amount of restraint in the demand for all countries to cede large swaths sovereignty for the sake of cutting carbon emissions, I'd be a little less inclined to dismiss the rest of the agenda.

I guess you could say I'm a climate change believer and a marxism denier. The two don't have to go together, they just alway seem to in the current political climate. So even though Inhofe may be a cook, that doesn't mean that his policy prefferences won't be better than the alternative. And even though some other politician may be very bright, that doesn't mean that the marxist policies he/she promotes in the name of science/global warming wouldn't be very damaging. (And yes, I do mean more damaging than the pro-growth alternative.)

'Arrogance' is an Appeal to Emotion (1)

Ichijo (607641) | about 9 months ago | (#44263023)

Inhofe...once denounced the 'arrogance' of scientists who suggest that 'we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate.'

When your argument contains a logical fallacy [wikipedia.org] , it's time to consider the possibility that you're on the wrong side of the truth.

The world needs more people on both sides of every argument pointing out these kinds of reasoning flaws.

Re:'Arrogance' is an Appeal to Emotion (1)

bryanandaimee (2454338) | about 9 months ago | (#44263199)

I totally agree. I would watch the debates more often if there were a buzzer that sounded every time either candidate tried an ad-hominem or straw man argument. Except you'd have to re-train the politicians or it would just be a lot of buzzing with a few words in between. And no politician would participate in a debate like that. I'm surprised some philosophy department hasn't done something like that already. Take the debate and dub it with captions and perhaps exploding head animations for each logical fallacy.

And they are wrong again (1)

s.petry (762400) | about 9 months ago | (#44263111)

If you want to know that Global Warming is real, simply look at the main goal of every Geo-Engineering project running. "control weather and cool planet". Never mind the part where the metals they are using cause more harm than good and don't work like they think they do.. those people are idiots and truly believe that they are always right. Point is, if there is no Global Warming why are they dumping aluminum and barium particles in the air?

To continue the global warming debate is useless! I have pointed this out before. Global Warming is absolutely the wrong argument. The argument should be about having unsustainable economies based on pollution! Before you say "but but oil" remember that Oil is finite! Instead of caring about how much we have for plastics and other purposes in the future, we are pumping and dumping everything we can so that a very select few people make bazillions! And before you claim there is lots of oil, go check facts. Tar sands and deep ocean drilling are the only prospects on the horizon. These are both extremely expensive methods of extraction and extremely dangerous methods of extraction.

I probably would not care so much what these massive corporations did, if they actually worked for the greater good they claim to work for. They don't, and more and more it has become obvious that the only thing they look out for is their own wallets and safety. Yes, they don't give 2 rat turds about your safety or wallet.

profits before the environment (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about 9 months ago | (#44263167)

What google means is this republican gets a hard-on for big business and will help their bottom line so they're willing to put their supposed beliefs to the side because what good is a clean environment if they're sitting on an even bigger pile of cash.

What a short memory. Remember the ozone hole? (1)

azav (469988) | about 9 months ago | (#44263203)

'we, human beings, would be able to change what He is doing in the climate.'

Well, I guess he completely forgot about Chlorofluorocarbons and how their creation and use by us created the Antarctic ozone hole?

So, for anyone who insists and can't fathom that our actions could possibly have an effect on something as large as the atmosphere, All they need to do is set their Wayback Machine to 1985, when this was discovered and reported in 1985.

How can people's memories be so short?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_hole [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ozone_depletion [wikipedia.org]

Whats has Google Marketing got to gain here? (1)

axonis (640949) | about 9 months ago | (#44263213)

I guess they used http://www.google.com/ [google.com] determine earth was a closed system?? .. hmm like a glass bell, CO2 just cracked their green $ desires in their desert of brain drought
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...