On Parshall's show, Burnett attacked Gore again while admitting he hadn't seen An Inconvenient Truth
Syndicated radio host Janet Parshall and Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, accused Al Gore of advancing fictional theories on global warming through An Inconvenient Truth, the documentary film about his campaign to raise awareness of global warming. While admitting that he had yet to view Gore's movie, Burnett attacked Gore for "demean[ing] the millions of people killed in various wars, pestilences, plagues" with his advocacy of governmental policies aimed at countering global warming.
After playing an audio clip of the trailer for An Inconvenient Truth, a documentary film about former Vice President Al Gore's campaign to raise awareness of global warming, syndicated radio host Janet Parshall attacked the movie, stating, "[T]here's more fiction than fact in this film." Parshall then introduced Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), who said: "[O]n many issues, I consider Mr. Gore to be an elitist, I consider him to be a liar, and I consider him to be a hypocrite. But on global warming, I don't consider him to be a hypocrite. I consider him to be a true believer." Burnett, who later admitted that he had not seen the film, accused Gore of "demean[ing] the millions of people killed in various wars, pestilences, plagues ... in horrific human and natural catastrophes, disasters throughout history."
From the May 25 edition of Janet Parshall's America:
PARSHALL: I think I saw this movie. I think it was called Chicken Little. Right? Oh no, no, no, no -- this is a different film. I think it's called An Inconvenient Truth. It was a hit at the Sundance Film Festival, and if you know anything about that film festival, I'm not surprised it was a hit. Now, I can't figure out, is Al Gore trying to be a movie star, the next American idol, or is he still running for the office of president of the United States? One thing's for certain though: Based on this movie, he's not a scientist. How do I know? Because there's more fiction than fact in this film.
And to back up my position, we have Doctor Sterling Burnett with us, who's a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis. And Sterling, I've seen you take him to task all over the place on this, because you and your organization have been speaking out, saying "Hey, wait a minute. I know they don't want to be bothered by the facts, but we are not on a ticking time-bomb, which is what Al Gore would like us to think." First of all, back up for a little bit. He wrote Earth in the Balance [Plume, 1993]. Obviously, he's concerned about the environment.
BURNETT: Sure.
PARSHALL: But why is this such a hot-button issue for him? He says it's the biggest problem.
BURNETT: I guess I can't explain his motives or, you know, why Mr. Gore's taking this too hard. One thing I will say is, on many issues, I consider Mr. Gore to be an elitist, I consider him to be a liar, and I consider him to be a hypocrite. But on global warming, I don't consider him to be a hypocrite. I believe him to be a true believer. So, for whatever reason, he does think global warming is the greatest threat ever posed to civilization. And I think that demeans the millions of people killed in various wars, pestilences, plagues, you know, in horrific human and natural catastrophes and disasters throughout history. But that's his belief, and, you know, I don't question his belief. I think he's that honest in that. I just think that he's misguided, and I think that based on the evidence I've seen, it's not Apocalypse Now, it's "Apocalypse Not."
PARSHALL: Very good. Very sharp, Sterling.
[...]
PARSHALL: All right, so let's go to some of the issues that Al Gore wanted to address in his film. And he did, he talked about creating these holes these in the ozone. The theory is that the cloud layer is removed, you get this hole, you get more solar activity -- that's what's causing the global warming, because the layer of protection has been eroded away, because man is not a producer, he's a polluter. Right?
BURNETT: Well, you know, I don't exactly understand. I haven't had the opportunity to see the film. I don't, to be honest, it's not released in Dallas. I think it's only in L.A. and New York right now.
Media Matters for America previously documented Burnett's comparison of Gore to Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels during the May 23 edition of Fox News' DaySide. Discussing An Inconvenient Truth on that show, Burnett declared, "You don't go see Joseph Goebbels' films to see the truth about Nazi Germany. You don't want to go see Al Gore's film to see the truth about global warming."
As noted by the weblog Think Progress, ExxonMobil Corp. has bankrolled the NCPA with more than $390,000 since 1998. Burnett recently penned an editorial defending former Exxon CEO Lee Raymond's retirement compensation (which totaled $190,000 a day in 2005) that did not mention NCPA's financial ties to the company.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
"I don't know what he said, but I'm sure that it's wrong!"
Niether of these two idiots have seen the movie and want to be treated as experts.
In other news... "our ticking time bomb is worse than your ticking time bomb." Illeagal immigration, and gay marriage are much more pressing problems right now, and burning the flag could spell the end of civilization. Besides, we have many more facts and experts to prove married, gay, immigrant flag burners are signs of the end times. Even though I've never seen one.
Thanks for saving me some keystrokes.
Sorry but I have to run. I think I just spotted a Mexican gay couple on their way to city hall. One is carry a flag and the other a lighter. God only knows what they intend to do.
they're not heading toward the Pentagon, are they?
Don't ask and I won't tell.
Let's just abridge this exchange:
PARSHALL: Based on this movie, he's not a scientist. How do I know? Because there's more fiction than fact in this film. And to back up my position, we have Doctor Sterling Burnett with us...
BURNETT: Well, you know, I don't exactly understand. I haven't had the opportunity to see the film. I don't, to be honest, it's not released in Dallas.
I'm not sure who's more ignorant, Parshall or Burnett. One thinks she's backing up her opinions with fact by having someone on who's not even familiar with the subject (the movie). The other criticizes the movie and Gore even though she hasn't seen it. GREAT MATCH!
I chuckled when she accentuated the word 'doctor' as she introduced him. As if someone with a Ph.D (regardless in which field) suddenly has enough knowledge to debunk anything that they want.
Whenever my wife runs into someone trying to impress her with his or her doctorate, she'll say, "Can you write me a prescription?" If they answer no, then she'll answer "then you're not a doctor.
the old radio skit "Dr. Science" on NPR (maybe it was just in Iowa)? This is a lot like that, only reversed. Er...
Show Host: "He's not a REAL doctor" Dr. Science: "I have a doctor's degree" Show Host: "In SCIENCE"
As a "lowly" Ph.D., I'd like to point out that my academic forebears were called Doctor at a time when the so called "real" doctors were called barbers.
Didn't mean to offend you. I respect everyone who's earned a doctorate, just think it's a little unsettling though, when someone with a PHD actually insists that you call him or her Doctor (usually happens in a social setting) , rather than Mike or Helen or whatever their name might be. My daughter is working towards her doctorate in psychology and we're very proud of her. But we're all drawing the line about calling her doctor which is what she's requested of us.
I had a co-worker, colleague if you will that was working on her doctorate. I called her by her first name, we all did. One day after receiving her doctorate she left me an informal note on a post-em and signed it Dr. XXXXX. We all laughed very hard. That said after my daughter received her doctorate in pharmacy I began addressing all her mail using Dr, but that's a bragging mom kind of thing. BTW in some states pharmacists can write scripts.
I just always find this whole "who's a real doctor" issue amusing.
All you have to do is ask for a single reference to an article in a peer reviewed scientific journal that is widely accepted by leading scientists that presents data showing Global Warming is not true. If this issue is so "false" then there should be at lease ONE such article.
Asking this question just shuts down most of these Pundits that are just pushing an agenda and not science.
These are the same people who are advocating "Intelligent Design" (Creationism in a lab coat). They don't need no stinkin' scientific facts!
...and the case made by Mr. Gore for global warming is extremely convincing; in fact, I would say it's incontrovertible.
At one point in the film, he cites 928 independent scientific studies that support the case for global warming, and zero that refute it. He also goes on to say that in an analysis of "popular press" (read non-scientific), 53% of the articles oppose the position.
Opinion-meisters will always take an opposing position even if unsubstantiated if they believe it will get them airtime or get them published.
I like to cite the adage "facts are our friends"...
If Parshall had a guest who doubted the veracity of the Bible, but hadn't actually read it, would she grant such a person any validity?
I've got to stop asking such questions. They're far too easy.
Stupid is as stupid does.
but think of Rhandi Rhodes every time I see Parshall. Did anyone see the C-span debate with these two? Rhandi calls her the "church lady".
And I'm sorry I did.
So this guy is full of it. It's on in two art house type places. If you haven't seen it, it's a tremendous movie, BTW.
Janet Parshall is so small potatoes. And she is a no nothing if there ever was one. Did anyone see her debate Randi Rhodes on CNN? Randi clobbered her with facts.
JJ
I didn't see that you had already mentioned Parshall and Randi's "debate" on CNN.
JJ
That's fine! The right can buy all the facts it wants and hire all kinds of "scientists" to "prove" that Gore was wrong. Of course they will still be wrong, but they don't care, they can also afford to buy houses on the new coastline.