Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Science questions posed to Palin

Katie Couric, whom Sarah Palin must by now privately refer to as She Who Must Not Be Named, recently asked Palin what her thoughts were on global warming. (See, that's how I'm justifying yet another Palin-obsessed rant....it's science questions.)

Couric: Is it manmade in your opinion?

Palin: You know … there are man's activities that can be contributed to … the issues that we're dealing with now with these impacts. I'm not going to solely blame all of man's activities on changes in climate.

Well, that's reassuring, to know that our activities are not due to climate change. Quite a load off, what?

Yeah, yeah, yeah, she misspoke, and two sentences in a row that appear to be attributing man's activities to climate change is obvs just a flustered gaffe. So let's ask about evolution now, shall we?

The portions of the Couric interview that have shown up in video clips display Palin agreeing that evolution is a serious scientific theory and should be taught that way, awesome. But then you read the transcript for the parts that are still on the cutting room floor:

Couric: Should creationism be allowed to be taught anywhere in public schools?

Palin: Don't have a problem at all with kids debating all sides of theories, all sides of ideas that they ever - kids do it today whether … it's on paper, in a curriculum or not. Curriculums also are best left to the local school districts.

Nice how she puts it off onto "the kids" to debate. But what we're hearing here, plain and simple, is "The nasty atheist Feds should get their mitts off our school curriculum, so's we can teach The Word of Our Lord alongside the librul science hoohah!" HMMMM.

Finally, I think that most scientists accept that homosexuality is an inborn genetic trait, like brown eyes or curly hair or, um, heterosexuality. Catch this from Palin:

Palin: But as for homosexuality, I am not going to judge Americans and the decisions that they make in their adult personal relationships. I have, one of my absolute best friends for the last 30 years who happens to be gay. And I love her dearly. And she is not my "gay friend." She is one of my best friends who happens to have made a choice that isn't a choice that I have made. But I am not gonna judge people. And I love America where we are more tolerant than other countries are. And are more accepting of some of these choices that sometimes people want to believe reflects solely on an individual's values or not. Homosexuality, I am not gonna judge people.

Yep, that's right. Them homos and their screwed-up "choices." God love 'em!

Not that we expected otherwise, but I thought you might like to have your scientist talking points together for your next cocktail party or swing state recruiting trip.

Link to the transcript.

5 comments:

DamnGoodTechnician said...

I read an interesting article on Daily Kos about her remarkably stupid views on evolution, and how they are completely at odds with Alaska's wealth in oil. Where do you think that oil comes from, dear Sarah? The mysterious oil fountains at the center of the earth? Perhaps some other explanation than moldering dinosaurs?

DamnGoodTechnician said...

Here's the link, btw.

Anonymous said...

Atrocious. That's my new favorite word for her.

Drugmonkey said...

since you don't have a recent comment list I'll note this here. you got a shout out for your blog-as-scientist-party concept

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqHK2JzKgsU

Albatross said...

I also noticed the 'actions due to climate change' thing in the interview and she said the exact same thing in the debate. Word for word!
She certainly has memorized her points...even if they are backwards!