Saturday, January 16, 2010

Danny Glover: Haiti Earthquake Caused By Global Warming -- you can't make this stuff up!!!

Pat Robertson said that "a pact to the devil" caused the devastating earthquake in Haiti, and now Danny Glover proposes another: climate change.

"What happened in Haiti could happen to anywhere in the Caribbean because all these island nations are in peril because of global warming," Glover said. "When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I'm sayin'?"


James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4

416 225 2777

www.jmortonmusings.blogspot.com

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is no less ridiculous than Al Gore's assertion that Hurricane Katrina was caused by manmade global warming.
-David

Woman at Mile 0 said...

good grief! It's not the same at all anonymous. Hurricane strength is increased by global warming because ocean temperature is increasing.

Anonymous said...

to put it 'kindly' ahm...

both Robertson's and Glover's comments are a good argument for - ' the importance of education', doncha think!

Daria S.

Anonymous said...

There's proof...a little bit of education is a dangerous thing.

Stephen Downes said...

It sounds farfeteched, but there are some very reputable scientists saying that global warming may cause earthquakes.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/07/guardian-global-warming-to-trigger-earthquakes-tsunamis-avalanches-and-volcanic-eruptions/

http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0819/p16s01-sten.html

http://www.celsias.com/article/global-warming-causes-massive-earthquakes/

Now, as always, the relation between global warming and mother events is not direct and is most certainly complex, so you can't just say "x caused y".

But in the same light, you can't just dismiss Glover as spouting nonsense. His statement, though poorly worded, shows he's more up on the science that either you or your commenters.

At the very least, I would have expected you - a prospective government official - to Google the issue before posting.

James C Morton said...

Downes -- very interesting -- may Glover was not as crazy as I thought.

Anonymous said...

Mile 0

One bad hurricane in a bad hurricane season is not proof of man made global warming.

Hurricanes have been far worse and probably have been around for billions of years.

Since 2005 the hurricane seasons have been surprisingly quiet.Can this be considered proof of global cooling? Of couse not.

Gulf storms are heavily influenced by water temperatures in the Gulf.They can change dramatically year to year and even week to week.This has always been the case.

John Paolozzi said...

In fact you can make this stuff up. You, and the rest of the rightwing did just that.

If you actually listen/read what he said, it's more likely that what he meant was that disasters of this magnitude can be expected in the Caribbean should climate change proceed unchecked.

He could have been clearer, to be sure, but what boggles the mind is that you, and thousands of others who are trumpeting this retardation, haven't bother to first check to see if he really meant that.

Instead, you just jumped to the conclusion that the man is an idiot. Which is possible, because hey... look at Robertson who's medieval beliefs are shared by tens millions of Americans.

Anonymous said...

Yes, John, you're right. Danny Glover speaks the truth, and everyone on the right is trumpeting retardation. Brilliant assessment. According to your own reasoning, YOU should be checking your facts. If you did, you'd find that your remarks about "everyone on the right" and "thousands of others" are not accurate. Sorry, pal. I know it's an inconvenient truth. But there you are. Now, I'm off to save the Caribbean from more natural disasters caused by Republicans.

Anonymous said...

Hey, John - Think about what you just said. You condemn everybody on the right for making things up about what Glover said. Then you say "it's more likely that what he meant was" ....

"More likely?" Why, John, you just made something up. Did you, in your words, "bother to first check to see if he really meant that"? No, John, you didn't, or you would have simply told us what he meant, not what he "likely" meant. Again, your words. Sorry.