Rush Limbaugh Says Only Atheists Can Accept the Science on Climate Change

The battle over what students learn about evolution in their science classrooms is just one of many challenges facing supporters of sound science. Climate change remains a prominent target of anti-science extremists. Take, for example, right-wing radio blowhard Rush Limbaugh. (Please.) On Monday, his voice dripping with contempt, Limbaugh even questioned the religious faith of people who think human actions that contribute to climate changeĀ endanger what they believe is God’s creation. From his Monday radio show:

“If you believe in God, then intellectually, you cannot believe in man-made global warming. You must be either agnostic or atheistic to believe that man controls something he cannot create.”

More on the Media Matters audio clip:

What Texas students learn about climate change will almost certainly be part of the debate over new science textbooks up for adoption by the State Board of Education this year. Remember back in 2009 when Don McLeroy, then still chairman of the state board, dismissed climate change science as “a bunch of hooey”? Climate change deniers still sit on the board.

If you haven’t already, sign the pledge to #StandUp4Science and help the Texas Freedom Network defend science education in public schools.

50 thoughts on “Rush Limbaugh Says Only Atheists Can Accept the Science on Climate Change

  1. “Take, for example, right-wing radio blowhard Rush Limbaugh. (Please.)” Question: Where would you like him taken? I hear Somalia is lovely this time of year…. But seriously, I will concede that the earth’s ecosystem is very powerful and does have a way of balancing heat, cold and natural pollutants. However, the rapid concentration of toxicity (human created) is throwing that balancing act off its axis, making Earth gradually unfit for human habitation. Cockroaches and many others of their ilk will do just fine. Who knows? Perhaps it’s all part of a “divine” plane….

  2. I’m not religious, but I believe in God. But I also believe that climate chance. is partly part of nature as we do go through periods of warming and cooling, but man is not helping either. I believe we need to take better care of the environment so we don’t make it worse.

  3. It doesn’t make sense.. Let’s say John is a born again Baptist. He is also a geologist who studies climate. He cannot be a believing Baptist because he believes in climate change. Rush’s PhD was definitely not in either theology or philosophy.

  4. In logic one example that shows “You must be either agnostic or atheistic to believe that man controls something he cannot create” is false is enought to prove it wrong.

    I can’t create life. Yet if I don’t feed an infant in my care it will die. I have control over something I didn’t create. Being a good Christian won’t change the outcome.

    How can anyone give anything he says any creedence?

  5. It’s my belief that Christians who believe the bible is ‘inerrant word’ of God, despite all the scientific proof to the contrary, have a fundamental disconnect with reality as the basis for their most deeply held beliefs. I really think that ability to disconnect translates to other parts of their lives, allowing them to discard anything, even documented science fact, that conflicts with their opinions. Scary, because these are the folks that are making a lot of the leadership decisions in this country.

  6. I am an atheist, and believe that humans are a factor in the warming of the earth, however the two are not related. I just happen to be right on both issues šŸ™‚

  7. Absolute control isn’t required; merely an ability to influence. And any cattle rancher should understand that you don’t need to have created a cow de novo to be able to unsubtly influence its course by whacking it with a cattle prod.

    It looks like a specious categorical denial, intended to avoid engaging with the substance of the empirical reasoning.

    1. @Vickie Vogel: The “ditto-heads” care. There are apparently many of those feral creatures roaming about — even if he-of-the-golden-microphone is losing sponsorship. That said, sponsors will buy ads on his show because he delivers an audience, sad to say…. even if the sponsors don’t agree w/ his “views expressed.”

  8. One of the more stupid comments he has ever made; Remember, YOUR God is too small if you have any doubt that HE can do anything He desires, it is because your concept of God is too small. You are thinking in human being terms not in God, the Almighty terms. Climate change is not a hoax…remember God gave us the conceptual power to think bigger, better,and broader. Why limit what God is able to do?? why limit what human being can become ?Judith R Gates

  9. There is an obviously huge correlation between evolution doubters & climate change doubters. The former is based on (a mistaken interpretation of) religion. But what, I wondered, could possibly be the religious objection to climate change. Thank you Rush for clearing that up.

    1. Using the GSS-2010 data variables EVOLVED and TEMPGEN1 (including “I don’t know” as median level response for each), the correlation is a level that seems significant, but just modestly — r=0.23 or so.

      Adding POLVIEWS and BIBLE attitudes to the correlation matrix implies that while both relate, religion is a more direct driver for (dis)belief on evolution, while politics is more proximately causal for climate change.

  10. I think everyone would be best served by not even mentioning that guy’s name. He’s like one of those villains from a fantasy movie where his power is gained through recognizing his evilness. Just ignore R*sh. Don’t mention him. Don’t link to his crap. Without attention he’s powerless.

  11. I’ve told it before and I’ll tell it again…
    The difference between Limbaugh and the Hindenburg?
    One’s a flaming Nazi gasbag and the other’s a dirigible.