Published January 14, 2015
This is a rush transcript from "Glenn Beck," February 15, 2010. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
GLENN BECK, HOST: Something very strange happened on the way to, you know, the environmentalists' happy fun land. Because by now, we were not only supposed to have jobs in a wonderful new green economy with free health care for everybody, but we were supposed to have saved the Earth.
If you think I'm overstating the promise, let me let the president of the United States and his words speak for themselves:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: Generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell the children this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs for the jobless. This is the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BECK: Holding and healing while creating the jobs. Shhh! I'm just creating some jobs over here on the back side of your head Mr. Planet. Yes. And that was time when we were going to start to care for the sick.
Well, now, back in reality land, where people don't heal planets, we just face the truth, the economy is far, far worse. Health care failed miserably and cap-and-trade is disaster.
But, what about the healing of the Earth?
Still, they seem to march with the whole cap-and-trade global warming thing despite the latest from Phil Jones. Phil Jones, a leading climate scientist from the alarmists' side of the argument.
Help, help, we're all going to die in a fiery flood.
Right? Central figure of the leaked e-mail scandal known by some who actually read papers that report the truth: Climate-gate.
Along with his admissions now in an interview with that right-wing organization the BBC, this is what he said: The rate of warming in the late 20th century not unique. What? Really?
Yes, he goes on to say, yes, it happened two other times in the past 150 years alone. Almost had you. Between 1860 and 1880 and then again 1910 to 1940, started to heat up and went down again.
That seemed to work itself out. By the way, those were both far before anybody had an SUV or there was a significant impact from man-made emissions.
Next, this guy admitted uncertainty in temperature readings only 130 years ago — 130 years ago — not really sure what happened. I mean, why don't we check and find out what happened 1,000 years ago? We have can't even find out what happened 130 years ago, let along 1,000.
But what about something a little more current? *I like current stuff. Al Gore TV is Current TV.*
Jones admits that there has been no significant warming since 1995, no statistically significant warming since 1995. Just doing the math in my head — that's 15 years. Fifteen years — that's weird. Doesn't it go all the way back to when Al Gore was just a dull vice president and not a dull atmospheric scientist/Nobel Prize-winning/climate profiteer?
Yes, I think it does — 1995.
And Jones also admits there has been a slight global cooling — cooling — since 2002. While it's also not statistically significant, someone at the head of the alarmist community even thinking the words "global cooling" is kind of a little victory right here in my heart.
Now, how about the famous "hockey stick" graph? Central idea is no, no, no, no something significant happened here — 1,000 years. Nothing. Very stable for 1,000 years. And then, all of a sudden, we get an SUV and, boom, it's all the way to the top, right?
Yes. This is when you started driving your kids to school — right here, you hate-monger. This was all part of Al Gore's supposed consensus.
But Phil Jones admits, yes, no real consensus on this one. Too much debate on whether an event known as the medieval warming period, yes, was global in nature and hotter than it is like right now. So, to quote, obviously, the late 20th century was not unprecedented. Oh, good.
Jones also admits the temperature readings going back 1,000 years are considerably less certain than recent data.
Remember the central chart in Al Gore's movie went back — I guess I said 1,000. But it's not actually 1,000 years. Isn't it 600,000 years? 600,000.
Jones also admits to asking a colleague to delete all the e-mails relating to the IPC climate report; which is weird — why would you do that? You're making history. And acknowledging that he has trouble keeping track of information. Where did I put those temperature records used to drive trillions of dollars in policy? Oh, they must be in my other pants.
But perhaps, most significantly, Phil Jones is admitting now what skeptics have been claiming forever. When asked if scientist believed the debate on climate change is over, he replied, quote, "I don't believe the majority of climate scientists think this. This is not my view."
No. There is still much that needs to be undertaken to reduce uncertainty. So no consensus among scientists. There's no consensus among — so I think he is saying there that the consensus is that there is there is no consensus. That's great.
The warming — not unprecedented. No significant warming since 1995. Is this the head of the global warming alarmist or a right wing think-tank? I'm not sure.
After everything else that has happened lately, if this really was about science and we're really in a debt and the problems we're in now, wouldn't you already say, "Whew, we don't have to spend that money"?
Wouldn't everybody stop and say, "Hey, wait. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Maybe we should reconsider."
When the trillions of dollars that are on the line with policy decisions all around the world require — well, it did India — come to a full stop.
Let's look at what is going on here. We're not — we can't trust these people.
If this were about science, wouldn't science matter just a little bit?
Content and Programming Copyright 2010 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2010 Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.