Yeesh! It's scary if someone is actually pulling Danny Glover's puppett strings and getting him to believe that global warming had anything to do with this or if he is just another opportunist that is using the present stage of Haiti to promote his global warming message.

Either way it makes him look bad. If he thinks global warming caused an earthquake in Haiti he never bothered to ask himself why did we have earthquakes before global warming???

If he knows it has nothing to do with global warming- then his credibility drops to almost nill- as he is just a blatant opportunist.

I can't see the video on mobile.

If they are conflating sub-surface geological events with environmental changes -- They're as stupid as Robertson.

Robertson will naturally get more coverage than Glover. Just like he gets more (negative) coverage than Jeremiah Wright, despite having 20 years of influence over a president. The media is always harder on right wingers than lefties, trying to use one dunderhead to discredit them all.

Side note: I find it interesting the Obama's approval rating dropped below 50% faster than Bush's did, considering the media did everything they could to tear Bush down and now does everything they can to prop Obama up.

No, having read the transcript he's making the same argument that Robertson did, except the sinner and the god are different.

Robertson thinks the Haitians pissed off God.
Glover thinks we pissed off Gaia.

This is a distraction from the real issue. If Haiti was a functional country, they wouldn't have 50,000 dead and no where to bury them.

When was the last time that you ever bought anything made in Haiti? Why did my Gap polo get sewn in India?

Haiti isn't a victim of God's wrath or Global Warming; they've done it to themselves. Their society is so broken that they can't even accept aid by plane because there's no where to land.

"Haiti isn't a victim of God's wrath or Global Warming; they've done it to themselves. Their society is so broken that they can't even accept aid by plane because there's no where to land."

Yup; when you know you live on a fault line, you try build your houses and infrastructure accordingly to account for the earthquakes that are likely to occur, like people in so many other countries too. It's a fault line, not some random unpredictable mystical thing, and construction methods for earthquake-resistance are well-known - and not even prohibitively expensive either even for poor nations.

Yes, let's compare Danny Glover's ignorance on the mechanics of earthquakes and their trivial to non-existent relationship to climate change -- an ignorance that he could probably easily be educated out of -- to Pat Robertson's hateful assertion that Haiti is now suffering because of his superstitious belief in God's wrath.

As good a time as any to bring up one of my favorite quotes by my religion's Founder, Mary Baker Eddy (and any and all disparagement of my religion will be ignored): "Whosoever believeth that wrath is righteous or that divinity is appeased by human suffering does not understand God."

it may be possible that mankind had nothing to do with the earthquake. It may be have been a natural disaster not controlled by sentient life. Just throwing that out there on the the table.

...an ignorance that he could probably easily be educated out of....

I doubt it. Most global warmists are quasi-religious in their belief and resist opposing points of view because they've been taught that they have "a consensus of scientists" on their side.

let's compare Danny Glover's ignorance on the mechanics of earthquakes and their trivial to non-existent relationship to climate change ... to Pat Robertson's hateful assertion....

Glovers assertion is pretty hateful, too. It has its roots in the resentment by the Third World toward the modernized world. Blaming the earthquake and the resulting damage on the modernized world, not only for the global climate change assertions, but also for the modernized world's failure at Copenhagen to had out millions of dollars in "restitution" to the Third World, only serves to stir up that resentment.

Glover is a supporter of Chavez and the Castros. He stands with them in blaming the Third World's ills on the capitalist economic system of the modernized world, an economic system that has enabled Glover to make a pretty good living.

Yes, let's compare Danny Glover's ignorance on the mechanics of earthquakes and their trivial to non-existent relationship to climate change

The point is not his ignorance of geology, it's his statement that the earthquake was a response to Copenhagen. That's a direct parallel to Robertson's idea that it was a response to sin, only Glover identifies the sin differently.

Conan: I doubt it. Most global warmists are quasi-religious in their belief and resist opposing points of view because they've been taught that they have "a consensus of scientists" on their side.

On the subject of resisting opposing points of view, your sweeping condemnation of climate change theorists seemed fairly indicative of that mindset.

I listened to Danny Glover's statement, and it sounded a bit like the suggestion that storms like Katrina will become more commonplace (admittedly a much more plausible theory) should we continue to ignore climate change. (Of course, that didn't stop the gleeful squeals of some on the right, insisting that Bush was being blamed for hurricanes. Not what was said, but that's never stopped any partisan.)

I heard no references to the wrath of God in Glover's statement. Lacking words to that effect, I choose to believe he's merely ignorant of what causes earthquakes. Had he mentioned something like Mother Earth being pissed off because of the U.S. stance on Copenhagen, I'd sooner make the correlation. But lacking the clarity of Robertson's statement, I'm simply not going to assume he was referring to some divine intervention.

"It may have been a natural disaster not controlled by sentient life."

Now that's just crazy talk.

On the subject of resisting opposing points of view, your sweeping condemnation of climate change theorists seemed fairly indicative of that mindset.

I didn't say I was opposed to global warming theory. You did.

There may be some validity to it. I doubt it's caused by mankind and in that I don't think that it's a "man-caused disaster," I don't think that mankind can do anything to slow it or change it, but I am open to the evidence (real evidence, not Al Gore's admitted exaggerations).

But you wanna see closed-minded partisanship? Try saying you doubt global warming is man-made around a group of global warmists.

I listened to Danny Glover's statement, and it sounded a bit like the suggestion that storms like Katrina will become more commonplace (admittedly a much more plausible theory) should we continue to ignore climate change.

It's a stretch to read that much thought into what Glover was saying. I listened to his remarks, too. He spent more time praising Venezuela and "Cooba" than he did trying to tie global warming into increased storm and tectonic activity

And his closing remarks were especially revealing, "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 saying?"

So, a conference in December failed to reach an agreement and an earthquake in Haiti in January was a direct "response" to that? Whose response? Sounds to me like a good old fashioned "wrath of " type thing.

Glover's comments were only marginally less sensitive and only marginally less asinine than Robertson's.

Glover is on the Hugo Chavez Bolivarian socialism band wagon. Blame the modernized world (especially the US) for the ills of the non-modernized world. And the modernized world must be made to pay.

Why the hell was Glover even asked to issue a statement? He is not an earthquake expert nor a Haiti expert.

Someone on Ebay got creative and it looks like they'll pull in a few bucks: A Pat Robertson voodoo doll.

Interestingly, Pat Robertson believes in Anthropogenic Global Warming.

Patrick, just because Glover refuses to say the deity's name, that doesn't mean he isn't a True Believer. If a Muslim less of a Muslim because they refuse to draw a picture of Muhammad? It's absolutely clear to me that Glover's statement was religious in nature, and every bit as hateful and ignorant as Robertson's.

Brian, I liked Tim Blair's take on it best. It went something like this: Gaia extracts vengeance against the wealthy white guys who didn't carry out Her will at Copenhagen by... killing a bunch of poor black people. Man, that's Old Testament.