Peter Daou asks:

For reference, here is the Drudge headline Daou was referring to:

And here is the data on 2010 being the hottest year on record.

To answer Daou’s question: it is extremely absurd, but at the same time, utterly predictable. But the underlying question is why Drudge (and other Republicans) would continue highlighting such stories when all available evidence supports the fact that climate change is real and already having an impact.

For the modern Republican party, particularly when it comes to environmental issues, facts are pesky annoyances that have no bearing on public policy. To explore another example of this, let’s take a peek under the hood of some polling on offshore drilling and the oil spill.

On 3/31-4/1, Rasmussen asked (premium account required) 1,000 likely voters if they were concerned that offshore drilling would cause environmental problems.

As you can see, while 70% of Democrats were at least somewhat concerned, just 31% of Republicans felt the same way. Now, this was before 100+ million gallons of oil (and counting) gushed into the Gulf of Mexico as a direct result of offshore drilling. We now have a current and extremely vivid example of offshore drilling actually causing major environmental problems. Indeed, by nearly all accounts the ongoing oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is the worst environmental disaster in American history. So, how have likely voters, Republican and Democrat alike, adjusted their beliefs in the wake of this disaster?

Just as the Tea Party itself is a faux populist movement, subsidized behind the scenes by a combination of hidden corporations, represented publicly by discredited figures like Dick Armey, or greedy bastards, exemplified by the organizers of many of their most highly touted events, so the news organizations now covering their first annual convention in Nashville, are combinations of various bizarre business models that pretend to represent some new paradigm.

First of all, this story should never have been called ClimateGate. Given the similarities between this smear job and the Swift Boat attacks on Senator John Kerry, SwiftHack is a far more appropriate name.

I’ve attempted to cover the major points of interest in this story. Consider this post a perpetual work in progress. It will be continually updated. Please leave appropriate links and angles I’m missing in the comments.

For your convenience, the following 6 points each links to the corresponding section of this post:

The scientific consensus on climate change remains strong.

The impacts of catastrophic climate change continue to rear their ugly head.

Hacking into private computer files is illegal.

All of the emails were taken out of context.

The story is being pushed by far-right conspiracy theorists.

Scientists are human beings and they talk frankly amongst themselves.

I don’t see anything even remotely controversial about this:

“Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases. It puts enormous pressure on the world’s resources. A vegetarian diet is better.”

Or this:

He predicted that people’s attitudes would evolve until meat eating became unacceptable. “I think it’s important that people think about what they are doing and that includes what they are eating,” he said. “I am 61 now and attitudes towards drinking and driving have changed radically since I was a student. People change their notion of what is responsible. They will increasingly ask about the carbon content of their food.”