Google pulls out of conservative political group over climate change

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt says the company is pulling its support of a conservative political group because he believes it is lying on climate change.

The group, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), lobbies state legislatures on a variety of issues. It has proposed legislation to roll back government mandates for greater use of renewable energy.

Schmidt, in an interview on National Public Radio’s “The Diane Rehm Show,” said Google decided to cut its support of the group because of its stance on climate change.

Schmidt said Google’s support of ALEC was due to an unrelated issue, which he did not identify. But he said “I think the consensus within the company was that that was some sort of mistake, and so we’re trying to not do that in the future.”

“The company has a very strong view that we should make decisions in politics based on facts—what a shock,” he said. And he said groups that argue against research showing that humans are the cause of climate change, “they’re just literally lying.”

ALEC CEO Lisa Nelson issued a statement saying she was sorry to see Google leave the group, but that it would not change its position.

“Google is an important voice on these and many other issues, and we will miss their perspective in our discussions,” Nelson said. “However, ALEC and its members will continue to advance limited government, free markets and federalism through dialogue, debate and model policy formulation.”

TM & © 2014 Cable News Network, Inc., a Time Warner Company. All rights reserved.

7 comments

  • floydhowardjr

    Dems are trying to legislate a narrative change hurting the American people in the process! All Democrats and supporters here and abroad are trying to flood the media with hysterical climate change & global warming alarms and fabricated evidence to take the heat off Dem candidates in the November 2014 and 2016 elections due to the train wreck of Obamacare, ISIS inaction and immigration chaos! They shout, scream, cry, make outlandish claims and won’t stop till after the elections! Poor Democrats! The tsunami cometh!

    • Say What

      Over 95% of the scientists agree that climate change is real. Like the Dinosaurs, attitudes like yours will go extinct — the problem is that if you have your way you will drag all of us down into the abyss!

      • Branko Pezdi

        And what are YOUR credentials in atmospheric science, pal? (Mine are legitimate; we all know that you have none). Take your first sentence, for instance. Are you talking about manmade climate change or natural climate change? Point us to one study, just ONE, that QUANTIFIES mankind’s contribution to the warming of the atmosphere that has been occurring over the past 10,000 years (long term) and the past 300 years (when the Little Ice Age ended). Computer models and simulations (M&S) do not count; they are not data or evidence, much less quantitative data. M&S are not the real world. Point us to M&S that successfully “predicts” today’s climate using known data over the past few decades. Oh, and please explain to us why “scientists” such as Michael Mann and various others need to engage in fraud, which they have been caught in numerous times. Explain why the 200 year warming trend has flat-lined for the past 17 years, taking every single computer model by surprise. Explain why the correlation coefficient between CO2 emissions and the Earth’s climate over time is virtually zero since the Industrial Age began. Explain to us why the terminology keeps on changing – first it was “global warming”, then it became “climate change” after 15 years of zero warming, and now it’s “climate disruption” as the Left attempts to be even more shrill in crying wolf. Explain to us why you think that only the warming skeptics are politically motivated, whereas those taking government funding are not. Explain to us how “climate disruption” is the one and only example of science where contrary physical data are not considered legitimate; in other words, explain to us why this is not simply the politics of the Left that has nothing to do with the real scientific method and everything to do with centralized control.

      • Say What

        Blanko, as I said, over 95% of the scientists agree that climate change is real and that man is the largest contributor to that change. I am not surprised that you, and your credentials, are a part of the 5%! I will provide just the one example that you asked for — from NASA! I am sorry to inform you that I will side with NASA over your “opinion.”

        http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

Comments are closed.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.