That is not an intellectually honest answer. It is a cop out, voting “present” on an issue that has been determined a proven fraud.
Gingrich’s statement on global warming is even more disturbing than I thought. I know that Gingrich as the intellectual capacity to understand a purposeful fraud when he see it, but he doesn’t have the capacity to admit that he made an error in judgement.
The National Academy of Sciences disagrees with you and Newt pointing that out is not a copout. If you don't like Newt that's fine, I was just pointing out that he doesn't believe in global warming as you asserted. If you find his position too nuanced, I am not going to defend him against you. As my tagline indicates, I am still undecided. I do believe his position is intellectually honest and not a copout.