Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Use my Amazon Portal
Regardless of the value of their argument (or not, as the case may be) these pro-global warming scientists are coming off as an arrogant, priggish, intolerant clique. Guess they never heard of the adage "when in a hole, stop digging."
If I were that Moreno guy, I'd ask to go back on the air with Watson just to call him 'Professor FuckNut'...then say we're now even, and let's get back to the science...
That Watson A-hole has forgotten the first rule of holes: stop digging!
Thanks for leaving out the first 2 minutes of context! Very compelling move coming from people claiming to be victimized by cherry-picking.
"Thanks for leaving out the first 2 minutes of context!"Follow the links, you silly little boy.
Watson - what an asshole. Talking over the guest, shouting, ridiculing him, not speaking in a reasonable tone. Yep, very arrogant, priggish and intolerant.Oh wait - that was what the fat guy in the polka-dot tie was doing.
I followed the link after I rewound the tape and watched it from the beginning. What she decided to highlight - versus allowing us to make up our minds after displaying the entire context first - is the point. Isn't that precisely the point, My Fellow Skeptics and Denialists? Do we have no common understanding of what behavior constitutes cherry-picking?
No matter how subtle?
The proper response to Watson's Openness comment is "I completely agree with you on the criticality of Openness. So let's all look at the source data and modeling code. Since we agree we can end this discussion."
Moreno is no prize either, but when you are up against a guy who has had control of the worldwide microphone for a decade, you have to be aggressive.
Ritmo--she can cherry pick what she wants, especially when she provides the whole link. Even you were able to figure out how to go back and get the whole context.
How is that different from reporting on massaged evidence from publicly available data? Apparently you were able to procure that as well. We both figured out how to go back and get what we thought shouldn't have been skimmed over or relegated to an afterthought.
Watson talks about character assassination; presumably, he's talking about his colleagues at Norwich. I think their behavior was tantamount to character suicide. Watson just hates the postmortem.
If presentation isn't everything then the skeptics have lost their own point.
Thanks for leaving out the first 2 minutes of context! What an asshole.
Now, a word from Massachusetts' own favorite "Masshole," Denis Leary...I'm an Asshole!(excerpt)I use public toilets and piss on the seat,I walk around in the summertime saying "How about this heat?"I'm an asshole (He's an asshole, what an asshole)I'm an asshole (He's the world's biggest asshole)Sometimes I park in handicapped spaces,While handicapped people make handicapped faces.I'm an asshole (He's an asshole, what an asshole)I'm an asshole (He's a real fucking asshole)Maybe I shouldn't be singing this songRanting and raving and carrying onMaybe they're right when they tell me I'm wrongNAAAAH!I'm an asshole (he's an asshole, what an asshole)I'm an asshole (he's the world's biggest asshole)(SPOKEN)You know what I'm gonna do? I'm gonna get myself a 1967 Cadillac Eldorado convertible, hot pink, with whale skin hubcaps and all leather cow interior and big brown baby seal eyes for headlights. Yeah! And I'm gonna drive around in that baby at 115 miles an hour, getting 1 mile per gallon, sucking down quarter pounder cheeseburgers from McDonald's in the old-fashioned non- biodegradable Styrofoam containers! And when I'm done suckin' down those grease ball burgers I'm gonna wipe my mouth on the American flag and then toss the Styrofoam containers right out the side, and there ain't a God-damned thing anybody can do about it. You know why? Because we got the bombs, that's why!Two words--nuclear fucking weapons, OK? Russia, Germany, Romania - they can have all the democracy they want. They can have a democracy cakewalk right through the middle of Tiananmen Square and it won't make a lick of difference, because we�ve got the bombs, OK? John Wayne's not dead - he's frozen! And when we find a cure for cancer, we're gonna thaw out the Duke and he's gonna be pretty pissed off. You know why? You ever taken a cold shower? Well, multiply that by 15 million times. That's how pissed off the Duke's gonna be.I'm gonna get the Duke and John Cassavetes and Lee Marvin (Hey) and Sam Peckinpah (Hey) and a case of whisky (Hey) and drive down to Texas
The pro-global warming people have no right to talk about character assassination. The emails that leaked show THEY were the ones who were doing the character assassination. They faked their data so they could line their pockets, and then tried to get anyone who disagreed with them fired. On top of that, they were calling for massive new taxes on the public that would have put millions of people out of work and made everyone live with a much lower standard of living.This man has some gall calling the "skeptic" an asshole.
"How is that different from reporting on massaged evidence from publicly available data?"It's telling that you can muster more outrage about the lack of context provided in a youtube link than you can about the exposure of unethical behavior in the upper echelon of climate scientists.
MUL, this Climategate thing is just eating away at you, isn't it? I suppose I'd feel the same way if I'd ever been dumb enough to have bought into anthropogenic global warming.By the way, the U.N. estimates that the upcoming 12-day Copenhagen climate conference will create 40,584 tons of carbon dioxide equivalents, roughly the same amount as the carbon emissions of the entire couuntry of Morocco in 2006. And I'm supposed take these jackasses seriously.
Are people here capable of adjusting their volume knobs or do we need the professor and Morano to manipulate that for us as well? Despite the fact that he was louder, everything in Morano's words lacks the exclamation points and other punctuation that he uses to in transcribing Watson's. I'm talking to you, Zrimsek. You incurious asshole!
It's telling that you can muster more outrage about the lack of context provided in a youtube link than you can about the exposure of unethical behavior in the upper echelon of climate scientists.Bias starts with the simplest of clues. People going on about climategate might want to start showing a willingness to confront their own biases or else they (and we) are back to square one. If that's the game you want to play...
What's the big deal about sliding the controller to the left? Took less than quarter of a split second. The "first two minutes" were hardly left out. And a link was given to an article. Cherry-picking accusation is a real stretch here...and the later analogy is a real dud.
I mean, you didn't even have to follow a link, much less leave this blog, to slide the controller to the left. For pete's sake.
"dumb", "jackasses", coming from someone responding on a comment thread about how climate scientists are not only biased, but uncivil!Shoot yourself in the foot much?
2007 video 1 hr 15 minThe Great Global Warming Swindle
I see reader. Some evidence is important enough to point out in the title, while some should be on more of a do-it-yourself basis. The internet makes it possible for all sorts of evidence to become more open and available. The reams of links I got from everyone here about that file comes to mind. So what's your point? We're talking about what someone's saying with their presentation.If you don't think that's the point, then the skeptics have no standing in their P.R. war.
What the pro-global warming scientists were trying to do is right up there with genocide. Too bad all the politicians went along with them or we could have put them on trial for crimes against humanity.
"Bias starts with the simplest of clues."The regulations aimed at cutting CO2 in the atmosphere could end up costing trillions of dollars. The bias evident in the emails is a monumental scandal. And you're going on about having to "rewind" a youtube video. This is an example of what is wrong with global warming evangelicals.
This is an example of what is wrong with global warming evangelicals.And what, precisely, is it an example of? The belief that people can have an effect on both the actions of their government and their environment? Ooohhhh... you got me there! The internal consistency just burns. OTOH, I'll bet that your agenda is the belief that you can fool people into thinking that we should remain reliant on a limited resource. Or that to do so is economically feasible, let alone desirable. Which stance is less consistent?
13,000 years ago most of America was covered with glaciers.
Two words:Trofim Lysenko.And before you say that's over -the-top, some of our warmist friends have said that being a "denier" should be a criminal offense.
I think both of the speakers were assholes, though of different sorts.Ritmo, though... just a typical eco-asshole.WV: pinizi... the eco Ponzi scheme that tries to bleed dissent away through endless pinpricks. Or just pricks.
If Althouse were being biased with her YouTube presentation, biased on par the pro-global warming scientists, she would have deleted the entire clip from the face of the Earth, then presented a transcript of what she thought she heard. Also, she would have received large sums of money from the government for her findings, have tried to get every commenter here who disagreed with her fired, and supported putting thousands of people out of work. And she would swear the original clip existed but not show it to anyone. Only then would she be on par with a pro-global warming scientist.
And John Burgess wins the thread for asshole-ness by linking his profile to a web page where it's clear that he can't see the Saudi oil as the threat that it is to America's economic, energy and foreign policy interests. So I'm an eco-asshole. So sue me. And Burgess is an economic and political asshole and the clearer threat to our country and rational thought.I can see why I've left you feeling so threatened, John. But to the other readers, look to him as an example of what to avoid. The Saudis are having more and more trouble feeding their own people as time goes on. Maybe John will blame that on America, too.
Watching the likes of MUL twist in the wind in the wake of Climategate simply could not be more gratifying. The fairy tale that is AGW is having a very happy ending.
I saw this before in the cartoons. The little mouse, Jerry, I believe, gets ahold of thread and runs with it causing an entire sweater to unravel from the bottom to the top and leaving a cat, Tom probably, naked in front of a crowd in an auditorium. Ha ha ha ha ha. This is great.
The only news with Climategate is that the public was ignorant about the method of science and now they aren't.Truth in science is what the majority of scientists say it is, which means that science has always been a mud wrestle of sociologically complex proportions.So, that the AGW proponents are trying to stay on top of the pack isn't news.It might be worth note that they are now more boorish than in times past.But the real news here is that the public thought that scientists were all objective and open learners looking at the cosmos, and now they've been educated to know better.Scientists spend most of their time proving what they have already accepted by faith to be true.
Arrhenius' unmitigated finding in 1896 had nothing to do with faith. But I feel bad for you that you labor under the impression that theories are any less important to science than data. Until the denialists and skeptics have a theory for which phenomenon will over-rule Arrhenius' finding, then his will still be the salient consideration - regardless of whether an effect is seen at 0.039%, 0.04%, or whatever concentration you are willing to wait to have us achieve before declaring your findings any more conclusive than they were before.
Defenseman Emeritus said... MUL, this Climategate thing is just eating away at you, isn't it? I suppose I'd feel the same way if I'd ever been dumb enough to have bought into anthropogenic global warming.Sorry, DE, but you sound stupid venturing into denialism. Like out of equilibrium DDT buildup, out of equilibrium radioisotope buildup once from nuke bomb tests, the acid rain buildup, the infamous Alar scare...yes, CO2 is building up out of equilibrium and common sense says that CO2 is a warming agent.The question is WHAT that CO2 from human overpopulation is doing.Scientists who are skeptics tend to believe it is not a dire thing..that any anthropogenic warming is slight...and mankind has far bigger problems than AGW in the near-term.Same with most skeptics, like me. It MIGHT be a serious problem...but NO EVIDENCE really exists that backs Catastrophism...and NOTHING calls for a massive destruction in US jobs and our citizen's standard of living at this time. But if it IS TRUE, we need to nail the science, come up with a 50 year plan to depopulate by mandatory population limits, and get a 50 year transition plan to get off use of fossil for electric generation - primarily with fission nuke Uranium-Thorium breeder reactors, and hopefully fusion..
I don't know who funds Climate Depot, but their transcript was pretty inaccurate and botched, as far as accusations of boorish behavior go.
I'm not surprised that MUL/BSR/RB/whatever-name-he's-hiding-under-today has already spammed the thread with over a dozen comments out of the first 40 in an effort to derail any discussion of the topic Althouse posted.I bet Jones, Salinger, Mann, et al. are wishing they could as easily change their names to escape the legal, academic, and financial consequences they're facing from the recent revelations of their widespread, long-term fraud. Enron Scientists, getting what they deserve; What a good year for science this is turning out to be.
I once bought a space heater at Climate Depot.
I still can't think of the word asshole without recalling the hilarious marriage scene from "Serial."
Plus that's where all the Mexican Day laborers hang out. You can save on your carbon footprint by having them trot alongside your pick-up. You use a lot less gas if their extra weight isn't dragging you down.
There was no spam, just points against which you can't defend. Jeebus. The initial post was about as short as a post can be. How much of a point do you think could have been made regarding whether Watson was a bigger asshole than the liar whom he called an asshole? Apparently not much of one but it seems you're just as willing to change the subject as you claim others would be.
Arrhenius was one august savant.
I once bought a space heater at Climate Depot.One of those ceramic ones? Those are cool.
lol. leave it to chickenlittle to finally give the thread the levity it was begging for.
From the level of his discourse, the quality of the content of his posts, and his overall approach to this thread, it is obvious to me that Ritmo is one of the discredited "scientists" who is looking for a job after faking global warming data./ignore.Trey
This blog comments are becoming unbearable with MUL dominating them. Either Althouse implements an anti-troll, anti-spamming policy or I'm out of here.
It is obvious Trey, that you are not only an asshole, but wrong - on all counts!Go back to taking pictures. Apparently anything less visually impactful is confusing and troubling to you.Once again, I'm only responding to the context explored in the extremely short post - and its video and link. It's amazing what will set some people off on a Ken Starr-style fishing expedition of facts and reasoning. But at least Starr came up with some good porn and a conclusion that was no less obvious than it was before the millions spent. And on the facts, at least it was probably somewhat accurate. If only climate change involved titties and ass then you guys would be all over it.
Either Althouse implements an anti-troll, anti-spamming policy or I'm out of here.So says the most weasel-like little troll of them all!
Oh please, please, please Ritmo, keep posting! You might be loquacious, annoying and wrong but, unlike Alex (and Titus and whatever other sockpuppets he/she uses) you're not a troll.
Geez, Palladian! If you're going to attempt reverse psychology you could have at least thrown in one compliment there! (Although I'm not sure loquacious is all that bad, and I don't see what I said that was wrong). Other than that - thanks for (incidentally) coming down on Alex. But I'm not sure if this means your opinion of Titus has changed and, if so, why.
In any event my "non-existent" job takes me away for business (and pleasure, given the venue) starting tomorrow and lasting through Thursday. I have to get my kicks in by then. But for five days, the club will be Ritmo-free!
Backpeddling, denials, outright character attacks and assassinations, arrogance, elitism, claims of scientific objectivity, and most of all, a crisis that the white house refuses to capitalize on. Where the hell is my popcorn? I haven't seen kabuki like this in a while. And we have Ritmo, the great messenger troll giving a soliloquy not on the merits of the science, but on how mean people are being to the scientists. Fabulous.
All this proves is that John Coleman was right.wv = uncower = truly?
Oh loqatious, annoying and wrong are all compliments in my book ;)My opinion of "Titus" remains the same; I've always thought it was a troll and I've become convinced that they're, as The Little Man From Another Place says in Twin Peaks, "one and the same."
People seem to forget that an Internet troll is not simply a commenter with whom you disagree.
It just means he's a true believer.
I think that you see what you want to see. For me, all along, Watson came across as the rectum, and the hostess seemed to be in his corner. I am sure that there are a lot who see this the opposite way, including, of course, Watson.
Palladian - thanks for the clarifications and the distinction between disagreement versus trolling activity. As for rh and Methadras, I have nothing against being "mean" to scientists. If they messed up in whatever public mission they thought they had, let the people relishing a backlash have at it. I think Judith Curry has the best response (look it up). But even accepting what has been shown so far doesn't allow me (or anyone) to rule out what would or could happen in the future in a dynamic, changing system. And I don't think that makes me a true believer of anything, just cautious.
Interesting post and even more enlightening comments!The poor skeptic had to fend off both the ignorant climate "scientist" and the MSM announcer / paid fool. O well, the skeptic was a fool for thinking he'd have a fair chance to present his case. Watson is ever so cool in the face of reality, after all he has the full support of the media to obscure the facts like CRU falsifying data and destroying their original weather station data.Lastly, we Alhousians have our own version of Prof. Watson tweeting in the wings, Dear RB, "he" of sock puppet fame.wv: vings shall hold us aloft unless they're made of wax.
Mian said: these pro-global warming scientists are coming off as an arrogant, priggish, intolerant clique.Because that's what they are.
Ah, to be abused by logical nitwits. Almost the same as working for the government!WV: What's the plural of "polder"? Why poldi, of course. No holding back the floodwaters now!
Sorry, DE, but you sound stupid venturing into denialism.Someone who blames at least 75% of the world's ills on the existence of Judaism is telling me I sound stupid? The strain is making my irony meter cry.
BBC: "Professor Watson, are you in denial?Watson: "Absolutely not."from Part 1 of the interview, at 6:26:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32a7PC49XPM
"But if it IS TRUE, we need to nail the science, come up with a 50 year plan to depopulate by mandatory population limits..."A Final Solution, eh? Nothing gets your little rocks in a lather like the thought of DEPOPULATION! IT VILL NOT BE DIFFICULT MEIN FUHRER!VE VILL NAIL ZUH SCIENCE UND ZEN NAIL ZUH JEWS UND UNDESIRABLES!
ZEDERNFURT HAS A PLAN!
"Will you stop shouting?"Leftists always seek refuge in civility when they are on the losing side of an argument. It is a transparent tactic but effective for their own true believers. It is a form of character assassination, implying your opponent is uncouth and therefore an ignoramus. I didn't hear any shouting, just spirited debate.And then the guy tries to say something in response,but the prof is still talking so he stops, and then the professor interrupts himself and tries to tar his opponent as a blustering cretin thinking it more useful to point out another example of rude behavior rather than make his feeble point. Watson later makes mention that his colleague is American (as if we didn't know) do I see a trend here? I don't even have to tweek the data. Then to top it off Mr. sophisticated Brit professor, believing he is speaking to an ally off air, blew the rest of his credibility as Mr. Civilsophisticate. What an asshole!
I read in the trades that in the new Sherlock Holmes movie, Dr. Watson warns of the dangers of overpopulation and global warming in Victorian London.Sherlock Holmes just fires up his bong to smoke some cocaine and laughs it off.But since Sherlock if played by Robert Downey Jr. that might have just been improvisation.
Watson does not call Sherlock Holmes an asshole.
I still can't think of the word asshole without recalling the hilarious marriage scene from "Serial."I'm glad someone else remembers that!
What the pro-global warming scientists were trying to do is right up there with genocide.Agreed. Except for the "were" part. They still are. And I think something much more damning than these emails is going to have to happen for all the people who were invested in the AGW gravy train to give up.Just look at ACORN. It's going to take a wooden stake and holy water to kill it.
Knowing Americans (and by extension Australians) as I do culturally, I know Watson is viewed as the ARCHTYPICAL arrogant Brit, smug, condescending, snotty.I hope to God that the Climate Change mafia put Watson out there as their voice, because normal people will automatically be turned off by his attitude. Cheers,Victoria
OK, re my dumb above:Galileo is Moreno, not Watson, etc. Too bad the more objective investigator isn't my dear Watson
82 comments on this thread! My God, people. It's a Saturday during Christmas season. Why aren't you out there attending Christmas parties knocking back the eggnog?I just went Christmas shopping (THE MALLS ARE DEAD), and now I'm getting ready for a par-tay.
Theo!!Nice to see you!wv: clisions -- We haven't had any clisions on the Intnet lately.
Oops! That should be "Rumba," not to be confused with "Roomba."Hey, Blake!vw = gaticWhat you get when you combine your garage and attic.
He is Jeremey.Trey
It isn't surprising an experienced political hit man can get a nerdy egghead scientist to lose his cool. I'm not sure what this says beyond that.
Zedernfurt:50 years from now none of us will give a fuck.
Pay no Attention to that Man Behind the Curtain! The Great and Powerful Prof Watson has spoken.Assholes.
For those of you chuckling over the apparent demise of the Global Warming crowd, I remind you one thing;This is no longer just about a scientific theory. For many of these people, it's not a theory, it's not conjecture, and it's not imaginary.It's their religion, and they believe in it as fervently as you might imagine. And people espousing fervent religious beliefs that they believe our greater society doesn't respect, or take seriously, have a tendency to do some very stupid and dangerous things.You can expect the the Envirowhacko version of the First Crusade or 9/11 any day now.
Palladian is back to teaching after his summer off chasing young boys in Thailand.How did it go, Palladian? Settle for one pederast conquest or did you go the full rent boy route?No wonder you have such objections to reducing global population to sustainable numbers! Less surplus boys, less fun for Palladian.....==================== vbspurs - "Knowing Americans (and by extension Australians) as I do culturally, I know Watson is viewed as the ARCHTYPICAL arrogant Brit, smug, condescending, snotty."The Dr. Watsons are the prime reason why the Empire failed. In every country that wanted the Brits out, never trusted them for an instant on true power-sharing, true equality with the "colonials" - there was a mental image of the Dr. Watsons of the day, and a feeling that whatever the cost, it was worth it to get rid of the Brit Dr. Watson cohort.Insufferable, classist, archly sarcastic.From America to Nigeria to India to Egypt to the Bahamas to Singapore to Australia...with varying degrees of success after independence..but at least no more insufferable Dr. Watsons..==================
Thank you, Ritmo Brasileiro. Your brilliant posting has convinced me that conspiring to destroy data, defy FOI requests, and shut down debate in peer-reviewed journals is ethically indistinguishable from starting a video in the middle.
Why aren't you out there attending Christmas parties knocking back the eggnog?When I got married 16 years ago today, I neglected to notice that the anniversary would forever coincide office Christmas parties. That's my excuse and I'm sticking with it!
That's my excuse and I'm sticking with it!I'm so envious. Anything to credibly avoid the dreaded Office Christmas Party.
The so-called scientists have to explain how they destroyed their data. That isn't science.And as someone else pointed out, the e-mails reveal the dog that didn't bark: if they had "lost" the data, why were there no e-mails at any time saying "hey, you know what? It appears we've lost all the data"? Instead, we have e-mails from the head guys saying "we'll destroy any data we have because it's inconvenient to our mission." Spin, spin, spin, but it's not science.
Herr Zedernfurt resorts to the pederast slur against a gay person. Typical, obvious choice for a marginally intelligent Nazi.Tell us, Doktor Zedernfurt, who will and who won't make the cut in your little population cull?Eh, don't bother. The answer's pretty obvious.
The deep question is why the quotes on asshole.Called tweezer quotes.Doris Kearnes Goodwin uses asshole but nicely, real audio, Aug 2, 1998.
And people espousing fervent religious beliefs that they believe our greater society doesn't respect, or take seriously, have a tendency to do some very stupid and dangerous things.Wow, I wasn't expecting the thread to take that turn!
Ritmo,Its been fun watching you spin lo these several hours, but I have a life and had to go out to do things.However, being in the PR business I can assure you it's never wise to call someone an asshole in a debate forum: you tend to lose points that way.Please tell the gang at the Warmist Clubhouse the next time you see them.
Were not their ultimate intent as deadly as their communist predecessor, this would all be terribly funny.It's not unlike finding out your kid's schoolbus driver has a gun and a rape kit stashed under the seat.
That said, I'm off to watch an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000.Now that's science you can bank on.
"That said, I'm off to watch an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000."Best show ever.I hope it's a Joel-era episode...
Ritmo has thrown in the towell on faux warming. He cannot stand to see the loss of Government Control from the revelation of the Great Hoax as a banal criminal act rather than an honest mistake. That must hurt.So he is now pleading the need for the Hoax...to save us from ourselves using up all of the cheap and abundant Oil, gas and coal. He throws out the next untruth that has its consensus as settled science: that oil, gas and coal are limited resources. That is also false.The next 500 years of reserves are already known and they haven't stopped looking. Wow! No crisis and therefore No Tyranny needed. How frustrating that must be.
Whatever. Can't I take a break for eight hours on a Saturday without having to step back in and remind the Mad Max/dirty energy addicts that: 1. Perceptions of civility might differ in Britain and America?2. The bias of the Deniers Club Membership has been put to use by think tanks and companies responsible their own huge, and hugely unethical, misinformation campaign?3. That carbon's contribution to climate at any higher concentration is not settled as inconsequential regardless of whatever climate data can be agreed upon at concentrations lower than 0.038%?(I remind the intelligent reader that Traditional Guy expounds upon the supposedly non-toxic nature of CO2 [as if that were the point] when, at concentrations greater than 2% it is a known neurotoxin). Before oil there was coal. Before coal there was peat, and before that wood. It takes less time to grow trees than to create coal and yet TG hangs on to the fiction that growing energy needs will be satisfied by fossil fuels with the same gusto that would have compelled a lumberjack to prevent people from transitioning away from wood as an energy source a hundred years ago. Enough with the bullshit, TG. Your obsession with seeing tyranny everywhere is about as relevant to where we get our energy as a grilled cheese sandwich is. And for what it's worth, goofball, go to Freedom House and let me know how far up on the freedom scale the most oil-rich nations lie. The truth of the matter - for anyone that cares - is that the availability of lucrative natural resources to monopolize, such as oil, serve as a compelling appetizer for would-be tyrants. As Saudi Arabia shows, the human development that would have occurred is stunted in favor of relying on oil, rather than the ingenuity of the people, to run one's state. That lack of human development prevents the creation of a middle class - thought to be a crucial precursor to a free society. And after you're done looking at that example, also see Columbia. And then Russia. Far from being a check on totalitarianism, oil encourages it.See Fareed Zakaria for details. And do yourself a favor and stop replying to comments until you do something about your delusions. For what it's worth, I think Watson's big nothing of calling someone an asshole is far less troubling than his interlocutor's inability to let someone else speak.
I meant to say Venezuela rather than Columbia. They're both not on a good spot on the freedom scale. But Venezuela provides a better lesson due to Hugo Chavez - the tyrant who merely wants to harness Traditional Guy's precious oil resources for the good of the state. Right. Maybe Alaska's next.
Ritmo...So how did you prove we are running out of the finite resource of coal,oil and gas? I did not see anything in your argument on that subject other than "It is self evident". That kind of assumption is flat earth stuff even if 95% of the people agree with that presumption. But politics is the subject, not science at all. Right? Or are you still beating the dead horse of increasing ppm CO2 dangers stalking human life world wide. I thought that hoodo voodo was over.
MUL/BSR/RB/ETC's method of arguing is simply to assume rather than examine the facts.Those of you who respond to him -- do you detect any sign of intelligence? You do realize as soon as he understand he's lost the argument he'll change his name to something else, don't you?
Green energy is part of the movement to decentralize energy production and allow consumers a greater stake in producing and selling their own energy. These are inherently democratizing, freedom-favoring trends. No wonder TG dismisses them. If totalitarianism didn't exist he wouldn't have such an enemy to keep him so animated and paranoid of the left. He rallies against Arrhenius' concepts as if that is part of a conspiracy to keep tyranny alive, when in truth, the dirty energy that tyrants love to monopolize is what keeps tyranny alive in the 21st century. But why listen to me? Go to Freedom House. Look at how free the countries that rely on oil are on their maps. Argue with their great liberal/tyrannical conspiracy. Whatever.
"That said, I'm off to watch an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000."Best show ever.Memo to myself: Pack more lifesaving serum in the future.
It is self-evident that we are running out of oil and coal because they are produced from decayed organic matter that takes thousands if not millions of years to produce. In the meantime, since people like you are opposed to energy efficiency and energy conservation, we can assume that as our needs increase, utilization will only continue to grow. Why you are not able to apply issues like supply and demand to natural resources is anyone's guess. Perhaps you can look to that idiot, Miller (who obviously feels overlooked and perhaps inadequate), to explain why. He's so full of information and explanations.
do you detect any sign of intelligence?Someone without any intelligence is disqualified from commenting on whether he can detect any in others.Which argument did I lose?
Ritmo...I get your point that all tyranny/empires have relied on some scarce resource under their control to raise the money for paying the Bureaucracy and the Army that administer the protection racquet. But part of American exceptionalism, that you seem to presume is not part of the equation, is that our tradition and Constitution still reject tyranny instead of trying to win the Tyrant of the Year award. Today's oil gas and coal scarcety is made up by the holders of the political power to scam the profit from these most excellent sources of revenue. Green Machines is a new attempt to diversify away from that power/Cartel. That is a good idea. But refusing to accept the benefits of the existing abundant and safe oil gas and coal is really working the reverse of the announced good intentions. Good night. I am less paranoid since Georgia Tech and Alabama won tonight despite the evil officials calls. We also attended a performance of Handel's Messiah that reminded me who is The King of Kings and Lord of Lords. So I'll let Him handle the arising Tyrannies instead of me.
I'd be more impressed in general if I could see that both sides in general showed more evidence of being able to create/make/fix/do things independently, on the smaller of, if not the smallest, of scales. But I don't see that, in general, and they don't show that, in general.
Have a good night, TG. I'm glad you were energized by the wins and enjoyed the performance. And regardless of what's in the Lord's hands, those of us who love freedom and the ability of a greater number of consumers to access and produce clean, renewable energy will do our part to make sure we don't become like Saudi Arabia, Russia, or Venezuela. Even when it comes down to something as mundane and unexceptional as how we use and produce our energy.;-)
What impresses me is those who embrace the future, and have the commensurate knowledge of and are involved in technology thereof (as they have, for decades), but ALSO understand the technical past and therefore embrace what's important about that--and given that knowledge, steadily collect the tools and knowledge (and have been) which will stand them in good stead regardless.wv: deregOh, lol.What'll happen by default if either extreme triumphs with, as desired, any possible checks left bleeding in the dust.I'd bet we'd figure out a way to survive. Not so sure about too many of you.
well i do most things on the smallest of scalesand let me tell you i won t mind global warmingone bit it s started to snow here in cambridgemass and it s pretty to look at but poor tommyhe's the boy whose computer i usewell poor tommy has to schlep aroundtomorrow singing xmas concerts and ringinghandbells and blowing on a recorderas an insect with the transmigrated soul of a12 tone composer you can imagine how muchi hate xmas music unless it s by schoenbergwhich isn t very likely although penderecki orsomeone like him probably wrote something forchristmas and of course there s messiaenwho was a catholic mystic and a church organistand wrote a ton of stuff about la nativite duseigneur which is for the birds if you ask mebut i suppose those guys are better than thetrans siberian orchestra and that computercontrolled xmas light house which is itselfresponsible for more c o 2 than demnarkand i wish tommy would stop playing thatdamned recorder because he s rehearsingthe same thing over and over a bit like here
Man, Palladian....Joel on MST3K.It's like the climate scientists were Frank.
"Hide the decline, Frank."
welcome seasons greetings of the blogging cockroach and would you please infest our house would you could you please thank you amen but if not thanks just the same on account of the very idea which is important
It is self-evident that we are running out of oil and coal because they are produced from decayed organic matter that takes thousands if not millions of years to produce.It is perhaps self evident if you are only aware of biogenic theories for the origins of petroleum and unaware of the abiogenic theories, of which there are a number. Most scientists do support the biogenic theories, however, there is not a consensus.Furthermore, while it is self evident that continued usage of a limited resource will eventually deplete that resource, it does not automatically follow that we are in imminent danger of depleting the world's supply of petroleum. It is an eventuality that we can plan for, but no one has any special knowledge of just how much petroleum still exists in the world.
The scientific consensus is that most of the coal was produced in the Carboniferous period(circa ~300mya)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carboniferous over some millions of years. We are steadily exhausting this supply - so it is imperative that we ramp up nuclear energy to preserve our coal supply as an emergency fuel.
one bit it s started to snow here in cambridge massI KNEW IT. Blogging Cockroach is an MIT boy genius.Cheers,Victoria
wv: snobu!! I KID YOU NOT.How the Japanese call Professor Watson.
It's like the climate scientists were Frank!...Climate change is for assholes...
Question. What is a moby? What does it stand for?
I found out.
I don't remotely think Ritmo is a troll. Wrong, to be sure, but not a troll at alHowever, AGW proponents have nobody to blame but themselves to blame for their lack of credibility. To attempt to spin the emails as has been tried makes the scientists no different than political hacks.
Hairybuddha says, "Never argue with an idiot. They'll only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
Post a Comment