Straw men are always easy to defeat.
Magoo! Are you a professor emeritus of physics at Princeton University and a member of the National Academy of Sciences?
No?
Please continue.
Straw men are always easy to defeat.
Breathe, grasshoppah.No wondering why you admire strongmen, dictators and egomaniacs.
I was hoping with the end of 2016 the left would finally accept The Donald as their leader and Savior, but it appears that they are still the little crying bitches as last year. It's going to be a long and entertaining year, maybe we should invest in tissue and xanex.Breathe, grasshoppah.
The fact that you use the term, "denier" lends credence to the basis of the piece.
Harper is among "researchers who see global warming as something less than a planet-ending calamity"...
So when are you gonna stop using fossil fuels?Ok, so what?
So when are you gonna stop using fossil fuels?
More confirmation.
Thanks for posting that. When my daughter joined her Filipina sorority
Shimabukuro makes so much sound come from such a small instrument, which he calls the instrument of peace. I liked it because it cannot be spun, it's unimpeachable. You catch shit here for telling stories, but for me story telling is the only thing that will allow the internet to be human rather than a bully playground of projection. Its like we need a fire to make it work. Anyway, my own daughter, at this point we've met the great-grandmother on the birth mom side, who is apparently native Hawaiian. It was a big deal, with the birth mom fluttering around not knowing what to do with herself. It would be interesting to know if our daughter would "qualify" for the Kamehameha school, although the genealogy on the birth dad side is not entirely clear. So maybe not, and I don't really know if they are that good an education to begin with. At any rate, she's three, going on four. We were at a New Year's day party today and I was watching her work the crowd. Bumping into people, pretending to be shy. "Oh so cute" in her princess dress. Looking over at me with her ringlets, dancing eyes and pirate's smile. This is so easy, dad. And I'm like, this wasn't in the script.
I like the thought you put into this, and I think we agree on the political nature of the debate.I doubt you need any more confirmation, but make of it what you will. I'm sure the Greenpeace guys were like "Hanukkah" or whatever that H work is Iz uses for "fish on". I personally prefer (well some other life time ago) a dry fly worked through the drift line to the smell of chum and diesel but that's just me.
Here are two more classic links to add to our treasure trove. I think they are worth a read to anyone with a passing interest in this topic. Not the blahgosphere this time but the semi-popular press. First, Happer's views circa 2011-and I don't think there are really any new wrinkles since then.
https://www.firstthings.com/article/2011/06/the-truth-about-greenhouse-gases
And a point by point rebuttal from Mike MacCracken, who is Princeton alum and was a chief scientist (and maybe still is?-not sure) at the Climate Institute at that time.
http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/...out-Greenhouse-Gases-and-Climate-Change_1.pdf
Two things about it. First, note that the discussion in these links, while from learned individuals, is at best tangentially about climate science. They are not engaging in a scientific argument. It is not data driven. There is very little data in it, in fact. Its really about policy, and, to me, more fundamentally about globalism and opposing metaphors into which we can shove and find operating modalities to make use of knowledge. The real climate scientists keep doing what they have been doing for the last decade or so, following the pulse of AGW through climatic mixing systems, learning about them along the way. Same thing with endocrine disrupters and the Alar stuff the came up awhile ago. Its all the same story.
Second thing. Like HD brought up, Happer is an MRI guy and not a climate scientist. He's got like over 200 peer reviewed "real" pubs and is in the National Academy. They don't just give that away. But you do see this from time to time as scientists approach the end of their careers. Sometimes especially when they have a big name. They walk away from the trenches and increasingly become a satellite orbiting, in an increasingly erratic fashion, their own laboratory. They write opinion pieces, give expert testimony, that sort of thing. And the money can be good. But its no longer about the science.
Im not qualified for one of those.
While you obviously give more weight to human released co2, and its impact on the climate, than I do, you dont come across as alarmist.
I can appreciate that.
It shows a certain rationality that has become lost in what you point out as an increasingly political debate.
Are we now to believe Bernie to be a real life nerd who simply has been playing a redneck? Say it ain't so!
Tell the people of Barrow Alaska it ain't happening.I like the thought you put into this, and I think we agree on the political nature of the debate.
While you obviously give more weight to human released co2, and its impact on the climate, than I do, you dont come across as alarmist.
I can appreciate that.
It shows a certain rationality that has become lost in what you point out as an increasingly political debate.
btw, thank you for unleashing more info about the ancestry and life style of vermontshire.
Showing any slight concern about the environment makes you an enemy and there for open game. They are like Scientologists in their defensive fervor.Can you point to a single "alarmist" that comments here?
It aint.Are we now to believe Bernie to be a real life nerd who simply has been playing a redneck? Say it ain't so!
Thank the Lord and pass the black eyed peas!It aint.
I can barely read.
...and I type with two fingers.
I like singing with the ukulele. I find Jake's tunes boring.Great song, and beautifully done on the ukulele.
The legendary lead guitar in the original version was actually laid down by Eric Clapton.