So what, these foreigners ought to be denied the same opportunity?
The day any comment thread can be closed because it satisfies some criteria for a "flame war" is the last day I'll even think about posting here again.
Any thread about environmental topics becomes a space to debate environmental politics, just like any thread about the US government becomes a space for leftists and right-libertarians to take pot shots at each other (I…
I'm not sure absolute falsification is meaningful with this kind of prediction. Then it's not science.
Yep, great movie.
OK that's good to hear. But read about the history of eugenics if you'd like to know how other people might misinterpret your argument.
What situation would falsify the theory of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming? Or the theory of catastrophic anthropogenic ocean acidification?
When someone says they have the right to dictate not only how much energy I use, but also where that energy comes from, I call it fascism.
Yeah yeah, I read Ishmael too.
Stewardship means handing it over to fascists?
That's it, thanks!
We seem to disagree, as I'm convinced that a carbon tax would almost certainly be an unmitigated disaster.
Most scientists agreed that fire involved phlogiston not so very long ago.
Giving politicians the authority to levy a carbon tax is an absolutely terrible idea, and it has nothing to do with how I feel about China.
Someone laments the fact that we're all doomed and wants to upend the social order, then someone else replies with a casual implication that population control would be an effective remedy. What a surprise.
Actually it seems like that's not the correct attribution. It was probably Peter Marshall: "Give to us clear vision that we may know where to stand and what to stand for—because unless we stand for something, we shall…
Someone famous once said something to the effect of: "When people believe in nothing, they will believe anything." Interestingly enough most of those people are completely in denial about their own irrational zealotry.
Since regulating CO2 is such a useful political tool, it's not surprising that a new hypothesis justifying regulation has been making its way into the mainstream as the global warming movement collapses. I doubt that…
Ah well, everybody has their off days.
Yet Germany has institutionalized the same mentality on a more abstract level. "Global warming might be happening, shut down the energy industry!" "We can't use nuclear power, someone might get cancer! Keep mining coal…
Wot wot pip pip cheerio get the torch line's engaged eat some crisps there's a good chap.
In other words, we should trust the DHHS and the IRS with information that the NSA can't be trusted to access? Am I reading that correctly?
Your opinions are provided by PageRank? Good to know.
I'm getting a serious Poe's law vibe from this comment and username.
So what, these foreigners ought to be denied the same opportunity?
The day any comment thread can be closed because it satisfies some criteria for a "flame war" is the last day I'll even think about posting here again.
Any thread about environmental topics becomes a space to debate environmental politics, just like any thread about the US government becomes a space for leftists and right-libertarians to take pot shots at each other (I…
I'm not sure absolute falsification is meaningful with this kind of prediction. Then it's not science.
Yep, great movie.
OK that's good to hear. But read about the history of eugenics if you'd like to know how other people might misinterpret your argument.
What situation would falsify the theory of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming? Or the theory of catastrophic anthropogenic ocean acidification?
When someone says they have the right to dictate not only how much energy I use, but also where that energy comes from, I call it fascism.
Yeah yeah, I read Ishmael too.
Stewardship means handing it over to fascists?
That's it, thanks!
We seem to disagree, as I'm convinced that a carbon tax would almost certainly be an unmitigated disaster.
Most scientists agreed that fire involved phlogiston not so very long ago.
Giving politicians the authority to levy a carbon tax is an absolutely terrible idea, and it has nothing to do with how I feel about China.
Someone laments the fact that we're all doomed and wants to upend the social order, then someone else replies with a casual implication that population control would be an effective remedy. What a surprise.
Actually it seems like that's not the correct attribution. It was probably Peter Marshall: "Give to us clear vision that we may know where to stand and what to stand for—because unless we stand for something, we shall…
Someone famous once said something to the effect of: "When people believe in nothing, they will believe anything." Interestingly enough most of those people are completely in denial about their own irrational zealotry.
Since regulating CO2 is such a useful political tool, it's not surprising that a new hypothesis justifying regulation has been making its way into the mainstream as the global warming movement collapses. I doubt that…
Ah well, everybody has their off days.
Yet Germany has institutionalized the same mentality on a more abstract level. "Global warming might be happening, shut down the energy industry!" "We can't use nuclear power, someone might get cancer! Keep mining coal…
Wot wot pip pip cheerio get the torch line's engaged eat some crisps there's a good chap.
In other words, we should trust the DHHS and the IRS with information that the NSA can't be trusted to access? Am I reading that correctly?
Your opinions are provided by PageRank? Good to know.
I'm getting a serious Poe's law vibe from this comment and username.