1
in b4 everyone!

2
f-you charlie Gibson sock puppet!

3 Proving that The Daily Show is willing to subordinate its politics to its need for cheap laughs.  This is a truth of show business that Progressives forget at their peril.

4 Will not watch.  Jon Liebowitz is a fuck-tard, regardless if he agrees with common sense this one time.

5 data? methodologies?

Never heard of it.

6 Sorry, not watching. Metro sexual beta males make me want to torment them until they cry or stomp off in a huff.

7
You gotta love the tepid applause.

<sup>heh heh ha

heh? oh, yeah, heh, it's jon stewart so it's okay to ha ha</sup>

8 Little by little Stewart is having to surrender his self-righteous douchebaggery in the face of overwhelming moonbat corruption. He had a wake-up call with the ACORN prostitution scandal but chose to take the blue pill and go back to doing monkey tricks for his audience... apparently it wasn't completely successful. There's still hope for this one.

9
Did you hear that near the end?

Jon Stewart pretty much pulled an eggmcuffin and said "You were right but you didn't know why you were right."

10 Skull-f*cking polar bears?  Well, if Gov. Palin had included that in our itinerary to Alaska, that interview might have turned out differently.

11 Proving that The Daily Show is willing to subordinate its politics to its need for cheap laughs.

Actually he did get his "politics" in at the end with his "this doesn't debunk the global warming theory".

The problem we have is that the members of the media who ARE covering this are not giving the entire message of how much of the AGW scam has been proved to be fraud already. Even before the "leaked e-ails" and code.

12

F John Stewart, bring back Craig Kilborn that was the last time that show was funny.

 

13 I wish this whole climategate thing would give me back oil paint. I hate this latex bullshit.

14

The problem we have is that the members of the media who ARE covering this are not giving the entire message of how much of the AGW scam has been proved to be fraud already. Even before the "leaked e-ails" and code.

It's making me scream at the computer when I'm reading people who are saying we need to spend more money to find out the truth. Uh, the truth is out there staring you in the face and you don't need more of my money to find it.

If there was AGW, they wouldn't have had to fake the data!

Why is that hard to understand?

15

As I said -- interesting to watch the psychological journey here.

Is it kinda like a big, juicy rationalization?

_{50 points if you know where that's from}

16 John Stewart would deepthroat Obama's junk if Obama had named his healthcare plan the "Final Solution". Wake me up if he ever gets around to wondering why the Justice Department drops guilty convictions against BP members for voter intimidation caught on freakin camera.

17 Obviously no one has bothered to tell Stewart that the polar bear population IS INCREASING.

18 That's it! Jon Stewart is banned from the internet!

19

Step 1: Claim global crisis.

Step 2: Fake your data, fake the research, throw out ethics, etc.

Step 3: Profit!

Step 4: Claim that you need more money to find out how things really work, but this time with real data.

Step 5: Continue profiting until retiring.

20

I can't stand John Stewart. They need to bring back Craig Kilborn. Those were the good old days.

Stewart just pissed me off because he is able to effectively hide behind the "i'm just a comedian" line when it suits him.

He expects to be taken seriously when he goes on a tirade or gives a speech on the show, but when he is shown to be wrong, unfair, or malicious, he is able to say he is just a comedian.  That and I happened to be watching when he was interviewing a guy from the Defense of Democracies on, and said that dropping the atomic bomb was a mistake and Truman was a war criminal.  He apologized the next day, but only because it is such an extreme and unpopular view in mainstream america. I think it was a moment of accidental honesty.

21 Um Jon, those aren't polar bears, they're restless moonbats roaming the artic trying to build sympathy

22 Only a liberal needs an excuse to skull-fuck a polar bear.

23

Obviously no one has bothered to tell Stewart that the polar bear population IS INCREASING.

Only a tiny bit of truth can drip in at a time, apparently.

24 Here's the thing: The most damaging thing the media does is not report on stories.  They can tell you what to think all they want, when it comes right down to it, once they tell you the story, telling you what to think about it only goes so far.

25 aka, I knew it was the Big Chill. Or rather, strongly suspected. First guess.

26 Clown nose on, clown nose off, still a clown.

27
I wish cognitive dissonance caused pain.

If Jon Leibowitz was on fire I'd look for gasoline.  F*ck him.

28

There is something lurking beneath the surface, imo, that explains a lot about liberal thought processes.

It is an arrogance of intellect that causes intellectuals (as they see themselves) to believe that they should, ne are obligated to control the behavior of those less intellectually gifted (as they see themselves) than those whose behaviors need to be controlled and that the end (behavior control) justifies the means (lying about every f--king thing). 

Tranlates easily to the conduct of the Barry administration and the liberal led congress.

29
yeah, I figured you know, Ace

Jeff Goldblum is dead, btw. Kinda sad; he wasn't that old.

30 17 Obviously no one has bothered to tell Stewart that the polar bear population IS INCREASING.

You do think they're endangered, don't you?

31

Carl Sagan got an erection when talking about how small and incosequential humanity is when compared to the universe.

But we figured out the climate of the earth, with some shitty math.

Very good.

32

We are many and will more than likely contribute to the rising sea level.........

33 That and I happened to be watching when he was interviewing a guy from the Defense of Democracies on, and said that dropping the atomic bomb was a mistake and Truman was a war criminal.  He apologized the next day, but only because it is such an extreme and unpopular view in mainstream america. I think it was a moment of accidental honesty.

Liberals never make hard moral choices.  For people who love to talk about gray areas, they can only operate in moral absolutes.  The atomic bomb is just a perfect example.  They never consider the unintended consequences of their moral choices, that it can lead to a worse outcome.

Just remember this: no matter how intellectual and sophisticated they may sound, their point of view on politics is not much more advanced than that of a pre-teen.

34 What? Jeff Goldblum's not dead.

35
He's dead. Shut up.

36 >>>Jeff Goldblum is dead, btw. Kinda sad; he wasn't that old. Are you serious? FYI, I *think* that there is a persistent Goldblum is dead rumor that goes around the internet every few months, along with phony obituary.

37

Obviously no one has bothered to tell Stewart that the polar bear population IS INCREASING.

You're welcome.

Now please excuse, I have a flight to catch.

38 Source?

39 Well he died in "The Fly".

40 ah I see. We're starting it up again, eh? Yes, too bad about Jeff Goldblum. He will be missed.

41 They replaced Goldblum with a perfect double for Paul McCartney.

42 Yeah, the last time the rumor hit was in June when people thought him, Dane Cook and someone else all fell off a cliff in New Zealand. Big hoax.

43 I'm not dead, but my career is.

I was married to Geena Davis though, so suck on that h8ters.

44

For the benefit of true believers like Stewart, lemme see if I can squeeze this whole methodology thing into a nutshell:

Jones, Mann, et al., practice paleoclimatology; that is, the statistical reconstruction of historic climate records. Their approach works something like this --

let y = a time series of observed global temperature records.

Unfortunately reliable time series only go back 100-150 years or so, a blip on geological time scale. To figure out if there is any sort of significant millenial trend, the series needs to go much farther back, 1000 years or so. Great grampa Ogg was too busy avoiding plague infested rats to write down the temperature, so we need to deduce it out from "proxy variables," like measurements on annually striated phenomena like tree rings, ice core samples and so on. so...

let x₁ ... x_p = a time series array of proxy variables.

Great! Now them thar proxy variable records will get us back 1000 years. But they're expressed in measures of tree ring width, band coloration, ice density, etc., not in temperature. And contrary to popular belief there isn't a physical law or textbook formula that converts these proxy measures into temperature. To do this Mann, et al., use a statistical approach --

1. perform a Principle Components Analysis (PCA) of the proxy variables. PCA is a standard statistical technique for linearly transforming/ reducing a set of raw correlated variables (x₁ ... x_p) into a set of variables called Principle Components (PC₁ ... PC_p) which retain the information in the original data. The PCs are orthogonal (uncorrelated) with one another.

2. Next, Mann et al. regressed the 100 years or so of observed temperatures against the proxy variable principle components:

y = b₀ + b₁*PC₁ + b₂*PC₂ + ... + b_p*PC_p + error

the regression coefficients (b's) estimated from recent data were then applied to the older proxy PCs to obtain retrospective "backcasts" or "hindcasts" of the temperatures in 1015, 1016,... 1850.

Voila! The Mann et al. statistical model resulted in the now infamous hockey stick, showing a radical increase in global temperatures in recent years versus the relatively flat milenial variation. This was in large part the basis for the IPCC report.

The initial controversy about this result was raised by MacIntyre and McKittrick (MM) who noted the backcasts of Mann's reconstructed temperatures didn't reproduce the amplitude of the Medieval "warm period" or the subsequent "little ice age" that previous research had estimated. That previous work suggested that the recent uptick in temperatures in no big whoop compare to previous decades in the past 1000 years, but Mann's result showed it off the charts. They published a couple papers suggesting the flat reconstructed historical temperatures were artifacts of Mann's selection of a time frame for extracting principle components (see step 1 above), which artificially suppressed the variation in the temperature backcasts. This is likely what the CRU emails were talking about when they referred to "Michael's Nature trick." This artifact explanation was largely confirmed by George Mason U statistician EJ Wegman (methods editor for JASA), who blistered Mann's model in a 2006 report commissioned by the Congressional Energy & Commerce committee. Amusingly, Wegman showed that replacing Mann's principle components estimates with repeated samples of random white noise continued to produce the same hockey stick shape.

Now here's where the fun begins. MacIntyre and McKittrick wanted to follow up on their research, and asked Mann and Jones for their source data. This is where M&J started stonewalling to the point where M&M made FOIA requests, which were ignored. The emails give some sense of how desperately the CRU group wanted to avoid providing it. Why? Because, I suspect (and seems obvious from the "harry_read_me.txt" programmer's notes), the basic observed temperature variables -- the linchpin of truth in Mann's model -- are hopelessly, utterly corrupted.

Now, if you've been following this, Mann's entire temperature reconstruction method rests on knowing (observing) recent periodic global temperatures, y. Quibbling about principle components aside, that's the dependent variable in the backcasts. But as is now becoming increasingly plain, y was constructed from an undocumented process that took raw ground station data and ran it through a black box that included smoothing, filtering, inference, manipulation, baling wire, glue and the juice of one whole lemon. This is what the CRU people are calling "valued added homogenized data." Or what normal people call "made up horseshit." It's also the temperature data that dozens, if not hundreds of AGW studies are based on.

In the last few days, the ECU has cynically offered to "share the data," but what they are offering to share is this numerical sausage. What they won't share is the source code for their computational raw data meatgrinder, which I suspect contains a treasure trove of numerical shenanigans.

45 What?  Paul McCartney dead?!

46 I heard the guy that played Zach Morris on Saved by the Bell just died in a motorcycle crash.

47 Dustin Diamond? There is a fall-off-the-cliff page where you can add any celebrity's name and you come out with a real-looking story about the "tragedy." I saw them do it with Dustin "Screech" Diamond too.

48

I love how this video was uploaded onto youtube by one of Inhofe's staffers.

Touche asshole.

49 Oh, I get it.

Clearly they were all too wasted on val-u-rite to see the cliff face after a long night of hobo hunting.

50 The Jeff Goldblum has died schtick never gets old.

51
It's true, he and Will Smith.   Some kind of private plane crash.

52 Iowahawk's a lot funnier on his own site.

And I was told there would be no math.

53 I have a degree in Atmospheric Proctology.

54

Daily Show. *Yaaaaaaaawwwwnnnnn*

Wake me up at 3am for some Red Eye.

55

Just so you know, I'm feeling just fine.

http://tinyurl.com/2qbdx

56 Just so you know, Stewart is not ready yet, of course, to give up his Pro-Science Talisman of Liberal Do-Goodery.

Breaking news:  Jon Liebowitz is not very smart.

57 Fuck Jon Stewart six ways to Saturday. He's just upset because it gives the other side ammunition against the religion of global warming climate change.

58 34 What? Jeff Goldblum's not dead.
          Ah, come on!  Am I dead or not?

59

Yeah Screetch and the kid from Wonder Years have been brutally slain hundreds of times in the past 2 decades. I never heard the ones about Jeff Goldblum I guess you learn something new every day.

OT but the boy from Silver Spoons was just found strangled to death in the bathroom of a gay Parisian nightclub.

60 Well, somebody make up their mind.

61 http://tinyurl.com/nfxvjm

Goldblum on Colbert refuting his death with comedic effects.

62 Jeff Goldblum's death is the saddest thing since I was killed in Vietnam.

63 Jayne rocks. The RNC needs more Jaynes.

64 Hey! We need to fact check Stewart!

65 Michael Crichton rocks.

66
Mindy Cohn, also dead.  They always go in threes.

67 Pop Rocks.  Why did it have to be Pop Rocks?

68 Meredith Baxter is still a thespian though, right?

69 I heard the actor that played Alex on Family Ties was just diagnosed with Parkinsons.

70 64 Hey! We need to fact check Stewart!

Posted by: CNN at December 02, 2009 03:16 PM (wnU1W)

No, CNN, shut up, didn't you get the memo? We ignore the story and claim it will blow over in a week.

71 62 Jeff Goldblum's death is the saddest thing since I was killed in Vietnam.

Posted by: Jerry Mathers at December 02, 2009

 

 

 

The Beaver is dead?  I guess Wally and I can finally smoke a little doobie up in his room without the little shit ratting on us.

72 Ace: "How do you deal with loss? Denial, then anger, then bargaining, then depression.

And finally -- doubt we'll see too many get the last step -- acceptance."

OK, so the new recovery timeline stages go something like this:

Denial -> Anger -> Smartassing -> Bargaining -> Depression -> Acceptance

We'll surely bring this up in a seminar post-Copenhagen. I believe I foresee some grant money for this systematic reclassification. And lots of depressed news anchors.

73
The kid who played "Mikey" on those Life cereal commercials?

Yeah, dead.

Killed in Cambodia by Stephen Spielberg. He fell out of the helicopter with Vic Morrow.

74

Nice post, iowahawk. But it needs to be peer reviewed before I'll believe it.

Ask Ed Begley.

(Laughs)

75

Killed in Cambodia by Stephen Spielberg. He fell out of the helicopter with Vic

But Vic just posted at 2:43 pm.

Or was that Brian Dennehy?

76 I see Jeff Goldblum.

77 It's old.

78

73
The kid who played "Mikey" on those Life cereal commercials?

Yeah, dead.

Killed in Cambodia by Stephen Spielberg. He fell out of the helicopter with Vic Morrow

 

 

 

Really?

79

40  Yes, too bad about Jeff Goldblum. He will be missed.

Brian Dennehy HAS to play him in the inevitable bio-pic, he;s the only one that can do the part justice.

80 Crichton's book about this is a great read.  I'm trying to think of the name, but it's not coming.  If anyone knows, please post it.

81 You know Goldi, if you are on the internet, you can look it up.

82 I also heard that, through vigorous testing, it was proven that the dinasaurs in "Jurrasic Park" were more intelligent than Jeff Goldblum.

83 I can neither confirm nor deny that Jeff Goldblum is dead.

84 Goldi, you're thinking of State of Fear. Ace, if you're reading the thread, I emailed you re Crichton and a speech he gave.

85

IowaHawk, you are a scholar and a gentleman sir.

Dr. Crichton, I miss you and know that while you are in a better place seeing this victory in the long war of seperating the Church of Gore from the very important state business of ecological managing, but I do wish you were here so I could see your smile at their tremors.

86

Does that mean Goldblum is a Zombie???

Yikes!!!

and will that effect his acting skills?

87 I still want to lauch Algore out of a clown-cannon, OK?

88 Jeff Goldblum and Paul McCartney both died. You can tell by the cover to Abbey Road. If you play Jurassic Park backward Jeff Goldblum says "I am dead."

89

20,

accidental honesty is a real bummer

90

Iowahawk may not be funny here, but I think he's pretty much right.  The AGW was flawed scientific technique turned into equally flawed theory, that the scientists who created it were loathe to re-evaluate because: 1)they hate to be wrong; 2)they love to be popular and recieve lots of kudos and cash (which the Gorester and Friends were only too happy to provide, once they saw this as a way to make some big, easy bucks and recieve a ready made, feel good political platform, with hippie chick groupies to boot of course -- follow the groupie and money trail and you usually find what's at the bottom of everything).  Throw in some good old fashioned sado-mashocism and self-righteousness and you have a custom built juggernaut of a weapon of mass destruction for those who want to use it (plus lots of money, groupies, some booze and blow during those speaking tours I'm sure).

What's really horrible about this from my pov, is that this will set back (and has set back) real environmental and conservation study and work for at least a decade.  It's kind of like the animal rights thing, but bigger.  You can't lobby or work to make any changes for the better within the system; you can't even work towards pushing to see more research conducted on better ways to do things for both the short haul and long term, because these greedy, stupid bastards and their idiot cultists just went and frakked everything up.

91 In other news, Michael Jackson is still dead.

92

91 In other news, Michael Jackson is still dead.

General Franco too.

93

90,

 

That was always Crichton's point as well.  The faux-rockstar quality of a business that should have all the glmour of anthropology did no service to their cause.  Quite the contrary it fostered the environment that made it easy for their submission to the temptation to doctor the source and "bend the curves and hide declines"....

At the end of the day what is needed is a prudent analysis with grim precision on how much we are to blame, how much we can forestall the 'rise' assuming there is such and whether we want to....

in nature most events and alterations have a positive and a negative impact....

grapes grew on south Greenland a hiccup on the geologic scale ago....

it is either ribald hubris, or the deepest greed to think we can understand this system.

94 I just got a call from a focus group. I actually like going to them because I mess with their suppostitions like explaining to the group that laws restricting vending machines are bad because they infringe on liberty. It pays well during free time and I get to mess with liberals. To fit in the group I had to be the primary food shopper, have children at home, and tell them on a scale of 1-10 how much I was concerned about the "environment". Since I am concerned that libtards are going to cost me money by trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist in the environment, I answered a 4. Now I get to earn $100 for 50 minutes of throwing their group off.

95 For years, I've responded to Global warming fanatics (people who tell  me I need a compost pile) with asking them to explain the settlement of Greenland. Works like a charm.

96

95 Dagny,

Here's a short form...

"what, precisely is the baseline environment you think is THE CLIMATE and precisely how many cars, pcs, private jets, refrigerators, MRI machines, and ovens we need to do away with to maintain "x'?"

their heads explode.

97

My own opinion.

Screw this CRU, AGW crap. Let's start over. Data needs to be re-collected, put in some sort of data-base, and open to everyone. Until that happens, this is just a bunch of horseshit and gun smoke.

Yes, it will take alot of money. But until this whole thing is taken away from the peoples who have a personal stake in it, then everything else is folly.

Re-do it, make the data public, and see what happens.

Surprising things may happen.

98

93 -- Yes, and at the same time not enough resources are being given to actual research on things that we actually can reasonably study with some guarantee of accuracy and respond to with some gurantee of success and positivity.  I'm all for responsible stewardship and conservation of resources in a way that benefits the most things over the longest stretch of time...that sort of approach has been sadly lacking in "environmental/ecological" circles for nearly a generation.  What's worse it's been/was replaced by what we see before us today, and the backlash against this idiocy that goes to the other, not any better, extreme. 

Of course, this isn't just relegated to the global warming controversy, and isn't something new to the human experience.

99 97 -- In my opinion, let's not spend any more money running down flawed science anymore; go back to what data we know to be correct and work on things we may actually have some input in and control of (working on pollution and conservation efforts -- a good thing imho; this global warming/carbon credit scam?  toss it all and go back to what we can actually work on).

100 By any sensible measurement, over the last several million years the planet has spent more time in a glaciated state than in the inter-glacials. By about a 10:1 ratio.

So the "normal" state of the climate has ice a mile deep on Manhattan.

Enjoy.

101 I loved Baldwin from the moment I first saw him on Firefly.  Finding out he was a conservative was the icing on the cake.  Finding out he was eloquent was the chocolate sprinkles on the icing.

102

99 UJ,

exactly....

"climate science" is a joke....to do the things they claim to want to do....personally I think they are watermelons with science degrees IOW reds who want to use the greens to inflict command economies worldwide with themselves as high priests of wealth generation we'd have to be on the cusp of the ability to make a serious effort at terraforming and we are NOWHERE NEAR THERE.....

 

work on what we can and slowly develop better methods towards that bigger goal but no matter how desperately Dr. Mann WANTS to know the answer to precisely how many PCs can the world run and not explode?-the fact is with current datamining potential because of measuring flaws he cannot even make a half-hearted guess....

 

we know so little about it we don't know what we don't know.

103

I understand jane, but what I'm saying is that the now "flawed science" is just going to be fought over again and again. The CRU lost the original data. Or so they say.

Wipe the slate clean, and start over.

Then we can have a shit-load of persons looking at the data. Not only the ones doing the publishing of *ahem* peer papers, but others who see flaws in the process.

This is too serious a subject to be left to persons who will not allow others to see their data.

So why not start again?

104 NEW MEME ALERT:

Climategate = "Swiftboating"

Check out Jim Treacher for more on "Swifthack" meme...

Developing...

105

What Stewart did was a political maneuver called "limited hangout" which is designed to minimize damage to the agenda.

http://tinyurl.com/ykxgz7u

Limited hangout is designed to add just enough of the truth, thereby disarming the bomb, to keep the lie alive.

106 John Stewart is a retard. Piss on him.

107

103 -- Primarily (why we should just pitch it) is this: we have other, more pressing concerns that need the research money.  Concerns like soil and water conservation -- just natural resource stewardship in general; creating newer crop species/varities that are even more hardy, resistant, and productive, pollution (which is a freaking biggie,  and which the global warming lunacy completely overshadowed and even helped to promote -- solar panel manufacture is a horrible pollutant, some of these freaking battery cells can be too -- good job Al).  Hell, even sensible conservation of wild animals and plants, as a natural resource  that we probably should be a bit more careful about keeping around.  All of it has either been tossed aside or even been damaged by this global warming crap.

And AGW theory is crap -- there is no way to truly plot climatic change; we don't have enough hard data (rather than postulate) because even if we had all the temps from all areas since the beginning of recorded human history, we still would only have a very minimal speck of actual information to work off of.  Plus, the planet is pretty notorious for throwing things up that we can't calculate and adjust for -- even if the Earth is warming right now, next year Yellowstone's super caldera blows its top and we'd be facing a massive and potentially catastophic cooling period which would last for a while.  And that's just this planet -- the sun is also a factor here as well.  And there is absolutely no way that we have of making the sun behave.

 

Global warming was a fascist attempt at only one thing: human population control; it does nothing to address the real needs of the environment or its other, non-human inhabitants -- in fact, it opens the door to further abuse of those; most importantly, it is absolutely toxic to the human race...except for those "special ones" of influence and power in the cult of Gaia.  Pitch it I asy. 

108 Goldblum died in the Arctic.  He was found pantsless next to a polar bear skull.

109 Thanks HH - STATE OF FEAR! Considering the fraud that is going on, he was a prophet and the book almost/maybe/ya think outlines the whole thing... I don't trust al gore and wonder if any of this could be true.... Oh, I think I'm kidding, but one wonders.

110

jane, again I agree. But how can you pitch it unless you go back to the original data to disprove it?

At this point you can't. They already cooked the books, as it were, and that is all we are left with.

So go re-do it. Modern technology like earth sattellites will make a hell of a lot of difference. Debates between what tree rings actually mean, and what some others say they mean can make a hell of a lot of difference.

The problem I see is this. They have their terms, i.e. their data. What we have to do is start over, and re-examine whatever data they thought they had. Or changed.

Fight them on their own battlefield.

My opinion, anyway...

111

HH, I understand where you are coming from -- but I just don't want to see more money thrown at what was essentially flawed science from its inception.  If you consider what exactly they were trying to accomplish it was a flawed premise to start with -- why throw more money down a rat hole, when that same money is desperately needed for other areas? 

I'm not sure how much of their data is good, or honest -- and we're talking about tons of data, and then finding "scientifically pure" researchers to double check it...is it even logical to do it?  To prove what -- that we have some falsified data from some scientists who were dishonest and unethical?  Haven't the leaked memos called this into question?  Perhaps rather than dig through their data, we study the data of scientists who have challenged AGW more closely?

112

Perhaps rather than dig through their data, we study the data of scientists who have challenged AGW more closely?

Good point!

Let's see how this plays out.

And so far, from what I've seen, pretty good.

113 In other news, Michael Jackson is still dead.

General Franco too.

Posted by: bebe's boobs destroy at December 02, 2009 03:56 PM (cniXs)

Wait, Michael Jackson is General Franco?  When did this happen?  I mean, I know he liked to wear the uniform and all....

114 Ref to those who post stuff like "Stewart's a poopy head". Hey. At least he's listens a bit to the other side. Prodigal Son, fatted calf and all that. If you dump on people like Stewart who at least go beyond the mere token of looking at the other side, you're not giving anybody else on the left any reason to think they'll be accepted if they switch.

115 I thought we agreed we'd be using the -quiddick suffix for scandals from now on.

116 It's assuredly OK to throw more money to find out if AGW is, in fact, a possibility.....As long as it's the money Al G. has been raking in. He's either got to pay up or go to jail (or both) for the damage he's done. For crying out loud--THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!! and how he's screwed them up.

117 Ohhh, excellent point Uncle Rick!

118 Don't know if this has been addressed, but can't wait for the multitude of new translations of General Krebs explaining the strategic situation to Gore.

119

Michael Crichton was the man.

120

A point I have not noticed being addressed:  The next or third generation of data manipulators of AGW hyperbole (polite term) or B.S. (not so polite) will claim their forbears were correct in their predictions, which did not materialize, because of decline in total human population, resulting from their perspicacity.

The fact is human population in the developed countries is imploding at accelerating rates; Spain & Italy, for example, in one generation will have one-half of current population, excluding net immigration.  When birth rates fall below relpacement level (2.1 per woman of childbearing age), the trend, provable by historic analysis, is irreversible.  If birth rates among immigrants to U.S., legal and illegal, are excluded, the U.S. is not far behind.  Negative population is an absolute economic disaster:  less demand for goods & services of all kinds; unsustainability of all gov't "entitlements" - - no one to pay for them.

The population controllers - - Planned Parenthood, the U.N. - - have done a good job.