Skeptic's Guide Massage Board
Yes, I've begun posting on a message board. That's the kind of dork I am.
I've been posting a bit over on the skeptic's guide to the universe message board. There's lots of good thinking going on, along with some real not good thinking.
Irregardless...
There is a discussion on global warming, which is cool because there are some skeptics of global warming. On the other side of that, there are skeptics who are of the mind that global warming skeptics are in the same league as skeptics of the holocaust.
So. It's pretty intense, yes? Yes.
I have a whole bunch to say about this global warming thing, but I have no time right now. (NO, NOT EVEN FOR MOTHER EARTH!!!)
I posted something there that I thought was quite good and thought it was worth putting up here, ass well.
Here it is:
I believe that the environment is far too important to let politicians decide what to do. I don't trust Chuck Hagel or Barbara Boxer with the ocean.
(No, my straw man hippie brother, I didn't say I trusted exxon. Go smoke another doobie, buddy.)
Imagine that something analogous to the Kyoto Protocol had been enacted when the big bad humans were bringing on another ice age 30 years ago.
I hate to sound like one of those Libertarians, but the government rarely changes their bad laws at a good speed. We've had several temporary taxes here in California and they seem to be temporary in that geologic type of temporary.
No, I don't know who we should listen to, Mr. Straw, but politicians are too concerned with saying what a majority of people want to hear to be considered for the position. Politicians have only been objective when they agree with us.
These are people who will allow chiropractors and acupuncturists to be "state licensed". Why would we think that they're suddenly objective about atmospheric science; a subject with concepts significantly more difficult than pure hooey like subluxations and chi.
Remember, they all love the lord. Or worse, lie and say they do. Except Culbert Olson. (Thanks, Google!!!)
I've been posting a bit over on the skeptic's guide to the universe message board. There's lots of good thinking going on, along with some real not good thinking.
Irregardless...
There is a discussion on global warming, which is cool because there are some skeptics of global warming. On the other side of that, there are skeptics who are of the mind that global warming skeptics are in the same league as skeptics of the holocaust.
So. It's pretty intense, yes? Yes.
I have a whole bunch to say about this global warming thing, but I have no time right now. (NO, NOT EVEN FOR MOTHER EARTH!!!)
I posted something there that I thought was quite good and thought it was worth putting up here, ass well.
Here it is:
I believe that the environment is far too important to let politicians decide what to do. I don't trust Chuck Hagel or Barbara Boxer with the ocean.
(No, my straw man hippie brother, I didn't say I trusted exxon. Go smoke another doobie, buddy.)
Imagine that something analogous to the Kyoto Protocol had been enacted when the big bad humans were bringing on another ice age 30 years ago.
I hate to sound like one of those Libertarians, but the government rarely changes their bad laws at a good speed. We've had several temporary taxes here in California and they seem to be temporary in that geologic type of temporary.
No, I don't know who we should listen to, Mr. Straw, but politicians are too concerned with saying what a majority of people want to hear to be considered for the position. Politicians have only been objective when they agree with us.
These are people who will allow chiropractors and acupuncturists to be "state licensed". Why would we think that they're suddenly objective about atmospheric science; a subject with concepts significantly more difficult than pure hooey like subluxations and chi.
Remember, they all love the lord. Or worse, lie and say they do. Except Culbert Olson. (Thanks, Google!!!)
Labels: skeptic/atheist
posted by mister snickers at 10:30 PM
1 Comments:
Can I just say that I agree with your analysis of Rebecca Watson's 'style' in podcasting? Yes, the 'inner sanctum skeptic masturbation' isn't amusing and you've hit it on the head with the frat-boy appreciation of her penis jokes. Good to see someone wasn't censored by her when saying it out loud.
Post a Comment
<< Home