prole

Can you feel it? Positively [font:Impact]S I Z Z L I N G ! ! ![/font]

It's impossible to give an answer when you don't accept the premise of the question.

Hurry, let's find a convenient scapegoat!

Let's move beyond the stifling either/or paradigm and embrace the more liberatory both/and.

Jim, the system is deeply broken. Even those still trying to save it, like Steve Keen in the video above, are proposing far more radical solutions than you're willing to entertain. What does that mean?

"L'audace, l'audace, toujours l'audace!"

[video:youtube]

Really, you think she's into the booger-sugar?

In past interviews, Herman Cain has said that God told him to run. Maybe now God wants him to jog or maybe just walk.

Okay seriously, this one's for the conservatives: We've had two recent presidential hopefuls with "Cain" in their last name. In the Bible, Cain slew his brother Abel thereby committing the first murder. Here's the question, Why in God's name hasn't Michelle Bachmann pointed this out yet?

"settled science" vs. "modelling" It's a toughie.

It helps if you understand what the "scientific method" actually is. Work on that one for a while. It'll blow your mind. Then move onto "modelling". Get back to us.

Yes, if you think this, this one model (how many models do you think paleo-climatologists, modellers, and other climate scientists work with on a regular basis at any one time, anyway? Want to venture a guess?), whose methodology is anything but settled, written by scientists still warning about the grave dangers of anthropogenic climate change is some kind of a "game-changer", then you are definitely unraveling.

What do Kojak's man-boobs have to do with any of this?

I presented nothing that wasn't in the BBC piece already. All of the nuance, uncertainty, questions posed by peers in the field (you know, science-stuff), as well as the authors of the reports' own fears of the dangers posed by anthropogenic climate change are all raised right there in the piece. Or were you too busy glorying in your Ah-HA! moment to notice?

That was the BBC piece, you halfwit.

Goldurnit Jay, you know all that don't mean jackshit except in a comparative context. Here, I looked it up!

Almost forgot...

This one, right? It's worth a repost just to try and decipher what the hell it is exactly you're on about. Is it this? Or this? Certainly not this. Or this. At any rate FW, it's clear (to you at least) that one climate model, reducing projections down one degree, by scientists still stressing the danger of anthropogenic climate change, whose methodology for the study is anything but uncontested within the community is the kind of ammo we need to make sure we keep on trucking.

Where is access being restricted? Whose lives are being interfered with? If anything, restriction to access and interference with people's lives are what is being protested against. Q: What does it mean to reject "subjective value judgements" in the context of a deeply unjust set of circumstances? A: Justification for the continuation of the status quo.

Hey, they were told to leave.

Fairweather's got the photos! Blames it on the hippies, don'tcha know.

Hey, you guys are the ones finding the time and inclination to comment. Change back to Masterpiece Theatre or whatever the fuck you were watching...

Well I can tell that you two bored, jaded hipsters have seen it all, but in my experience it appears that our fellow citizens are getting dumber, meaner, more medicated, shorter fused, and better armed by the day. But hey, maybe it's just the lamestream media...or maybe I'm not listening to enough Jack Johnson around a campfire or some shit.

Meanwhile...