Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Foxfyre wrote:

parados wrote:

Fox,

While tact might work in the sentence as you used it, it doesn't make much sense in the context of how you used it.

Quote:

In fact I think I'll copy the whole discussion as it might come in handy if he continues on this tact....

And this is fairly good documentation, absent several other of his personally directed slurs, that illustrates why I adopted my personal policy of not feeding, the trolls, arguing with idiots, or engaging in exercises of futility.

The meaning would be 'I'll copy the discussion if he continues using his keen sense of not giving offense.' Which directly contradicts your statement about not feeding trolls or arguing with idiots. Obviously, Cyc has given offense based on your later statements.

Certainly one wouldn't continue "on this tact". They would continue "with tact". Everything points to you misusing the word Fox.

Well admittedly there are other words that I could have used. But in American vernacular one frequently uses the term that is an absurd opposite to emphasize something that is ridiculous or just plain wrong.

Example: Blatham using the "Compassionate Torturers Handbook" to take a poke at me, or somebody quoting something absolutely assinine and commenting "absolutely brilliant!" to emphasize that it was anything but. Or referring to somebody as "learned, astute, wise, etc." when you are communicating that the person is anything but.

And given a member's propensity for rude, unkind, malicious, hateful, childish, and inappropriate remarks along with an enormous double standard utilized almost every time he takes up a new subject, I thought 'tact' to be a much better term than the really rude, unkind, malicious, hateful, childish, but quite appropriate terms that I could have used.

In other words, I tried to be as tactful as possible under the circumstances.

Get it?

Probably not, but that's the way it is.

Tack, on the other hand, would have in no way communicated what I was communicating.

I will concede that I may not have communicated as clearly as I would have liked if those who do not share the member's dislike of me didn't get it either.

I understand irony Fox. I also understand word usage. If you had intended to use the opposite meaning in an ironic fashion then you would have used "with tact".

More on the funding (by oil and toabacco corporations) of front groups to protect their financial interests.

As Adolpho Schmidlapp, citizen of Dusseldort in 1942 said, "Well, sure they are moving out all those jewish people in cattle cars, but maybe it is just to a resort on the Spanish coast so they will be safe until the war is over. We ought to keep an open mind about it."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1881024,00.html

Sharks pursue their appetites. That's natural. But do you want on in your pool?

al Qaeda or the KKK or the Catholic church will pursue their perceived interests. Do we just leave it at that, or do we make discriminations?

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration has blocked release of a report that suggests global warming is contributing to the frequency and strength of hurricanes, the journal Nature reported Tuesday.

The possibility that warming conditions may cause storms to become stronger has generated debate among climate and weather experts, particularly in the wake of the Hurricane Katrina disaster.

In the new case, Nature said weather experts at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration ? part of the Commerce Department ? in February set up a seven-member panel to prepare a consensus report on the views of agency scientists about global warming and hurricanes...

In February, a NASA political appointee who worked in the space agency's public relations department resigned after reportedly trying to restrict access to Jim Hansen, a NASA climate scientist who has been active in global warming research.

How many times are we going to go over and over and over the same crud? Lassen's graphs have been shown to be due to conflating several different types of statistical smoothing and the correlation disappears when the latest data points are added properly

http://www.realclimate.org/damon&laut_2004.pdf

This is at least the third time around.

O'BRIEN: But some Republicans are fighting a different battle. Listen to the Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Environment.

INHOFE: I'm going to speak today about the most media-hyped environmental issue of all time, is the word that gets everybody upset when you say it and the word that many or the phrase that many politicians are afraid to say and that is global warming.

O'BRIEN: It's not new ground for Oklahoma's senior senator. Jim Inhofe has repeatedly called global warming a hoax. Despite a steady stream of stark evidence, melting ice caps, rising sea levels, the warmest temperatures in 12,000 years, the senator is not convinced.

INHOFE: During the past year, the American people have been served up an unprecedented parade of environmental alarmism by the media.

O'BREIN: In a 45-minutes speech on the Senate floor, he voiced skepticism over this graph called the hockey stick. Despite some flaws, most climate scientists consider it the best t depiction of Global Warming. Inhofe says there's evidence that the an arctic is actually cooling, even though most scientific findings suggest the contrary and point to the loss of major chunks of ice sheets and shelves. And he says the polar bears of the arctic are thriving, even though two of the most influential wildlife agencies say they are veering toward endangered status. Inhofe is all but alone on capitol hill these days. Most Republicans believe the scientific juror is in...

O'BRIEN: We should point out in the recent five-year period, Senator Inhofe received more than $850,000 in campaign donations from the oil and gas industry. Inhofe challenged the media to get this story straight in that speech, but when we asked for an interview with him we were told he's too busy to speak with us this week.

Senator Inhofe received more than $850,000 in campaign donations from the oil and gas industry.

Shame really I was counting on the sun's magnetosphere crashing to save the world. Oh well.

username wrote:

How many times are we going to go over and over and over the same crud? Lassen's graphs have been shown to be due to conflating several different types of statistical smoothing and the correlation disappears when the latest data points are added properly

http://www.realclimate.org/damon&laut_2004.pdf

This is at least the third time around.

thanks user

it may be the third time for you but its the first time I've seen such a devastating rebuttal.

Shame really I was counting on the sun's magnetosphere crashing to save the world. Oh well.