…
But the situation is more delicate for those who gained their notoriety, made their reputations, and received their government funding on the old “sky is falling” model. For them acknowledging new facts means admitting the major possibility they were wrong. This includes conceding policy prescriptions based on their work may be draconian, counterproductive, and in the end vastly harmful to poorest of the world’s population. The ethanol disaster is but one example of “consensus” science taking food off the table for no discernible reason. These admissions would be a tough pill to swallow but ones a true scientist would embrace.
Watchdog.org reports:
Virginia gubernatorial candidate Terry McAuliffe and three top GreenTech advisers met with the key White House aide responsible for helping bankrupt solar-panel maker Solyndra win federal loans and high-profile presidential support, a Watchdog investigation has revealed.
What they discussed in the Oct. 12, 2010, meeting with Obama “green energy” aide Greg Nelson is a mystery – the White House visitors log offers no details. But the confab came seven months after a stock transfer made McAuliffe a GreenTech majority owner and company chairman.
h/t to Junkscience.com
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Has dailycaller.com been taken down? I’m unable to get a peep out of the site this morning. Did the mighty Mann ge tthem clobbered?
Those California folks who are moving to Texas could also do a lot to flip the state to the Democrats. They’re already putting up In-N-Out Burger joints all over the place. Little grey cow patties on a tiny bun and they actually make you pay for the tasteless dink. Texifornia is what it’s looking like to me lately, in some parts of the great state.
Daily Caller won’t respond at all.
So… Hispanics that register to vote get a month of free donkey burgers from In-N-Out Burger courtesy of the DNC! 🙂 Would that do it?
Gotta go to bed, maybe float off by dawn in these Missouri floodwater by Springfield/ Rolla. Ttyl
Yes it has been down for me too but now back up…
Was addressing steveta_uk
Ed Mertin, Perot is a kook who fabricated a story about N. Vietnamese commie ninjas attacking his house and promoted a conspiracy that GW Bush was going to ruin his daughter’s wedding.
And the pesky facts show that his company, EDS, was in fact going to get fat contracts from Hillarycare.
As to the story that Perot drew equally from democrats, that is another Perot lie.
Clinton would have had his head handed to him except for Perot coming out of nowhere and getting tons of free promo on CNN and other big media. Now where have we seen that happen over the past few years?
Maybe John Corzine could be the financial advisor. What a bunch of unaccountable crony crooks – no wonder Mann is making an endorsement.
Michael Jankowski says:
August 7, 2013 at 4:56 pm
Lol, David Appell is over in the comments arguing that we should be in the midst of the Little Ice Age!
_________________________________
He’s also misleading people about the relative retail gasoline prices during the GWB and BHO administrations repectively.
It’s hard to keep on topic about the charlatan but both Mann and McAuliffe are an emabarassment to Virginia. I don’t have too much confidence in what’s going to happen in the Gov’nors race here because the state has been leaning more left each year. I only hope the legislatures will keep the ‘antics’ of McAuliffe in check.
I wonder if Mann has his lawyers on speed dial yet?
Tie McAuliffe to WorldCom. That alone should be enough. if Cuccinelli’s personal views on abortion become an issue, then take a leaf from Gov. Edwards’ campaign in Louisiana and make bumper stickers and poke a little fun at Cuccinelli that say “Vote for the Neaderthal. It’s important.”
More Alinksy than Pasteur. I like that.
I’m sure I read under a different post a few weeks ago the entreaty to argue the science, not the man. Or did I dream it?
Ed Mertin says:
August 8, 2013 at 12:48 am
Clearly it is you who need to do your homework.
I know that the megalomaniac Perot got out of the Navy as soon as he could to go into business, & that he had a long-standing grudge against the elder Bush.
It’s ludicrous to claim he pulled 38% of both the Bush & Clinton votes. Even simple arithmetic shows that impossible. Clinton won with 43.0% of the popular vote to 37.5% for Bush & 18.9% for Perot. According to your fuzzy math, Clinton would have won with 59.34% to 51.75% for Bush, without Perot in the race. Not even in Chicago is that possible.
If Perot had taken equally from each of the other candidates, the Clinton-Bush result would have been 52.45% to 46.95%. But Perot did not draw equally. Quite the contrary.
Actual polling data show that Perot took about twice (or more) as many votes away from Bush as from Clinton, as the latter’s operatives knew he would, which is why they made him the deal to get back in the race. The damage Perot did in the Electoral College was proportionally even greater.
Margaret Hardman says:
August 8, 2013 at 8:01 am
I’m sure I read under a different post a few weeks ago the entreaty to argue the science, not the man. Or did I dream it?
Perhaps you dreamed that he had any science to argue with to begin with.
Margaret Hardman says:
August 8, 2013 at 8:01 am
Mann has no science to argue, so has resorted to ad hominem attacks from the git-go, as in questioning in knee-jerk fashion the “funding” of real scientists who raise unanswerable scientific objections to his religious dogma & trying to shut them up with law suits. Were the science on his side, then these illogical & intimidating tactics wouldn’t be needed.
Without Perot in the race from the beginning to attack Bush from “right” the whole tenor of the race would have been different. It would have been Bush over Clinton in a laugher. IIRC late in the race Bush was recovering momentum in the polls when Special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh very strategically indicted a bunch of Bush’s guys like Cap Weinberger on Iran-Contra garbage.
Just a thought for those supporting the “lesser of two evils” approach (i.e. vote for the R because he’s better than the D, even if he’s not the best):
How’s that working for you?
As for the main topic here: I’m wondering if Mann will sue on this one. Certainly, directly and blatantly being called a “charlatan” is far more actionable (and has much better basis) than his complaint with the National Review.
Could be fun to watch. Truth is an absolute defense – can Daily Caller prove Mann is a charlatan?
The Cooch has been all over Mann:
http://turble.blogspot.com/2011/01/yes-virginia-climate-cover-up-sott.html
Bruce, Milodonharli
Of course that’s a pat way of saying I deny your reality and substitute my own. Solipsistic, isn’t it? Did you not spot the dissimulation from what I quoted?
Justa Joe says:
August 8, 2013 at 9:42 am
You recall correctly. And in Dec 1992, a federal judge threw out the indictment. Clinton was going to win by hook AND by crook.
Lady in Red says:
August 7, 2013 at 7:28 pm
Some Republican (& a few Democrat) candidates do “want to force women to (give?) birth against their will”. The lame-brained losers Akin & Mourdock, for instance. Cuccinelli may or may not be of their ilk, but in any case is unlikely to blunder so idiotically. As with most Americans, however, the majority of GOP candidates recognize that girls & women usually make up their minds rapidly, as soon as they find out they have an unwanted pregnancy. In rare instances a prospective mother might not discover until her third trimester that she’s pregnant, but by then giving birth is less dangerous to her than an abortion.
I’d agree that most Republicans & most Americans “just don’t want an innocent little fetus to suffer pain, etc”. As a premie myself, I can sympathize. At some point, a viable fetus should be accorded its human right to life, enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. Most people oppose infanticide, such as occurs in big city abortion mills & hospitals. IMO states should be able to write their own murder statutes. MA might well want to allow infanticide, while MS prohibit all abortions, with MI somewhere in between. Were I a state legislator, I’d vote for five months rather than six months, both because more & more babies are viable at five months & because it Solomonically splits the difference, but on the right to chose side rather than right to life. In any case, as noted, most women make arrangements for abortions long before five months.
Democrat columnist Kirsten Powers describes a former abortion doctor’s testimony as to partial birth abortion procedures:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/08/on-abortion-wendy-davis-doesn-t-know-what-she-s-talking-about.html
FWIW, I’m an Independent, although it has been a long time since I’ve voted Democrat.
Margaret Hardman says:
August 8, 2013 at 11:38 am
If the issue is attacking the person rather than the science, then the first person to whom you should address your question is Mann. Skeptics would love to debate the science with the fraudulent charlatan, but he refuses to do so, because he knows he would lose. Therefore, his only option is to engage in usually baseless ad hominem attacks.
Why should skeptics unilaterally disarm in such a mud-slinging fight, started by their opponents, especially when it’s so much fun & so easy to ridicule a hoaxing huckster like Mann?
TonyG says:
August 8, 2013 at 9:52 am
Yes, the Daily Caller can easily prove in court that Mann is a charlatan. All they need is a blow-up of the Hockey Stick graph to do so, by which his “Nature trick to hide the decline” would be blatantly laid bare.
“Charlatan” may in fact be an easier case to prove than “molester”, where the issue might be whether the alleged slur (or accurate description) was meant figuratively or literally.
“Tenured Prof Retires His ‘Boomer Butt,’ Leaves ‘Authoritarian Hellhole’ of Penn State.”
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2013/08/tenured-prof.html
“While I have been fortunate in my set of departmental colleagues at Penn State, the institution as a whole is phenomenally weird, following a North Korean governance model without the transparency [6], and with an Office of Sponsored Programs—OSP, the Office for the Suppression of Productivity—that has the tapeworm as their mascot. In discussing my decision to leave with a colleague who is an ardent supporter of the system, I referred to PSU as “an authoritarian hellhole,” which elicited the reply “Well, it is that…” [12] Suffice it to say that the serial pedophile Jerry Sandusky found a welcoming and protective environment at Penn State not out of luck, but rather as an all-but-inevitable consequence of the institutional culture.”
Lady in Red:
With all respect, what did an innocent baby do to deserve getting killed?
Does a baby deserve to die just because it is inconvenient?
Does a baby deserve to die because one person couldn’t keep her knees together, and the other couldn’t keep his pants zipped?
If you want to dance to the music, you should be prepared to pay the piper. Anything other than that is pure selfishness.