I was wondering if “a pissy-cyst” was going to post and attempt to make a direct correlation to the depression and AGW. I have tried to read his condescending posts with an eye toward neutrality but found his tone, his choice of words and that oh-so-annoying “chummy” choice of “y’all” and “ain’t” and other terms just irksome.
Then there’s the blogs and uber-left “statistics” and “articles” he cites. He is simply schilling for the left while apparently acting as the smartest man in the room. Yet, he fails to acknowledge that a theory is a theory, not a fact. And he also fails to acknowledge that if the US goes whole hog and stops production of CO2 entirely, what of China, Russia, other industrialized nations that couldn’t give two spits over AGW.
Then, the fact that everything in nature thus far, as near as science can determine, is cyclical (That means it has highs and lows, for those of you in Rio Linda). Of recent note is the dinosaur fossils found in Alaska from the Cretaceous Period. The lack of volcanic evidence, the Earth was warmer back then somehow. SUV’s? Coal-fired powertplants? What? Even “a pissy-cyst” doesn’t know. Or does he?
It’s a theory. AGW is a theory. Proof is yet to be shown. And said proof takes a long time, over many centuries of studying empirical evidence. In the 70′s we were all doomed to an impending ice age.
Perhaps it’s the drive to gain funds and recognition in one’s peer group that is a real driver here in many ways. Pride, ego and desire for acclaim in the oddly socially competitive world of academia can cause otherwise bright and forthright people to behave in ways they normally wouldn’t. And, such behavior is insidious. It is also hard for the person doing it to realize they are. Objective thinking suffers first in many cases. This is because of a fear of persecution by others, “going with the flow” and adhering to the thought process of who the tenured “thinkers” are.
At the end of the day, acceptance and belonging is more important to 99% of human beings than actually going against the grain and being right versus supporting a lie. In this case merely a theory that remains unproven.
