First of all - Thank you so very much for the personal insult. {roll_eyes}
Secondly, to be clear about what it is we are referring to:
Definition of DIPLOMACY
1: the art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations
2: skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility : tact
With that definition in mind, that SA, the US, and/or other countries talk to each other through secret diplomatic channels and say things they may not repeat in public, does not surprise me in the least. This is a common, human thing to do. It allows one to express the depth of feelings or intentions about an issue without offending someone else, without creating issues with them so that discourse may go on perhaps to a satisfactory ending for all concerned, or might keep an antagonistic personality somewhat mollified, avoiding provoking them to attack.
Tell me how blowing this process out of the water is, could possibly be in any way good or beneficial for the stability of the region, for the diplomatic process going on between the nations there?
Third, and last: Do you personally have any idea of what the last word in that definition - "tact" - means? Apparently not. Might be a good one for you - and Wikileaks - to learn, then practice.
It is not only damaging to the US; you should take off your blinders and RTFA.
Example: You will read, just like Iran (and, of course, Muslim fundies that support them) will, about Saudi and other Gulf states calling for the US (or whomever) to do whatever it takes to erase the Iranian nuclear weapons threat.
The short term result? Increased destabilization of an area of the world that really, really does not need that. Slightly longer term - war, quickened by this release. A war that otherwise might have been avoidable, or conducted on more favorable terms to those who don't want Iran to have nukes - which includes parts of Europe that are in range of their missiles, as I recall.
I hope I am wrong. I have a gut feeling that I'm not.
Bzzzt - Wrong WRT Hulu (dunno about CNN). Flashblock does *not* break Hulu. I use it under both Win32 and Lin32 w/FFox, and watch Hulu all the time, no problems.
On my 64-bit system, when booted into Linux there is an issue - Hulu fscked something up the other day and it hasn't been working at all. This issue has _nothing_ to do with Flashblock, however; it has been widely reported by many Lin64 users.
I use both on my AO751h (+ABP), and a 9 cell battery gets me ~10 hours of use, streaming video or whatever. And no damned "Punch the Monkey" ads. Don't see why the same wouldn't work on/for Macs...
What's wrong, is that you don't see anything wrong with people who are *not* bona fide US Citizens having a vote in a US election.
How about I get a vote on the board at your company which determines when, if, and how much of a raise you should get? Or a vote at your HOA/POA meetings, when it comes time to determine how to spend the money you pay into the collective account? Or we could just cut out the meetings and voting, and I get to say how you can or can't spend your money. Yep, that's fair, isn't it? Makes a whole lot of sense, right?
No, it doesn't. At all. And *that* is 'whats wrong' with it. HTH.
How about I just continue with the plan I came up with over 25 years ago, when even as a child I saw where we were heading, and not reproduce.
Yes, I walk my talk. I haven't, and won't, make additional consumers of Earth's resources. I drive an older, small, efficient car, and keep it up so that it remains that way. I live in a boat made the same year as I was born, 'recycling' it, and do so without air conditioning or television. I use a composting toilet that I made. Etc, etc... Compared to most people, especially the ones who preach at us about 'climate change' and 'carbon credits' and who want to tax me even more, my 'carbon footprint' is non-existant. This 'pot' wishes more 'kettles' were black.
Tell us about yourself there, anon? Do you live what you believe, or do you choose the modern day equivalent of paid absolution?
The flaw is that it still does not address the root issue:
Overpopulation.
Yep, if there is indeed "anthropogenic global warming" (or, *cough cough* 'climate change'), then the root problem lies with the 'anthropogenic' part, right? Just too many damned people. Fix that shit first, and the problem will solve itself... No need for non-solutiuon, stop-gap measures like 'sequestration' or 'carbon credits' or more new taxes by which to further hold down individuals under the thumb of Big Gov't...
But that doesn't serve the purposes of those who know better than we do what is good for us... {roll_eyes}
IF it ever comes out, Lenovo's U1 should be a better option than this Dell. A detachable screen that near-instantly boots into it's own 'pad' OS, and seamlessly reintegrates and syncs with the main system when reattached... Nice idea, but the implementation must be giving them hell, given that over 9 months have passed since they first showed a working demo model...
For anyone as misinformed as was the previous responder about the types of conditions one can expect and should be prepared for when venturing into high latitudes, here is some very current reading of the experiences of Ron Llewellyn(yes and yuk, he's using MySpace for his blog, but the content is outstanding) in the southern ocean. Scroll down to Part 2. Several 60 kt gales, one that had *recorded* winds of 120.
I have since learned:- The wind at Cape Horn on the night I was rolled was recorded at 120 kts.
You start off with wrong assumptions, and get worse from there... Just for starters - I drink neither Charbucks nor 'soda', and the money I do pay into S&R and other boating-related organizations would exceed those costs by a large amount in any case.
My seat is far from 'uniformed'. For background: I live aboard and sail a boat full time for the past 7 years, and have been sailing both professionally and passionately for almost 30 years now. My knowledge comes not from media articles or what the Sunderlands PR folks (are allowed to) say to the general public, but from hard-won experience and time spent aboard, not from reading some fictionalized, glossy account from a media company which took their cues from what 'Team Abby' wants the general public to believe about her and that trip.
Regarding the weather she encountered: Sailors who venture into the southern oceans (below 35-40* S lat) - and there are those who do it every year - are VERY much prepared for 60 kt winds and 20-25ft seas because they KNOW they are going to have to deal with them sooner or later. There is no getting around that. My boat is prepared for that, as should be any boat crossing *any* ocean - those conditions are not as uncommon as you or other non-seagoing, and therefore uninformed, people would think. Conditions like that are closer to the norm down there, than they are the exception. Hell, the Cape Town Yacht Club regularly holds races in conditions where the winds exceed 40kts, with accompanying swell heights. Storm fronts down there can run only 24-36 hours apart. The fetch (that's the distance wind can travel unobstructed to create waves) is literally *all the way around the globe*. I personally know people who have suffered up to uncounted (one of them quit counting after 35 or so...) knockdown/rollovers while approaching Cape Horn. So, if you go to sail there, you can indeed, and in fact, YOU'D BEST be prepared and ready to deal with those type of conditions. To sail there, especially on a non-stop route, and escape experiencing conditions of that severity at least once would be a miracle of no small order, ***especially*** in the austral winter, which when when Abby was pushed out there by the thing known as her father. In short - your assumptions on this count are far, far off base, and show a decided lack of knowledge on the topic.
Regarding the boat: Wild Eyes was designed and made for sailing down there, and intended to be sailed *fast*. That is part of the strategy of that kind of boat (the Open 40's, 50's, 60's); get on the leading edge of a front, and be able to *stay there*, traveling east-about at 15-20 knots sustained, in order to not get in the mess which lies behind the leading edge of the front. Attributing Abby's survival to anything other than the capabilities and design of the boat is nonsense and shows a huge lack of comprehension about sailing and boats and the southern oceans. Wild Eyes kept her alive to be rescued. She may have had lots of gear, but Abby was *clueless* about how to sail that boat. For example, one of many, look at her average speeds for the entire trip: 4.5-5 knots, give or take. You can do that kind of speed over long distances with a "6 knot leadmine"; that is, a full keeled, heavy displacement cruising boat loaded to the gunwales with the water and food and gear needed for slow, long distance, transoceanic passages, with a top hull speed of ~7kts for its displacement hull. Jessica Watson made better speed on her S&S 34 (a moderate displacement cruiser/club racer) than did Abby on her full-bore, 40 foot, planing-hulled thoroughbred raceboat. Wild Eyes, sailed properly by a competent sailor, could easily have (and HAS prior, in several RTW & smaller races) averaged 3X the speeds Abby maintained. She was woefully unprepared to be sailing that boat; her experience at sailing prior to this attempt has NEVER been shown or proven, only claimed, by - you guessed it - her father and the Sund
...or prosecute/put on trial the person(s) responsible once the rescuee(s) have been returned, to determine whether negligence and/or stupidity is to blame. If it is, then slap the fines to them, making sure they at least pay the bill for rescue ops.
The payee could be the someone rescued, or someone like Laurence & Maryanne Sunderland, the (ir)responsible parents of "I-Hit-The-Button-Come-Save-My-Ass-Before-I-Die" posterchild Abby Sunderland, who had no right or reason to be in the Southern Ocean on a boat she was woefully unprepared for sailing even at latitudes where the weather is generally good. Estimates have put her rescue costs as approaching, or even over, US$1 million - not to mention the risk to the rescuers lives. All that cost and wastefulness for a publicity stunt designed for media whoredom and familial enrichment...
Mine is that you should see someone about these anger issues you have. Why else would you feel such a need to publicly and vociferously insult and curse me, a complete and total stranger whom you have never met, will likely never meet? You know absolutely nothing about me at all, my hopes, fears, loves, desires, education, prejudices, whatever - yet seem to assume that in your infinite wisdom you have me all figured out, and all that I am worthy of as far as you are concerned is scorn, insult, resentment, anger, and public vilification...
I pity you, friend. I hope that you can someday find it in yourself to have compassion and understanding for people who might not think exactly as you do.
"War means fighting, and fighting means killing." — Nathan Bedford Forrest
There can be no such thing as "a truly defensive war". Even if there was, people would still die in it - both combatants and civilians alike. Nice pipedream, though.
..and 2000 *barrels* @42 gal/per = 84,000 *gallons* per day. (Barrels to gallons conversion made because otherwise the numbers seem so disparate...).
The California seafloor leaks are much larger. I don't think they know exactly how much, but this source quotes "8-80 Exxon Valdez spills", I would guess they mean annually. That's somewhere between 86.4 and 864 million gallons.
Cites - have them? I do, and they refute that argument you are repeating.
"Lots of pollution from low growth western nations". Like in India, right? Not. India has 1.18 billion population, the annual pop. growth was 1.34% in '08, and is estimated at 1.548% in '09. Look.
Take a look at the numbers, all over the areas you describe, the "Third World", population growth parallels that of industrialized nations while the use of consumables, pollution and carbon emissions rises at a much faster rate than that of the 'developed' world for at least the next 20 years. Only Russia has had a negative growth in population, and they have apparently overcome that recently. Check the first link, you might find it eye-opening and educational, because population growth pretty much everywhere is on the + side, and the second link will show you that the western nations have stabilized their pollution and carbon emissions, by and large, while the very areas you claim don't show relatively large increases of said.
Note source of article/graphs for the second link and following info is Mongabay.com:
Mongabay.com is considered a leading source of information on tropical forests by some of the world's top ecologists and conservationists.
I doubt they are a 'right wing tool', & they are using DOE EIA numbers. Accordingly:
According to the Energy Information Administration, after China and the United States, among major polluters only India is expected to have significant growth of emissions over the next 20 years.
According to the Department of Energy's (DOE) Energy Information Administration (EIA), after China and the United States, among major polluters only India is expected to have significant growth of emissions over the next 20 years.
I'll have a look at that. WRT politicization of the issue, I would argue that pre-Gore, the concept/theory of GW was contested and debated, even hotly at times, but that it was he who made the idea of _A_GW a definitively and solely Democrat/liberal plank. As some of the data has refused to fit those theories, it has been interesting to watch the spin doctors morph AGW into what I think is a more likely and accurate way to put it - "climate change". Something Earth has experienced for its entire existence.
The skewing of data - which you may or may not believe happened, but I think did, and does, by *both* sides - has made me a skeptic of both sides respective points. I find it laughable that AGW proponents absolutely _refuse_ to publicly tackle the core issue if AGW is indeed happening: and that is that there are TOO MANY PEOPLE on Earth already, at least for the infrastructure we have in place to feed and house and move them around. Seems to me that if they want to stop AGW, they gotta start with the A part of the equation. But no, instead it's all electric cars and inefficient solar and wind power instead of proven nuclear, etc etc... OTOH are those who don't give a shit about all the things I truly love and enjoy, like pristine woodlands, healthy ecosystems, mountains and clean seas, because they are so short-sighted and materialistic that they cannot see the havoc they are sowing with their unabashed consumption of the very limited resources available on this little blue ball.
Daniel Quinn was onto something when he wrote:
"The premise of the Taker story is the world belongs to man...The premise of the Leaver story is man belongs to the world."
Sometimes the Truth hurts. In this case, it hurts me, for pointing it out. I was halfway expecting that, actually, because I knew that however true, what I wrote wouldn't sit well with some moderator who has a partisan political agenda to push.
Hate to go Off Topic on this homosexuality discussion (???), but in reference to your statement in the article summary at top, the last sentence you wrote says:
"No end in sight for the politicizing of the science and research surrounding climate change."
As I recall it was Al Gore who first politicized this area of science. How much of the blame does he get for letting the political genie out of the bottle on a topic so important as this one could be? Seems to me that if we are going to bust anyones chops for that particular offense, it oughta be his...
Slashdot Mirror
Time to turn in your geek card there, AC...
First of all - Thank you so very much for the personal insult. {roll_eyes}
Secondly, to be clear about what it is we are referring to:
Definition of DIPLOMACY
1: the art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations
2: skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility : tact
With that definition in mind, that SA, the US, and/or other countries talk to each other through secret diplomatic channels and say things they may not repeat in public, does not surprise me in the least. This is a common, human thing to do. It allows one to express the depth of feelings or intentions about an issue without offending someone else, without creating issues with them so that discourse may go on perhaps to a satisfactory ending for all concerned, or might keep an antagonistic personality somewhat mollified, avoiding provoking them to attack.
Tell me how blowing this process out of the water is, could possibly be in any way good or beneficial for the stability of the region, for the diplomatic process going on between the nations there?
Third, and last: Do you personally have any idea of what the last word in that definition - "tact" - means? Apparently not. Might be a good one for you - and Wikileaks - to learn, then practice.
It is not only damaging to the US; you should take off your blinders and RTFA.
Example: You will read, just like Iran (and, of course, Muslim fundies that support them) will, about Saudi and other Gulf states calling for the US (or whomever) to do whatever it takes to erase the Iranian nuclear weapons threat.
The short term result? Increased destabilization of an area of the world that really, really does not need that. Slightly longer term - war, quickened by this release. A war that otherwise might have been avoidable, or conducted on more favorable terms to those who don't want Iran to have nukes - which includes parts of Europe that are in range of their missiles, as I recall.
I hope I am wrong. I have a gut feeling that I'm not.
Bzzzt - Wrong WRT Hulu (dunno about CNN). Flashblock does *not* break Hulu. I use it under both Win32 and Lin32 w/FFox, and watch Hulu all the time, no problems.
On my 64-bit system, when booted into Linux there is an issue - Hulu fscked something up the other day and it hasn't been working at all. This issue has _nothing_ to do with Flashblock, however; it has been widely reported by many Lin64 users.
So - FFox and Flashblock for the win...
I use both on my AO751h (+ABP), and a 9 cell battery gets me ~10 hours of use, streaming video or whatever. And no damned "Punch the Monkey" ads. Don't see why the same wouldn't work on/for Macs...
Hahahahh lol lol lol.... yer killin me...
Oh - you are *serious*???
What's wrong, is that you don't see anything wrong with people who are *not* bona fide US Citizens having a vote in a US election.
How about I get a vote on the board at your company which determines when, if, and how much of a raise you should get? Or a vote at your HOA/POA meetings, when it comes time to determine how to spend the money you pay into the collective account? Or we could just cut out the meetings and voting, and I get to say how you can or can't spend your money. Yep, that's fair, isn't it? Makes a whole lot of sense, right?
No, it doesn't. At all. And *that* is 'whats wrong' with it. HTH.
How about I just continue with the plan I came up with over 25 years ago, when even as a child I saw where we were heading, and not reproduce.
Yes, I walk my talk. I haven't, and won't, make additional consumers of Earth's resources. I drive an older, small, efficient car, and keep it up so that it remains that way. I live in a boat made the same year as I was born, 'recycling' it, and do so without air conditioning or television. I use a composting toilet that I made. Etc, etc... Compared to most people, especially the ones who preach at us about 'climate change' and 'carbon credits' and who want to tax me even more, my 'carbon footprint' is non-existant. This 'pot' wishes more 'kettles' were black.
Tell us about yourself there, anon? Do you live what you believe, or do you choose the modern day equivalent of paid absolution?
The flaw is that it still does not address the root issue:
Overpopulation.
Yep, if there is indeed "anthropogenic global warming" (or, *cough cough* 'climate change'), then the root problem lies with the 'anthropogenic' part, right? Just too many damned people. Fix that shit first, and the problem will solve itself... No need for non-solutiuon, stop-gap measures like 'sequestration' or 'carbon credits' or more new taxes by which to further hold down individuals under the thumb of Big Gov't...
But that doesn't serve the purposes of those who know better than we do what is good for us... {roll_eyes}
IF it ever comes out, Lenovo's U1 should be a better option than this Dell. A detachable screen that near-instantly boots into it's own 'pad' OS, and seamlessly reintegrates and syncs with the main system when reattached... Nice idea, but the implementation must be giving them hell, given that over 9 months have passed since they first showed a working demo model...
Unless we defeat it. Then we'll get another chance, ad infinitum, like one of those timeless creatures of evil that will never truly die.
Dammit. I thought we'd heard the last of SCO and Darl...
I have since learned:- The wind at Cape Horn on the night I was rolled was recorded at 120 kts.
You start off with wrong assumptions, and get worse from there... Just for starters - I drink neither Charbucks nor 'soda', and the money I do pay into S&R and other boating-related organizations would exceed those costs by a large amount in any case.
My seat is far from 'uniformed'. For background: I live aboard and sail a boat full time for the past 7 years, and have been sailing both professionally and passionately for almost 30 years now. My knowledge comes not from media articles or what the Sunderlands PR folks (are allowed to) say to the general public, but from hard-won experience and time spent aboard, not from reading some fictionalized, glossy account from a media company which took their cues from what 'Team Abby' wants the general public to believe about her and that trip.
Regarding the weather she encountered: Sailors who venture into the southern oceans (below 35-40* S lat) - and there are those who do it every year - are VERY much prepared for 60 kt winds and 20-25ft seas because they KNOW they are going to have to deal with them sooner or later. There is no getting around that. My boat is prepared for that, as should be any boat crossing *any* ocean - those conditions are not as uncommon as you or other non-seagoing, and therefore uninformed, people would think. Conditions like that are closer to the norm down there, than they are the exception. Hell, the Cape Town Yacht Club regularly holds races in conditions where the winds exceed 40kts, with accompanying swell heights. Storm fronts down there can run only 24-36 hours apart. The fetch (that's the distance wind can travel unobstructed to create waves) is literally *all the way around the globe*. I personally know people who have suffered up to uncounted (one of them quit counting after 35 or so...) knockdown/rollovers while approaching Cape Horn. So, if you go to sail there, you can indeed, and in fact, YOU'D BEST be prepared and ready to deal with those type of conditions. To sail there, especially on a non-stop route, and escape experiencing conditions of that severity at least once would be a miracle of no small order, ***especially*** in the austral winter, which when when Abby was pushed out there by the thing known as her father. In short - your assumptions on this count are far, far off base, and show a decided lack of knowledge on the topic.
Regarding the boat: Wild Eyes was designed and made for sailing down there, and intended to be sailed *fast*. That is part of the strategy of that kind of boat (the Open 40's, 50's, 60's); get on the leading edge of a front, and be able to *stay there*, traveling east-about at 15-20 knots sustained, in order to not get in the mess which lies behind the leading edge of the front. Attributing Abby's survival to anything other than the capabilities and design of the boat is nonsense and shows a huge lack of comprehension about sailing and boats and the southern oceans. Wild Eyes kept her alive to be rescued. She may have had lots of gear, but Abby was *clueless* about how to sail that boat. For example, one of many, look at her average speeds for the entire trip: 4.5-5 knots, give or take. You can do that kind of speed over long distances with a "6 knot leadmine"; that is, a full keeled, heavy displacement cruising boat loaded to the gunwales with the water and food and gear needed for slow, long distance, transoceanic passages, with a top hull speed of ~7kts for its displacement hull. Jessica Watson made better speed on her S&S 34 (a moderate displacement cruiser/club racer) than did Abby on her full-bore, 40 foot, planing-hulled thoroughbred raceboat. Wild Eyes, sailed properly by a competent sailor, could easily have (and HAS prior, in several RTW & smaller races) averaged 3X the speeds Abby maintained. She was woefully unprepared to be sailing that boat; her experience at sailing prior to this attempt has NEVER been shown or proven, only claimed, by - you guessed it - her father and the Sund
...or prosecute/put on trial the person(s) responsible once the rescuee(s) have been returned, to determine whether negligence and/or stupidity is to blame. If it is, then slap the fines to them, making sure they at least pay the bill for rescue ops.
The payee could be the someone rescued, or someone like Laurence & Maryanne Sunderland, the (ir)responsible parents of "I-Hit-The-Button-Come-Save-My-Ass-Before-I-Die" posterchild Abby Sunderland, who had no right or reason to be in the Southern Ocean on a boat she was woefully unprepared for sailing even at latitudes where the weather is generally good. Estimates have put her rescue costs as approaching, or even over, US$1 million - not to mention the risk to the rescuers lives. All that cost and wastefulness for a publicity stunt designed for media whoredom and familial enrichment...
Or perhaps Myst: The Movie. *That* would be a gripping, edge-of-the-seat cinematic experience!
As an aside, to all the people who bring their US hate into unrelated conversations {snip}
Fixed...
Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
Mine is that you should see someone about these anger issues you have. Why else would you feel such a need to publicly and vociferously insult and curse me, a complete and total stranger whom you have never met, will likely never meet? You know absolutely nothing about me at all, my hopes, fears, loves, desires, education, prejudices, whatever - yet seem to assume that in your infinite wisdom you have me all figured out, and all that I am worthy of as far as you are concerned is scorn, insult, resentment, anger, and public vilification...
I pity you, friend. I hope that you can someday find it in yourself to have compassion and understanding for people who might not think exactly as you do.
"War means fighting, and fighting means killing." — Nathan Bedford Forrest
There can be no such thing as "a truly defensive war". Even if there was, people would still die in it - both combatants and civilians alike. Nice pipedream, though.
I hope enough reasonable, intelligent people have Mod points today to give you the +5 you deserve for this post.
Thank you.
Oh, you'd *know* about it - it would of course get posted here and @other techblogs.
;) :D
You just wouldn't be able to personally *see* it, from down there in your parents basem..., um, H@x0rs L@!r...
..and 2000 *barrels* @42 gal/per = 84,000 *gallons* per day. (Barrels to gallons conversion made because otherwise the numbers seem so disparate...).
The California seafloor leaks are much larger. I don't think they know exactly how much, but this source quotes "8-80 Exxon Valdez spills", I would guess they mean annually. That's somewhere between 86.4 and 864 million gallons.
Take a look at the numbers, all over the areas you describe, the "Third World", population growth parallels that of industrialized nations while the use of consumables, pollution and carbon emissions rises at a much faster rate than that of the 'developed' world for at least the next 20 years. Only Russia has had a negative growth in population, and they have apparently overcome that recently. Check the first link, you might find it eye-opening and educational, because population growth pretty much everywhere is on the + side, and the second link will show you that the western nations have stabilized their pollution and carbon emissions, by and large, while the very areas you claim don't show relatively large increases of said.
Note source of article/graphs for the second link and following info is Mongabay.com:
Mongabay.com is considered a leading source of information on tropical forests by some of the world's top ecologists and conservationists.
I doubt they are a 'right wing tool', & they are using DOE EIA numbers. Accordingly:
According to the Energy Information Administration, after China and the United States, among major polluters only India is expected to have significant growth of emissions over the next 20 years.
According to the Department of Energy's (DOE) Energy Information Administration (EIA), after China and the United States, among major polluters only India is expected to have significant growth of emissions over the next 20 years.
The skewing of data - which you may or may not believe happened, but I think did, and does, by *both* sides - has made me a skeptic of both sides respective points. I find it laughable that AGW proponents absolutely _refuse_ to publicly tackle the core issue if AGW is indeed happening: and that is that there are TOO MANY PEOPLE on Earth already, at least for the infrastructure we have in place to feed and house and move them around. Seems to me that if they want to stop AGW, they gotta start with the A part of the equation. But no, instead it's all electric cars and inefficient solar and wind power instead of proven nuclear, etc etc... OTOH are those who don't give a shit about all the things I truly love and enjoy, like pristine woodlands, healthy ecosystems, mountains and clean seas, because they are so short-sighted and materialistic that they cannot see the havoc they are sowing with their unabashed consumption of the very limited resources available on this little blue ball.
Daniel Quinn was onto something when he wrote:
"The premise of the Taker story is the world belongs to man...The premise of the Leaver story is man belongs to the world."
I enjoy life more as a Leaver.
Mods turned me into a newt!
(I got better...)
Really, though...
"Flamebait"... lol
:)
Sometimes the Truth hurts. In this case, it hurts me, for pointing it out. I was halfway expecting that, actually, because I knew that however true, what I wrote wouldn't sit well with some moderator who has a partisan political agenda to push.
So it goes!
"No end in sight for the politicizing of the science and research surrounding climate change."
As I recall it was Al Gore who first politicized this area of science. How much of the blame does he get for letting the political genie out of the bottle on a topic so important as this one could be? Seems to me that if we are going to bust anyones chops for that particular offense, it oughta be his...
Of course, YMWV.