Republicans have some "Splaning" to do about Hurricane Harvey!!!

[CHUCKY]

An explanation so simple even a conservative like Chucky can understand it......



From Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey, Episode 12 - "The World Set Free" (available on Netflix)

lady q have you ever read the book STATE OF FEAR by Michael Crichton? if not i suggest you do and get back to me.

[Lady Quagga]

lady q have you ever read the book STATE OF FEAR by Michael Crichton? if not i suggest you do and get back to me.

James E. Hansen, former head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies at the time, wrote that Crichton "doesn't seem to have the foggiest notion about the science that he writes about." Jeffrey Masters, chief meteorologist for Weather Underground, writes: "Crichton presents an error-filled and distorted version of the Global Warming science, favoring views of the handful of contrarians that attack the consensus science of the IPCC."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_...ific_community

Try not to confuse science fiction for science fact, Chuckster......

[DarkShadow]

lady q have you ever read the book STATE OF FEAR by Michael Crichton? if not i suggest you do and get back to me.

Wow...a fiction book being touted as basis for research?

I always wondered who voted for Trump.

Next thing we know, the Chuckster is going to use Jurassic Park as his basis on why stem cell research is bad.

[CHUCKY]

[QUOTE=Lady Quagga;790501]James E. Hansen, former head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies at the time, wrote that Crichton "doesn't seem to have the foggiest notion about the science that he writes about." Jeffrey Masters, chief meteorologist for Weather Underground, writes: "Crichton presents an error-filled and distorted version of the Global Warming science, favoring views of the handful of contrarians that attack the consensus science of the IPCC."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_...ific_community

Try not to confuse science fiction for science fact, Chuckster......[/QU
the science fiction portion of the book was not the point. it was the premise of the book that the biased news media uses fake/ doctored data to whip the mass populace into a frenzy, hence The State of Fear.

[CHUCKY]

And i also do not use wikipedia as a source of facts.

[etucker1959]

lady q have you ever read the book STATE OF FEAR by Michael Crichton? if not i suggest you do and get back to me.

Well CHUCKY, I can at least admire you're trying to fight back with the weapons you have!!! Not like those 2 Gents (Cowards) who threw some insults around and backed it up with absolutely "NOTHING!!"

[etucker1959]

[QUOTE=CHUCKY;790504]

James E. Hansen, former head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies at the time, wrote that Crichton "doesn't seem to have the foggiest notion about the science that he writes about." Jeffrey Masters, chief meteorologist for Weather Underground, writes: "Crichton presents an error-filled and distorted version of the Global Warming science, favoring views of the handful of contrarians that attack the consensus science of the IPCC."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_...ific_community

Try not to confuse science fiction for science fact, Chuckster......[/QU
the science fiction portion of the book was not the point. it was the premise of the book that the biased news media uses fake/ doctored data to whip the mass populace into a frenzy, hence The State of Fear.

Sorta like what the Republicans said about "Death Panels" in the Obama Care debate??? lol Unfortunately both sides do it in trying to make their point. The solution is to cross references your sources with hopefully unbiased groups. I would like to think true men of science aren't politically motivated!!!

[Lady Quagga]

the science fiction portion of the book was not the point. It was the premise of the book that the biased news media uses fake/ doctored data to whip the mass populace into a frenzy, hence the state of fear.

So by your logic, such premises should be the basis of our belief systems?

I've read both Jurassic Park and Rising Sun, both written by Crichton. I found them quite entertaining. Does this mean I should believe there are Scottish and African-American detectives tear-assing around Los Angeles looking to expose murderous Japanese businessmen, or that geriatric Englishmen are hard at work applying wonky DNA science to bring a live T-Rex to Disneyland?

and i also do not use wikipedia as a source of facts.

You prefer fiction over fact. Color me surprised. /sarcasm

Of course, Wikipedia backed the excerpt I quoted with facts (those pesky little things you choose to ignore):

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2005/C...n_20050927.pdf

https://www.wunderground.com/resourc...tateoffear.asp

[Natural Lefty]

Michael Crichton died in 2008. I wonder what he would think of global warming now.

And he thought that scientists were getting rich by having government grants to publish fake data on climate change? LOL How rich was he? A lot richer I surmise than the average -- or maybe any -- climate scientist.

I have a brother who is an environmental scientist, and I can tell you unequivocally, he is not rich, nor is he, nor any that I know of, dishonest. That is an insult completely beyond the pale to intelligent, hardworking, sincere scientists.

Reading about Crichton's view on Wikipedia, I just lost whatever minor respect I may have had for him.

[etucker1959]

Michael Crichton died in 2008. I wonder what he would think of global warming now.

And he thought that scientists were getting rich by having government grants to publish fake data on climate change? LOL How rich was he? A lot richer I surmise than the average -- or maybe any -- climate scientist.

I have a brother who is an environmental scientist, and I can tell you unequivocally, he is not rich, nor is he, nor any that I know of, dishonest. That is an insult completely beyond the pale to intelligent, hardworking, sincere scientists.

That's an excellent point of him dying in 2008. Back then even the whole scientific community wasn't totally convinced about Climate Change yet! (Forget about the Republicans and the Ya Who's for a minute) But every year since then (you could graph it) more and more of the Scientific community got on board with Climate Change. I would say by 2015 it was almost 100% of the Scientific community agreed there is some thing too Global Warming. Only the Republicans now a days still doubt "Global Warming is real!!" Unfortunately we have a Republican President in the White House now acting like a fool on Climate Change!! People in the future will look back and ask, "how could they have been so foolish" when all the evidence in the world was staring them in the face!!!