Untitled

partybarackisinthehousetonight:

pro tip: glue a tiny mirror over your drivers license photo so when you  hand it to the police they will get confused and arrest themselves instead

wiredclover:

scienceisbeauty:

I’ve always been a proud skeptic of the (alarmism on) Anthropogenic Global Warming, and now I’m very happy to fully endorse this recap (Know the Facts - A skeptic’s guide to climate change) from berkeleyearth.org and its main conclusions (my comments in brackets):
Stay skeptical (always)
Practice and promote energy efficiency (by principles)
Recognize that most future emissions will come from China and the developing world (and Science and technology depends on that, and they are the only thing who eventually could save us from a global crisis)
Demand sustainable and cost-effective solutions in the US and around the world (yep, pragmatism should be always above politic, and, of course, above science tainted by politics).
So please, do not let that some interested people (or gullible persons or guided by a specific agenda) to use Science (and propaganda) in order to impose damaging policies for everyone in general, and for developing countries in particular. Not in the name of Science, it does not work, Science always win, because…

….reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
Richard Feynman


This guide seems little more than a propaganda pamphlet for their own studies.  I really wish they would cite which of their reports they pulled their facts from and where, instead of just directing you to their website.  I am glad they do not dispute that global warming is actually happening but I do not agree with some of their assertions.  For example, the chart on page two regarding the links between weather and climate change, where are they pulling those ‘yes’ ‘no’ ‘maybe’ categories from?  A lot of the discussion I have seen regarding the linkage between weather and climate change is severity and frequency and this pamphlet doesn’t even touch upon that. 
This pamphlet also doesn’t actually give examples of “Much of what you hear about climate change is exaggerated or highly uncertain.” before concluding with its recommendations (as stated in the original post).  There is always argument and debate within science but you need to be specific on what actual issues are up for debate and to the degree that they are debated.  Otherwise people will feel that they shouldn’t listen to anything anyone is saying.
It doesn’t actually say anything besides ‘climate change is happening due to CO2 emissions by humans’ but then everything else is written for controversial effect or to cast doubt on other work.  It seems to me that the papers (as far as I can tell from the titles because they are blocked to people without access to those journals) are examining measurements and methods or explaining their own, specifically for temperatures.  That’s it.  I can find nothing else on their website to justify some of the claims or doubts they put forward.  This is written for maximum controversial affect merely to push forward their own findings.

Ack ack my reblog did not have my comment, oh my Lord did that need a caption. 

I reblogged it because it seemed interesting and I wondered how people felt about this seriously measured acceptance of climate change. wiredclover you totally nailed it, and called my attention to the lack of caption, THANK YOU! What do you think? Better than nothing (at least they’re acknowledging that climate change is a thing) or worse (because they want to shift the blame to other countries and limit possible US solutions)?

wiredclover:

scienceisbeauty:

I’ve always been a proud skeptic of the (alarmism on) Anthropogenic Global Warming, and now I’m very happy to fully endorse this recap (Know the Facts - A skeptic’s guide to climate change) from berkeleyearth.org and its main conclusions (my comments in brackets):

  • Stay skeptical (always)
  • Practice and promote energy efficiency (by principles)
  • Recognize that most future emissions will come from China and the developing world (and Science and technology depends on that, and they are the only thing who eventually could save us from a global crisis)
  • Demand sustainable and cost-effective solutions in the US and around the world (yep, pragmatism should be always above politic, and, of course, above science tainted by politics).

So please, do not let that some interested people (or gullible persons or guided by a specific agenda) to use Science (and propaganda) in order to impose damaging policies for everyone in general, and for developing countries in particular. Not in the name of Science, it does not work, Science always win, because…

….reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.

Richard Feynman

This guide seems little more than a propaganda pamphlet for their own studies.  I really wish they would cite which of their reports they pulled their facts from and where, instead of just directing you to their website.  I am glad they do not dispute that global warming is actually happening but I do not agree with some of their assertions.  For example, the chart on page two regarding the links between weather and climate change, where are they pulling those ‘yes’ ‘no’ ‘maybe’ categories from?  A lot of the discussion I have seen regarding the linkage between weather and climate change is severity and frequency and this pamphlet doesn’t even touch upon that. 

This pamphlet also doesn’t actually give examples of “Much of what you hear about climate change is exaggerated or highly uncertain.” before concluding with its recommendations (as stated in the original post).  There is always argument and debate within science but you need to be specific on what actual issues are up for debate and to the degree that they are debated.  Otherwise people will feel that they shouldn’t listen to anything anyone is saying.

It doesn’t actually say anything besides ‘climate change is happening due to CO2 emissions by humans’ but then everything else is written for controversial effect or to cast doubt on other work.  It seems to me that the papers (as far as I can tell from the titles because they are blocked to people without access to those journals) are examining measurements and methods or explaining their own, specifically for temperatures.  That’s it.  I can find nothing else on their website to justify some of the claims or doubts they put forward.  This is written for maximum controversial affect merely to push forward their own findings.

Ack ack my reblog did not have my comment, oh my Lord did that need a caption. I reblogged it because it seemed interesting and I wondered how people felt about this seriously measured acceptance of climate change. wiredclover you totally nailed it, and called my attention to the lack of caption, THANK YOU! What do you think? Better than nothing (at least they’re acknowledging that climate change is a thing) or worse (because they want to shift the blame to other countries and limit possible US solutions)?

mr-muppetface:

brutereason:

A big challenge in activism is fighting harmful things without necessarily shaming, stigmatizing, and belittling people who buy into those harmful things. For instance: pseudoscience, fundamentalism, altmed, normative beauty standards. It’s tempting to…

Can I join the friends? Cause that post is perfect.

scienceisbeauty:

I’ve always been a proud skeptic of the (alarmism on) Anthropogenic Global Warming, and now I’m very happy to fully endorse this recap (Know the Facts - A skeptic’s guide to climate change) from berkeleyearth.org and its main conclusions (my comments in brackets):
Stay skeptical (always)
Practice and promote energy efficiency (by principles)
Recognize that most future emissions will come from China and the developing world (and Science and technology depends on that, and they are the only thing who eventually could save us from a global crisis)
Demand sustainable and cost-effective solutions in the US and around the world (yep, pragmatism should be always above politic, and, of course, above science tainted by politics).
So please, do not let that some interested people (or gullible persons or guided by a specific agenda) to use Science (and propaganda) in order to impose damaging policies for everyone in general, and for developing countries in particular. Not in the name of Science, it does not work, Science always win, because…

….reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
Richard Feynman

scienceisbeauty:

I’ve always been a proud skeptic of the (alarmism on) Anthropogenic Global Warming, and now I’m very happy to fully endorse this recap (Know the Facts - A skeptic’s guide to climate change) from berkeleyearth.org and its main conclusions (my comments in brackets):

  • Stay skeptical (always)
  • Practice and promote energy efficiency (by principles)
  • Recognize that most future emissions will come from China and the developing world (and Science and technology depends on that, and they are the only thing who eventually could save us from a global crisis)
  • Demand sustainable and cost-effective solutions in the US and around the world (yep, pragmatism should be always above politic, and, of course, above science tainted by politics).

So please, do not let that some interested people (or gullible persons or guided by a specific agenda) to use Science (and propaganda) in order to impose damaging policies for everyone in general, and for developing countries in particular. Not in the name of Science, it does not work, Science always win, because…

….reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.

Richard Feynman

knitmeapony:

egobus:

one time when I was about four, the 10 year old neighbour boys attacked me with water guns and when I ran away and told my mom she gave me the hose and set it to pressure wash and basically told me to finish what they started  

Excellent parenting.

laughterkey:

Best combo.

There are only two important elements to a great novel. The first is an interesting character. A character that you thoroughly know and feel will go a long way toward attracting a readership.

The second element is an interesting problem.
Walter Dean Myers, with advice for a young writer. (via thebitch-and-thejerk)

mishasassbutt:

talking to people you want to be friend with more like
image

coffeeandcockatiels:

typette:

zeedikay:

drcabl3:

jessicreep:

kittydoom:

A Multi-Function Clip That Hides a Toolbox In Your Hair

Um yes!

I still want to bulk buy these and adonize  batch pink.

And it would still get stuck in my hair…

now THIS is what I’m fucking talking about
EDIT: IT FUNCTIONS AS A FUCKING ORANGE PEELER, AND EVEN A LAMP IF YOU HAVE A STRING AND SOME OIL. SERIOUSLY???

JUST IN CASE YOU APPARENTLY NEED AN EMERGENCY ONE FOR RELIGIOUS SERVICES?

Buying these asap.

coffeeandcockatiels:

typette:

zeedikay:

drcabl3:

jessicreep:

kittydoom:

A Multi-Function Clip That Hides a Toolbox In Your Hair

Um yes!

I still want to bulk buy these and adonize  batch pink.

And it would still get stuck in my hair…

now THIS is what I’m fucking talking about

EDIT: IT FUNCTIONS AS A FUCKING ORANGE PEELER, AND EVEN A LAMP IF YOU HAVE A STRING AND SOME OIL. SERIOUSLY???

JUST IN CASE YOU APPARENTLY NEED AN EMERGENCY ONE FOR RELIGIOUS SERVICES?

Buying these asap.