Amy Ridenour of the conservative National Center for Public Policy Research slams all those crrrraaazy global-warming agitators in the media who don’t know nothin’ ’bout science:
Anyone smart enough to take in O and emit CO2 knows you can’t prove planetary warming (or planetary cooling, or planetary astonishment at ABC) from regional fluctuations, even IF ABC’s “correspondents” get their facts right. [my emphasis]
Anyone taking in O would be very clever indeed. As anyone who took high school chemistry can tell you, oxygen is diatomic: You breathe in O2. But maybe I’m not smart enough to understand how global warming isn’t happening. Republican war on science, indeed.
If she fixes this later today, I’ve got a screenshot. Thanks to Bugsy for the steer.
If I recall correctly, there’s plenty of monatomic oxygen up in the Ionosphere. Perhaps she’s just talking about those of us smart enough to hang out 300 miles (give or take) above the surface of the earth.
When I first read your comment, I thought it said “loonosphere”. My eyes did a Freudian slip. đŸ™‚
WTF?
<
p>
I’ve been reading NewsBusters, the link provided from the link above. His main beef: not that the alarmist rhetoric is over the top, but that there is … “absolutely no conservative counterpoint.”
<
p>
When did science become conservative and progressive? Why would he expect a science piece to have counterpoints in the first place?
<
p>
Seriously. This is science. You want to get a handful of respected scientists to discuss facts, theories, evidence, and whatnot, that’s cool. But, there is absolutely no reason to have a “conservative counterpoint” to any issue that the progressives champion.
<
p>
I mean, if they did an expose that showed that blacks weren’t being served in diners in North Carolina, would they be compelled to call on Jesse Helms for a “conservative counterpoint”? If they did a show demonstrating how low wage employees were having their OT stolen or their hours trimmed by management, would they need to call in Pete Coors for a “conservative counterpoint”? If they did a report showing that Haliburton was stealing millions of dollars from tUSA by overbilling, double billing, not performing work, etc., would they need to call on Dick Cheney for a “conservative counterpoint”?
<
p>
Hint: no. News is news man. Some things are so clearly right or wrong that the news shouldn’t give a so called “conservative counterpoint” the air time. Editors need to grow some backbone and go with a story if its right — regardless of what the other side is whining about.
science is for kids.
<
p>
<
p>
conservatives don’t have to care about the facts when they control the airwaves.
<
p>
to err, Oceania is no longer at war with Eastasia; it is at war with Eurasia. 2+2=5. Who controls the present,controls the future… etc.
“No longer” at war with Eastasia? Oceania has never been at war with Eastasia, and any indications to the contrary have gone down the memory hole.
<
p>
Science is progressive. That’s why Republicans can’t stand it.
<
p>
<
p>
How quaint! This was true thirty years ago, but it hasn’t been true for some time. I agree with you about the should, but the is is way different.
I try no to read into these things too deeply as a missing digit could be an honest mistake.
<
p>
However, it does become an even funnier mistake when preceeded by comments like this.
<
p>
“for, as we know, real journalists use fact-checkers. ahem.”
<
p>
Do they?