Originally Posted by RobJordan
Originally Posted by MojoHand
Originally Posted by RobJordan
Michael Crichton, a brilliant science fiction writer (now deceased) with both an undergraduate and MD degree from Harvard (obviously a Bible-thumping Republican neanderthal) explains in this series of interviews and speeches why he is a global warming "denier". This is a great video because it shows the rational thought of a liberal, secularly inclined intellectual on why global warming hysteria is essentially unadlterated horse schit. Crichton is fully informed on the latest science and has a brilliant mind. He gives very cogent and thoughtful reasons why the leftist hand-wringing over global warming is out of all proportion to any real possible harm.

Well worth listening too. Too bad Crichton died in 2008. The pursuit of rationality in science and politics could use him today.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJJsDtSHjdE


You mean the guy who was into clairvoyance and astral projection, etc???

laugh

I find it amusing that Havard is the epicenter of liberalism and elitism to the Right....until someone from there 'validates' a conservatives worldview... grin


You haven't learned a thing, have you? The first statement is classic ad hominem.

As to the second, I find it amusing that conservative environmental opinions are nothing more than the product of an anti-science, anti-rational political agenda---until a
card carrying secular liberal intellectual validates those conservative environmental opinons, at which point the previously revered secular-liberal intellectual suddenly becomes an clairvoyant, astral-projecting nut case.

Once again, your complete inability to respond on the merits loudly trumpets the impotence of your position. Thank you for acknowledging (yet again!) that you're in over your head. grin


Ahh, Jordan...

Still haven't figured out what a ad hominem attack is yet, eh? MC opinions are just that....where are his scientific papers refuting the evidence? BTW, I tend to agree that some of the 'hysteria' over AGW is just that. Even scientists still debate the ramifications and extended predictive models...none of which invalidates the existing evidence.

Also, YOU are the one who used the term 'nut case', I merely remarked on the incongruence of your statement on rationality and MC's own views... smile

Please read his book 'Travels' and get back to us (hint: it ain't like Anthony Bourdain!).

You might even be amused! laugh


It ain't what you don't know that makes you an idiot...it's what you know for certain, that just ain't so...

Most people don't want to believe the truth~they want the truth to be what they believe.

Stupidity has no average...