I don't get a lot of comments on this blog, so it allows me to respond to the few I get each time. I did a post last year about Lana del Rey's look for a video she was shooting. I didn't think it was particularly mean spirited on my part, but a couple of commenters took me to task assuming I prefer women to be dieted down to skin and bones.
Clearly they haven't seen my proliferation of Daily Duffster posts. Anyone who has seen those and thinks I prefer scrawny chicks is definitely reading comprehension impaired. But just to make my point, here's a couple of my favorite hot ladies from the good old days that no one would accuse of being skin and bones:
4 comments:
"Fortunately, his running mate Paul Ryan has openly expressed the logical concerns of most people about the shoddy science and fear mongering of climate hysterics like the Goreacle."
ah yeah, the shoddy science
You really were a bruised sperm in a rotten egg weren't you.
Gee . . . went back in the archives to quote that one, didn't ya?
Let's see -- ignore 500 years of contradictory data to make your graph smooth -- base a "scientific" report on anecdotes from a hiking magazine -- climate models that cannot predict even verify past climate events -- hysterical claims of increased storms, floods, etc., that do not come true -- blah, blah, blah -- you don't write the conclusion first, then cherry pick the data to support it. Yeah, that's shoddy science in my book, dumbass.
It really doesn't take much intellectual curiosity to look into the issues, problems, and weaknesses of anthropogenic global warming.
But it takes a closed little mind to pretend that AGW is proven, beyond debate, determined by a "consensus" that basically doesn't exist. It's very curious that those closed minds almost always exist in the realm of either politics, or among people I consider scientifically illiterate.
Well said.
Thanks for commenting :-)
Post a Comment