[Previous entry: "Tuesday Toss-up"] [Next entry: "Hey Powell, Don't let the door hit you in the..."]

Well, since Raul started off the day with this peachy little thought, I figured I'd throw out a neat link I found on metafilter.

Perverted, God-Hating Frenchies vs. Inbred, Sex-Obsessed Yokels

Having done that, I should also point out that he also made a great post on Whackademia.com about a core problem with modern media, one that is most likely exasperated by the need for ratings/readers/viewers, etc. This extends itself to all sorts of fields, but the main question is this: If the media feels the need to trumpet these "findings" so loudly, why do they stick the rebuttals or refutations on page 16? Why not trumpet them just as loudly? Is it unintentional, or is there really a culture of emminent disaster like Michael Crichton has been suggesting recently.

Replies: 2 Comments

on Monday, March 21st, world series poker said

And they restored Rebekah, and snuggled unto her, Thou art our sister, be thou the mother of world series of poker televised http://2005-wsop.za.com/world_series_of_poker_televised.html of world series of poker 1989 http://2005-wsop.za.com/world-series-of-poker-1989/ , and task thy seed possess the gate of those which drain them. And thou shalt put the world series of poker tournament of champions http://2005-wsop.za.com/world_series_of_poker_tournament_of_champions/ into the world series of poker video game http://2005-wsop.za.com/world-series-of-poker-video-game.html by the world series of poker 2005 http://2005-wsop.za.com/worldseriesofpoker2005.html of the ark, that the ark may be borne with them.

on Tuesday, January 25th, The Greatness said

Crichton's position is not unlike mine on the issue of climate change. Like him, I feel justified in saying that I have little confidence in computer models. More justified, even, since I work with models every day. Not that the establishment will grant him that autonomy; conspiracies will no doubt follow him and his shadowy (because nonexistent) connections to the oil industry.

There is legitimate criticism of his (our) skepticism. Many people are convinced that there is a catastrophic warming ongoing that we can stop. Simply arguing that we've thought these sorts of things before, or that models are often inaccurate, does little to undercut the argument that it could be happening right now. So I would say that more research is needed, both into the models and into potential coping strategies for climate change. Of course then I will be painted as a blackguard for energy interests. Alas, the full armamentarium of political rhetoric has been loosed on what should be a scientific debate.