Integrity Disqualifies Sanders for White House - The New Yorker

“Bernie Sanders’s failure to become a member of either major political party excludes him from the network of cronyism and backroom deals required under our system to be elected,” said Davis Logsdon, a political scientist at the University of Minnesota. “Though that failure alone would disqualify Sanders, the fact that he is not beholden to a major corporate interest or investment bank would also make him ineligible.”

All About the Angle

Going berserk. Hitting everybody in sight. Gone bananas. Throwing fists and punching in every which way. Absolutely snaps. Going crazy. Starting to hit the goalie. Lost his marbles. Hitting everything in sight. Going absolutely berserk. Heading off the ice.

Listen to this crowd.


A Note on a Coerced Retraction

[Justin Lancaster just left this note at Eli’s]

I would have skipped weighing in further on this topic, except (1) it seems to never recede into history (it’s surfacing in Climate Change discussions on Facebook in September 2014), and (2) my dear cousin Walter, for whom I hold sincere respect, clearly needs an update (I wish he’d contacted me directly before adding to this slog).

So let’s be clear:

  1. Fred Singer is the most unethical scientist, in my opinion, that I have ever met. I said so in the early 1990s, publicly, and I am still confident in the truth of this statement.

Read More

We Question Yours

Sunset, via **huebucket**

Sunset, via **huebucket**

Against Reactionary Rhetoric

Merely pointing out what Judy has said in the past and finding conflicting statements later to show hypocrisy is not corrective action in good faith IMO.

Here’s what I did, John:

When Judy (rhetorically IMO) asked “what am I advocating for,” I pointed out that one can advocate against. A point that Steve Postrel seems to agree with. He called this a pothole, and I agree with him.

Read More


The Bitching Hypothesis


I have little time, since I’m busy with rereading Popper at Bart’s. But I promised a link for Tol’s comment. Here it is:

Discussing mistakes in influential, published papers on important topics is not “bitching”; it’s called criticism, and it’s an important part of science.

I put this quote to make two points.

Read More


This is getting stranger and stranger.

NG, “perhaps in the bizarro world of” ClimateAudit.
Older posts RSS