Thursday Highlights

Good morning.

  1. Confused about the nature of religion, worship is public and communal.
  2. Speaking of confused, one school is quite so.
  3. Mandates.
  4. (not) acting alone.
  5. Cultural movement, regress or progress (or even sustainable)?
  6. A boy to note.
  7. Drunk drivings vs suicides.
  8. Noting silliness on the gun control front.
  9. Lies of 2012, some of the more notable noted.
  10. At this point … does it matter (if we were shown to be inexperienced stupid boobs), well maybe maybe not, but shouting doesn’t prove anything?
  11. For those who reject, … uhm, genetics.
  12. Der Speigel and climate change.
  13. The “assault weapon ban” and Sandy Hook.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


  1. Boonton says:

    Drunk drivings vs suicides.

    The question I’d have is the automobile is only 100 yrs old or so, rural Ireland much more so. What the heck was everyone doing in rural Ireland before it became the norm to drive to the pub and get shloshed?

  2. Mark says:

    You took your horse and buggy to the pub and got sloshed (and the horse knew the way home).

  3. Boonton says:

    Der Speigel and climate change.

    So hows that old “global cooling since 1990 (or was it 98?)” claim been working for you guys?

  4. Mark says:

    The claim wasn’t cooling but that the temps for the last two decades have been basically flat. And I think that’s still the case, if I remember. You, I see, are not touching the substantive points, like this:

    The all-clear signal on the hurricane front is another setback for the IPCC. In keeping with lead author Kevin Trenberth’s predictions, the IPCC report warned that there would be more hurricanes in a greenhouse climate. One of the graphs in the IPCC report is particularly mysterious. Without specifying a source, the graph suggestively illustrates how damage caused by extreme weather increases with rising average temperatures.

    When hurricane expert Roger Pielke, Jr. of the University of Colorado at Boulder saw the graph, he was appalled. “I would like to discover this sort of relationship myself,” he says, “but it simply isn’t supported by the facts at the moment.”

    Pielke tried to find out where the graph had come from. He traced it to the chief scientist at a London firm that performs risk calculations for major insurance companies. The insurance scientist claims that the graph was never meant for publication. How the phantom graph found its way into the IPCC report is still a mystery.

    with a 10 foot rhetorical pole. Did you see this, going off of some of the more glaring lies in the inaugural address. Or maybe the President wasn’t lying, is it that he’s just too stupid to know the difference?

  5. Boonton says:

    Granted an internal graph that wasn’t prepped for publication shouldn’t be put into a public report until its read. How does that demonstrate anything about global warming?

    As for temps being flat, interesting how last year was the hottest on record…