Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)

6. I see now why Gavin didn't respond to my tweet.

Reply to GliderGuider (Original post)

Thu Aug 1, 2013, 05:10 AM

Aug 2013

Wadhams and that article basically agree with my original post on this.

Do you have any idea how fucked up it is that an armchair amateur gets this right when the fucking scientists play minimalist?

The fucking anti-science lobby has got them running fucking scared. Hansen is totally right. Scientific reticence at its core.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Arctic methane catastrophe scenario is based on new empirical observations [View all] GliderGuider Jul 2013 OP

kick, for significance. nt wtmusic Jul 2013 #1

Doomy, gloomy kick hatrack Jul 2013 #2

kick and chervilant Jul 2013 #3

I wish I could get to a zen place about all this Mojorabbit Jul 2013 #4

Yeah, it sure helps. GliderGuider Jul 2013 #5

I see now why Gavin didn't respond to my tweet. joshcryer Aug 2013 #6