They don't have an excuse for what exactly?Originally Posted by Roland
They don't have an excuse for what exactly?
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
This is boring now.
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand. They listen with the intent to reply.” Stephen Covey
Well Mr. B, you’ve got Roland well and truly tied up in knots,
When I first saw this silly letter, I wondered how many employees NASA have. A little bit of searching says 18,000 direct ones and about 280,000 indirect ones e.g. working with NASA on a contract basis
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_e...does_NASA_have
... so :- 49 ‘nutters’ – says it all
I also found a blog analysis of the letter, which pointed out that NONE of the signatories had published anything in Climate Science, 3 of the signatories are already well known sceptics/deniers, and it is simply another attempt to smear Hansen. The internet has been swamped by nutter websites on this story so I can’t readily find this link. If & when I do I’ll post more of it.
And with respect to James Hansen, he was recently awarded a prestigious medal in Edinburgh :-
http://www.sciencefestival.co.uk/new...dinburgh-medal
a quote from which :-
&The Edinburgh Medal is a prestigious award given each year to men and women of science and technology whose professional achievements are judged to have made a significant contribution to the understanding and well-being of humanity.
The first Edinburgh Medallist in 1989 was the theoretical physicist and Nobel Prize winner Abdus Salam; of the subsequent twenty Medallists, three have gone on to be awarded the Nobel Prize. (my bold)
Denial is a defense mechanism in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence.
Denial is a mechanism of the immature mind, because it conflicts with the ability to learn from and cope with reality.
Why don't you just answer the simple and direct question with a simple and direct answer?
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
Because to answer it I'll have to go through the last god knows how many posts doing the i said then you said then i said then you said type thing. If it was of major relevance to the debate maybe I'd go through that process but as it's not I can't be bothered.
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand. They listen with the intent to reply.” Stephen Covey
God might know how many posts. I do.
This thread is now just 26 posts long.
And you don't even have to trawl through even those..
Just address the the simple question:
They don't have an excuse for what exactly?
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
To waste tax payers money on preventing climate change.
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand. They listen with the intent to reply.” Stephen Covey
Let's try again. Here's what you posted:
What specifically have you had to pay taxes for that you believe there is now no excuse for and that you thus think should be refunded to you?They always need an excuse. Now they don't have one I want my money back.
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
How the hell would I know that. Ask the last three chancellors of the ex chequers.
“Most people do not listen with the intent to understand. They listen with the intent to reply.” Stephen Covey
Let me see if I have got this right.
"Now they don't have one I want my money back.Now they don't have one I want my money back" is what you posted.
But you are now indicating that you don't know specifically what they don't have an excuse and that you don't know what you want your money back for.
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks