Global Warming The debbil made me do it

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:JvRBj.19502$TT4.12916@attbi_s22:

There's a perfectly rational explanation for the "overwhelming
scientific consensus": any researcher who dares disagree finds
himself without a pipeline into the grant money gravy train.
Scientists have to eat just like the rest of us.

Perfectly rational? It's absurd.

To believe it, you have to believe that virtually every practicing
geo-scientist in the world is cooking the books

No, you only have to know history. Look up Copernicus, and what
happened when his perfectly rational heliocentric theories ran up
against well-financed, fervent opposition.

And you would have been at the head of the line to lynch him, you
hypocritical piece of ****.


Bertie

In article ,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:JvRBj.19502$TT4.12916@attbi_s22:

There's a perfectly rational explanation for the "overwhelming
scientific consensus": any researcher who dares disagree finds
himself without a pipeline into the grant money gravy train.
Scientists have to eat just like the rest of us.

Perfectly rational? It's absurd.

To believe it, you have to believe that virtually every practicing
geo-scientist in the world is cooking the books

No, you only have to know history. Look up Copernicus, and what
happened when his perfectly rational heliocentric theories ran up
against well-financed, fervent opposition.

And you would have been at the head of the line to lynch him, you
hypocritical piece of ****.

copernicus was wrong
he was still using perfect circles epicycles etc

kepler was the first one with a simple model
using a single ellipse per planet
and nothing else

arf meow arf - i dont like squishy
i think i hit a wookie on the expressway
nobody could do that much decoupage
without calling on the powers of darkness

mariposas rand mair fheal wrote in
:

In article ,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:JvRBj.19502$TT4.12916@attbi_s22:

There's a perfectly rational explanation for the "overwhelming
scientific consensus": any researcher who dares disagree finds
himself without a pipeline into the grant money gravy train.
Scientists have to eat just like the rest of us.

Perfectly rational? It's absurd.

To believe it, you have to believe that virtually every practicing
geo-scientist in the world is cooking the books

No, you only have to know history. Look up Copernicus, and what
happened when his perfectly rational heliocentric theories ran up
against well-financed, fervent opposition.

And you would have been at the head of the line to lynch him, you
hypocritical piece of ****.

copernicus was wrong
he was still using perfect circles epicycles etc

kepler was the first one with a simple model
using a single ellipse per planet
and nothing else


Jay would have burned him at the stake as well. No extra charge.

bertie

On Mar 12, 3:06 pm, mariposas rand mair fheal
wrote:
In article ,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:



"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:JvRBj.19502$TT4.12916@attbi_s22:

There's a perfectly rational explanation for the "overwhelming
scientific consensus": any researcher who dares disagree finds
himself without a pipeline into the grant money gravy train.
Scientists have to eat just like the rest of us.

Perfectly rational? It's absurd.

To believe it, you have to believe that virtually every practicing
geo-scientist in the world is cooking the books

No, you only have to know history. Look up Copernicus, and what
happened when his perfectly rational heliocentric theories ran up
against well-financed, fervent opposition.

And you would have been at the head of the line to lynch him, you
hypocritical piece of ****.

copernicus was wrong
he was still using perfect circles epicycles etc

kepler was the first one with a simple model
using a single ellipse per planet
and nothing else

arf meow arf - i dont like squishy
i think i hit a wookie on the expressway
nobody could do that much decoupage
without calling on the powers of darkness

Do you always write in Haikus?

Just wondering....

In article ,
Dan wrote:

On Mar 12, 3:06 pm, mariposas rand mair fheal
wrote:
In article ,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:



"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:JvRBj.19502$TT4.12916@attbi_s22:

There's a perfectly rational explanation for the "overwhelming
scientific consensus": any researcher who dares disagree finds
himself without a pipeline into the grant money gravy train.
Scientists have to eat just like the rest of us.

Perfectly rational? It's absurd.

To believe it, you have to believe that virtually every practicing
geo-scientist in the world is cooking the books

No, you only have to know history. Look up Copernicus, and what
happened when his perfectly rational heliocentric theories ran up
against well-financed, fervent opposition.

And you would have been at the head of the line to lynch him, you
hypocritical piece of ****.

copernicus was wrong
he was still using perfect circles epicycles etc

kepler was the first one with a simple model
using a single ellipse per planet
and nothing else

arf meow arf - i dont like squishy
i think i hit a wookie on the expressway
nobody could do that much decoupage
without calling on the powers of darkness

Do you always write in Haikus?

tankas for the memories

arf meow arf - i dont like squishy
i think i hit a wookie on the expressway
nobody could do that much decoupage
without calling on the powers of darkness