25 Comments
While Bwog was browsing the Earth Institute’s Environmental Programs fair this afternoon–at which earthy professors explained how eager students could save the world, including through a new undergraduate sustainable development major which may or may not exist–we heard one upside to the otherwise disturbing trend of climate change:
“I don’t think I’ve heard anyone make the connection between global warming and pornography before. Because people will be wearing less clothing…”
Loading …
25 Comments
@LOLLERSKATES LOL!
@free speech is for pussies
@bwog considering you were one of the groups represented, i’m hoping i can count on a recap of the aclu free speech event which i couldn’t attend
@Avi Zenilman We weren’t represented. I RSVP’d when I get an early email, thinking I was going to get bwog seats to cover it, when in fact it meant I had signed up to be a panelist. That was quickly corrected.
@ah poo did you guys get to cover it?
@Lydia We were there, but not in an official capacity–that would be silly. Instead we looked on and threw in the occasional comment. It doesn’t really bear repeating.
@did anyone eat with anne kornblut? what did she say?
@fair enough thanks for the info though
@i am global warming
@Anonymous uh. people respond to incentives. scientists get more research money if they say global warming is mankind’s fault and a big problem.
maybe it is our fault, and maybe it is a big problem. but don’t blindly trust the scientists. sure, industrialists have incentives to lie. but so do scientists.
(i happen to think it’s only partly our fault and not too big a problem. yes, i’ve read the skeptical environmentalist. yes, the 1st edition had some errors, but none that undermined the central arguments. no, i don’t blindly trust it either.)
@indeed how do you think scientists get grants? to study models which predict temperature fluctuations are normal natural processes.
by the way, #12, you’re again ad homing..first of all, there is little empirical evidence which conclusively supports human driven global warming (most of it is based upon complex and poorly devised/understood models)..second of all, its a grave charge to impugn the integrity of tenured profs at harvard, mit and csu becuase you disagree with their position or because they recieve grant money or have some tenuous connection with an energy company. aslo, you’re also being very amateurish by assuming i don’t think measures should be taken to combat global warming or to reduce pollution anyway. but hey, don’t let facts or the fact that your strawmen don’t exist to get in the way of your point
@i like porn. bwog needs porn.
@remember when bwog was funny? those were the days. *sighs wistfully*
@dudes Forget fighting the guy whose only source on global warming is Steven Milloy, consider the more important part of this post – we’ve already reached bwog “you should’ve seen this place back when, it sure used to be funny” nostalgia!
yay!
@Anonymous Clearly, objective scientific evidence derived from several decades worth of quantitative data is not convincing enough for you. Perhaps if someone reprograms Bill O’Reilly’s brain chip, he will start barking about global warming and you will believe. After all, it’s common knowledge that all scientists are dirty liberal anarchofascist jihadists bent on desotroying your moral values so that intelligence ::shudder::…oh that god-awful word…will prevail over the religious zealotry you have so come to love.
@he's super serial http://www.manbearpig.com/
@Anonymous that’s wonderful. I watch South Park too.
@yeah. they’re good at ad homs and using inconclusive results to support their political views to.
as a scientist, its obvious you have no idea what time scales climate change can operate on or the fact that there are actually numerous harvard, mit, csu, etc climatologists/physicists/geologists who are all skeptical of the idea that humans are driving current global warming
@ugh There are a few scientists who deny the human causation of global warming, but they are greatly outnumbered by those who believe that humans are driving it. The American Geophysical Union, Joint Science Academies, American Meteorological Society, and American Association for the Advancement of Science all believe that something should be done about global warming. But hey, they clearly don’t know nothing, since they’re not funded by the industries producing greenhouse gasses, right?
I’m a conservative, and I still don’t why anyone would so fervently deny the possibility that humans are making an impact on the environment – at least not unless they benefit financially from said denial.
I mean, think about it. What’s a more likely scenario: A) Industries are funding scientists to diminish the concern about global warming in order to avoid costly environmental regulation… or B) Scientists are going out of their way to produce bullshit theories so that they can somewhat financially hinder certain industries (for their own amusement, presumably)?
@if by if by wien you mean his $10 million mansion paid for by columbia
@republican Global warming, like the ISO’s chances of getting anything accomplished, doesn’t exist.
@Overheard in Pupin “Until I was 13, I used to think gefilte fish was a type of fish. I asked my mom where gefilte fish live, and she was like “no, honey…” ”
.
.
.
“But gefilte fish is the baloney of the sea!”
@i thought Actually Im pretty sure Jeffrey Sachs only gets paid $30k plus a free room in Wein.
@slightly off This is how we end world poverty…
http://chronicle.com/weekly/v49/i13/13a01002.htm
SACHS, OFF FIFTH AVENUE: The traditional inhabitants of New York’s Upper West Side — shrinks, lawyers, and writers — are being joined by an economist. Columbia University lured Jeffrey D. Sachs, a prominent economist, away from Harvard University in April, reportedly paying him more than $300,000. Now, it is providing him with one of the city’s toniest addresses.
The university has spent a whopping $8-million to buy a renovated townhouse on 85th Street, a mere block from Central Park, for the new Earth Institute, which he was hired to lead. Twenty-feet wide — large by Manhattan standards — the home is the most expensive single-family townhouse in the area, according to real-estate agents.
The first floor of the townhouse will serve as a reception center for the institute, which is designed to increase collaboration among the university, international dignitaries, and the United Nations. Mr. Sachs, 48, and his family will rent the three upper floors, which feature six bedrooms, a dumbwaiter to the main kitchen, several marble baths, and numerous wood-burning fireplaces. Columbia has not disclosed the amount Mr. Sachs is paying in rent.
@clearly …this is what we pay jeff sachs millions for…