8 thoughts on “Knitting with only one needle.”

1. love the graphic

2. The aliens are very critical of our . . . artificial insemination because this is ‘unnatural,’

   Hah!  The Aliens are the ones to talk!

   It doesn’t take more than one abduction (or SIX, or Eight) to understand the Aliens’ advanced insemination protocols.  

3. Talk about your “lunatic fringe!”

4. He’s an actual candidate? On the comparative sanity scale, he puts Sarah Palin firmly into the “sane” category, and SHE actually believes in witches (yes, the kind that have to be “cast out” for the good of the village).

   In addition to believing that the US created a targeted-earthquake weapon for stealing gold and oil (buried treasure, though I guess now we’re supposed to call it “underground” treasure, thanks to Entergy’s redfinition of “buried.”), but he also believes in “abiotic” oil, which is one of those impossibilities in the realm of physics that dominionist “christians” like to cling to.

   Abiotic oil is a necessary fiction to support the young-earth concept of young-earth creationism. The whole reason they had to invent abiotic oil is to describe how the oil that resulted from the decay of organic matter deposited and heated under pressure over the course of millions of years could exist if the earth has only existed for a few thousand years … leading to another happy fiction of young-earth creationism: humans and dinosaurs co-existed.

5. Odum: Thanks for helping me put all this wing-nuttery into prespective and helping me laugh. At the time, however I took great offense to Mr. Foty’s Bin Laden post on VT Tiger as I am a 9/11 survivor. I’ve had some go arounds with him before – and have called him a anti-science ideologue. Well, he didn’t have the courage to post my response to his nonesense, so I wrote Mr. Norman, one of the blogs founders. No response. I thought your readers might find my letter and comment interesting (copied below). I appologize for it being serious but the Global Warming Deniers who use anything but scientific evidence to push their ideological and political goals need to be called out – not that it does any good. Also, sorry for the length, but I appreciate the opporutunity to post this material. Many thanks, Sandy
   
   ____________________________________________________

    Hi Mr. Norman:

   I must say your Mr. Foty went beyond the pale this weekend and I felt compelled to answer (he of course deleted my post). I thought Mr. Foty’s “Jihad Greened,” was in very poor taste and added nothing to the debate over Global Warming.

   I consider myself a fiscal conservative (I’ve worked for large corporations most of my life) but try to think rationally about science and environmental issues. I worked at the World Trade Center and lived through 9/11. From my point of view there was nothing funny about Mr. Foty’s post and I saw it as further evidence of his non-scientific approach to the issue of Global Warming.

   I realize Mr. Foty took offense to my labeling him an anti-science ideologue (this was solely based on a review of his writings – as I don’t know him). He on the other hand, attacked me personally by charging that I must have a vested interest in this issue (I don’t) implying that he didn’t have to answer any of my science questions as a result.  This is simply a trick to avoid answering – he has done this over and over again. His approach hardly makes for the kind civil discussion he advocates

   I don’t mind the attacks, however as they come with the territory. Nevertheless, Mr. Foty is hardly innocent. Read a few of his comments. He almost always makes a point to answer a post that disagrees with him. He writes paragraph after paragraph never acknowledging that the other person has an interesting or rational point of view, just that they are wrong. He often implies that because he is a scientist (I’m not sure his background means he understands climate science better than the average person – but that is irrelevant) and has studied the issue, the commenter must be wrong. Maybe a little less “I’m a scientist so I must be right rhetoric” (it comes up all the time) and a little more scientific data and research might make him more credible and the debate more worthwhile.  

   And, of course, he is never above his own labeling calling scientists – “dishonest,’ and cynically remarking that some of the most respected scientists in the world call “themselves scientists.” He labeled James Hansen a “busted flush,” Obama’s economic advisers “economic illiterates” and one Tiger commenter as living in a “thick cocoon.” I called him an anti-science ideologue because science is the last thing he discusses in his posts – individual scientists and the scientific process get lots of space, but there is very little scientific evidence.

   Finally, I won’t bother you with the number of factually untrue statements he has made that can easily be shown to be false. There is no point – he wouldn’t answer the charge with scientific evidence. Believe me I don’t mind that he disagrees with my point of view, but expect that if he attacks scientific conclusions that he should have scientific evidence to back his point of view. Global Warming science may be awash in politics but whether it’s happening or not is a scientific question.  

   Mr. Norman, I know when to quit and will do so – frankly I’ve got better things to do than argue with someone whose critical thinking powers lend themselves to conspiracy theories, attacks against the scientific community, and the all time topper: grouping environmentalists with Osama bin laden. You can bet, however that I will continue to preach climate science literacy and stand up to those that would take the actions of a few and use them to imply that the entire scientific community is corrupt.

   Although Mr. Foty has yet to acknowledge that Climate Science is built on many independent lines of research, modeling, and actual observation, his refusal can’t change this obvious fact. I believe his posts hurt the credibility of what you are trying to do a Vermont Tiger and think that is unfortunate.  

   I would only ask one last favor. Please post my response to Mr. Foty’s “Jihad Greened.”  As a 9/11 survivor I take great offense to his post. I think your readers deserve to see my perspective and judge for themselves whether I have a reasonable point. I am attaching my post – below.

   My Comment:

   “A terrorist such as Osama Bin Laden, who is in hiding, depends on gullible media outlets to provide him with a platform to spread his words of hate. That Mr. Foty would showcase Bin Laden’s words to vilify environmentalists clearly shows that Mr. Foty will go to any extreme to push his political and ideological objection to Global Warming.

   There is really nothing funny or appropriate about giving Osama Bin Laden a mouthpiece for his propaganda and hatred against America.

   This post clearly revels that Mr. Foty has little interest in scientific evidence but will stop at nothing to attack environmentalists, scientists, and the scientific process.

   By his twisted logic he trivializes the death of thousands of his fellow citizens and Vermont Tiger readers should see Mr. Foty’s flippant words for what they are; an affront to all Americans.  

   Finally, I personally object because I worked at the World Trade Center on the 51st floor of the South Tower. I survived 9/11 but many of my friends and colleagues did not.”  

Comments are closed.