May socalism rot in the depths of hell for eternity.

Southern California-ism?

Meat Eater, thank you for exemplifying the best the denialist have to offer.

Thank you for telling me what kind of light bulbs I should use. I was not aware that mercury laden light bulbs are far superior in safety and lighting quality.

Thank you for putting ethanol in gasloline. I appreciate you locking up every small engine in america in the name of a thunderstorm.

Thank you for dictating that I must give up red meat for the cause weather. I appreciate your efforts as my doctor and my meoterologist.

Furthermore, I appreciate your calm and cool ways of redistributing wealth in the name of climate. It does indeed make tyrants look better when hey change the name of a dictatorship to reflect what scientists really wnat.

So, these statements being said, I can say with one hundred perent individual sovereign authority that I WILL NOT COMPLY. Fuck you if you think I will. I’ll eat all the meat I choose. I will use regualr light bulbs until the end of my days. I will also switch to diesel instead of using your watered down gas.

May socalism rot in the depths of hell for eternity. Now, if we could invent a time machine and go back and hang Saul Alinsky for his globalist imperalist treason…

Entire habitats become almost non-existant and others that were rare dominant during major climate fluctuation.

That’s what I meant by balance. Some gain, others lose. I’ll admit there may seem to be more loss than gain in the case of, say, the end-Permian extinction, but that event created major opportunities for certain species that happened to be pre-adapted to the new situations. Including our ancestors.

If the southern continent’s glaciers melted all of NYC would have to be moved. You have no problem with seeing that happen over a few decades? Interesting.

Nope. Cities are obsolete. (And if anybody wants to preserve NYC in place, well humans have had partly aquatic cities for a millennium and a half.) So, IMO, is terrestrial agriculture, or soon will be. 2-3 Decades is more than enough time for adaptation. And adaptation will be generally beneficial to humanity as a species, as it will put a premium on practical intelligence, which is one of our species strategic specialties.

You just told me that in order to do that, I had to read whatever was referred to in that blog post.

No, but if you don’t, especially when it refers to (the equivalent of) peer-reviewed literature, you open yourself up to criticism. Especially after you come out with “you just accused an author of ‘selective writing’ because you chose to read only part of his work and then disparage him” when I didn’t.

Perhaps I should have said something like: “WTF, Greg, you jump all over me for reading only the first few pages of Gleick’s link (ref) before disparaging him (Gleick), when you didn’t even read the first word”. I know the cases aren’t parallel, yours is a post in a widely read blog, mine is just a comment.

I have more response(s), but no more time, probably until tomorrow night, if then.

No, no, you don’t understand! Kill all the blue flowers and half the pink flowers will volunteer to be blue! You know nothing!