Jeter added, "One can visualize the expansion of the hole in the UV-blocking ozone layer just by watching me try to field ground balls at shortstop."

Standing ovation for the Repoz intro.

There have been a lot of publicity stunts to bring attention to climate change.

I know. I have a friend who was in NO when Katrina blew through. What a cheap and vulgar spectacle that was.

Outsider's weather charters noted a significant Hole in Ozone in previous New York studies.

Hole in the D-Zone?

Hole in the Ultimate Zone?

Or, hole in the ho-zone?

Speaking of which, apparently Jeter is dating the girl from the DirecTV commercials so as always, he's doing fine.

Jeter is right. We should use scientific methods and academic consensus to address pressing social issues.

And since the science has changed, do we readdress the abortion issue which was decided on the science of the day in the early 70's? Will science only rule when it is also politically correct?

Jeter said: “Regardless of how you feel about it, it’s something that needs to be addressed because we’re seeing more and more natural disasters each year, it seems like.”

"Regardless of how you feel about it, it's something that doesn't need to be addressed because we're not seeing more and more natural disasters each year, it doesn't seem like."

"Regardless of how you feel about it, it's something that doesn't need to be addressed because we're not seeing more and more natural disasters each year, it doesn't seem like."

Or it does:


Dengue is fastest spreading tropical disease

Transmitted by the bite of female mosquitoes, the disease is occurring more widely due to increased movement of people and goods - including carrier objects such as bamboo plants and used tires - as well as floods linked to climate change, the United Nations agency said.

I lived in Indonesia for almost three years and I was exceptionally lucky in that I never got Dengue, although almost everyone around me came down with it. It's not a pleasant experience for sure.

Climate change denial, at this point, is just... I would say it's like ostriches putting their heads in the sand but it's a myth that they actually do that. I don't know what it's like. It's absurd. We can argue about the specific causes and how best to address it, but ignoring the results is puerile.

as well as floods linked to climate change, the United Nations agency said.

Is there anything the U.N. can't connect to climate change?

With enough black helicopter rotor blades, we can cool the planet.

Well, Joe, why don't you debunk their argument then? You seem to have a countering argument. Provide us with that argument for an alternative explanation of global warming, with a synopsis of the data from the studies that support it.

By the way, Joe. The UN agency referenced is the World Health Organization. Can you also provide us with your credentials that might substantiate your expertise so that your challenge to WHO science would have some credibility?

Well, Joe, why don't you debunk their argument then? You seem to have a countering argument. Provide us with that argument for an alternative explanation of global warming, with a synopsis of the data from the studies that support it.

By the way, Joe. The UN agency referenced is the World Health Organization. Can you also provide us with your credentials that might substantiate your expertise so that your challenge to WHO science would have some credibility?

LOL. Let's plummet the world economy into depression so we can try to avoid having a couple floods somewhere on the planet which allegedly spread dengue fever a few miles farther than it already existed. Give me a break.

You guys would be better off sticking with the "New York City is going to be underwater in 10 years!" scare tactic.

I lived in Indonesia for almost three years and I was exceptionally lucky in that I never got Dengue, although almost everyone around me came down with it. It's not a pleasant experience for sure.

It's awful. I got denque about three years ago in India (at the time, there was something of an outbreak in Delhi. I believe it's happening again this year; it happens every few years) and while I was very lucky that it wasn't life-threatening or anything nearly that major (relatively minor, in fact), it was still really unpleasant.

LOL. Let's plummet the world economy into depression so we can try to avoid having a couple floods somewhere on the planet which allegedly spread dengue fever a few miles farther than it already existed. Give me a break.

I'm asking you to substantiate your position, Joe. If you believe cap and trade will "plunge the global economy into depression", please site your sources and provide a synopsis of the data supporting this view. And while you're at it, please provide studies/data on what will happen to the global economy if we do nothing at all, so we can have an informed risk/benefit discussion comparing doing nothing versus invoking cap and trade.

And if you know of no studies and are just citing an opinion that has no substantiation, let us know that too so we can all gauge how seriously you think about things.

It's awful. I got denque about three years ago in India

A colloquial name for it is "breakbone fever". Is that an accurate description of how you felt?

I'm asking you to substantiate your position. If you believe cap and trade will "plunge the global economy into depression", please site your sources and provide a synopsis of the data supporting this view. And while you're at it, please provide studies/data on what will happen to the global economy if we do nothing at all, so we can have an informed risk/benefit discussion comparing doing nothing versus invoking cap and trade.

And if you know of no studies and are just citing an opinion that has no substantiation, let us know that too so we can all gauge how seriously you think about things.

My position is substantiated by something called "common sense."

It makes no sense for the U.S. to essentially unilaterally disarm environmentally and/or economically when we know the BRIC countries and other developing nations aren't the least bit interested in the issue, except to the extent they can fleece naive do-gooders in the U.S. with high-cost, low-yield environmental technologies and investments.

The American working class is already getting creamed. It's idiotic to make it more expensive and onerous for their employers to operate in the U.S. when the U.S. is already increasingly unattractive for businesses in the sectors most likely to be affected by schemes such as "cap and trade."

U.S. CO2 emissions are lower today than at any point in the last 20 years. Per-capita emissions are their lowest since 1966. Obviously, we must conclude that any attempt to reduce CO2 emissions is impracticable.

My position is substantiated by something called "common sense."

So you just want us to accept what you say because you're Joe Kehoskie and Joe Kehoskie claims he has "common sense".

That and a token will get you a ride on the subway.

For now. I hear it will be underwater soon.

A colloquial name for it is "breakbone fever". Is that an accurate description of how you felt?

Assuming I'm interpreting that correctly, yes, very much so. The most noticeable effects for me were a very high fever/extreme weariness (since they often go hand-in-hand) and serious arm and leg pain (which I figure would be the "breakbone" component). Thankfully (for me, at least), my family contains an inordinate number of doctors [insert Indian stereotype joke here], so at the very least, I was well taken care of while lounging around at home.

So you just want us to accept what you say because you're Joe Kehoskie and Joe Kehoskie claims he has "common sense".

I'm not sure if you know this, but attempting to reason with Joe about anything is a waste of time.

… says the guy famous for threatening people with neck-stabbings.

That and a token will get you a ride on the subway.

Metrocard!

The most noticeable effects for me were a very high fever/extreme weariness (since they often go hand-in-hand) and serious arm and leg pain (which I figure would be the "breakbone" component).

This happens because immune complexes localize to the joints, causing inflammation. From what I hear, it's incredibly painful.

Dr. Jeter's address started:

"you people are fools, fools! 800 foot tall reptiles don't awaken in Tokyo's bay by accident! The cataclysm is upon us!"

Climate change denial, at this point, is just... I would say it's like ostriches putting their heads in the sand but it's a myth that they actually do that. I don't know what it's like. It's absurd. We can argue about the specific causes and how best to address it, but ignoring the results is puerile.

To lump all critics and skeptics together as "denialists" is to surrender your abilities as a critical thinker.

To accept the entire current climate change theory, you have to separately believe in the following.

1) that the earth is getting warmer.
2) that the warming earth is predominantly caused by man made effects.
3) that the costs of a warming earth outweigh its benefits.

I believe science can prove #1 with a fairly strong degree of sureness. I believe it can establish #2 as significantly more likely than not.

I am not convinced they have established conclusively #3 is true, and I'm skeptical of their ability to do so. I still remember the ice age that we have been long told is due in the next few thousand years, and the cooling during the Middle Ages that seemed to be its beginning. The current PR campaign to link specific incidents from our extremely variable weather conditions directly to global warming is almost ludicrous. The planet has had huge hurricanes and floods and specific areas dry decades and wet decades and colder years and warmer years forever. Trying to winnow out specific outliers in from a data set that has always had huge variance with many outliers seems disingenuous to me.

Does that make me a denialist? Anyone who accepts all of the tenets of climate change without thinking through each one and the evidence provided, has the critical thinking abilities of a sheep.

As far as WHO goes, again, accepting their opinions at face value is silly. There is a huge amount of junk science out there, and assuming they can link a specific illness, or even floods, directly to global warming requires a child like belief in WHO.

I have no doubt great scientific research is done under their auspices, but I am also confident they aren't always right, and that they have a strong political agenda to maintain their relevance and funding that impacts the type of studies they do and the PR they churn out.

Did the Captain bring gift baskets with him to Davos or did he use them all on the flight attendants?

I don't mind people being stupid and denying global warming, but the scariest thing about the deniers, is this belief that it will cause economic ruin, or that there is a conspiracy afoot to profit off of it.... the energy companies in first world could easily change their methods and it wouldn't affect anything other than their margins for a little bit. And the third world countries aren't really going to change anything until they themselves get sufficient energy.

Conspiracy theorist are about the most simplistic human beings on the planet....They are even worse than religious radicalists... if you believe any one of the following, please shoot yourself before you breed. 1. Aliens visited earth 2. Moon landing was faked 3. Earth is 8000 years old 4. 9/11 was organized by Bush 5. There is a conspiracy in the Sandy Hook shooting 6. Loch Ness Monster/Sasquatch/Big foot 7. Kennedy was assassinated by the CIA/Mob 8.Global warming is an economic conspiracy of some sort.

if you believe any one of the following, please shoot yourself before you breed

Any one, sure... but what if I can combine them all?

Any one, sure... but what if I can combine them all?

Unless it involves the reverse vampires and the RAND corporation, I ain't buying it!

I have a friend who was in NO when Katrina blew through.

That's called "weather".

I'm just glad pre-historic man was around to end all the previous Ice Ages in recorded history with their selfish wasteful SUV's, coal-fired power plants, incandescent light bulbs, and whatnot. Baseball is best played in the summer and not in blinding snowstorms. We all owe them a debt of gratitude.

Here's what I don't understand:

People say "That guy should stick to..." every time an actor, an athlete, or another celebrity expresses political ideas. Why can't they have these, and why can't they talk about them? I feel free to take Jeter's opinion on climate exactly as seriously as I take another non-scientist's opinion. But it has value.

U.S. CO2 emissions are lower today than at any point in the last 20 years. Per-capita emissions are their lowest since 1966. Obviously, we must conclude that any attempt to reduce CO2 emissions is impracticable.

The point is that reducing US emissions is completely pointless since China, India, etc. are expanding their emissions at multiples of any potential "First World" reductions.

In fact, if you pass onerous emission laws in the US/Europe/Japan etc., you're just going to drive more industry to China/India etc., where they will use cheaper, dirtier technology, and generate more emissions.

The biggest thing you could do to reduce CO2 emissions would be for the developed world to enact high tariffs on imported manufactures from China, etc., and move the industry back to the West. Anything produced in the US or Europe generates a tiny fraction of the pollution (of all kinds) that it does when produced in China.

Here's what I don't understand:

People say "That guy should stick to..." every time an actor, an athlete, or another celebrity expresses political ideas. Why can't they have these, and why can't they talk about them? I feel free to take Jeter's opinion on climate exactly as seriously as I take another non-scientist's opinion. But it has value.

The issue is that actors, athletes and various celebrities, are not selected for their positions based on intelligence. Yet b/c of their fame/monetary success they have an inflated sense of their own importance, and the idiotic sheeple listen to them, making them dangerous. The average guy sitting two desks away from you at work probably knows more about climate change than Derek Jeter.

The average guy sitting two desks away from you at work probably knows more about climate change than Derek Jeter.

… who, incidentally, lives in a 30,875-square-foot palace in Tampa. I know that probably qualifies as a starter home for the Davos crowd, but there always seems to be a lot of hypocrisy cognitive dissonance when the jet-setters talk about the environment.

People say "That guy should stick to..." every time an actor, an athlete, or another celebrity expresses political ideas. Why can't they have these, and why can't they talk about them? I feel free to take Jeter's opinion on climate exactly as seriously as I take another non-scientist's opinion. But it has value.

He should stick to whatever interests him, definitely. But once he's flown out to Davos to talk about it the value of his opinion is subject to a much higher replacement level, at least ideally.

Yet b/c of their fame/monetary success they have an inflated sense of their own importance, and the idiotic sheeple listen to them, making them dangerous.

I don't think 'idiot sheeple' care or listen to Jeter talking global warming or whatever popular "end is near" scenario that makes the rounds on a given day. But it does give the media something to talk about. That's the main effect.

In the end though, it just hurts the cause. Normal people can see the hypocrisy of talking global warming while not changing one's behavior.

… who, incidentally, lives in a 30,875-square-foot palace in Tampa. I know that probably qualifies as a starter home for the Davos crowd, but there always seems to be a lot of hypocrisy cognitive dissonance when the jet-setters talk about the environment.

Yeah, that's goes without saying.

That group could reduce a ton of emissions/pollution if they just flew commercial to Davos, but I'm guessing you can't swing a dead cat there w/o hitting a Gulfstream.

Getting Jeter to talk climate change is no less than getting Joe Namath to pitch Noxema. "We" know it's silly, but celebrity marketing has a long history of success, even if it doesn't make sense. And if I am Jeter, why would I turn it down, assuming I personally endorsed the message? We're stuck with gang, and besides, it's fun to make fun of, so continue.....

This happens because immune complexes localize to the joints, causing inflammation. From what I hear, it's incredibly painful.

Huh, that's really interesting, thanks. It hurt a ton but, thankfully, I had a pretty quick case, so it didn't last for very long (I don't know if that's normal or what). This is the only "me-sick" story I have that's any good, heh.

sheeple

I really, really hate this term, it's so pointlessly condescending.

Agreed.

As far as WHO goes, again, accepting their opinions at face value is silly. There is a huge amount of junk science out there, and assuming they can link a specific illness, or even floods, directly to global warming requires a child like belief in WHO.

The WHO uses all the latest and most reliable analyses, like those from the the US National Academy of Sciences and the International Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It takes major cajones on your part to dismiss National Academy reports as "junk science". And I'm going to have to ask you to substantiate your claim that "there is a huge amount of junk science out there". Please use specific citations and data from unbiased and independent organizations. I don't doubt that there have been some flawed studies. But there's a huge leap from that to nullifying the copious numbers of well-conducted studies and assuming WHO expert panels cannot distinguish good from bad science.

My position is substantiated by something called "common sense."

Jeter is indeed an awesome fielder. Just look at him!

Jeter is indeed an awesome fielder. Just look at him!

Too clever by half, Lassus. I could make a similar joke about people who swear a couple specific floods or hurricanes were caused by climate change.

The old Appeal to Authority fallacy, always love hearing that.

Thanks Publius.

Meanwhile, a new study in Norway just dug another dagger into IPCC's global warming models. That's OK though, they'll just move the goalposts one more time.

Too clever by half, Lassus. I could make a similar joke about people who swear a couple specific floods or hurricanes were caused by climate change.

Which would have no damned point at all. But go crazy.

The old Appeal to Authority fallacy, always love hearing that.

Who else do you go to for the best information but the people who are working on it? There is no other source, unless you know of someone who's doing boffo climate science out of their parents' basement that nobody knows about.

And I'm impressed with the old "Intellectual Elites Are Out To #### Us" fallacy. Thanks Shibal. I also thought it was rich that, at the same time you scoffed at my appeal to authority, you rebutted by doing the exact same thing- citing the Norwegian study. Good job. Most people shamefully disguise their hypocrisy. You mount it on a pedestal and spray paint it in neon orange.

Oh, and please provide the Norwegian study that nullifies the last 25 years of accumulated data. No offense but I'm a bit skeptical of your claim.