Because, you know, the only way to “play it straight” is to agree with him.
I don’t think we’ve ever seen a president so contemptuously dismissive of the motives of anyone who disagrees with him. He is almost constitutionally unable to grant good will to what he views as his only enemies, which are domestic, not foreign.
This doesn’t sound like a huge legal victory for the administration. It only postpones an actual ruling until later this summer.
“…and I said nothing, because women deserve to play sports, too. Then they came for the frat boys, and I not only said nothing, I cheered it on, because frat boys are the scum of the earth. Then they came after men in general, and I said nothing, because they need to understand the fear women have of rape, and to fear engaging in sex.
Then, oh, wait. Holy s**t, they’re coming after me!”
From me, over @Ricochet.
The Space Access Society has a legislative alert, to try to fix the budget on the Senate side, than fix the whole thing in conference.
Some thoughts from Sam Dinkin over at The Space Review, with a plug for the Kickstarter, which has slowed since the burst last week. About half way to the goal, with a little over half the time left. Spread the word, at Facebook and other places, if you haven’t already.
I like his work, but he sure doesn’t come off very well as a person here.
The strategy of hyping certainty and a scientific consensus and dismissing decadal variability is a bad move for communicating a very complex, wicked problem such as climate change. Apart from the ‘meaningful’ issue, its an issue of trust – hyping certainty and a premature consensus does not help the issue of public trust in the science.
This new paper is especially interesting in context of the Karl et al paper, that ‘disappears’ the hiatus. I suspect that the main take home message for the public (those paying attention, anyways) is that the data is really really uncertain and there is plenty of opportunity for scientists to ‘cherry pick’ methods to get desired results.
Apart from the issue of how IPCC leaders communicate the science to the public, this paper also has important implications for journalists. The paper has a vindication of sorts for David Rose, who asked hard hitting questions about the pause at the Stockholm press conference.
It’s a good, and necessary first step.
Statistics that show it’s better to have one than not are misleading and fraudulent. It matters a lot more what kind of degree you get than whether or not you get one. But federal policy, and media propaganda ignores this.
…while human spaceflight burns. My latest thoughts on our Congressional space-policy follies, over at PJMedia.
[Afternoon update]
As usual with space pieces, the comments over there are painfully ignorant.