tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post6504236926665147882..comments2023-12-20T04:18:41.617-06:00Comments on The Hunting of the Snark: Cashing In On Death: The Megan McArdle ExperienceSusan of Texashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00076915322771385454noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-51389447983567574052016-06-05T19:09:51.765-05:002016-06-05T19:09:51.765-05:00Thanks, everyone.Thanks, everyone.Susan of Texashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00076915322771385454noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-74780811228957049962016-06-05T15:17:52.843-05:002016-06-05T15:17:52.843-05:00another good jobanother good jobmccamjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06219447000482810272noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-23855811625406526792016-06-04T21:03:47.506-05:002016-06-04T21:03:47.506-05:00Ooh, that was a low blow.
Hit her again, harder t...Ooh, that was a low blow.<br /><br />Hit her again, harder this time. Robert M.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08894019036517722829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-12276205813301240672016-06-04T16:32:10.788-05:002016-06-04T16:32:10.788-05:00"If you can't say something good about so..."If you can't say something good about someone, sit right here by me."Nelsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-2359421098808758982016-06-04T08:15:43.460-05:002016-06-04T08:15:43.460-05:00Great takedown, Susan.
The English prof in me is ...Great takedown, Susan.<br /><br />The English prof in me is struck by the styling of this little paragraph, truly a marvel of obfuscation. To an undergraduate, I'd say something like: Try saying what you mean, not its opposite; tell the reader what you are instead of what you "are not really yourself"--especially when the referent is a word you've just made up. Find a strong antonym to replace "less skeptical," so that your meaning is clear, and stop interrupting yourself with "I thinks" and parentheticals, which make it hard to follow the meaning of your sentence from beginning to end. But in Megan, these are not writing flaws, but strategies.<br /><br />**I was careful to note, as I wrote, that I am not really myself a "lukewarmist" on climate change; I’m less skeptical of high warming projections than they are, and more importantly, I think that even a relatively small risk of catastrophic warming -- say 1 percent -- is worth ensuring against.**JPnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-58883363131571786762016-06-04T08:12:23.285-05:002016-06-04T08:12:23.285-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.jphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13161076094578449499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-91023191153922931122016-06-04T01:12:29.166-05:002016-06-04T01:12:29.166-05:00Susan you deserve a Nobel! Or Pulitzer, but Nobel ...Susan you deserve a Nobel! Or Pulitzer, but Nobel has more $$$ attached, which you highly deserve!Kathyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03176801494652946278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-82464070006314254842016-06-03T23:44:00.169-05:002016-06-03T23:44:00.169-05:00Bravo!Bravo!Free Range Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07255275954377503128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-1310173058053826402016-06-03T21:34:00.307-05:002016-06-03T21:34:00.307-05:00That was all terribly uncivil of you! More, please...That was all terribly uncivil of you! More, please.OBShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11290768768025981403noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2222630007427380394.post-30498731151049934092016-06-03T20:25:29.508-05:002016-06-03T20:25:29.508-05:00"A scientific approach would be to acknowledg..."A scientific approach would be to acknowledge that advocates' initial hypothesis -- that name calling will advance the cause -- has failed to be borne out by the experimental evidence."<br /><br />Now THAT'S what a perfect example of a Conservative STRAW-MAN. Huge, bristling with aggression, with a scary mean face and dressed up in a costume of cast-off idiotic Talking Points. <br /><br />I ask Megan, WHO, exactly, was it hypothesized that calling skeptics names was a good way to establish a "debate" on climate change? No one I know. <br /><br />The reason the experts and scientists warning about climate-change are shouting and calling you "skeptics" names is not in hopes of "winning" a debate, but because THERE IS NO DEBATE about climate change. IT IS HAPPENING, NOW.<br /><br />No matter how brilliant (you think) your rationalization that the world is Flat and only 5 thousand years old may be, its still not not a subject to be debated. The planet is billions of years old and it is round. And you are not smart, you're a craven lick-spittle.Kathyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03176801494652946278noreply@blogger.com