John Holdren’s scientific partner Paul Ehrlich wrote this gem in 1972.
Good to know we have such brilliant scientists setting government science policy.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
- Glaciers Vs. The Hockey Stick
- CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- IPCC : Himalayan Glaciers Gone By 2035
- Deadly Cyclones And Arctic Sea Ice
- What About The Middle Part?
- “filled with racist remarks”
- Defacing Art Can Prevent Floods
- The Worst Disaster Year In History
- Harris Wins Pennsylvania
- “politicians & shills bankrolled by the fossil fuel industry”
- UN : CO2 Killing Babies
- Patriotic Clapper Misspoke
- New York Times Headlines
- Settled Science At The New York Times
- “Teasing Out” Junk Science
- Moving From 0% to 100% In Six Years
- “Only 3.4% of Journalists Are Republican”
- “Something we are doing is clearly not working”
- October 26, 1921
- Hillary To Defeat Trump By Double Digits
- Ivy league Provost Calls For Assassination
- Record Arctic Sea Ice Growth
Recent Comments
- Disillusioned on CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- Disillusioned on “falsely labeling”
- Disillusioned on “falsely labeling”
- stewartpid on “falsely labeling”
- dm on Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- dm on CNN : Unvaccinated Should Not Be Allowed To Leave Their Homes
- D. Boss on IPCC : Himalayan Glaciers Gone By 2035
- Robertvd on Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- arn on “falsely labeling”
- arn on “falsely labeling”
He really did not mean what you think he meant. Of course my not being one of the initiated that understands the Esoteric meaning of Prophet Paul’s pronouncements I also read it to mean what it says. I am sure one of the Anointed will try to enlighten us with their “Pearls of Wisdom”!
Look, it was just one guy, reported by the media. This was not a prediction, he was just giving a scenario. It is well known that we are all indeed lucky, how can you disprove that we would not have disappeared in a cloud of blue steam, had we not been so lucky? It is up to you, the denier of blue steam, to disprove the statement that we would not have. You can’t just go around making such vauge claims with only anecdotal evidence and ridicule. The science is sound, and robust even, that it we had not been lucky, we would have indeed disappeared in a cloud of blue steam!
Thank you for that explanation. 😉 It is all clear as mud now and as transparent as granite!
What would be the temperature of “Blue steam”?
Living close to the Blue Ridge Mountains that were named for the Blue steam coming of them and seeing Blue Steam mornings when weather conditions are just right. I would say the temperature range for Blue Steam is any temperature that is below the DEW point. This morning it was 40F and last week it was 34f.
Whew! That was a close one!
More importantly, pg. 393………
“We must gravely regard the prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by federal largess. We must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”——D. Eisenhower
Sadly, no one listened and we have the worst of both worlds. Were it not for the likes of Sen. Inhofe, I shudder to think where we’d be.
“Blue” steam has been seen shooting from the ears of many Democrats after the recent elections. Maybe the Ehrlich projection still has some merit. ;*)
So lucky that now the world has no alternative for the next 40 years of energy needs other than fossil fuels. Isn’t scientific humility and self criticism a wonderful thing?
I take off for a day and a half and have to play catch up to your prolific writing, reading four pages of posts.
On the prediction front, if they can’t get it close for 20 years, how well are they handling a century?