… until you’ve convinced the “Wheel of Fortune” host.
A lot more than 10 questions on Man-Made Global Warming from US spinmeister and vowel pusher, Pat Sajak.
The link from the site’s home page says that Sajak’s piece answers “… all your burning questions.” That’s clearly an overstatement – what we now need to know is where does Alex Trebek stand on climate change?
Ah yairs but…http://www.newstatesman.com/200712190004
Re Sir Henry’s link – amazing what ?
Jesus Christ, Bird was right all along !?
Well that’s it for me – forget blogging, I’m off to the beach for the rest of my life.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22894150-421,00.html
And like so many others Mr Sajak falls down on the useage of the word ‘temperature’, applying it in its day-to-day, layman definition.
Fro a quick scan they are perfectly reasonable questions for an intelligent layman. Though not very fundamental ones.
Now if he was as well read as he claims, he’d have found out the answers a while back.
GT
I do not claim to be an habitue of the scientific community, but Chris O’Neill very kindly pointed out some said community sites for me, and I can assure you debates over climate change are heated and many. They are far from “over.”
Exactly my point JG. It won’t be in any sense “over” until the global community of television game show hosts has reached a consensus – or failing that, a widespread majority agreement, on the issue of climate change and what, if anything, to do about it.
Maybe next year I’ll find time to do a survey of game show web-sites to see how they’re progressing towards achieving that consensus.
GT
While I don’t want to diss other blogs, one of the inexplicably frustrating thing about JQ (I say that because he is obviously an extremely smart and informed dude) is his constant insistence “the debate is over…the denialists have lost.” But as you know, I have always mainatined that consensus over “fuck, the planet really IS warming up and fast” does not do squat in saving us all from burning alive.
WHAT to do about is the where the REAL debate is. Until recently, I was under the impression that there was NOTHING we could do to stop the process over the next 50-100 years; especially if all that “doing something” meant was reducing emmissions. However, as I noted above others have pointed me in the direction of more optimistic scientific viewpoints. OTOH, I must say, from what I have read of them so far, I am not yet persuaded my initial fears are not off-base!
JG,
Can we keep it light please, and content our selves with having a little bit of a giggle over the silliness of game-show hosts who write earnestly and long on matters of which they know little – and others of that ilk?
(For example, the editorial genius at The Age who decided that the views of Mark Holden, an expatriate model and various other worthies, as recorded in their one week election diaries, were worth a special feature. All I learnt from that was that most of the worthies who were invited to participate in this exercise weren’t all that interested in the election anyway. This apparently is “surprising”).
Hmmm – not quite the lightness of tone I was striving for.
Look Gummo, gameshow hosts can have more than one string to their bow. Remember, your adopted brother Groucho was one:
Also, Eddie Maguire.
Yeah, and when was the last time Al Gore bought a vowel?
When he was trying to work out what _NTHR_P_G_N_C GL_B_L W_RM_NG was, so that he could win the round.
Al bought a “U”.
Presumably Catch the Fever ministries will be assuring us that the heavy rains over South-Eastern Australia for the last few days are all their doing. Sure their day of prayer is not until Australia day, but they’ve put down the deposit on the hall, so every drop between now and weeks after is entirely to their credit.
Pat Sajak makes the claim âI consider myself to be relatively well-read on the matterâ? of âman-made global warmingâ?, the questions display an appalling ignorance on the issues associated with human induced climate change. I donât know this guy from a bar of soap, all I can conclude is that he is another climate change sceptic or worse still another stooge for the various vested interest groups from the energy industries.
Gummo Trotsky
Do you mind if I email your response around the globe? Nobody has EVER chided me for being too earnest!
Habby :How would you convince a game show host.
And enough with the”stooge for the energy industries” We are buying all they’ve got.
They don’t need no stinkin’ stooges
Chrisl @ 14
Of course we as consumers continue to use cheap energy sources in ever increasing amounts that generate greenhouse gases. What we need are governments who are prepared to put in place policy mechanisms that effectively price carbon (that will increase the price of energy). However what we have are lobby groups (and their stooges) representing the energy intensive industries who are very actively attempting stop (or at least slow down) these sorts of policy changes. If you are in any doubt of this I suggest you read the paper prepared by Clive Hamiltion â âThe dirty politics of climate changeâ? see -
http://www.tai.org.au/documents/downloads/WP84.pdf
Hamiltonâs recent book Scorcher gives the who sorry story of the Howard governments delaying tactics on climate change.
The 10 questions put by Pat Sajak reek of the lines that come out of these type of lobby groups.
You ask “how do you convince a game show host” – very easy, for Pat Sajak it is probably just another little earner.
It is all so reminiscent of the pro smoking lobby groups.
Habby:You are the consumer! You don’t need the government to put policy mechanisms in place.
As for you carbon tax idea, the price of petrol has increased by 4o % recently. Do you notice less cars on the road? What level does the carbon tax need to be to discourage use?
Hey I could ask 10 questions myself.
I must be a stooge
Where do I get all that money you mention