NOT “As Smart as a Fifth Grader”

“. . .[T]he economy sunk [sic] deeper into the red. . . ” was all that was needed to convince me to stop reading the article. If neither the writer nor any putative editor could bother to be more literate than a fifth grader, then buh-bye! (And yes, there were other such things before the last straw.) When a writer has no real respect for his readers (and apparently no self-respect at all) such that he does not even bother to learn standard conjugations for strong verbs (by reading literate text, if nothing else!), then why should I pollute my time with his dreck?

And no, I refuse to link the piece here. I’ll have a hard enough time erasing the experience from memory. *heh*


Just in case any reader who did not pass fifth grade should stumble on this, “Sank is the past tense (e.g., the ship sank to the bottom of the sea). Sunk is the past participle, so it’s used in the perfect tenses (e.g., the ship has sunk to the bottom of the sea) and as an adjective (the sunk ship is at the bottom of the sea).”1

Interested in “Climate Change”?

If you have any interest in “climate change” at all, then you probably fall into one of two classes of persons interested in “climate change.” One class is comprised of folks who want hard numbers and replicable, real world research to verify or falsify hypotheses (or just refine wild-assed guesses so that hypotheses can be formed and tested). This class can contain both people whose personal inclination is to believe that anthropogenic climate change is real and potentially catastrophic, and those who doubt such a proposition.

As long as the above class seeks to gather hard numbers and perform well-designed, replicable research, then their interest is legitimate and to be lauded, no matter what they are predisposed to believe.

Then there is the second class: those who seem to belong to the Cult of Anthropogenic Climate Alarmism. CACA acolytes DGARA about facts, replicable testing, etc., but simply have “faith” that mankind is killing Mother Earth. Because dogma.

Now, it they weren’t trying to compel folks to conform to CACA dogma against their consciences, they’d just be kooks. But these kooks are dangerous. And to compel others to conform to their religious beliefs is evil. Since CACA acolytes almost uniformly seek to impose their indefensible (a fair description, because I have yet to see or hear a defense of CACA dogma using replicable research based on verifiable, undoctored facts) beliefs on those they deem to be unbelievers, regardless of any reasons for scepticism. Indeed. condemnation of scepticism alone is enough to condemn this class of persons, because science without scepticism is just. . . unfounded dogma.