Straight Talk Has Montana School Running Scared

School authorities’ cancellation of a talk that a Nobel laureate climate researcher was to have given to high school students has deeply divided this small farming and ranching town at the base of the east side of the Rocky Mountains.


“[Running] is not an agenda-driven ideologue”.

Yeah, sure Ross, if you say so.

Good for the school board. The American public is finally starting to push back against the cultist brain-washers.


You’re absolutely right though. Who could be more of a cultist than someone who has decades of world-leading research under his belt? And make no mistake, Dr. Running is about as impressive a remote sensing/modeling scientist, er, oops, I mean cultist, as there is in the world.

I suspect that the board has not done this as a “push back” against obvious cultists like these idiotic, reputable scientists. Instead, it’s probably more that the school board just didn’t have the stomach for another mindless fight. Because, as everyone with ZOG’s obviously impressive credentials knows, reality is a partisan issue and members of the global climate conspiracy (which - odd for a conspiracy - seems to include virtually everyone) can’t be trusted to present… the facts.

Instead, we should just ask ZOG - s/he seems to know. That would be WAY more reliable than asking one of these scientists/cultists/conspirators.

Man… you need help. -J

“decades of world-leading research under his belt…”

Running is a forester, Professor of Ecology, “Director of the Numerical Terradynamics Simulation Group” and a climate dilettante at that world-renowned centre of scholarship, the University of Montana in Missoula. He has been a contributing author to a raft of obscure papers about mostly bugger all. Truly a giant in the world of science!

He isn’t a complete mediocrity though; I’m told that he’s a terrific skier.

That’s a laugh. You obviously haven’t a clue about this guy. I suppose you must mean, by “obscure”, papers published in scientific journals? Duh, the guy’s a scientist and unlike your favourite professional liar - you know, Timmy boy - he has world-class credentials and accomplishments. On the off chance you are capable of reading a scientific paper and understanding it too, you might find your case better served if you could demonstrate at least a minimal level of comprehension. But that’s not really your game, right?

Or you could stick with the self-satisfied ad hominen shtick, the only kind of “contribution” you ever make. I’m guessing you’re nothing more than a political hack. If you’re this predictable, why even bother posting? Your posts are always just anagrams of one another - just move the random insults around and they are all the same. -J

So, for kicks (hell, it’s Saturday), I counted the number of papers Running published in 2005. Looks like 12 or so - mostly remote sensing/modeling/flux tower contributions to global change biology. That’s more than Timmy published in his entire, undistinguished career on the subject of the climate change at the… where was it… University of Winnipeg’s Department of “Climatology”?

Wow. But I’m sure you’re right: Timmy is the guy we should be listening to. He’s way more credible.

Yes. Why confuse students with scientifically derived, reproduceable data and continuously refined models?
And we should certainly “balance” their conclusions by giving the true believers equal airtime to have their say. You know, those folks who spend their days reinforcing their unmoveable viewpoints by mining the internet for quirky quotes….Isn’t that why we elect the Board of Education?