“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” [attributed to Daniel Patrick Moynihan]

Instead of addressing the errors, you became defensive, and even resorted to a non sequitur about Al Gore to deflect criticism, and even that was logically flawed. ‘Practicing what you preach’ and ‘putting your money where your mouth is’, are not hypocrisy or conflict of interest, but emblematic of someone who believes what they say.

Duffer, you have quoted paid liars three times that I remember, including two about the BP disaster. I stand by my accusation: quoting a demonstrable paid liar is not morally superior to lying yourself. If you want us not to call you a liar, you really must find better sources. You are being willingly, knowingly led astray, in an era and on a medium in which there’s no excuse.

The tax dollars, as I already pointed out, are going to the utilities, and not to the vendor. The vendor might expect to make more sales, and will certainly highlight this in its annual report, but the Federal money is going to the utilities, and the utilities will decide how it is used.

There is no conflict of interest, Gore is investing his own money into conservation and energy efficiency, and not just talking about it.

The Department of Defense has already classified global climate change as a major threat to world stability based on its own research, and has been testing bio-fuels and solar energy to reduce costs and their carbon footprint. It is real, and no one cares if you want to commit suicide by ignoring it, we won’t join you to ensure future profits for the fossil fuel industry.

One can… Duffer does… lie by quoting liars. Most often, Duffer quotes well-paid professional liars. For such lies the repeater is as guilty as the original liar. If you’re not willing to take responsibility for the “facts” you quote, you shouldn’t be quoting them.

“And, Batesy, do cheer up!”

And, Duffer, do fuck yourself!

(You still haven’t learned how to insert a link that shows as ordinary text. Lazy, aren’t you?)

Nor claimed by conservative German politicians…

It is the requirement that you have to give up your autonomy to another person to do it that precluded my going for it. After the military I wasn’t ready to do that again.

There are plenty of people who display great talent and admirable diligence who do not have academic degrees, e.g., jazz musicians before about the 1970s. But times have changed, degree requirements for faculty are the rule not the exception, and there is hardly any serious field of study… yes, most certainly including jazz… in which a PhD is not a prerequisite for someone in a faculty position. They should not be handed out wantonly by blog commenters.

Steve, I take PhDs seriously, because I know a lot of people who have busted their butts as slaves trying to complete the program and failed due to money problems. It is a grind and there is a lot of ramen soup involved as you do all of the grunt work for professors while attempting to complete your own research. The PhD requires original work, and some fields don’t lend themselves to it. In other fields, people see the equivalent of their thesis published by someone else when they are in the final stretch. It is a miserable life, and the people who complete the process deserve respect, even when they are total whackos when outside their field of study.

As an ‘Intelligent Design’ creationist, D’Aleo would have a difficult time finishing a scientific doctoral program.

Oh, to be clear, Mr. Duff awarded the degree. Mr. D’Aleo has made no such claim.

I have an innate dislike for propaganda – I was required to read the Soviet version for years, and the wingnuts haven’t improved the style.