Both are Democratic governors.  Go figure.  So much for "tolerance" of views and "diversity".  So yes, strip them of their titles or fire them when the facts start to get in the way. :)

I think it would be reasonable for the governor to say something like, "When you speak on global warming, make it clear in your comments that you are offering your own opinion and not speaking for the state government."   But if he makes a speech, he's likely to be introduced as the state climatologist.  If he writes an article, the editor is likely to insert a line or two identifying him by title.  Is he going to be penalized for that?  If the governor is trying to silence him, she should have the guts to fire him, or at least ask him to resign.

Irrespective of your starting point in the debate, there is certainly enough information to define it as such... a debate, that is.

The uninhibited quashing of free speech, vigorous inquiry, and lively refutation is the real scary business here, far more so than the amount of heat cow flatulence is going to generate in the next hundred years.

It's time to start slapping down those who declare free speech on the matter "over" or "settled". We'll know when true consensus is reached, or at least a responsible majority. And that will have nothing to do with hysteria and volume!

(Someone at work used "Goracle" (with a straight face) to describe Al's "work". Thought I was gonna die laughing!)

Noel, are you keeping a tally on all the people who have been ostracized like William Gray, Fred Singer, Timothy Ball, scientists who debunked Mann hockey stick, etc...  I think the list is starting to get lengthy on the GW skeptics.  Concensus, my eye!  How can you have a concensus with a growing list of objectors coming out of the closet?????  The best part is every time the GW folks make a big deal out of someone's disagreement, it documents one more person against the so called consensus.

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius

Consider this statement by the Daily Times:

"The Competitive Enterprise Institute, linked by some environmental groups to an Exxon-Mobil-funded "misinformation" campaign, filed the brief. Exxon-Mobil has disputed the alleged connections as "deeply offensive and wrong," but one environmental group branded Legates as "a favorite scientist of the global warming denial machine."

1.) Read it carefully. It proves absolutely nothing and serves no purpose other than to casually suggest that some unnamed environmental group (unnamed, how convenient!)  believes Legates is somehow connected to a group or in the pay of a corporation that refuses to conform to the G.W. orthodoxy. The Daily times has no proof, anecdotal or otherwise that can link Legates to Exxon-Mobil. The important thing was to get Legates name in the same paragraph as Exxon-Mobil. Appearances are everything.

2.) I always laugh when G.W. skeptics are referred to as "deniers".  As if Al Gore and the entire G.W. movement haven't deliberately denied for more than a decade the overwhelming data both current and prehistoric that easily debunks the theory of man-made Global Warming and climate change. The "hockey stick"  deception and the outright negation of the "medieval warm period" are two striking examples of this steadfast denial by Global Warmists.  

"Your views on climate change, as I understand them, are not aligned with those of my administration," Minner wrote.

So a scientist's view, using the scientific method, on a part of earth science is trumped by a bureaucrat's view, using, what, feelings?

We're doomed.

Double sheesh.

D

Want your elected reps to know what you think? Go to Congress.org, it's real easy.

You can also send faxes to your reps about immigration from Nu