Colbert told you

It might be hard to believe that these clips arent edited, but I have heard this time and time again, how so many of these anti-intellectual types basically say "teach every theory, and let the child choose what to believe".

lol colbert such sick rape

daily show clips good too

nice post

^at my current job i get paid at least 2x more than a migrant worker

plus migrant workers are often paid well below minimum wage and would be a job that wouldn't mean shit on a resume, might as well be an employment gap.

About global-warming skepticism. Richard Muller who led this investigation and his team published all their data on the Berkeley website. You can also find a letter in which he explains the study and the conclusions they obtained. Richard Muller admitted in the past that he had doubts on the previous researches and for some was considered as a global warming skeptics.

an excerpt : "Our biggest surprise was that the new results agreed so closely with the warming values published previously by other teams in the US and the UK," said Prof Muller. "This confirms that these studies were done carefully and that potential biases identified by climate change sceptics did not seriously affect their conclusions."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15373071

The website where all datas are published and were the four papers are submitted to peer review : http://berkeleyearth.org/
The letter : http://berkeleyearth.org/Resources/Berkeley_Earth_Summary_20_Oct
The movie shown in the daily show : http://berkeleyearth.org/movies.php

Graph where you can see the correspondence between the data measured from his team and previous team part of the IPCC.
+ Show Spoiler +

about global warming:

yeah, all of this is why the global warming "skeptics" aka corporate backed talking heads have used a different angle of attack outside of "if its happening" by changing it do "does man's activities have an affect on global warming" (obviously the answer is a resounding yes but.....sigh @ people)

They are two different claims. First one was clearly not receivable as it is mainly about collecting the data and the statistical analysis , and actually it's more an observation than an analysis. So skeptics would just say : "Earth does not get hotter, I can continue living the way I always did", which leads to a dangerous passivity.

But if we agree on the fact that earth is warming, then another debate is what cause this warming. Considering the history of earth temperature, we can assess that this warming can be considered as quick, even abnormally (in the sense it had not happened yet) quick. Then the debate relies on whether it is due to human activity or not. Correlation between those two is also a fact, but the causality is debated by skeptics.
Here skeptics say : "It's getting hotter, but it's not my fault, so why would I do something different ?" But here you can oppose the fact that you have to do something as this warming is hazardous.

It's a shame that a study had to be carried on again on the very first aspect of the debate, but I just hope that we can all focus on second one now.