That’s what Superman said about Lex Luthor, but Lex would have made a killing on all that real estate he bought in Nevada if Ms. Tessenbacher(sp?) hadn’t taken the Kryptonite necklace off.
Moral of the story: there’s still time to get land up here pretty cheap and make a killing on it in 20 years. 
I’ll see your MSPMag and raise you the New York Times:
That’s on the other side of the state from where I live now, but it’s where I graduated from high school and where I hope to move back to within a few years. They have very strong unions and impressively high teacher pay even for Minnesota, and—at least for now—relatively cheap housing costs.
(BTW, I did specify “northern Minnesota”. Minneapolis-St. Paul is in the southern half of the state.)
Kimstu, some bits from your cite you didn’t happen to quote:
For most people up here, this is just not going to sound like a bad tradeoff. Our relatively mild summers will get a little warmer, and our bitterly cold winters will get significantly milder? Okay, I can work with that. 
You’d already said the bit about warmer winters; I was just pointing out some of the features that you didn’t happen to mention.
In any case, I hope all northern Minnesotans and everybody else will find the impacts of climate change less inconvenient than currently feared. But at present, AFAICT, rebranding shrunken Rust Belt cities as “climate refuge” locations is more of a Chamber of Commerce marketing ploy than a serious or well-thought-out plan for coping with the expected population dislocations.
So you think a Harvard lecturer is just some hack spouting whatever nonsense the city’s Chamber of Commerce pays him to say?
Who to believe - the professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota’s Department of Soil, Water, and Climate AND the Director The University of Minnesota Center for Forest Ecology, and Institute on the Environment , or some politicians trying to up-sell their own city (and one guy who does have very good cred - hell, I’ve read Keenan - but admits “climate-proof Duluth” was “tongue-in-cheek”). Especially when you read the NYT article and realise even there, they’re not really talking about things being better, just not as bad as elsewhere.
Strawman. I’m not claiming that Keenan is a “hack”, just that “an economic development and marketing package” is a sales pitch, not a scientific analysis.
But it still sounds like both of you are saying he is using his good credentials to sell out to the highest bidder.
If that’s what my remarks “sound like” to you, you need to adjust your set. There is nothing wrong with a researcher being commissioned to help with an economic development and marketing package, but it’s silly to expect that the resulting package won’t be focused on selling the product.
I think many researchers with good reputations would not get involved with selling a product unless they actually believed in it.
Sure, ok.
That’s even sadder then.
Nobody’s said that. He’s pretty respected in the resilience field AFAIK, I have no reason tho think he’s a shill. But the message he’s pushing in that article (“North Minnesota will be one of the last refuges of climate change”) and your apparent takeaway (“Climate change will be positive for N Minnesota”) are two different things. The article is completely correct that some places will find the negatives of climate change easier to manage.
Only an utter fool would look at that with anticipation verging on joy. But I guess if anyone was going to be that fool…
Sure, but AFAICT Keenan’s version of “selling” does not involve blithe promises that people will “make a killing in 20 years” on newly purchased land. Then again, you’re not a researcher with a good reputation, so there’s no guarantee either of your bona fides or your competence as a forecaster.
This is the guy who likes other people having shitty or insurance because it makes him feel proud of himself for having good insurance . . . and who thinks that reaction is normal.
I often take Slacker’s side in these disputes. But I was startled to see his comments, in an Elections thread, on the bank bailouts of 2009. I can sympathize with questions of Warren’s electability, or whether her progressive programs would go too far. But Slacker offered comments on the bank bail-out that seemed to be a confused hybrid of right-wing prattle and general ignorance.
However, I note that even the best Dopers sometimes go too far, or stray from their areas of expertise. We’re here to fight ignorance and I just hope Slacker will have a less confused interpretation of TARP in the future.
Thanks for the posts guys, besides showing that the Slacker say so that “nobody is interested” was horseshit…
Interesting that that fool jumped when I pointed out that Republicans today do fall for lukewarmer messages like that, looks more like the Slacker also feels bad to be confronted with information that makes **Republicans **look as insane as what they are nowadays. Peculiar from someone that still posts canned replies about how Democrat he is or how knowledgeable he pretends to be about global warming or other issues.
Yep, as I think you pointed before, he is an unreliable narrator besides being a jerk.
Oh, GIGO: I giftwrapped an invitation for your friends to white-knight you on this topic, but they still could not summon the interest to talk about your favorite Scandinavian. Take what you can get, but your exultation is cringe-inducing. :rolleyes:
I promise you I am less ignorant about TARP and the actions taken in the fall of 2008 than the vast majority of people, who clearly don’t even understand that these were loans which were repaid with interest. And it’s certainly not right wingers who take the side of Timothy Geithner et al on this. They love to go on and on about “bailouts” and “banksters” themselves. It’s a rare instance of unity from the right and left. I am very much a centrist on this one. And the center is small on this topic, but more sober and knowledgeable for sure.
Well, which is it? Shitty? Or insurance? 
(Looks like I’m not the only one who posts using voice to text. Proofreading is key!)
N/m
It is always a pleasure to notice that the Slacker, to get a stupid point across, has to ignore that the Scandinavian was not the only hook in his trolled mouth that is painfully showing.
Since it was just part of how he swallows Republican or lukewarmer bait on the climate change issue, it is clear that yes, there was an interest from others regarding how he is trolled around by right wingers on this and other subjects, and he is still horseshitting around.