UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

[Dan]

Zoofer, here is UNH’s Junior Hockey scoring for this season...

* Will Margel
(Madison, USHL): 12 G, 1-0–1 (Traded out of USHL)
(Coquitlam, BCHL): 11 G, 4-9–13 (At least he is scoring here)

* Connor Sweeney (Trail, BCHL): 37 G, 2-6–8
* Liam Devlin (Chicago, USHL): 22 G, 4-1–5

* Aidan Curran
(Cedar Rapids, USHL): 0 G, 0-0–0 (Doesn’t make team)
(Salmon Arm, BCHL): 11 G, 1-4–5 (Traded out of BCHL)
(Bonneyville, AJHL): 13 G, 0-4-4 (Recently left team to return to NCDC)

* Robert Cronin (Dubuque, USHL): 19 G, 1-3–4
* Nick Cafarelli (Wenatchee, BCHL): 33 G, 13-19–32
* Jack Ring (Northeast, NCDC): 27 G, 2-11–13
* Cy LeClerc (Islanders, NCDC): 26 G, 6-15–21
* Tim Bakos (Sioux Falls, USHL): 21 G, 3-3–6

Richels, Sacco, Turner and Winters are all still in HS. Richels is scoring and I’m sure the others are as well, but it’s at a level of competition that has no real predictive value.

So, quick math as I ride the bike that is 37 goals in 232 man games of junior hockey for an average of 0.16 GPG. USHL scorers are averaging 0.12 GPG (9 G in 74 GM).

If you add the two defenseman you get 0.14 GPG overall and 0.11 USHL GPG...

* Nick Ardanez (West Kelowna, BCHL): 34 G, 1-12–13
* Alex Gagne (Cedar Rapids, USHL): 15 G, 1-4–5

 

[scoreboard]

Hey guys....been away to long for the hockey discussions, not the politics though!! How does an educated person confuse climate with weather?

If someone disagrees with your point of view they are uneducated? Okay...

 

[Chuck Murray]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Thank you Dan for saying what I, and I'm sure many others, were thinking.

You can say that again ...

Thank you Dan for saying what I, and I'm sure many others, were thinking.

That's fine Chuck - it wasn't meant to be flattery. Just, remember (when you throw terms like pretentious around) who started this conversation excited about the opportunity to put naive lemmings who don't ask the right questions in their place (and who posted twice begging for my response). With apologies to Darius and others, this post really needs a response - but it will be my last thoughts on the matter.

This will be my last response on the topic as well. Just want to point out that it was none other than you who escalated this to the point where we eventually got to. Looking back, e.cat and myself were poking some (deserved) fun at Time's 2019 Person of the Year - apparently the Hong Kong protesters were not sufficiently "woke" to qualify, and/or Time didn't want to hurt its circulation numbers in the Chinese Politburo, learning from Daryl Morey's "offensive" tweet - and I admittedly came off a little overbearing, prompting the estimable 'Watcher to call me on it. We had a relatively tame and respectful exchange, because that's what people having an informed debate do. Then you came in over the top, tried to make this all political … and we were off to the races ...

Sure. Your party got paid to flip on what was a critical issue for them (perhaps even more so than the Dems). They profited for their denials - what's the benefit to you in all this?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/us/politics/republican-leaders-climate-change.html

Paraphrasing Woke Dan … wow, citing the highly-partisan NY Times GOP bad, Dems good lol.

You have nothing to stand on in this debate if your resorting to this type of attack. Seriously Chuck, are YOU unable to do many things in your own life as a result of posting on this message board? That would be sad to hear. Personally, I (like most everyone else, I assume) am able to post here, have a job, a social life and more - and all in addition to supporting, donating to and actively fighting for many things I believe in. But if you need to convince yourself of the virtues of your own beliefs by pretending that anyone who doesn't work for Climate Change 24/7 doesn't really believe either than do your thing (and if you need to convince yourself, maybe that's a clue in and of itself) ...

This was in response to me pointing out that if CC was truly (1) existential and (2) man-made, why are we here d!ck!ing around on a college hockey message board. Dan did not answer whether he felt CC was either (1) or (2). I've answered that it's neither of those two, so I'm OK and not bothered. I've explained why that is. The planet is in better shape now than when I was a kid, and things here in the USA are WAY better ecologically than 50 years ago when I was a 3rd grader on the first-ever Earth Day. Every day, here in the USA, the air is cleaner (less pollution and less smog), and the water is cleaner (see Charles River, Boston Harbor and Merrimack River for 3 relatively local examples). If we can stop public defecation on the Streets of SF, all the better.

I do have to admit, the apologist handling of my pointed question about President Obama's recent purchase of oceanfront property on the Vineyard did produce some fantastic creative writing …

The fact that you would assume Obama purchasing ocean front property could ONLY mean he doesn't actually believe in Climate Change is the perfect illustration for how deeply you've buried your head in the sand, how biased you are and how disingenuous your arguments are on this topic ...

It may be low hanging fruit to make that sort of joke (practically scraping the ground to be honest), but that's not what it has to mean at all. Does it not occur to you that Obama might care about Climate Change BECAUSE he likes the ocean and wishes to live on the coast - or does it just not fit your narrative? In a concept especially foreign to your party these days - perhaps he understands he has the means to take the risk of living on ocean front property and cares about Climate Change issues out of empathy for other people, both now and in the future …

Yes, of course, what was I thinking? My life experience tells me it makes TOTAL sense to spunk $15MM on an oceanfront property when you're convinced sea rise is an imminent and existential threat. Kind of like building a ski chalet on an active volcano, right? Because you're going to lead by example, and take the hit for the rest of civilization. Whatta guy (ditto Algore).

Honestly, one could possibly disagree with timelines, severity or how to best stand up to Climate Change - but there is zero reason to pretend it doesn't exist unless one is looking to profit from said denial or validate ones political standing by doing so.

OK … so here's the point where you've finally gotten down from your high horse, and admitted this *might* not be as simple as some would lead you to believe. If you dig back far enough, you'll see I did say that climate was, is, and has always will be in a state of change. In fact,, right now, sea rise is happening at the rate of 3.1mm/year. If that rate is maintained - and most of the models most scientists have put forward in the past have been proven by subsequent real-life data to be overstated (and wildly at times, including the "hockey strick" graph) - that means it will take three hundred (300) years for sea rise to gain one (1) meter. Clearly, Algore and President Obama can do this simple math, too. And if polar ice is net receding in the Northern Hemisphere, NASA data will tell you it's growing at a faster rate/volume down in Antarctica. Archimedes tells us overall we'll likely be OK.

---

What follows is a link I've found helpful AND balanced (the many comments afterwards are insightful as well). Issues such as plate tectonics, undersea AND above-surface volcanic activities, sunspot activity, and documented long-term climactic cycles all play into a very complicated picture. So when someone tries to oversimplify this issue by claiming that CO2 levels are THE primary cause, and serve as a "dial" for human activity to impact future climate … it flies in the face of past data, and conveniently ignores the fact that in all previous extended (and more pronounced) warming periods up until now, human activity (and specifically use of fossil fuels) was never a factor:

https://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm

As far as the "yucky and gross" argument, I get it. But again, at least here in the USA, it's remarkably better now that it was for generations, dating back to the Industrial Revolution. I never said it was perfect - and the fact is, nothing ever will be perfect. There are huge issues elsewhere in the world, most notably in China and India. If we lack the intestinal fortitude to challenge China on this, let's start with India, which is not run by a socialist/totalitarian regime. Half a loaf is better than none, and a good start, no??

Truth be told, we currently lack the technology to rely on windmills and solar panels to replace what the current energy demands are. Over time, that will likely change - as has efficiency and emission levels of fossil fuels. And good for future generations - we keep working at it, and the human race has solved other problems, there's no reason to believe it won't continue to make progress on this too. But to ditch what we have working (wonderfully) right now for something that's not even close to ready, is foolish. It speaks to an agenda of governmental control, all this demonizing of the fossil fuel industry, which has made much progress in my lifetime, and I'm sure will continue to make further progress in the future. Because that's what we, as humans, have always done.

JMHO. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and GO UNH!!!

 

[Snively65]

You can say that again ...







This will be my last response on the topic as well. Just want to point out that it was none other than you who escalated this to the point where we eventually got to. Looking back, e.cat and myself were poking some (deserved) fun at Time's 2019 Person of the Year - apparently the Hong Kong protesters were not sufficiently "woke" to qualify, and/or Time didn't want to hurt its circulation numbers in the Chinese Politburo, learning from Daryl Morey's "offensive" tweet - and I admittedly came off a little overbearing, prompting the estimable 'Watcher to call me on it. We had a relatively tame and respectful exchange, because that's what people having an informed debate do. Then you came in over the top, tried to make this all political … and we were off to the races ...



Paraphrasing Woke Dan … wow, citing the highly-partisan NY Times GOP bad, Dems good lol.



This was in response to me pointing out that if CC was truly (1) existential and (2) man-made, why are we here d!ck!ing around on a college hockey message board. Dan did not answer whether he felt CC was either (1) or (2). I've answered that it's neither of those two, so I'm OK and not bothered. I've explained why that is. The planet is in better shape now than when I was a kid, and things here in the USA are WAY better ecologically than 50 years ago when I was a 3rd grader on the first-ever Earth Day. Every day, here in the USA, the air is cleaner (less pollution and less smog), and the water is cleaner (see Charles River, Boston Harbor and Merrimack River for 3 relatively local examples). If we can stop public defecation on the Streets of SF, all the better.

I do have to admit, the apologist handling of my pointed question about President Obama's recent purchase of oceanfront property on the Vineyard did produce some fantastic creative writing …



Yes, of course, what was I thinking? My life experience tells me it makes TOTAL sense to spunk $15MM on an oceanfront property when you're convinced sea rise is an imminent and existential threat. Kind of like building a ski chalet on an active volcano, right? Because you're going to lead by example, and take the hit for the rest of civilization. Whatta guy (ditto Algore).



OK … so here's the point where you've finally gotten down from your high horse, and admitted this *might* not be as simple as some would lead you to believe. If you dig back far enough, you'll see I did say that climate was, is, and has always will be in a state of change. In fact,, right now, sea rise is happening at the rate of 3.1mm/year. If that rate is maintained - and most of the models most scientists have put forward in the past have been proven by subsequent real-life data to be overstated (and wildly at times, including the "hockey strick" graph) - that means it will take three hundred (300) years for sea rise to gain one (1) meter. Clearly, Algore and President Obama can do this simple math, too. And if polar ice is net receding in the Northern Hemisphere, NASA data will tell you it's growing at a faster rate/volume down in Antarctica. Archimedes tells us overall we'll likely be OK.

---

What follows is a link I've found helpful AND balanced (the many comments afterwards are insightful as well). Issues such as plate tectonics, undersea AND above-surface volcanic activities, sunspot activity, and documented long-term climactic cycles all play into a very complicated picture. So when someone tries to oversimplify this issue by claiming that CO2 levels are THE primary cause, and serve as a "dial" for human activity to impact future climate … it flies in the face of past data, and conveniently ignores the fact that in all previous extended (and more pronounced) warming periods up until now, human activity (and specifically use of fossil fuels) was never a factor:

https://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm

As far as the "yucky and gross" argument, I get it. But again, at least here in the USA, it's remarkably better now that it was for generations, dating back to the Industrial Revolution. I never said it was perfect - and the fact is, nothing ever will be perfect. There are huge issues elsewhere in the world, most notably in China and India. If we lack the intestinal fortitude to challenge China on this, let's start with India, which is not run by a socialist/totalitarian regime. Half a loaf is better than none, and a good start, no??

Truth be told, we currently lack the technology to rely on windmills and solar panels to replace what the current energy demands are. Over time, that will likely change - as has efficiency and emission levels of fossil fuels. And good for future generations - we keep working at it, and the human race has solved other problems, there's no reason to believe it won't continue to make progress on this too. But to ditch what we have working (wonderfully) right now for something that's not even close to ready, is foolish. It speaks to an agenda of governmental control, all this demonizing of the fossil fuel industry, which has made much progress in my lifetime, and I'm sure will continue to make further progress in the future. Because that's what we, as humans, have always done.

JMHO. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and GO UNH!!!

Chuck, you claimed earlier that you do not take talking points from others, that you speak for yourself, blah, blah, blah, but you continue to post links to bogus sites that deny science. Sad.

 

[NCAA watcher]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Chuck, googling cliff Harris, your "balanced" source, suggests you may not want to rely on that site too much. Unless you also want to buy into contrails conspiracies and bible driven analysis

One of the three sources for that chart is from this guy:

Iben Browning (January 9, 1918 – July 18, 1991) was an American business consultant, author, and "self-proclaimed climatologist."[1]. 2 He is most notable for having made various failed predictions of disasters involving climate, volcanoes, earthquakes, and government collapse.[2]. 11

the second source is from a business writer

https://www.amazon.com/Michael-G.-Zahorchak/e/B001KMJMMY?ref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share

the third are secret documents only these guys own

I love contrarians who question things, but if there is a consensus, I'd hope for more cogent challenges. Sometimes "settled science" does get it right

 

[Dan]

Chuck, googling cliff Harris, your "balanced" source, suggests you .at not want to rely on that site too much unless you also buy contrails conspiracies and bible driven analysis

Anything but a newspaper that cites...checks notes...past GOP campaign commercials...

I would like to learn more about this post Industrial Revolution clean up, however! You know, so I can do my part!

What could have possibly contributed? I assume there were no progressive environmental laws or social regulations (it probably happened by investing more money into factories and rolling back oversight of the industries all together, if anything). Still, if initiatives had been suggested for implementation, I wonder who might have supported, opposed or invested capital in denying the need for said (purely hypothetical) laws and regulations...

 

[Dan]

In an entirely unrelated topic JVR has three goals and six points in the last six games and is back up to (at least) a 20-goal/season pace for the 10th time in his 11 year career!

I’d imagine JVR is excited about cleaning up his game, following one of the grimiest stretches of productivity in the entire existence of his career...

He probably breaths easier now that he can actually see the horizon of production through the haze he was previously mired in...

Regardless, I bet he won’t settle for these three goals. He’ll probably want to stick with what worked and may even look for new solutions that will help him be even better...

He definitely won’t want to get complacent and allow the same old negativity to return to pollute his thoughts...

JVR has been very fortunate financially, but he still wants to do right by his teammates!

 

[Snively65]

In an entirely unrelated topic JVR has three goals and six points in the last six games and is back up to (at least) a 20-goal/season pace for the 10th time in his 11 year career!

I’d imagine JVR is excited about cleaning up his game, following one of the bleakest stretches of productivity in the entire existence of his career...

He probably breaths easier now that he can actually see the horizon of production through the haze he was previously mired in...

Regardless, I bet he won’t settle for these three goals. He’ll probably want to stick with what worked and may even look for new solutions that will help him be even better...

JVR has been very fortunate financially, but he still wants to do right by his teammates!

Despite being "a third line plodder," what I like about JvR is that he sets up in front of the net and gets punished on the PP. I think that he is earning those goals the hard way.

 

[Darius]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

If someone disagrees with your point of view they are uneducated? Okay...

Believe in the impact or not. Believe it is happening or not. Not knowing the difference between climate and weather?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ohdh2is4UMw

 

[e.cat]

You can say that again ...







This will be my last response on the topic as well. Just want to point out that it was none other than you who escalated this to the point where we eventually got to. Looking back, e.cat and myself were poking some (deserved) fun at Time's 2019 Person of the Year - apparently the Hong Kong protesters were not sufficiently "woke" to qualify, and/or Time didn't want to hurt its circulation numbers in the Chinese Politburo, learning from Daryl Morey's "offensive" tweet - and I admittedly came off a little overbearing, prompting the estimable 'Watcher to call me on it. We had a relatively tame and respectful exchange, because that's what people having an informed debate do. Then you came in over the top, tried to make this all political … and we were off to the races ...



Paraphrasing Woke Dan … wow, citing the highly-partisan NY Times GOP bad, Dems good lol.



This was in response to me pointing out that if CC was truly (1) existential and (2) man-made, why are we here d!ck!ing around on a college hockey message board. Dan did not answer whether he felt CC was either (1) or (2). I've answered that it's neither of those two, so I'm OK and not bothered. I've explained why that is. The planet is in better shape now than when I was a kid, and things here in the USA are WAY better ecologically than 50 years ago when I was a 3rd grader on the first-ever Earth Day. Every day, here in the USA, the air is cleaner (less pollution and less smog), and the water is cleaner (see Charles River, Boston Harbor and Merrimack River for 3 relatively local examples). If we can stop public defecation on the Streets of SF, all the better.

I do have to admit, the apologist handling of my pointed question about President Obama's recent purchase of oceanfront property on the Vineyard did produce some fantastic creative writing …



Yes, of course, what was I thinking? My life experience tells me it makes TOTAL sense to spunk $15MM on an oceanfront property when you're convinced sea rise is an imminent and existential threat. Kind of like building a ski chalet on an active volcano, right? Because you're going to lead by example, and take the hit for the rest of civilization. Whatta guy (ditto Algore).



OK … so here's the point where you've finally gotten down from your high horse, and admitted this *might* not be as simple as some would lead you to believe. If you dig back far enough, you'll see I did say that climate was, is, and has always will be in a state of change. In fact,, right now, sea rise is happening at the rate of 3.1mm/year. If that rate is maintained - and most of the models most scientists have put forward in the past have been proven by subsequent real-life data to be overstated (and wildly at times, including the "hockey strick" graph) - that means it will take three hundred (300) years for sea rise to gain one (1) meter. Clearly, Algore and President Obama can do this simple math, too. And if polar ice is net receding in the Northern Hemisphere, NASA data will tell you it's growing at a faster rate/volume down in Antarctica. Archimedes tells us overall we'll likely be OK.

---

What follows is a link I've found helpful AND balanced (the many comments afterwards are insightful as well). Issues such as plate tectonics, undersea AND above-surface volcanic activities, sunspot activity, and documented long-term climactic cycles all play into a very complicated picture. So when someone tries to oversimplify this issue by claiming that CO2 levels are THE primary cause, and serve as a "dial" for human activity to impact future climate … it flies in the face of past data, and conveniently ignores the fact that in all previous extended (and more pronounced) warming periods up until now, human activity (and specifically use of fossil fuels) was never a factor:

https://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm

As far as the "yucky and gross" argument, I get it. But again, at least here in the USA, it's remarkably better now that it was for generations, dating back to the Industrial Revolution. I never said it was perfect - and the fact is, nothing ever will be perfect. There are huge issues elsewhere in the world, most notably in China and India. If we lack the intestinal fortitude to challenge China on this, let's start with India, which is not run by a socialist/totalitarian regime. Half a loaf is better than none, and a good start, no??

Truth be told, we currently lack the technology to rely on windmills and solar panels to replace what the current energy demands are. Over time, that will likely change - as has efficiency and emission levels of fossil fuels. And good for future generations - we keep working at it, and the human race has solved other problems, there's no reason to believe it won't continue to make progress on this too. But to ditch what we have working (wonderfully) right now for something that's not even close to ready, is foolish. It speaks to an agenda of governmental control, all this demonizing of the fossil fuel industry, which has made much progress in my lifetime, and I'm sure will continue to make further progress in the future. Because that's what we, as humans, have always done.

JMHO. Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and GO UNH!!!

+1

 

[scoreboard]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Believe in the impact or not. Believe it is happening or not. Not knowing the difference between climate and weather?

believers think it is a change in climate. Non-believers think it is just weather. That is the difference.

 

[Chuck Murray]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Unlike others, chitter-chattering like the Lindsay Lohan character in "Mean Girls", I'll keep my promise to keep further comments to myself. Instead, I'll let others speak for me ...

“[...] One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. [...] One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.”

Ottmar Edenhofer, co-chair of working group 3 of the IPCC

"Schoolchildren, young people, and adults all over the world will stand together, demanding that our leaders take action, not because we want them to, but because the science demands it. That action must be powerful and wide-ranging. After all, the climate crisis is not just about the environment. It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will. Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fueled it. We need to dismantle them all. Our political leaders can no longer shirk their responsibilities."

Woke socialist/political scientist Greta Thunberg

 

[NCAA watcher]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

I’d like to point out that the events JVR outlined at the Whitt were orchestrated by Scott Borek. Now I know some/all of you will disagree or spin this statement, but nonetheless - Scott Borek IS a good recruiter and SHOULD have been the replacement for Richie U. At least would have given the wildcats a better/ best chance of competing again in the NCAAs

It wouldn’t surprise me if Merrimack is competing in NCAAs consistently in about 4 years onward from now. ,,, Here are my viewpoints on those to support him being the hypothetical best fit for the current UNH head coach:

• UNH: the main reason the depth of the recruiting classes diminish after 2013 was because Borek was essentially the only one on the road at that point for UNH. If you were a recruit would you want to talk to Borek or the likes of York, Parker, Donato, Leaman? (UNH asst. vs prominent head coaches who actually recruit)

Umile would rarely be seen in person targeting coveted recruits, while the likes of his head coaching competitors were

You are not alone in noting how disinterest Umile was in the critical recruiting. I cannot fathom a mindset of a supposedly competitive guy not caring how you get talent into the organization. Was he lazy? Or so unaware of the role of recruiting, or just so limited that he only hit it off with the Greater Boston kids like him from Malden, Melrose and Arlington (which is what he did before McCloskey)?
Seeing Umile's selfish 3 year plan, I have a very dim view of him, whether he was so deluded to believe it was best for the team (when he cared not to procure talent), or so selfish to not care.

And what set me off on this this am, I looked again at Warren Foegele, with good scoring stats as a regular NHLer, who Umile burried in 15-16 as a sophomore.

oAnd yes, the coaching staff collectively misfired on some decisions that saw verbal commits skate at other universities

Well, the last part is a big concession. Two Hobey finalists were deferred during a period that the team cried out for talent. If I recall, Vecchone's decision was based on a Borek viewing in November where he decided to defer him for another year.

I'm all for second chances and people growing from past failures. On your overall takeaway that Borek should have been Umile's successor, I'd say no. I suggested Borek would be a good fit for Merriakc when the opening arose, because he clearly is pretty competent at elevating talent level. But I think his track record is baked in well enough to conclude that it was unlikely he could ever take a program into a destination. (acknowledging a couple of hits like JVR)

 

[NCAA watcher]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

The BCHL players that made the Junior A all-star roster include:

Goaltender

Jackson Glassford (Alberni Valley Bulldogs)

Defencemen

Ryan Helliwell (Langley Rivermen)*
Trey Taylor (Vernon Vipers)*

Forwards

Ethan Bowen (Chilliwack Chiefs)*
Kyler Kovich (Nanaimo Clippers)*
Luke Mylymok (Salmon Arm Silverbacks)
Danny Weight (Penticton Vees)*
Luc Wilson (Cowichan Valley Capitals)

*Indicates players listed as Players to Watch on NHL Central Scouting’s recent list.

 

[zoofer]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Thanks Dan for the stats, although I feel so much worse after reading them... On top of this, I couldn’t help but notice the attendance for Michigan?...Michigan!!!! I can remember when getting them to travel was HUGE....getting Red Berenson in Durham! And then attendance was 5200 and 6040 respectively......am I wrong to suggest that Souza should try and connect with a couple of Alumni that know the players pipeline like they knew how much a beer at Scorpios was!?

 

[Greg Ambrose]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Just two points:
1) Scott Borek will never lead any team anywhere. Period.
2) re: climate vs. weather. Chuck, what if your ilk are wrong? Then what?

Happy Holidays to all. Hope to be at the Whit next month. I definitely want to see it before they shrink it.

 

[Chuck Murray]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Just two points:
1) Scott Borek will never lead any team anywhere. Period.
2) re: climate vs. weather. Chuck, what if your ilk are wrong? Then what?

Point One - totally agree, Greg, as stated previously a few pages ago.

Point Two - keeping my promise, I'll let noted this noted right-wing activist chime in on the climate issue, and the "arrogance and conceit" involved in analysis of "cause" and the fallacy of a "fix" ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c

It's only the second funniest video on this thread BTW. 'Watcher's Monty Python/Holy Grail video on the Cippolone "we already got one" sketch is unbeatable AND on topic hockey-wise.

 

[Darius]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Thanks Dan for the stats, although I feel so much worse after reading them... On top of this, I couldn’t help but notice the attendance for Michigan?...Michigan!!!! I can remember when getting them to travel was HUGE....getting Red Berenson in Durham! And then attendance was 5200 and 6040 respectively......am I wrong to suggest that Souza should try and connect with a couple of Alumni that know the players pipeline like they knew how much a beer at Scorpios was!?

 

[Dan]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

Point Two - keeping my promise, I'll let noted this noted right-wing activist chime in on the climate issue, and the "arrogance and conceit" involved in analysis of "cause" and the fallacy of a "fix" ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c

So, two posts in a row touting your moral authority to 'promise keeping' in which you...fail to keep your promise? Is just saying you'll keep your promise enough to convince yourself you've actually done so? In reality it took only two strikes of the return key to get from moral authority back to making your case on weather/climate with all the depth and intelligence of the Amanda Seyfried character in Mean Girls...

If you insist on 'keeping' your promise Chuck, I can start a thread on the Cafe and we can spare those who don't wish to be subjected to your continued 'promise keeping'. In the meantime, I'll honor my promise and walk away...

Before I move on, I do want to note this well known left-wing activist's illustration that for even some of America's most highly 'respected' sycophants (jk he's not a left-winger at all!) denying science is a bridge too far...

"I would encourage [republicans] to look long and hard at the science and find a solution. I'm tired of playing defense on the environment. Climate change is real, the science is sound and the solutions are available. If I [said] that Mueller thinks climate change is a hoax, we'd be well on our way."

- Lindsey Graham (2019)

---

Oops, I think I know where I went wrong...

 

[GreenBear]

Re: UNH Hockey: Treading Water or Trending Upward

So I was looking at the list of topics I hadn't read in a while, and as a Dartmouth fan who does keep tabs on UNH, I thought: "Huh...I wonder how UNH fans are feeling about their season so far."

Imagine my surprise when I clicked and got The McLaughlin Group instead!