I sat in the lounge-type stylist’s chair. I had never been to this place for a haircut before, but decided, since it was near and relatively new, I’d go. I prefer the same barber, or alternatively “Great Clips”. That same barber knows what I want, while “Great Clips” has a specific number, from previous sessions, that tells the stylist or barber the style I am after. That style number has not changed in many years, which seems contradictory to the fewer hairs I have on my head.
The stylist I had that day, who I am going to assess is in her mid-20s and naturally wants to chat. I suspect conversation and affability are proven techniques or at least thought to generate a bigger gratuity. After the weather and a few other conventional niceties, she asked, “So what do you do in your spare time”.
I told her about this blog. Logically, after a rather insignificant description of my articles, she assumed I was writing about the reality of human-induced climate modification. When I gave her a more thorough description she was originally aghast, nearly dropping a comb, but then the “potential tip control” took over. “Interesting”, was all she could say.
She, like the many of her faith, likely read a quote by celebrity stargazer Neil deGrasse Tyson who said, “How sad it must be – believing that scientists, scholars, historians, economists, and journalists have devoted their entire lives to deceiving you, while a reality TV star with decades of fraud and exhaustively documented lying is your only beacon of truth and honesty”.
That was not a scientific quote, but a flagrantly, divisive political gesture. You will hear many of them between now and the first week of November. The dishonesty occurred with the invention of the 97% consensus as I write about in the article titled “The 97% Consensus, subtitled or a 97% Contention”
Despite sitting in the most comfortable of barber’s chairs, she likely assumed I was “off my rocker”. I asked her if she knew how much carbon dioxide was in the atmosphere (I think I said air). She did not know. When I told her it was around 420 parts per million and man was only responsible for about 12 of those, she picked up the pace on the haircut. The conversation seemed to screech to a halt.
It was again obvious that climate change was construed as genuine and enhanced by people’s apathy to investigate the issue beyond academia, politics, protestors, mainstream media, and Hollywood.
My tip was a little more than 30% significantly higher than the human contribution of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Dennis Davis (God bless his soul) would have listened to your explanations of climate change and would not have dropped his comb, I'm certain of that.The community still misses his sense of humour!