Preskoči na sadržaj
Korištenjem servisa na Twitteru pristajete na korištenje kolačića. Twitter i partneri rade globalno te koriste kolačiće za analize, personalizaciju i oglase.

Za najbolje sučelje na Twitteru koristite Microsoft Edge ili instalirajte aplikaciju Twitter iz trgovine Microsoft Store.

  • Naslovnica Naslovnica Naslovnica, trenutna stranica.
  • O Twitteru

Spremljena pretraživanja

  • obriši
  • U ovom razgovoru
    Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @
Predloženi korisnici
  • Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @
  • Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @
  • Jezik: Hrvatski
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • Ελληνικά
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Imate račun? Prijava
    Imate račun?
    · Zaboravili ste lozinku?

    Novi ste na Twitteru?
    Registrirajte se
Profil korisnika/ce davelevitan
Dave Levitan
Dave Levitan
Dave Levitan
Ovjeren akaunt
@davelevitan

Tweets

Dave LevitanOvjeren akaunt

@davelevitan

Journalist, mostly science and politics; bylines @gizmodo @thedailybeast @newrepublic @washingtonpost and lots more. Author: NOT A SCIENTIST

davelevitan.com
Vrijeme pridruživanja: veljača 2009.

Tweets

  • © 2020 Twitter
  • O Twitteru
  • Centar za pomoć
  • Uvjeti
  • Pravila o privatnosti
  • Imprint
  • Kolačići
  • Informacije o oglasima
Odbaci
Prethodni
Sljedeće

Idite na profil osobe

Spremljena pretraživanja

  • obriši
  • U ovom razgovoru
    Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @
Predloženi korisnici
  • Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @
  • Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @

Odjava

Blokiraj

  • Objavi Tweet s lokacijom

    U tweetove putem weba ili aplikacija drugih proizvođača možete dodati podatke o lokaciji, kao što su grad ili točna lokacija. Povijest lokacija tweetova uvijek možete izbrisati. Saznajte više

    Vaši popisi

    Izradi novi popis


    Manje od 100 znakova, neobavezno

    Privatnost

    Kopiraj vezu u tweet

    Ugradi ovaj Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Dodajte ovaj Tweet na svoje web-mjesto kopiranjem koda u nastavku. Saznajte više

    Dodajte ovaj videozapis na svoje web-mjesto kopiranjem koda u nastavku. Saznajte više

    Hm, došlo je do problema prilikom povezivanja s poslužiteljem.

    Integracijom Twitterova sadržaja u svoje web-mjesto ili aplikaciju prihvaćate Twitterov Ugovor za programere i Pravila za programere.

    Pregled

    Razlog prikaza oglasa

    Prijavi se na Twitter

    · Zaboravili ste lozinku?
    Nemate račun? Registrirajte se »

    Prijavite se na Twitter

    Niste na Twitteru? Registrirajte se, uključite se u stvari koje vas zanimaju, i dobivajte promjene čim se dogode.

    Registrirajte se
    Imate račun? Prijava »

    Dvosmjerni (slanje i primanje) kratki kodovi:

    Država Kod Samo za korisnike
    Sjedinjene Američke Države 40404 (bilo koje)
    Kanada 21212 (bilo koje)
    Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Irska 51210 Vodafone, O2
    Indija 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonezija 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italija 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » Pogledajte SMS kratke šifre za druge zemlje

    Potvrda

     

    Dobro došli kući!

    Vremenska crta mjesto je na kojem ćete provesti najviše vremena i bez odgode dobivati novosti o svemu što vam je važno.

    Tweetovi vam ne valjaju?

    Prijeđite pokazivačem preko slike profila pa kliknite gumb Pratim da biste prestali pratiti neki račun.

    Kažite mnogo uz malo riječi

    Kada vidite Tweet koji volite, dodirnite srce – to osobi koja ga je napisala daje do znanja da vam se sviđa.

    Proširite glas

    Najbolji je način da podijelite nečiji Tweet s osobama koje vas prate prosljeđivanje. Dodirnite ikonu da biste smjesta poslali.

    Pridruži se razgovoru

    Pomoću odgovora dodajte sve što mislite o nekom tweetu. Pronađite temu koja vam je važna i uključite se.

    Saznajte najnovije vijesti

    Bez odgode pogledajte o čemu ljudi razgovaraju.

    Pratite više onoga što vam se sviđa

    Pratite više računa da biste dobivali novosti o temama do kojih vam je stalo.

    Saznajte što se događa

    Bez odgode pogledajte najnovije razgovore o bilo kojoj temi.

    Ne propustite nijedan aktualni događaj

    Bez odgode pratite kako se razvijaju događaji koje pratite.

    Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
    • Prijavi Tweet

    Yes, it was the scientists who were wrong. They have doomed us all.pic.twitter.com/MaosFA8rvg

    20:10 - 8. stu 2019.
    • 254 proslijeđena tweeta
    • 753 oznake „sviđa mi se”
    • Chris Liro Kathleen Fitzgerald Kakistocracy Man Jeff Cookston Mark Warner Dana ☕netw3rk Space Force Spliff (now in camo!) Keeper of the Eternal Souls
    254 proslijeđena tweeta 753 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa
      1. Novi razgovor
      2. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Woof. Okay, I have some thoughts.https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/08/opinion/sunday/science-climate-change.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytimesscience …

        5 replies 40 proslijeđenih tweetova 115 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      3. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        The basic premise of this lengthy piece is that the rapidity of many climate change processes and impacts has shocked -- shocked! -- many scientists, and that their failure to predict well has helped lead us to our current predicament of fucked-ness. But. BUT.pic.twitter.com/r3dGQ2IFMJ

        27 proslijeđenih tweetova 138 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      4. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        The piece seems to take as a given that all the estimates of climate change's pace were wrong until recently. But they weren't! Here, look at this graphic they include:pic.twitter.com/VYFOUDBZay

        9 proslijeđenih tweetova 120 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      5. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        But was the consensus from the 60s --> 80s really that it would take "centures or millenniums" for impacts to arrive? Nope! Here's what the intro to the landmark 1979 National Research Council report had to say: "A wait-and-see policy may mean waiting until it is too late."

        30 proslijeđenih tweetova 210 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      6. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Dave Levitan je proslijedio/a tweet korisnika/ceDave Levitan

        Or how about the 1983 EPA report -- the Reagan EPA! Not exactly enviro radicals! -- that essentially predicted the same amount/timing of warming predicted today: potentially 2 degrees C by 2050. (See this thread on that report from earlier this year: https://twitter.com/davelevitan/status/1100141281332940802 …)

        Dave Levitan je dodan/na,

        Dave LevitanOvjeren akaunt @davelevitan
        For… reasons… I am reading a 1983 EPA report titled “Can We Delay a Greenhouse Warming?” and it is inCREDible. Stunning consistency since then: “Current estimates suggest that a 2 degrees C increase could occur by the middle of the next century… 5 degrees C increase by 2100” pic.twitter.com/KhMYh7bCQG
        Prikaži ovu nit
        61 proslijeđeni tweet 187 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      7. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        "Substantial increases in global warming may occur sooner than most of us would like to believe," wrote scientists in 1983. "Our findings call for an expeditious response."

        1 reply 21 proslijeđeni tweet 158 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      8. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        But also! The NYT piece upends its own argument with the examples it itself cites! 1993 was 26 years ago! How does this mean that scientists were caught by surprise by like the last two years of extreme weather or something??pic.twitter.com/laVWlOHQVM

        1 reply 23 proslijeđena tweeta 167 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      9. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Or this one! 2002 was still a while ago. Scientists may have used relatively staid language in IPCC reports but that is not the same thing as being WRONG about impending catastrophe!pic.twitter.com/1u6rP4C2iJ

        1 reply 8 proslijeđenih tweetova 113 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      10. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        The public's delays in getting up to speed are somehow the SCIENTISTS' fault?? (Let alone that these data have nothing to do with public understanding of RAPID climate change specifically.) Where has this writer BEEN?? I am using so many capitals and exclamation points!!pic.twitter.com/sbT8qVZDx9

        18 proslijeđenih tweetova 154 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      11. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Then it goes through some of the updated and yes-very-scary estimates. It is not a fucking SCANDAL that scientists like, do some science and learn more stuff as we go. YES sea level rise estimates have gotten more dire, and so on, but this is absurd.

        8 proslijeđenih tweetova 132 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      12. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        For all the... for all... wut?pic.twitter.com/6G1oddqsDj

        1 reply 4 proslijeđena tweeta 86 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      13. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Honestly I don't even understand where the argument goes.pic.twitter.com/MwJ6EKglmo

        1 reply 4 proslijeđena tweeta 70 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      14. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Scientists did not "lowball" anything. They communicated what they knew, when they knew it, and were not in charge of who built what power plants or the explosion in SUVs or whatever. They did, in fact, offer some fairly dire warnings as far back as the 70s, if not earlier.

        34 proslijeđena tweeta 254 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      15. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        That the NYT is publishing long pieces, in 2019, blaming SCIENTISTS for our failures to act, is INSANE. There is no debate about why we didn't act! It wasn't because we thought it might not be that bad! It was because of evil people who wanted more money! I am done yelling now!

        12 replies 271 proslijeđeni tweet 976 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      16. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 8. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Anyway, NYT, hire me to write the piece that refutes all of that one, I'm available.

        15 proslijeđenih tweetova 231 korisnik označava da mu se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      17. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 9. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        I should have gone back farther. The 1965 report to LBJ on the "greenhouse effect" had some VERY dire warnings. Like, that the entire Antarctic ice sheet could melt in 400 years. Or that seas could rise 40 feet/century. Or that we could see up to FOUR deg C of warming by 2000.pic.twitter.com/kKgY975pLb

        31 proslijeđeni tweet 159 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      18. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 9. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Still trying to imagine the pitch that led to this piece. "I'm arguing that scientists are at fault for the climate crisis, because they didn't warn us that it would get this bad this fast." "Great. I have absolutely no follow-up questions whatsoever. Give me 2500 words."

        1 reply 17 proslijeđenih tweetova 182 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      19. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 9. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        I know there's a wall between the op-ed pages and the newsroom, but the NYT climate reporters and editors are SO good! Any one of them could have probably seen this and been like "Uh, hang on a sec." I mean, this was from just last year!!! https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html …pic.twitter.com/RXBuKBNYzs

        8 replies 18 proslijeđenih tweetova 150 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      20. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 10. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Okay so as a few people have pointed out, the author of this dumbshit NYT op-ed is currently employed by a hedge fund, which is odd but I don't know what to do with that. He has also, however, written some books. About which I have a couple more thoughts.pic.twitter.com/VapgW2aFGT

        1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 18 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      21. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 10. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Specifically, his 2006 book "The Winds of Change: Climate, Weather, and the Destruction of Civilizations," which seems to do a bit of a Guns Germs and Steel thing where he blames previous climatic changes for various civilizations' collapse. Which, fine, whatever.pic.twitter.com/Bd1MJ2GU4e

        1 reply 4 proslijeđena tweeta 14 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      22. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 10. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        In this book, toward the end he includes an ENTIRE TIMELINE of scientists calling attention to the possibility of rapid climate change, dating back into the 1950s. 13 years ago he provided the entire refutation of his future op-ed. It's glorious.pic.twitter.com/kM1x6TMAVo

        1 reply 12 proslijeđenih tweetova 33 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      23. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 10. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        AND. He notes numerous times about policymakers and others IGNORING the warnings from scientists. Again, just the pure opposite of what he published in the Times!pic.twitter.com/666q2O5VKl

        1 reply 6 proslijeđenih tweetova 23 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      24. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 10. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        It is BAFFLING to me how you can go from this -- policymakers are dumb and should listen to scientists -- to arguing that scientists were way off and are at fault for not sounding the alarm, over the course of 2006-2019. Anyway, he should go read his own book or something.pic.twitter.com/TisgTqvz4o

        5 proslijeđenih tweetova 36 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      25. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 11. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        I know I should leave this alone but this idea of blame for climate change, and some people's apparent need to find someone outside the obvious culprits, is stuck in my head.

        1 reply 4 proslijeđena tweeta 16 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      26. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 11. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Even the non-dumbshit-NYT-op-ed versions of the discussion tend to anonymize it. "Fossil fuel companies" or whatever. But it was actual people who did this shit, and it's frustrating as hell that by and large, NONE of them will face any consequences for it.

        6 proslijeđenih tweetova 20 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      27. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 11. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        Anyway, here's another thing I wrote a few months ago:https://newrepublic.com/article/154649/reformed-climate-deniers-dont-deserve-redemption …

        1 reply 8 proslijeđenih tweetova 19 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      28. Dave Levitan‏Ovjeren akaunt @davelevitan 11. stu 2019.
        • Prijavi Tweet

        "Blame the scientists for not being capable of puncturing our collective avarice-driven myopia" is the most galaxy-brained shit. Like, "it's my doctor's fault that I didn't undergo chemotherapy" when she told me to but instead I gave a million dollars to the snake oil shaman.

        0 replies 4 proslijeđena tweeta 28 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        Prikaži ovu nit
      29. Kraj razgovora

    Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

    Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.

      Sponzorirani tweet

      false

      • © 2020 Twitter
      • O Twitteru
      • Centar za pomoć
      • Uvjeti
      • Pravila o privatnosti
      • Imprint
      • Kolačići
      • Informacije o oglasima