re: #445 robdouth

Actually this seems like solid logic. I’ve said numerous times today to give the guy the benefit of the doubt, and I still believe you give him a chance to explain before condemnation, but this explanation at least seems more plausible than the Charles explanation at the moment. It’s such a shitty audio quality that it’s hard to speculate, but at least if you follow this reasoning, it’s not an outrageous outrage. Just like those who are automatically saying it’s clear he said something outrageous are jumping the shark, so is defending what he said as “clear.” One of those rare times when both sides are jumping the shark, but no one ever learns.

However, anyone trying to say he was claiming AGW caused the earthquake, either hasn’t seen the video or is just doing the out-outrage like Charles said.

I honestly doubt that even Glover has any idea what he really meant.