The Prius side of me, and yes I’ve been “coal rolled” in a Prius more than once, believes that all human beings are redeemable. While it would likely be more expedient financially to let him go and replace him, I hope SWA will look at this as a moral responsibility and not give him a pass, but help him rehabilitate himself. What SWA will need to deal with is whether or not this individual is redeemable and if so how. The primary concern is this pilot’s capacity to lose it professionallty during what is arguably the most critical segment of any flight operation. His worldview and politics, though not entirely irrelevant are obviously not the paramount concern. What we have here is an extreme case of loss of both professional conscience and professional consciousness. See, this is why we should listen to actual credentialed experts. Which clearly ignores the fact burning would is a net CO2 neutral action since wood is part of the carbon cycle. “I suppose that on a planet which has experienced multiple hot flashes and ice ages well before man burned his first CO2-spewing fire” Of course part of this was evidenced by your statement:

So after 50+ years of models pointing to increased surface temperatures and recent actual observations validating those models, anyone who still doubts the reality of anthropogenic climate change is blissfully sitting on the left-hand side of the Dunning-Kruger curve. And yes, science is forced to deal with many variables, but they are constantly adjusting their models to address these variables (because it’s research science, not engineering which is an applied science) and while these adjustments do cause variations in the models’ outcomes, the general direction is the same. Over 97% of published climate scientists agree that anthropogenic climate change is real, and the data they publish support their findings, not to mention the the peer reviewing science community has validated their findings.

So when it comes to the topic of climate change I will trust the research of actual climate scientists, not arm chair quarterbacks on social media who think sharing a few memes and links from discredited sources makes them experts. Science is about observation and experimentation to determine likely causes. Engineering is about developing solutions. But to your point, climate science is science, not engineering. It’s sometimes used as a display of environmentalism protest when the truck operators encounter hybrid and electric vehicles on the road.Īctually, the first thing I learned while pursing my B.S.E.E. Gregor also said that it was the FAA that reported the incident to the airline.īy the way, we looked it up and the reference to “rolling coal” in the clip concerns reprogramming the engine control computer in diesel pickup trucks to allow more fuel to enter the engine so that when the throttle is depressed the truck emits large clouds of black smoke. “FAA regulations prohibit airline pilots from talking about subjects that are unrelated to safely conducting their flight while taxiing and while flying below 10,000 feet altitude,” FAA spokesperson Ian Gregor said in a statement. Although there was some initial confusion about the source of the transmission, Southwest later claimed the pilot as one of their own and said his comments were an “isolated incident involving a single employee and not representative of the nearly 60,000 hardworking, respectful people of Southwest Airlines.” He was not identified and his fate is unknown, but in addition to the offensive nature of the comments, they were also in violation of the sterile cockpit policy for critical phases of flight and that caught the attention of the FAA.

Live atc southwest pilot rant