You know that you have no proof whatsoever on those statistics, do you?
All you have is the trust in your eyes, the screen, the cable, the electronics in your computer, the operating system, the browser, the internet provider, random servers on the internet, the Wikipedia server, the person who made the statistics page, the people who created the graphics and extracted the information, the people who collected the data, and the technology and everything else involved in that. While you can’t even prove that anything except yourself even exists. ^^
(Don’t get me wrong: I’m not stating an opinion on if this is good/bad/right/wrong and all than simple-minded shit.)
What I’m saying is: Don’t trust everything you see. After all, the probability of it coming from some some jobless person in his underpants, who is very insecure and defensive of the own reality, and has built his happy-place, is pretty close to 100%.;)
I think everybody just realized the foundational problem in the idea behind Wikipedia. We all thought it was a really great idea at the time. I was a big fan of it. But some things threw me off.
My guess is that it all began by people realizing, that there is more than one view on some things, because it’s either impossible to find out the truth, it's not worth the effort, or there are in fact two physically distinct truths on the same thing (relativity). (Don’t even think about confusing this with the Creationism bullshit please. As you will see below, my arguments are specifically methods to prevent such things.:)
This naturally caused the admins to think about what to do against that problem. Unfortunately they chose a very bad “solution&rdquo. They got in a back room (mailing list) and discussed what views Wikipedia now would represent. (And as a consequence, which things would be censored.) You may remember this turning up on Slashdot as the “secret admin mailing list scandal”.
But as there are always people with other opinions. Some that you can’t prove wrong. Perhaps because it is just as much true. Perhaps for lack of information. And some that are just trolling. Then there are many more in between. So of course people fought about the “one true truth”. And as “anyone can edit” Wikipedia, anyone did.
Which led to the logical conclusion to lock down pages, and enforce strict rules. And that is what broke the neck of it, for me. It was as if Wikipedia died at that moment, and something else emerged. “Anyone can edit“ my ass! Now you have to get at least three ranks up to even post a picture. And check all your changes for just being reversed for “Because I can” pseudo-reasons. No wonder, the term “Wikinazis” even came up. I mean, if that does not remind you of it, then you have to learn your history.
Here you have to know a basic rule about human psychology: There are two reasons why someone does something: A) Because he thinks that is the right thing to to. And B) Because he thinks he is forced to do it. But both have in common, that they themselves are good and not wrong. That self-value and sense of the own reality is so important, that the inner “it” literally think it’s dying when it breaks down. (Aka, going crazy.) So people will go to extreme lengths to prevent from having to accept being bad or wrong. This is not a bad mechanism. It’s an evolutionary developed one. And in normal life also a very useful one.
Now imagine everybody, basing on his own knowledge, what he thinks is right and wrong and soandso. But since they don’t have the same base of information, they reach different conclusions. And then they base their self-acceptance on it. I think you can already feel the luring conflict potential in this, can you?
The thing is, that there is in theory, apart from some unusual physical properties of the universe, a real physical “truth” for all of us. But in practice, that does not help us very much, does it? Because: What ways of finding “the truth” do we use? Of course, we could go and deduce it via plain hard logic. But then you end up with people having different paradigms that don’t fit. If you even ever get that far. Have you tried finding out what is “relevant” enough to be put in an article via pure logic based on the rules of physics? I have. It’s not a pretty thing. And you won’t be able to do it in a lifetime. Or even a thousands of lifetimes.
So how do we “know” anything at all then? Well, that’s where the alpha/beta sense of reality and the concept of trust come is. See, why do you believe a single word of what I just said? Or what you read in TFA. Or on TV? Or even from the person that is closest to do? How do you know that there is a computer screen in front of you right now? We
What’s wrong with that? Think of 1.0 as perfection. And just as with a mathematical limit, you will never reach it.
You will only get to a certain level of closeness to perfection, that in “good enough”.
Then (or even in parallel), you write a new roadmap for 2.0, (the second generation) that is not possible with the 1.0 architecture, and requires a major redesign. And until that one gets to “good enough” for you, it’s still 0.x/1.0 for you.
I think the major misconception is the mixup of major version and generation here. They work more in the [generation].[version] mindset as in the [major].[minor] mindset. Firefox did that too until 1.0. Then they switched to major-minor for marketing reasons. You can still see the old versioning in the Gecko engine. It is now at 1.9.1.5 for Firefox 3.5.5. As you can see, we “only” are close to the second generation. Which took just as long as the years that it took to get to 1.0.
So, as another commenter said: See it as Inkscape 47.0, and be happy. : (Or more exact: See the 47 as a mix of the major and minor version. And it being the first generation, where counting started at zero.)
Nah. It’s a mental handicap to pre-judge software that way. And besides: What kind of needy loser lets others dominate how he wants to build his software? Someone with no own sense of reality and system of values? Well then he won’t become much of a leader, or innovator will he? ^^ Especially, if you work for free anyway.
Maybe you should not assume, that you can demand special treatment from someone who gives you things for free.:)
I, for example, have only one reason I write most of my software: For me. So I can use my computer in a better way. If you happen to like it, that’s nice and all. Take it, have fun.:) But don’t come and ask for anything as if you payed for it! You can offer me money to listen to your suggestion or help you, of course. But also don’t expect me to take it, if it’s not worth it for me.:)
Toast is a bad idea though. As it is nearly pure starch. Meaining it will frag your immune system even further. Healthy food is always a good idea.
That’s why it’s so horrible that the food at hospitals is so bad. It basically works strongly in favor of the disease.
But as I see that your mom made the food herself and had a great amount of variation in it, I can tell you that that was a biiig plus for your immune system. If you then concentrate on eating as little processed food as possible, you will grow old without any of those “age-related” diseases, that somehow turn out not be be age-related at all (but related to eating bad food for decades.):)
Same as your dog’s immune system in his mouth still being better after eating spoiled meat and poo. ^^
The thing is: You can heal pretty much all of your auto-immune diseases, with the right diet. I’ve seen it myself. Really bad asthma? Gone. Not a trace left. The trick were these rules:
As non-processed as possible. (Badness: 1. Preparation [as in: pure sugar], 2. conserve [includes all white flour products], 3. heated, 2. fermented [pickles, sauerkraut, beer, wine, cheese, yogurt, salami/ham, etc], 1. mechanically processed [no problems here], 0. unprocessed)
As few heated proteins (especially animal ones) as possible. (This is the main rule to become allergy-free. Non-heated and especially vegetable ones are OK, as you need them.)
As long carbohydrates as possible (short to long: dextrose, sugar, starch, fibers)
As few saturated fats as possible (But unsaturated ones are good and can be eaten in relatively big quantities.)
As much variation as possible.
Don’t forget psychology. It has to taste great and be possible without much work.
As the son of a biologist, this it was always clear in our family. I found it crazy to shower twice a day, and then apply a lotion, just so your skin does not turn into paper. Even in the winter. Especially as a child, when you don’t smell or sweat much. Of course the second part of child health is healthy food. Fresh (or frozen) and as un-processed as possible.
Independently from the immune system, using all those “hygiene” products is like taking drugs (be it illegal or pharma ones) or wearing glasses: The more you use them, the more your body will have trouble without them. They advertise with giving you the things, that they took from you in the first place.
It always reminds me of that child in the (mediocre) TV series “Earth 2”, that was so “protected” that it nearly died when it came in contact with the normal germs that everybody has on/in him. Or “Bubble Boy”. ^^
Also, how are you going to build a normal digestive fauna, without any germs? A lack of it will not only cause bad digestion, but change your mood in negative ways. Especially if a bad germ gets to be the first to settle down there. (There are germs known to have massive changes on a person’s character.) You need to have a dense settlement of good germs, so bad ones can’t settle down anymore.
But learning Haskell is only in a small part about writing Haskell. It’s mainly about getting to the next level in programming skill. And becoming much better in every language.
Besides: Want to earn some big money for doing actual “mission-critical” software, that lives depend on, and that really means something? There’s no way to do serious business like that without Haskell, and not go crazy. ^^
So there you go. If you want to continue doing basically a front-end to a database on color mixing machines, or a sales system, to earn enough to live, then go ahead, continue doing C++/Java/Delphi.:)
Yeah, and you may thank them when attached to a heart-lung machine that was NOT written in C/C++ instead, because B. Curry’s gonna kick yo ass with that attitude!;P
The idea is that you can split up the program in parallel tasks in a fully automated way. If you as a programmer even have to think about parallelizing, I’m sorry, but then your compiler is “doin’ it wrong” and your languages is from the stone age. ^^ An a bonus, when you can completely rely on a function with the same input producing the same output, you can also throw caching in there algorithmically (where required, on-demand, whatever you wish) But bla... that is all just the stuff on the surface. Like explaining the pointlessness of “metaprogramming” when there stops being a difference between data and code.
I find the most amazing thing about Haskell as it is today, is that things that need the addition of new constructs to the language and a big change in the compiler, are just your normal library in Haskell. It can look like a whole new language. But it’s just a library. And that is amazing! Then, when you get to the GHC extensions, things that are as much on the forefront of Informatics science as the LHC on physics, with everybody else copying it years later... Sorry, but if you like elegance in programming,...I just have no words for it...
The thing is, that it’s crazy hard to learn. Which is not a fault in language design. Because it’s very elegant. It’s simply the fact that it is so far ahead of anything in your everyday language. You won’t expect to sit in a spaceship and drive it like your car too, would you? Or program the LHC like a VCR.
Yes, I am a fan. Even if I sometimes hate it for being so damn smart compared to me the normal programmer. But I became so much a better programmer in all other languages, it’s crazy.
It’s simply a completely different class of skill. And that is why one should learn Haskell. Fuck the “Oh, we’re now only coding in Haskell” attitude. When you really understand the ideas behind it, every language becomes Haskell. And you can write practically bug-free programs of...
Aaah, what am I saying. <John Cleese>Oh it’s driving me mad... MAD!</John Cleese> *slams cleaver into the table* *head developer comes in* Head developer: Easy, Mungo, easy... Mungo... *clutches his head in agony* the war wound!... the wound... the wouuund... Manager: This is the end! The end! Aaargh!! *stabs himself with a steel lambda sculpture*
You mean better fake quality reviews. Everyone knows that there are no real quality reviews on the net. Just as there are no real girls or facts on it. ^^
The idea is to make it possible to *change* the layout! Unless you have single-pixel buttons that are electronically raisable, you can’t do that with buttons.
Imagine a big red button that says *NUKE* and a load of info displays and buttons on a surface that lies in the location of your keyboard, when playing your mech game. (Mechwarrior was famous for needing a mouse, a joystick *and* a keyboard to properly play it. And I *loved* it for the ability to look, move and shoot in 3 different directions!:D)
It always depends on if it’s worth it. I think you can do pneumatics entierly without moving parts. Or if you have to, one single part. (I don't count the moving surface as a part.
On the other hand, the buttons on all old phones and the buttons that you used to type your comment, are moving parts. You don't see them falling apart, do you?
At least not until you replace them by something better anyway.
So all in all, oh yeah, I think it is worth a ton to finally have a real touch-typable keyboard, that you can also make into a dashboard with a big red button that says *nuke* for your next mech game.:D
...and discarded it because the screen itself is not flexible enough for serious dynamics (e.g. the form that your keyboard keys have), or if you use a second surface above it that you fill with the air, you get optical distortions.
My current concept is much cooler: Put pins in every spot between 4 pixels (on the corners), and use small magnetic actuators (like speakers) behind the screen, to drive the pins up and down. then attach a flexible foil on the top of the pins. now you can create very nice, fast and detailed tactile surfaces.
If you want to develop this (I haven’t got the time for it, since I'm already trying to make some other inventions reality:), just mention that you got the idea from me and send me a free product with lifetime replacement guarantee, and we’re good.:) I just want to use it, tell everybody how cool it is (advertisement for you), and have made the world a bit better.
countries having to "pay" to some "World Fund" for their carbon emissions. The establishment of this fund and the redistribution of wealth from rich countries to poor countries via environmental guilt it the being of the One World Government
Yeah, it it such an evil thing to for once give poor countries something back for raping their country, draining it of resources, and leaving behind a polluted wasteland. Way to go.
Better take more from the poor countries, and give it to the rich ones, right?
Boy does it shine trough that you're in the pockets of big energy!
So you say we all should believe in it, because there is this book with all the truth in it?
Hmm... where have I heard this before? ^^
It's a sad sight when nutjobs defend themselves. Because they are far out from being able to use logic and proper paradigms anymore, and must rely on elaborate chains of circular logic and “everyone knows” appeals...
Most scientists do their work on global warming because that is where the money is.
What a load of bullshit. If they wanted to work where the money is, why would they go into science in the first place? Because it gets you all the girls? Ha ha.
Slashdot Mirror
You know that you have no proof whatsoever on those statistics, do you?
All you have is the trust in your eyes, the screen, the cable, the electronics in your computer, the operating system, the browser, the internet provider, random servers on the internet, the Wikipedia server, the person who made the statistics page, the people who created the graphics and extracted the information, the people who collected the data, and the technology and everything else involved in that.
While you can’t even prove that anything except yourself even exists. ^^
(Don’t get me wrong: I’m not stating an opinion on if this is good/bad/right/wrong and all than simple-minded shit.)
What I’m saying is: Don’t trust everything you see. ;)
After all, the probability of it coming from some some jobless person in his underpants, who is very insecure and defensive of the own reality, and has built his happy-place, is pretty close to 100%.
I think everybody just realized the foundational problem in the idea behind Wikipedia.
We all thought it was a really great idea at the time. I was a big fan of it.
But some things threw me off.
My guess is that it all began by people realizing, that there is more than one view on some things, because it’s either impossible to find out the truth, it's not worth the effort, or there are in fact two physically distinct truths on the same thing (relativity). (Don’t even think about confusing this with the Creationism bullshit please. As you will see below, my arguments are specifically methods to prevent such things. :)
This naturally caused the admins to think about what to do against that problem. Unfortunately they chose a very bad “solution&rdquo. They got in a back room (mailing list) and discussed what views Wikipedia now would represent. (And as a consequence, which things would be censored.) You may remember this turning up on Slashdot as the “secret admin mailing list scandal”.
But as there are always people with other opinions. Some that you can’t prove wrong. Perhaps because it is just as much true. Perhaps for lack of information. And some that are just trolling. Then there are many more in between.
So of course people fought about the “one true truth”. And as “anyone can edit” Wikipedia, anyone did.
Which led to the logical conclusion to lock down pages, and enforce strict rules. And that is what broke the neck of it, for me. It was as if Wikipedia died at that moment, and something else emerged. “Anyone can edit“ my ass! Now you have to get at least three ranks up to even post a picture. And check all your changes for just being reversed for “Because I can” pseudo-reasons.
No wonder, the term “Wikinazis” even came up. I mean, if that does not remind you of it, then you have to learn your history.
Here you have to know a basic rule about human psychology: There are two reasons why someone does something: A) Because he thinks that is the right thing to to. And B) Because he thinks he is forced to do it. But both have in common, that they themselves are good and not wrong. That self-value and sense of the own reality is so important, that the inner “it” literally think it’s dying when it breaks down. (Aka, going crazy.) So people will go to extreme lengths to prevent from having to accept being bad or wrong. This is not a bad mechanism. It’s an evolutionary developed one. And in normal life also a very useful one.
Now imagine everybody, basing on his own knowledge, what he thinks is right and wrong and soandso. But since they don’t have the same base of information, they reach different conclusions. And then they base their self-acceptance on it.
I think you can already feel the luring conflict potential in this, can you?
The thing is, that there is in theory, apart from some unusual physical properties of the universe, a real physical “truth” for all of us. But in practice, that does not help us very much, does it?
Because: What ways of finding “the truth” do we use?
Of course, we could go and deduce it via plain hard logic. But then you end up with people having different paradigms that don’t fit. If you even ever get that far. Have you tried finding out what is “relevant” enough to be put in an article via pure logic based on the rules of physics? I have. It’s not a pretty thing. And you won’t be able to do it in a lifetime. Or even a thousands of lifetimes.
So how do we “know” anything at all then? Well, that’s where the alpha/beta sense of reality and the concept of trust come is. See, why do you believe a single word of what I just said? Or what you read in TFA. Or on TV? Or even from the person that is closest to do? How do you know that there is a computer screen in front of you right now? We
Don’t tempt the Internet! Or someone will release Ubuntu “Tentacle Tux”!
My argument is, that you can put this thoughts into general transformational formulas, and put them in the compiler. :)
I might be wrong, but at least I will try and find out / prove it. :)
Actually it’s not. That’s GP’s point. The extensions are simply not shown in Firefox & co. Just as with Word HTML.
What’s wrong with that?
Think of 1.0 as perfection. And just as with a mathematical limit, you will never reach it.
You will only get to a certain level of closeness to perfection, that in “good enough”.
Then (or even in parallel), you write a new roadmap for 2.0, (the second generation) that is not possible with the 1.0 architecture, and requires a major redesign. And until that one gets to “good enough” for you, it’s still 0.x/1.0 for you.
I think the major misconception is the mixup of major version and generation here. They work more in the [generation].[version] mindset as in the [major].[minor] mindset. Firefox did that too until 1.0. Then they switched to major-minor for marketing reasons. You can still see the old versioning in the Gecko engine. It is now at 1.9.1.5 for Firefox 3.5.5. As you can see, we “only” are close to the second generation. Which took just as long as the years that it took to get to 1.0.
So, as another commenter said: See it as Inkscape 47.0, and be happy. :
(Or more exact: See the 47 as a mix of the major and minor version. And it being the first generation, where counting started at zero.)
Nah. It’s a mental handicap to pre-judge software that way. And besides: What kind of needy loser lets others dominate how he wants to build his software? Someone with no own sense of reality and system of values? Well then he won’t become much of a leader, or innovator will he? ^^
Especially, if you work for free anyway.
Maybe you should not assume, that you can demand special treatment from someone who gives you things for free. :)
I, for example, have only one reason I write most of my software: For me. So I can use my computer in a better way. :) :)
If you happen to like it, that’s nice and all. Take it, have fun.
But don’t come and ask for anything as if you payed for it!
You can offer me money to listen to your suggestion or help you, of course.
But also don’t expect me to take it, if it’s not worth it for me.
Toast is a bad idea though. As it is nearly pure starch. Meaining it will frag your immune system even further. Healthy food is always a good idea.
That’s why it’s so horrible that the food at hospitals is so bad. It basically works strongly in favor of the disease.
But as I see that your mom made the food herself and had a great amount of variation in it, I can tell you that that was a biiig plus for your immune system. If you then concentrate on eating as little processed food as possible, you will grow old without any of those “age-related” diseases, that somehow turn out not be be age-related at all (but related to eating bad food for decades.) :)
Same as your dog’s immune system in his mouth still being better after eating spoiled meat and poo. ^^
The thing is: You can heal pretty much all of your auto-immune diseases, with the right diet. I’ve seen it myself. Really bad asthma? Gone. Not a trace left.
The trick were these rules:
As the son of a biologist, this it was always clear in our family. I found it crazy to shower twice a day, and then apply a lotion, just so your skin does not turn into paper. Even in the winter. Especially as a child, when you don’t smell or sweat much.
Of course the second part of child health is healthy food. Fresh (or frozen) and as un-processed as possible.
Independently from the immune system, using all those “hygiene” products is like taking drugs (be it illegal or pharma ones) or wearing glasses: The more you use them, the more your body will have trouble without them. They advertise with giving you the things, that they took from you in the first place.
It always reminds me of that child in the (mediocre) TV series “Earth 2”, that was so “protected” that it nearly died when it came in contact with the normal germs that everybody has on/in him.
Or “Bubble Boy”. ^^
Also, how are you going to build a normal digestive fauna, without any germs? A lack of it will not only cause bad digestion, but change your mood in negative ways. Especially if a bad germ gets to be the first to settle down there. (There are germs known to have massive changes on a person’s character.) You need to have a dense settlement of good germs, so bad ones can’t settle down anymore.
But learning Haskell is only in a small part about writing Haskell. It’s mainly about getting to the next level in programming skill. And becoming much better in every language.
Besides: Want to earn some big money for doing actual “mission-critical” software, that lives depend on, and that really means something? There’s no way to do serious business like that without Haskell, and not go crazy. ^^
So there you go. If you want to continue doing basically a front-end to a database on color mixing machines, or a sales system, to earn enough to live, then go ahead, continue doing C++/Java/Delphi. :)
Yeah, and you may thank them when attached to a heart-lung machine that was NOT written in C/C++ instead, because B. Curry’s gonna kick yo ass with that attitude! ;P
The idea is that you can split up the program in parallel tasks in a fully automated way. If you as a programmer even have to think about parallelizing, I’m sorry, but then your compiler is “doin’ it wrong” and your languages is from the stone age. ^^
An a bonus, when you can completely rely on a function with the same input producing the same output, you can also throw caching in there algorithmically (where required, on-demand, whatever you wish)
But bla... that is all just the stuff on the surface. Like explaining the pointlessness of “metaprogramming” when there stops being a difference between data and code.
I find the most amazing thing about Haskell as it is today, is that things that need the addition of new constructs to the language and a big change in the compiler, are just your normal library in Haskell. It can look like a whole new language. But it’s just a library. And that is amazing! ...I just have no words for it...
Then, when you get to the GHC extensions, things that are as much on the forefront of Informatics science as the LHC on physics, with everybody else copying it years later... Sorry, but if you like elegance in programming,
The thing is, that it’s crazy hard to learn. Which is not a fault in language design. Because it’s very elegant. It’s simply the fact that it is so far ahead of anything in your everyday language. You won’t expect to sit in a spaceship and drive it like your car too, would you? Or program the LHC like a VCR.
Yes, I am a fan. Even if I sometimes hate it for being so damn smart compared to me the normal programmer. But I became so much a better programmer in all other languages, it’s crazy.
It’s simply a completely different class of skill. And that is why one should learn Haskell. Fuck the “Oh, we’re now only coding in Haskell” attitude. When you really understand the ideas behind it, every language becomes Haskell. And you can write practically bug-free programs of...
Aaah, what am I saying. <John Cleese>Oh it’s driving me mad... MAD!</John Cleese> *slams cleaver into the table*
*head developer comes in*
Head developer: Easy, Mungo, easy... Mungo... *clutches his head in agony* the war wound!... the wound... the wouuund...
Manager: This is the end! The end! Aaargh!! *stabs himself with a steel lambda sculpture*
You mean better fake quality reviews. Everyone knows that there are no real quality reviews on the net. Just as there are no real girls or facts on it. ^^
Yes, it requires I look when I text,
“Getting-the-idea-FAIL”! :D
The idea is to make it possible to *change* the layout! Unless you have single-pixel buttons that are electronically raisable, you can’t do that with buttons.
Imagine a big red button that says *NUKE* and a load of info displays and buttons on a surface that lies in the location of your keyboard, when playing your mech game. (Mechwarrior was famous for needing a mouse, a joystick *and* a keyboard to properly play it. And I *loved* it for the ability to look, move and shoot in 3 different directions! :D)
It always depends on if it’s worth it. I think you can do pneumatics entierly without moving parts. Or if you have to, one single part. (I don't count the moving surface as a part.
On the other hand, the buttons on all old phones and the buttons that you used to type your comment, are moving parts. You don't see them falling apart, do you?
At least not until you replace them by something better anyway.
So all in all, oh yeah, I think it is worth a ton to finally have a real touch-typable keyboard, that you can also make into a dashboard with a big red button that says *nuke* for your next mech game. :D
But it’s great for natural selection! Just stay off the roads for some weeks (don’t forget friends and family), and let nature do its thing. :D
...and discarded it because the screen itself is not flexible enough for serious dynamics (e.g. the form that your keyboard keys have), or if you use a second surface above it that you fill with the air, you get optical distortions.
My current concept is much cooler: Put pins in every spot between 4 pixels (on the corners), and use small magnetic actuators (like speakers) behind the screen, to drive the pins up and down. then attach a flexible foil on the top of the pins. now you can create very nice, fast and detailed tactile surfaces.
If you want to develop this (I haven’t got the time for it, since I'm already trying to make some other inventions reality :), just mention that you got the idea from me and send me a free product with lifetime replacement guarantee, and we’re good. :) I just want to use it, tell everybody how cool it is (advertisement for you), and have made the world a bit better.
Don't worry, I think the Chinese are pretty good at protecting their estates. ^^
That were only true, if that were the only source of science. Which of course is utter bullshit.
It’s: If they are down to simply popularity or majority group-think, then THEY ARE NOT SCIENCE. By definition. :)
Doesn't mean all of science is dead, because they are not all of science.
countries having to "pay" to some "World Fund" for their carbon emissions. The establishment of this fund and the redistribution of wealth from rich countries to poor countries via environmental guilt it the being of the One World Government
Yeah, it it such an evil thing to for once give poor countries something back for raping their country, draining it of resources, and leaving behind a polluted wasteland. Way to go.
Better take more from the poor countries, and give it to the rich ones, right?
Boy does it shine trough that you're in the pockets of big energy!
Oh, and how much is 90 billion in 20 years again, days of average energy or war industry income? A half? Or maybe a whole one?
You make a fool out of yourself.
So you say we all should believe in it, because there is this book with all the truth in it?
Hmm... where have I heard this before? ^^
It's a sad sight when nutjobs defend themselves. Because they are far out from being able to use logic and proper paradigms anymore, and must rely on elaborate chains of circular logic and “everyone knows” appeals...
Most scientists do their work on global warming because that is where the money is.
What a load of bullshit. If they wanted to work where the money is, why would they go into science in the first place? Because it gets you all the girls? Ha ha.