The main thing Shkreli did was point out exactly how broken government regulations around pharmaceuticals are. The patent on the drug in question expired several decades ago, yet he was still able to lock down the market and keep free-market competitors at bay because of government idiocy.
Moreover, there have been some anecdotes from people who have witnessed some animals eat other animals. While sifting through the scant evidence, should we really rule out the possibility of the human animal doing what some other animals -- in the bosom of Mother Gaia -- might actually do?
Yes, with geo-engineering. We can alter the temperature within two years for about 1/1000th the cost of CO2 reduction. But, the religious folks don't consider that to be proper repentance for their notional sins committed against Mother Gaia for enjoying a high standard of living. So, we're scheduled to squander tens of trillions of dollars of borrowed money on a plan that not only won't work, but that we won't actually go through with it in any serious way.
It's always been clear why women aren't competitive with men at the 100-meter dash, but it's not clear why women aren't competitive with men at professional poker.
The risk of millions dying because of temperature increase* is so great that you are willing to kill tens of millions through energy poverty in pursuit of a goal that is politically and economically unachievable (global CO2 reduction) and that even if it were achievable, would take 70 years to have any effect on the climate. It can't be achieved in a democracy since when people have suffered enough loss of standard of living, they'll just throw the bums out (Australia) and it can't be achieved in a dictatorship because when the cost of food exceeds the fear of the government, revolution happens (Arab Spring). And this all assuming that the CO2 hypothesis hasn't already been refuted by the two-decade "hiatus", meaning that the developed countries will take on tens of trillions of dollars of debt for nothing and will have even fewer means to address the real causes and real effects. *OTOH, geo-engineering could adjust the global temperature within two years and would cost only 1/1000th as much as CO2 reduction. I think your assessment of relative risks and costs is a little lop-sided.
If you look back, you'll find that all the temperature increases over the pas 100 years have come from El Nino bumps. I wonder what's actually happening. It's certainly not the slow, even heat of CO2.
Yes, we should kill tens of millions of poor people and donate tens of trillions of dollars to genocidal dictators in order to "play it safe", y'know, just in case. Good thing that CO2 hypothesis has already been refuted by the two-decade "hiatus". Just as soon as the layperson realizes this is all a giant scam, we can be done with this.
You also rack up many more $trillions in needless debt building these impractical technologies. Hint: if they were actually practical, then free enterprise would be all over them without any subsidies at all. Also, you kill tens of millions of people in the third world through needless energy poverty.
The anti-vaccination craze? Fad ketosis dieting? Near-worship of media figures like the Kardashians? Climate change skepticism? I'd go on but that's already more than enough to refute your statement.
"Less" means "not as many as before"; it doesn't mean "none". Also, as long as reality continues to defy the Warmist Cult doomerism, skepticism is the most rational choice. There are three factors lining up right now that could make the climate cool down markedly in the next 5-10 years. If that happens, it will be very entertaining to watch the Warmists explain how the $trillions they bilked from the not-skeptical-enough public was well spent.
tumbled down the mountain, careened into the chasm and plunged into the magma.
And the later Special Edition featured a CGI shot of the magma belching after swallowing Lucas, with eight new weird-looking creature in the background and Jar Jar stepping in some poop...
You'd think that now that Lucas's "artistic vision" is out of the picture that Disney would be okay with going back to the Money Well and releasing the original versions of the films on Blu-Ray just like dedicated fans have always wanted.
Not to worry. It seems that all press is good press for Trump. It would be surprising if he didn't emerge from this debacle without even higher polling numbers.
The US attacks happen in gun-free zones like movie theatres and shopping malls and... ironically... military bases. (You'd think the soldiers would be trusted to carry weapons, considering it's their *job*.)
Fortunately, though, it is precisely the religious zealotry of the Islamic radicals that keeps them poor and weak. First-world democracy and freedom will always dramatically outperform The Caliphate both economically and militarily. And, after enough of these terrorist attacks, the SJW Fifth Column in the west will be discredited and we'll actually get serious about screening immigrants and eliminating The Caliphate.
Slashdot Mirror
...Or any actor retroactively decides they want more money.
The main thing Shkreli did was point out exactly how broken government regulations around pharmaceuticals are. The patent on the drug in question expired several decades ago, yet he was still able to lock down the market and keep free-market competitors at bay because of government idiocy.
Moreover, there have been some anecdotes from people who have witnessed some animals eat other animals. While sifting through the scant evidence, should we really rule out the possibility of the human animal doing what some other animals -- in the bosom of Mother Gaia -- might actually do?
Yes, with geo-engineering. We can alter the temperature within two years for about 1/1000th the cost of CO2 reduction. But, the religious folks don't consider that to be proper repentance for their notional sins committed against Mother Gaia for enjoying a high standard of living. So, we're scheduled to squander tens of trillions of dollars of borrowed money on a plan that not only won't work, but that we won't actually go through with it in any serious way.
It's always been clear why women aren't competitive with men at the 100-meter dash, but it's not clear why women aren't competitive with men at professional poker.
The risk of millions dying because of temperature increase* is so great that you are willing to kill tens of millions through energy poverty in pursuit of a goal that is politically and economically unachievable (global CO2 reduction) and that even if it were achievable, would take 70 years to have any effect on the climate. It can't be achieved in a democracy since when people have suffered enough loss of standard of living, they'll just throw the bums out (Australia) and it can't be achieved in a dictatorship because when the cost of food exceeds the fear of the government, revolution happens (Arab Spring). And this all assuming that the CO2 hypothesis hasn't already been refuted by the two-decade "hiatus", meaning that the developed countries will take on tens of trillions of dollars of debt for nothing and will have even fewer means to address the real causes and real effects. *OTOH, geo-engineering could adjust the global temperature within two years and would cost only 1/1000th as much as CO2 reduction. I think your assessment of relative risks and costs is a little lop-sided.
If you look back, you'll find that all the temperature increases over the pas 100 years have come from El Nino bumps. I wonder what's actually happening. It's certainly not the slow, even heat of CO2.
It started testing poorly in focus groups when the globe stopped warming 18.8 years ago.
What if you don't live at a gun club?
Yes, we should kill tens of millions of poor people and donate tens of trillions of dollars to genocidal dictators in order to "play it safe", y'know, just in case. Good thing that CO2 hypothesis has already been refuted by the two-decade "hiatus". Just as soon as the layperson realizes this is all a giant scam, we can be done with this.
It's at least plausible that such a concentrated consumer of electrical power could get some genuine utility out of some low-cost solar panels.
I have a huge amount of cash savings but only a couple grand in a deposit account. Really, only a business or a dummy would have a large deposit.
You also rack up many more $trillions in needless debt building these impractical technologies. Hint: if they were actually practical, then free enterprise would be all over them without any subsidies at all. Also, you kill tens of millions of people in the third world through needless energy poverty.
The figures in the report after 2009 are projected. How about a more recent report?
"Less" means "not as many as before"; it doesn't mean "none". Also, as long as reality continues to defy the Warmist Cult doomerism, skepticism is the most rational choice. There are three factors lining up right now that could make the climate cool down markedly in the next 5-10 years. If that happens, it will be very entertaining to watch the Warmists explain how the $trillions they bilked from the not-skeptical-enough public was well spent.
If they're pulling a new connector out of their asses, they could make it any shape, not one compromised by 70 years of backward compatibility.
So, just have a kid every year and live on the dole.
And the later Special Edition featured a CGI shot of the magma belching after swallowing Lucas, with eight new weird-looking creature in the background and Jar Jar stepping in some poop...
You'd think that now that Lucas's "artistic vision" is out of the picture that Disney would be okay with going back to the Money Well and releasing the original versions of the films on Blu-Ray just like dedicated fans have always wanted.
Can't say I've ever met a young person who was actually "free-thinking". They are very conformist, just to different things from older people.
Not to worry. It seems that all press is good press for Trump. It would be surprising if he didn't emerge from this debacle without even higher polling numbers.
Moreover, how many times a day is an American abortion clinic blown up?
The US attacks happen in gun-free zones like movie theatres and shopping malls and... ironically... military bases. (You'd think the soldiers would be trusted to carry weapons, considering it's their *job*.)
Fortunately, though, it is precisely the religious zealotry of the Islamic radicals that keeps them poor and weak. First-world democracy and freedom will always dramatically outperform The Caliphate both economically and militarily. And, after enough of these terrorist attacks, the SJW Fifth Column in the west will be discredited and we'll actually get serious about screening immigrants and eliminating The Caliphate.
In the Middle Ages... er, I mean the Middle East, mass murder is common and expected. In the first world, it isn't.