You must be like the guy telling the Jews in the mid-1930s "Don't worry, they just want to register you. It'll be just fine..."
Trump has made it clear he doesn't accept the science. He's surrounded himself by people who either don't accept the science, or have strong commercial reasons to try to suppress it. He has a Congress stacked with people who either think God wants coal to be burned or who take their orders from fossil fuel companies.
But you know what, it doesn't fucking matter, because the laws of nature don't give a fuck about Donald Trump, and CO2 has the properties it has, and all the delicate little Republican snowflakes in the world won't make a bit of difference. You cannot stop the laws of physics with a fucking vote.
The "publishing skeptics" you refer don't publish AGW-skeptical papers. This is something you should note very carefully. The actual small number of out and out skeptical researchers in climatology don't write their vast AGW-debunking critiques in journals, they write them in places like the Wall Street Journal. Their published works tends to be pretty mundane stuff.
This reminds me so much of how people would trumpet Michael Behe as the great destroyer of evolutionary theory, because he is a Intelligent Design-trumpeting biochemist... except he doesn't actually publish anything that debunks evolutionary biology at all, but rather uses his reputation as a IDer/Creationist to bilk morons in church basements out of speaking fees, much as Spencer and Curry use their reputation as AGW-debunkers to earn speaking fees and get anti-AGW screeds published in the WSJ, while they collect nice little paychecks from the Koch Brothers.
Sorry mate, if you're going to the literature to look for you big debunking anthropogenic climate change, you're pretty much fucked. There's about as many published works debunking AGW as there are works debunking Common Descent and General Relativity. You've been sucked in by a scam every bit as made up as a perpetual energy scam, but with some very rich people who have a lot to lose if CO2 is priced for the damage its doing. You're a sucker.
Provide the list of works that falsify AGW. And no, tweets, blog posts and WSJ editorials are not falsifications. Since you seem to believe AGW has been demolished, it should be trivial to find a dozen published articles falsifying the link between CO2 emissions and warming, or falsifying the data that demonstrates the warming.
Can you define "barely predictive"? They all point to warming, which confirmed by the data. This appears to be one of those goal post moving arguments.
That's just an absurd claim made by morons who have no idea what they're talking about. While that does demonstrate your stupidity, it doesn't provide the information I requested.
And this the US, by continuing to do flyovers and sailbys, demonstrates that the preeminent naval power has no intention of surrendering the South China Sea to China.
There's no alternative interpretation of this bit of maritime.lae. if the original sea mount isn't above water at high tide then it isn't an island and pouring gravel and concrete on it does not make it an island, at least not for the purposes of extending maritime economic zones.
oh fuck off. We all know what the poster was referring to, the conspiracy theory that Clinton had Rich assassinated in some sort of gangland-style take down. For fuck's sake, this is exactly what fake news is, where the diseased minds that invent these conspiracy theories suddenly become accepted as being holders of the "real story".
There's no evidence that Rich leaked anything, and there's no evidence that the Clinton's had him killed. These are pure fabrications that have been repeated by the Sanders and Alt-right lunatics so much that they just assume the truth of this particular fantasy.
Well, I'm not bloody confused, and I think it's a reasonable assumption that Russia wanted to do what it could to prevent Clinton from winning the election, and at least initially has got what it wants; a president who is Russia-friendly and a Secretary of State with pretty deep ties to Russia. We can debate how much influence the Russians really did have, but I'd say the Wikileaks emails did Clinton tangible harm.
No, you don't know that, and once again we see the Clinton Crime Family conspiracy theory put forward. Seth Rich was killed in a robbery, and it took him an hour to die. It wasn't a hit, it was just bad luck.
I do see what fake news really is. It's every fucked up maniac's conspiracy theory somehow rendered legitimate.
And how would that have been done, seeing as the presidential election is effectively 50 separate elections, with different voting technologies? As to Democrat email leaks, it is unclear to me that the Executive branch has ever had an overt role in securing political parties' data.
What upheaval of my premise. That there are pedophiles in the political classes, as there are in every other single walk of life is hardly surprising. The fact remains the pizzeria story was completely false, a made up story designed to do specific political damage. That there are actual pedophiles in Washington is utterly and completely irrelevant.
Not to mention that the Russian government also hacked the RNC's servers, and yet oddly enough none of that has ended up being released.
Russia manipulated the US presidential election. Now how much of an influence that had will likely be debated for years to come. I think Comey's interventions likely did more damage, and certainly Clinton has to take some responsibility for how she ran the campaign (by all accounts both her husband and President Obama have been pretty damned critical of her campaign), but in a race where she polled so far ahead of the actual Electoral College winner, to the point that it is the biggest spread between popular vote and EC votes in US history, it's hard to argue that the Wikileaks intervention didn't play some significant role in her loss.
First of all, there's little enough to demonstrate any corruption. Second of all, the RNC was also hacked, and yet not a whiff of those emails has ever made it into the public view. Other than some old Trump tax returns, the RNC's leak has produced nothing. So while you're declaring Russia hacking the DNC is the bestest thing ever, haven't you thought about this long to ask "Why can't I go look up any RNC emails?"
Slashdot Mirror
You must be like the guy telling the Jews in the mid-1930s "Don't worry, they just want to register you. It'll be just fine..."
Trump has made it clear he doesn't accept the science. He's surrounded himself by people who either don't accept the science, or have strong commercial reasons to try to suppress it. He has a Congress stacked with people who either think God wants coal to be burned or who take their orders from fossil fuel companies.
But you know what, it doesn't fucking matter, because the laws of nature don't give a fuck about Donald Trump, and CO2 has the properties it has, and all the delicate little Republican snowflakes in the world won't make a bit of difference. You cannot stop the laws of physics with a fucking vote.
Some day they'll sort out that Canute was trying to demonstrate he *couldn't* stop the tide. Too late for everyone of course.
The "publishing skeptics" you refer don't publish AGW-skeptical papers. This is something you should note very carefully. The actual small number of out and out skeptical researchers in climatology don't write their vast AGW-debunking critiques in journals, they write them in places like the Wall Street Journal. Their published works tends to be pretty mundane stuff.
This reminds me so much of how people would trumpet Michael Behe as the great destroyer of evolutionary theory, because he is a Intelligent Design-trumpeting biochemist... except he doesn't actually publish anything that debunks evolutionary biology at all, but rather uses his reputation as a IDer/Creationist to bilk morons in church basements out of speaking fees, much as Spencer and Curry use their reputation as AGW-debunkers to earn speaking fees and get anti-AGW screeds published in the WSJ, while they collect nice little paychecks from the Koch Brothers.
Sorry mate, if you're going to the literature to look for you big debunking anthropogenic climate change, you're pretty much fucked. There's about as many published works debunking AGW as there are works debunking Common Descent and General Relativity. You've been sucked in by a scam every bit as made up as a perpetual energy scam, but with some very rich people who have a lot to lose if CO2 is priced for the damage its doing. You're a sucker.
Provide the list of works that falsify AGW. And no, tweets, blog posts and WSJ editorials are not falsifications. Since you seem to believe AGW has been demolished, it should be trivial to find a dozen published articles falsifying the link between CO2 emissions and warming, or falsifying the data that demonstrates the warming.
Can you define "barely predictive"? They all point to warming, which confirmed by the data. This appears to be one of those goal post moving arguments.
The scientific consensus IS that humans are causing it. What politicians, ACs on /. and bloggers think is utter irrelevant.
And you have citations to show this fraud? And no, blog posts and WSJ articles are not citations.
Water vapor amplifies warming
https://www.google.ca/amp/phys...
Are those scientific sources? Why would you even mention them? Are you a fucking idiot?
That's just an absurd claim made by morons who have no idea what they're talking about. While that does demonstrate your stupidity, it doesn't provide the information I requested.
Then list these legitimate criticisms. And no, someone's blog or a WSJ article is not legitimate criticism.
in other words it was not a direlect and was under control and/or supervision at the time it was seized by China.
There is a word for that; piracy.
And this the US, by continuing to do flyovers and sailbys, demonstrates that the preeminent naval power has no intention of surrendering the South China Sea to China.
There's no alternative interpretation of this bit of maritime.lae. if the original sea mount isn't above water at high tide then it isn't an island and pouring gravel and concrete on it does not make it an island, at least not for the purposes of extending maritime economic zones.
Because the thief got spooked, and Wikileaks is full of shit.
oh fuck off. We all know what the poster was referring to, the conspiracy theory that Clinton had Rich assassinated in some sort of gangland-style take down. For fuck's sake, this is exactly what fake news is, where the diseased minds that invent these conspiracy theories suddenly become accepted as being holders of the "real story".
There's no evidence that Rich leaked anything, and there's no evidence that the Clinton's had him killed. These are pure fabrications that have been repeated by the Sanders and Alt-right lunatics so much that they just assume the truth of this particular fantasy.
Well, I'm not bloody confused, and I think it's a reasonable assumption that Russia wanted to do what it could to prevent Clinton from winning the election, and at least initially has got what it wants; a president who is Russia-friendly and a Secretary of State with pretty deep ties to Russia. We can debate how much influence the Russians really did have, but I'd say the Wikileaks emails did Clinton tangible harm.
No, you don't know that, and once again we see the Clinton Crime Family conspiracy theory put forward. Seth Rich was killed in a robbery, and it took him an hour to die. It wasn't a hit, it was just bad luck.
I do see what fake news really is. It's every fucked up maniac's conspiracy theory somehow rendered legitimate.
And how would that have been done, seeing as the presidential election is effectively 50 separate elections, with different voting technologies? As to Democrat email leaks, it is unclear to me that the Executive branch has ever had an overt role in securing political parties' data.
You seem to be confusing two completely different email sets here. Are you confused, or are you just trying to be confusing?
It's strange how many ACs there are out there telling us how Russia is our friend.
Until you morons finally figure out there's no hoax.
What upheaval of my premise. That there are pedophiles in the political classes, as there are in every other single walk of life is hardly surprising. The fact remains the pizzeria story was completely false, a made up story designed to do specific political damage. That there are actual pedophiles in Washington is utterly and completely irrelevant.
Not to mention that the Russian government also hacked the RNC's servers, and yet oddly enough none of that has ended up being released.
Russia manipulated the US presidential election. Now how much of an influence that had will likely be debated for years to come. I think Comey's interventions likely did more damage, and certainly Clinton has to take some responsibility for how she ran the campaign (by all accounts both her husband and President Obama have been pretty damned critical of her campaign), but in a race where she polled so far ahead of the actual Electoral College winner, to the point that it is the biggest spread between popular vote and EC votes in US history, it's hard to argue that the Wikileaks intervention didn't play some significant role in her loss.
First of all, there's little enough to demonstrate any corruption. Second of all, the RNC was also hacked, and yet not a whiff of those emails has ever made it into the public view. Other than some old Trump tax returns, the RNC's leak has produced nothing. So while you're declaring Russia hacking the DNC is the bestest thing ever, haven't you thought about this long to ask "Why can't I go look up any RNC emails?"