First you pay to skip commercials. Then they add "premium" commercials that still get through. They charge whoever wants to air such commercials extra money, of course. Then they introduce an option to skip these "premium" commercials, again for additional money. Then you pay for that option and the situation repeats...
This happens in other industries, so why not here, right?
Predicting the past is easy. As is evident from the Climategate and other materials, the creators of the models were spending most of their time tuning the models specifically to match past records. Needless to say, such retrofitting does not in any way make these models useful for predicting the future, which is what we actually need.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. Since when do we do determine scientific truths via polls?
As much as I want to free the climate science from biases and dishonesty, this is not the way to do it.
That said, that 10:10 movie aired by the proponents of catastrophic global warming was a thousands times worse than this misguided lawsuit.
First you pay to skip commercials.
Then they add "premium" commercials that still get through. They charge whoever wants to air such commercials extra money, of course.
Then they introduce an option to skip these "premium" commercials, again for additional money.
Then you pay for that option and the situation repeats...
This happens in other industries, so why not here, right?
Predicting the past is easy. As is evident from the Climategate and other materials, the creators of the models were spending most of their time tuning the models specifically to match past records. Needless to say, such retrofitting does not in any way make these models useful for predicting the future, which is what we actually need.