Hell, over half the coding community doesn't code all that great but I don't think it's because of what they were taught in high school. A lot of times an artistic people can write cleaner, better functioning code than a person that has just done code all their lives.
I like a lot of what you said, but sugar isn't something that this grown. You are confusing sugar cane with sugar. Sugar beets can also produce sugar and grow in a lot more places than cane does. Supposedly beets produced sugar is less sweet, but I have had them next to each other and it was hard for me to tell the difference.
There are a lot of uneducated opinions out there that should be called out for how utterly stupid they are. The people shouting them seem to have a recall of history of about 2 years. Beyond that, the failing in the past or warnings against their stupid ideas are just noise to them. It's like when users on the network I run try to tell me what I should do with the network based on what someone told them to do with their home PC and think they actually know what they are talking about.
I remember that story on all the major media outlets, but remember few that actually covered the follow up where the NHTSA said Tesla made up the numbers and that it never broke any machines.
Here & here covered it. Was a PR stunt probably concocted by Musk.
That is kind of the insanely stupid norm we have these days. Discussions and arguments that where one party seems to think history doesn't go beyond 2 years and yet they think they have valid points, if for nothing else than not wanting to admit they are clueless on a subject. Participation awards and the whole "everyone is equal" mentality has boiled over to people opening their mouth when they shouldn't based on how they "feel" and not on knowledge. It like the Chris Rock skit about going to school in the hood and kids making fun of him for carrying books and the whole situation boiling down to the guy asking him to answer a question, if he is so smart, "Can you kick my ass?"
I am guessing you are not in the US? In the US liability still is on the bank. I am sure the banks would love to have it on the consumer and will probably try to push for that sometime down the road, but as of now it's on the bank. Stories like this will probably be used by the bank to have it the other way around.
Bigger question is with all the money that has been poured in to combating climate change and we still get the running reports and claims of "warmest year ever" which has been ramped up to monthly proclamations now? If the amount that we have spent and cut back on pollution has done nothing to quell it, I think there needs to be rethinking on the amount being given.
All that is nice but still doesn't explain WHY FUCKING SATELLITE TEMPS ARE NOT USED??? Somehow we are supposed to believe that old sensors just need to be "read" right and the previous manipulation of temps that was proven to have occurred in the past isn't happening now? I have a feeling that you didn't RTFA all the way through. It blames severe weather on climate change and it blames no weather (drought) on climate change. I thought the mantra was "weather is not the climate" when we had record colds in most areas of the globe the 2 prior years? But yes, tell us how questioning the glaring holes in the reports are us not "reading" the data right or that rationale thinking is no match for a climate scientists opinion.
When you take the infotainment system out of the mix, one that Ford was cutting edge on, They are up on the above average side. I seriously think there are a lot of people not honest about how (until recently) all infotainment systems are glitchy. Toyota's you can't even use steering wheel buttons to answer the phone.
I am thinking you missed the ST and RS versions? They have a hard time keeping them in stock. RS are impossible to find and dealers are selling at $5000 to $10000 over MSRP. At 350 hp, All wheel drive and a drift mode it's a tad popular. But hey, 1999 is a good year to be struck in there Marty McFly.
From the get go, how that "over 90%" figure is obtain is manipulated MASSIVELY. If it was done straight up with no manipulation, it would have a hard time cracking 50%. Look it up. When it was discovered how the "95%" was obtained, no one has ever refuted that what was discovered was false.
It's the cavalcade of meme's there! "such as pregnant women, children, the poor, the elderly, minorities, immigrants and people with disabilities". What about LBGTQ populations? Might as well throw them in to. Let me guess, the solution is to just send more cash to Washington? That's worked "so well".
Actually it is in this context because it's used to deny or disavow a person's beliefs without it's surely not a term of science. Speaking in generals and painting all with a broad brush (i.e. "99.9%) isn't scientific either. That's like last years claims of "the warmest year EVER!". Nasa release after the fact that the number had a 38% chance of being right and a tolerance of ±.1 c for a claim of.02 c warmer. Math is math and when you have a tolerance bigger than the claimed number it means there is no accuracy in the number what so ever. So do you want to argue math is sheer ignorance too??
The funny thing is if you look at the amount of money put in to climate change it is A LOT more than the those looking to ignore it could ever put forth, yet we are supposed to believe that small, in comparison, amounts are enough to throw the cloud of doubt on the science? I think for sure this guy has a bias and an agenda. He has multiple books on how bad tobacco is and some on Nazi Germany's science being "misunderstood". That right there should be an alarm.
So If he is really investigating the spread of ignorance, why did he use a religious term of "denier" to explain people that doubt climate change is as dire as some report? This is a guy that has wrote books about how forward thinking the Nazi's were about science. He has multiple books about tobacco, and testified against the tobacco industry. Does that discount it all? No, but full disclosure wasn't done and it defiantly shows a bit of an agenda on Proctor's part.
Feel free to find half of the companies on the list. Also when a company takes money from the feds under the "renewable energy act" does your perception of them mean jack shit??? Hey, but lets just keep giving them money because it makes you feel good.
Slashdot Mirror
Hell, over half the coding community doesn't code all that great but I don't think it's because of what they were taught in high school. A lot of times an artistic people can write cleaner, better functioning code than a person that has just done code all their lives.
If you want your caps you can keep your caps.
I like a lot of what you said, but sugar isn't something that this grown. You are confusing sugar cane with sugar. Sugar beets can also produce sugar and grow in a lot more places than cane does. Supposedly beets produced sugar is less sweet, but I have had them next to each other and it was hard for me to tell the difference.
SPF 200 recommended if they have stayed inside that long. Bad to be sunburned AND suicidal.
There are a lot of uneducated opinions out there that should be called out for how utterly stupid they are. The people shouting them seem to have a recall of history of about 2 years. Beyond that, the failing in the past or warnings against their stupid ideas are just noise to them. It's like when users on the network I run try to tell me what I should do with the network based on what someone told them to do with their home PC and think they actually know what they are talking about.
I remember that story on all the major media outlets, but remember few that actually covered the follow up where the NHTSA said Tesla made up the numbers and that it never broke any machines.
Here & here covered it. Was a PR stunt probably concocted by Musk.
WHAT???????? SPEAK UP SON!!!
That is kind of the insanely stupid norm we have these days. Discussions and arguments that where one party seems to think history doesn't go beyond 2 years and yet they think they have valid points, if for nothing else than not wanting to admit they are clueless on a subject. Participation awards and the whole "everyone is equal" mentality has boiled over to people opening their mouth when they shouldn't based on how they "feel" and not on knowledge. It like the Chris Rock skit about going to school in the hood and kids making fun of him for carrying books and the whole situation boiling down to the guy asking him to answer a question, if he is so smart, "Can you kick my ass?"
I am guessing you are not in the US? In the US liability still is on the bank. I am sure the banks would love to have it on the consumer and will probably try to push for that sometime down the road, but as of now it's on the bank. Stories like this will probably be used by the bank to have it the other way around.
Bigger question is with all the money that has been poured in to combating climate change and we still get the running reports and claims of "warmest year ever" which has been ramped up to monthly proclamations now? If the amount that we have spent and cut back on pollution has done nothing to quell it, I think there needs to be rethinking on the amount being given.
All that is nice but still doesn't explain WHY FUCKING SATELLITE TEMPS ARE NOT USED??? Somehow we are supposed to believe that old sensors just need to be "read" right and the previous manipulation of temps that was proven to have occurred in the past isn't happening now? I have a feeling that you didn't RTFA all the way through. It blames severe weather on climate change and it blames no weather (drought) on climate change. I thought the mantra was "weather is not the climate" when we had record colds in most areas of the globe the 2 prior years? But yes, tell us how questioning the glaring holes in the reports are us not "reading" the data right or that rationale thinking is no match for a climate scientists opinion.
When you take the infotainment system out of the mix, one that Ford was cutting edge on, They are up on the above average side. I seriously think there are a lot of people not honest about how (until recently) all infotainment systems are glitchy. Toyota's you can't even use steering wheel buttons to answer the phone.
I am thinking you missed the ST and RS versions? They have a hard time keeping them in stock. RS are impossible to find and dealers are selling at $5000 to $10000 over MSRP. At 350 hp, All wheel drive and a drift mode it's a tad popular. But hey, 1999 is a good year to be struck in there Marty McFly.
Because they can
From the get go, how that "over 90%" figure is obtain is manipulated MASSIVELY. If it was done straight up with no manipulation, it would have a hard time cracking 50%. Look it up. When it was discovered how the "95%" was obtained, no one has ever refuted that what was discovered was false.
Mod up parent. Telegram has been proven to be junk. It's funny how often it is mentioned in news articles like it's somehow "rock solid"
Today will be partly sunny or partly cloudy. That's been Perspective Weather with Captain Obvious. Have as good a day as you feel like having!
It's the cavalcade of meme's there! "such as pregnant women, children, the poor, the elderly, minorities, immigrants and people with disabilities". What about LBGTQ populations? Might as well throw them in to. Let me guess, the solution is to just send more cash to Washington? That's worked "so well".
Also the program doesn't work because it's the factories of Mexico City that create all the pollution. PR stunt is all it is.
without explaining the reasoning, who is spreading mis-information, or why their stance is so much more factual and it's surely
Had to edit.
Actually it is in this context because it's used to deny or disavow a person's beliefs without it's surely not a term of science. Speaking in generals and painting all with a broad brush (i.e. "99.9%) isn't scientific either. That's like last years claims of "the warmest year EVER!". Nasa release after the fact that the number had a 38% chance of being right and a tolerance of ±.1 c for a claim of .02 c warmer. Math is math and when you have a tolerance bigger than the claimed number it means there is no accuracy in the number what so ever. So do you want to argue math is sheer ignorance too??
The funny thing is if you look at the amount of money put in to climate change it is A LOT more than the those looking to ignore it could ever put forth, yet we are supposed to believe that small, in comparison, amounts are enough to throw the cloud of doubt on the science? I think for sure this guy has a bias and an agenda. He has multiple books on how bad tobacco is and some on Nazi Germany's science being "misunderstood". That right there should be an alarm.
So If he is really investigating the spread of ignorance, why did he use a religious term of "denier" to explain people that doubt climate change is as dire as some report? This is a guy that has wrote books about how forward thinking the Nazi's were about science. He has multiple books about tobacco, and testified against the tobacco industry. Does that discount it all? No, but full disclosure wasn't done and it defiantly shows a bit of an agenda on Proctor's part.
Well hookers and blow FTW then!!
Feel free to find half of the companies on the list. Also when a company takes money from the feds under the "renewable energy act" does your perception of them mean jack shit??? Hey, but lets just keep giving them money because it makes you feel good.