I'm still trying to come to grips with my little experiment of a few days back, where I grabbed the data that was archived from 3 years ago and comparing it to the data today. Never mind the fact that we know for a fact that the warming we saw in the data 3 years ago had been adjusted to increase the warming trend. The fact that sometime in the last 3 years, it got adjusted again, but the amount is pretty incredible. They actually added about 25% to the warming trend in those 3 years. How much had already been built in prior to that.
What gets me about this, is that global temperature is the measure to test our theories. The temperature is clearly being falsified, but we have little choice but to accept what is being given to us due to the amount of effort it takes to compile this sort of data daily. Nobody is going to do it for free. Nobody is going to give government funding to duplicate these efforts to verify what we are being told. Those who are compiling the data are not being transparent in their methods, and they are proven liars.
So if you are trying to model the climate, you need an accurate measuring stick. The only measuring sticks we have are obviously falsified. They have made the field of climate science virtually impossible to study with any good deal of accuracy. This would be tragic if this were as far as it went. The problem is that, literally, trillions of dollars are at stake. It's a huge thumb on the scale of many countries economies. It's the sort of thing that easily leads to military conflicts. We just saw France on fire over a carbon tax on fuel.
Imagine trying to manufacture motorcycles, or anything when someone keeps sneaking into your factories and swapping out your measuring instruments for ones with a "new calibration". You would never get anything to work right. That appears to be where we are on climate science.
Despite the mockery of ms. Hyphen Cortez saying establishing social ecological justice will end racism, she does indeed have a valid point.
Once freedoms are extinguished and total control over your lives nailed down, there will no longer be a need to preach racism to the subjects. I predict that racial hatred has been such an effective tool by Evil leftists that they won't give it up, after it goes effectively obsolete, but theoretically it could be dispensed with.
It’s almost as if they’re more interested in submission to a transnational bureaucracy than in results. And note that the U.S. reduction comes from the switch to cleaner fuels made possible by fracking, which environmentalists opposed.
So, I'm relaxing. Spiced rum in hot apple cider (HIGHLY recommended for cold weather!). Flipping around during commercials while watching Bull. Clicked to the science channel, talking about, basically, "Mars, the new frontier", and some knucklehead "scientist" is crowing about how Mars is our salvation, and all we need to do is warm it up - and since we have climate change / global warming here on earth, we obviously "know how to do it" and can "easily raise Martian temps 10C in 100 years and start greening the planet as the frozen water liquifies".
Riiiiiiigggghhhhhtttttt......you go, bro. Launch yourself up there, warm shit up, and keep in touch to let us know how it's going.
Problem with that is Mars has no magnetic field, hence no "Van Allen Belt" and no more atmosphere. We don't know how to "terra-form" Mars yet.
We are lucky to have a large moon that keeps our core liquid and generating a magneto-electric field. That and being a little farther from the sun lets us live.
The planet closer to the sun, Venus, is hot enough on the surface to melt lead and tin. Mars, our outer neighbor, is cold enough for liquid CO2 to lie in pools on the surface.
Too much coincidence to belie our world's significance.
The atmosphere on Mars is mostly CO2. Does he think we can carbon emission our way to a hospitable climate by adding a bit more? We’d need to find a way to release thousands of trillions of tons of nitrogen and oxygen in order to do that. We do not have the technology to terraform Mars. Let alone the will.
1. Men should drink their coffee black. 2. Lattes are girly drinks. 3. Women should not be allowed to vote unless they're married (to a man). 4. Black coffee is a foreign drink so this conversation is irrelevant.
1. Authoritarian! 2. Never had a latte, not really sure what it is. Don't care. 3. I cisagree, but the notion has merit. Only married, responsible adults should vote. Sex is irrelephant. 4. Coffee is an improbable beverage in the first place. Consider the steps required. Seems to have origins of biblical area. By your rationalization, Christianity is foreign etc. Etc. Irrelephant? Quit trying to capitalize on the upcoming Dumbo movie!
Dang Patrick, I really expected to get more of a rise out of you over not letting women vote. I guess even feminists occasionally second guess the 19th amendment?
Oh, I cisagreed. I'm not going to say women only should vote, self enlightened etc. But married couples , sex don't matter,is fine. Gay & Lez couples same rights.
Or since a poll tax is unconstitutional, an IQ & fact test.
Which ten questions?
Nazis are Socialist, T/F?
How many millions have Marxist religions killed? 7? 33? 150? 398+?
How many branches of Government? 2? 3? 4? No limits?
A group of professors of medicine conducted a satirical “PARACHUTE trial”(PArticipation in RAndomized trials Compromised by widely Held beliefs aboUt lack of Treatment Equipoise) to illustrate the dangers of interpreting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) out of context. Topline results, after all, are just that—topline, and devoid of the numerous conditions that create a sound basis for analysis, and ultimately good medical practice.