heybruce

Seriously? You open with "Not to victim blame" then you victim blame? Do you think the civil rights movement would have succeeded without confronting people about injustice?

She didn't ram anything down anyone's throat, she publicly displayed her views, much like people wearing MAGA merchandise do. Would you accuse a MAGA republican of ramming his/her views down the throats of others for wearing a MAGA hat in a predominantly Democrat area?

"Trump says he will be arrested on Thursday" Promises, promises... "The bail filing says Mr Trump can remain free pending trial so long as he does not attempt to threaten or intimidate witnesses. ..... "The defendant shall perform no act to intimidate any person known to him or her to be a co-defendant or witness in this case or to otherwise obstruct the administration of justice," says the court filing posted on Monday. "The above shall include, but are not limited to, posts on social media or reposts of posts made by another individual on social media," the order adds." Alright Donnie, you know you will can't abide by those condition. Just let them lock you up.

I don't know about you, but there is a lot about me that my family doesn't know.

Or it could mean he is a space enthusiast and has found a lot of published reading on the subject.

MSM as opposed to what? Fringe media with an obvious agenda?

Possibly true (a source would have been nice) but irrelevant. If the CO2 generated by people is more than the environment can absorb through photosynthesis and other processes, then the CO2 builds up in the atmosphere along with the greenhouse effect. If you increase your body weight by 10% a year it will only be a few years before you have serious health problems.

Can you identify climate change deniers that don't profit from denial? Either directly (paid by fossil fuel industry), indirectly (politicians appealing to their base) or egotistically (semi-celebrities seeking attention)?

Maybe he's not in Russia and therefore is allowed to speak and post freely. BTW: What information in that post do you consider sensitive? I didn't see anything nearly as sensitive as the headline of this topic.

Use this, especially for serious long-haul flights: https://seatguru.com/ Plug in the flight information and see what kind of seat you will get. You don't have to have a reservation to use it, just airline, date and flight number. I use it before making any long-haul flight. Eight seats across in economy on a Boeing 777 is bearable, ten across is not.

Trump in - the United States' remaining reputation as a reliable ally is destroyed overnight!

That is not something to brag about.

Thanks. I believe these safeguards are to restrict bias in the data (there's a lot of racist stuff published on the internet, and AI incorporates everything it is fed). I assume if racist ideas can be blocked, others could as well. Not a problem for me, I have no intention to use AI to answer moral or cultural questions. I think its greatest potential is in speeding up advances in science. It could expedite research in general, but questions should be asked that result in answers that are verifiable; "X was established on Y date" is verifiable, "X is bad" is opinion and therefore not verifiable. AI can be a useful tool, but people should not expect AI to do there thinking for them.

Source? I'm genuinely interested in knowing if a numbers crunching program running through vast quantities of data can be programmed to alter the results without anyone knowing.

I wish I could give your post five stars and a laughing emoji: "The agreement was lowest among scientists who chose Economic Geology as one of their fields of research (84%)." Priceless!

Good luck to him, but I'm not getting my hopes too high. I think any progress in bringing South Korea and Japan closer together will take time. There's a lot of history there. However I would be thrilled to be proven wrong on this. It would be great to have a strong alliance of Japan, South Korea, the US and maybe a few other democracies in the region.

How much do you know about computer programming and AI?

First, I thought the discussion was regarding average temperature ranges, not specific peak temperatures. I don't know if that can be done. There are a number of sources that show that well over 90% of climate scientists agree that man's contribution to global warming is significant. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change

The difference is time frame. Putin's miscalculation on Ukraine forced him and Russia to rely on China for support. That has been a done deal since early in the war and can't be undone. Ramaswamy, by using the present continuous verb tense, suggests that this reliance is an ongoing but reversible process. It isn't. Russia will be dependent on China for decades to come, if not longer. This won't change regardless of what happens in Ukraine. Economically Russia can't be a big player on the world stage by itself; Putin has reduced the country into a corrupt petro-state. Russia won't rise above that low standard without seriously tackling it's economic dependence on energy exports and its corrupt oligarchies. I don't see any progress in that direction, and don't expect to see any while Putin is in charge. To the contrary, letting Putin claim any semblance of victory will further entrench him and the corrupt system he created and leads. This will extend Russia's economic decline. It's actually in the interest of the Russian people for Putin and his corrupt government to be widely recognized as failures. That could lead to a better government that reverses the country's decline. I posted "He's either an idiot or a stooge." If Ramaswamy doesn't understand all, or most, of this yet thinks he's qualified to be President then he's an idiot. If he does understand this but still wants to take action that supports Putin, then it's fair to think of him as a stooge.

Shocking! You'd never catch a far right news source admitting to error.

"Adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will cause surface temperatures to continue to increase. As the atmospheric concentrations of CO2 increase, the addition of extra CO2 becomes progressively less effective at trapping Earth’s energy, but surface temperature will still rise." https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/question-8/ Interesting thing about that part of the report you reference. It states: "CO2 becomes a less effective greenhouse gas at higher concentrations because of what in physics is called “saturation.” Each additional 50 ppm increase of CO2 in the atmosphere causes a smaller and smaller change in “radiative forcing,” or in temperature. The saturation is shown in the chart below." https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Happer-Lindzen-EPA-Power-Plants-2023-07-19.pdf However if you click on the small "64" at the end of this statement, which should lead you to their source for the claim, it returns you to the same report. Talk about circular logic! I did a quick search and could find no credible source that supports the saturation claim. However based on my understanding of how CO2 works as a greenhouse gas I can see how, at a certain level, it can reach a concentration at which the atmosphere becomes opaque to the wavelengths "blocked" by CO2 (it's actually the absorption and re-emision of discrete wavelengths by the electrons of the CO2 molecules). However that does not mean that the full effect of the CO2 warming has been reached--you don't immediately become warm when you put on a coat, it takes a while to get the insulating effect. Plus the additional warming of the climate caused by the CO2 will lead to increasing levels of methane as permafrost melts and vegetation rots. This will increase additional greenhouse gases. I won't speculate further, that is just my skeptical engineering take on the matter. As I posted earlier, I'm not a scientist. However I will point out that all evidence shows that the long term trend is to further warming, CO2 has credibly been identified as a driver, and your single outlier source has its flaws.

Seriously? That's it? No degrees, no publications? I'm USAF, retired. BA Mathematics, BS Aeronautical Engineering, MS Astronautical Engineering. Most of my work was in aerospace system test, plus five years at a lab doing stuff (not climate related) I won't discuss here. Co-author on a few publication, nothing recent and nothing science related. I don't consider myself a scientist or present myself as one. However I do have a reasonable grasp of numbers, graphs, statistics (including the concept of outliers) and I respect the opinions of those who get their work published in respected peer-reviewed journals. That's what the climate scientists who maintain global warming is real and being driven in part by greenhouse gases generated by modern society have been doing.

Yes, CO2 fluctuates year to year. That's why long-term trends are important. CO2 levels have increased 50% since the start of the industrial revolution? https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide

Right, it's like hysteria about nuclear war. Scientist say it would be bad, but they can't prove it.

In other words, because you don't know how temperatures in the past were determined and you haven't bothered to check, that means they can't be trusted. Is that your point?