placeholder

I agree that the Palestinians have been treated very unjustlly. It's a disgrace. But what does that have to do with Abbas making antisemitic comments?

Certainly the Palestinians have been badly mistreated and still are. There's no good excuse for the brutal way the Israelis have treated them. That said, such a comment by Abbas was really stupid. I don't see how it does anything but hurt their cause.

Well, I don't think that's exactly the case. Yet. Idaho did pass a low that criminalized aiding a minor to get an abortion out of state. Which probably won't pass a Constitutional challenge. But I don't think it's yet been criminalized for women to travel out of state to get an abortion. Anyway, it's good news for women in Texas who want an abortion, particularly for those living in South Texas. And really bad news for the anti-abortion movement.

A convenient judgement.

By itself, this usage might seem perfectly innocent. But you're not taking into account the virulent Hindu nationalist policies of the current Indian government.

More nonsense from you. No, Biden didn't "wander off". He walked in a straight line to exit the ceremony. Looked purposeful to me. No divagation that I could spot. But even worse is your face reading allegation. Can you please point to what moment in the ceremony this guy looked completely embarrassed? Here's a link to a video so you can point out the moment and share with us how has face changed expression.

Actually, it's you who's doing the cherry picking. You arbitrarily chose a point in time that would create an image of a massive fall. Why not choose a starting point of 5 years ago? Or even 3? Had you chosen a starting point 3 years ago, Tesla stock would show a 100% price increase.

You just don't get it. If, in the past a group has voted at a much lower rate than previously, and now votes at a disproportionately higher rate, that changes the electoral math. It's such a simple idea to grasp, I don't understand why you reject it.

Thanks for the passive-aggressive notification.

The difference between your use of that phrase and mine is that I always give a justification for using it. You just use it as an empty taunt. You have still offered no evidence to back up the validity of comparing gun manufacturers to oil companies. That's because you truly have nothing.

You didn't seem reluctant to engage with a issue just a little ways back.

And what relevance does that have to the claim of hypocrisy?

I frequently back up my claims against your false. And you know what happens every time? You evaporate. You don't even have the courtesy to acknowledge my correctiona.

You're the one who likened gun manufacturers to oil companies. It's up to you to prove that it's valid.

You claimed that there was scientific evidence to support this belief. I never disputed that it was believed.

Please provide a link to a credible source to back up your assertion.

This links to evidence supporting your speculations about pre-history? Can you point out to me what specific reference in the article specifies this?

When you come with a thing called actual evidence, let me know.

Thanks for sharing your view. You got any actual evidence to back up your take on this? Do you even have evidence that ancient people believed that the moon revolved around the earth. To have believed that, they would have had to believe that the earth is spherical. Do you have any evidence to support that?

Not a question of what they think but how their thinking will affect their vote.

Really? The first evidence we have of recognizable science being practiced is from the ancient Greeks. They believed the earth was round. Apparently, they came to this conclusion from observing that during an eclipse the shadow of the earth on the moon was round .

I don't have the patience to keep on addressing your logorrhea. It shows how unbalanced your expectations are that you actually think it's reasonable to expect someone to read a 17 page treatise on problems with machine learning! If you have any specific science-based objections to actual climatology research, as opposed to broad claims about conspiracy, groupthink, and and various malign influences, I will be happy to engage. Otherwise not. I won't be holding my breath.

Scientific evidence?

What can be said to someone who believes either in mass conspiracy or mass hypnosis? The fact is that the climate change model has proven to be wildly successful. And your silly misrepresentation of Thomas Kuhn's work not worth responding to in detail. When Copernicus declard that the earth orbited around the sun, it met with lots of opposition from the old guard. As I pointed out earlier, Louis Agassiz, a justly eminent scientist, rejected the theory of evolution. It's not a matter of groupthink when a new theory enjoys massive confirmatory success and the opposition to it repeatedly comes up empty.

At a certain point in time, when a theory is massively supported by evidence it's time to move on. And when the critics repeatedly get it wrong, they should no longer be taken seriously.