You better get out your aluminum foil hats because many conspiracy theorists have been warning about the militarization of local police for years. Were the "nuts" actually right?

It sure is, and it's not just the republicans.

I'd like to see him go into a laboratory with a bunch of "bags" and molecules and come out with self replicating life.

It can't be turned back. That is how big government bureaucracies work, always. They are put forth with perceived good intentions and then they grow out of control like a cancer.

Just look to China for advice on how to hide your nukes. Create a 3000 mile long underground facility, build and hide your nukes there, and leave the rest of the world guessing. My guess it is much larger than the 300 estimate we have now.

I grew up in southern VA and we always used the phrase "three sheets in the wind". I don't think I have ever heard anyone say "three sheets to the wind".

Isn't the shape of the shadow information? You can see a shadow of a finger and deduce it is made by a hand without actually seeing the hand. Isn't this information?

My mind is totally blown. How the hell have I never heard of Chex Quest? I was a total fps freak in the 90's. I thought I played them all, but somehow Chex Quest eluded me, and it was free! WTF???

The .22 is the total century trend. This is nowhere close to mainstream models.

Please take a look at the updated link

Where do you get the ~0.22 year increase? The bright blue line in the graph? Here is an updated version of the article...

These are just articles that are discussing a fact – rss satellite data shows no global warming in over 17 years. These are not studies – just commentary of a new fact. Do you deny the rss data does not show this? Are you being completely dismissive on a data point, rss data, that all climate scientists use? If so,…

Do you realize that almost all GW theory is based on some 80+ computer models? All of these models say that as co2 increases, so does global temperature - no exception. Scientists use rss satellite data to reaffirm their findings from the computer models- the very definition of scientific method.

Dude, your wikipedia article is about increase in greenhouse gases. The articles I posted say that greenhouse gases are rising - they do not deny that. I don't think anyone is denying that. What's your point?

How are you applying that data to this argument? Please provide supporting links.

Yes, please elaborate on your 400 years of data...

That makes no sense

And you forget that a 1,000 years means nothing on a geological scale...

Wow, your graph actually helps support their point, but you would have to read past the first paragraph to know that.

Why does everyone ignore the fact that rss satellite data shows there has been no global warming in over 17 years despite increasing CO2?