siempre44
siempre44
siempre44

Believe me, I take no joy that it was the National Enquirer that broke and continued the story of Edward's criminal behavior while the New York Times denied and ignored the issue. That is just wrong- but sadly true. And Edwards was a serious presidential candidate at the time. We live in a sad era.

Read the actual Met's release- not headlines from other sources.

I think that would be a great list to see what books io9 considers hard sci-fi by women.

The data from the Met is what we are discussing and you can read the Met's own press release that their data shows no warming. That is data-not opinion. It is opinion as to what the 16 years of data mean and the Met says we should make nothing of the last 16 years. I think 16 years that do not follow warming theory is

Actually, the Antarctic has record ice GAIN. The Southern Hemisphere had a cold winter. Europe and Asia had a cold summer. The USA/North America is not the planet . And, the topic is the data. The Met data, by the Met's own admission is no significant warming in 16 years and no one is saying warming is following CO2

Only mega-nerds[and we know who we are] even consider hard sci-fi versus soft sci-fi but I know no one who asks the author's gender before they download a new book. In the internet age, publishing barriers are non-existant. The four most successful book series of the last 2 decades are Harry Potter, Hunger Games, The

Mark, wherever you went to school, did they not teach that ad hominum is not an argument? Try reading the world's news from non-USA sources and read primary science papers- not just the titles and someone else's summaries. That is my advice and then when you disagree, you can use a more cogent agument than your

There is so much self-publishing by everyone, I never noticed that anyone discriminated against women as to sci-fi writing nowadays. Lightspeed regularly publishes short sci-fi of all types by women, and I only know about the gender or notice because Lightspeed usually has an interview with the author after the

The Met released a press release which alluded to the data showing no warming for 16 years as the release went on to explain why the Met did not consider the 16 years as significant. The release is cleverly worded to not repudiate the Met's own data while explaining why the Met thinks others should not take the 16

John, as i wrote to another, you must read the whole Met release carefully and you find the Met does acknowledge that the data does not show heating for 16 years. the release then goes on to make an argument why that 16 years data should not be taken out of context. But, the release does not disavow that the last 16

Actually, if you carefully read the Met press release , the Met alludes to the data showing no significant warminging in 16 years. The release then goes on to assert that you cannot make anything of that and that one should look at long term. But, the release does not disavow that the last 16 years showed no

Actually, the concept of a denier is based on the rejection of dogma and was first a religious concept. The Holocaust survivors borrowed the term to show the strength of their position and as a double message as it was a religious group-Jews- as well as others that suffered the 'final solution' in the Holocaust. The

Ask the Germans and the British who actually are having to shut down industry because of inadequate electric supplies who are the 'idiots'. Spiegel.de and the Telegraph have regular stories about how the drive to green energy to save us from Global Warming has led to real power shortage that is only going to get

Exactly- the earth is doing what it does based on Complexity and has no stable climate. No one can make the climate stable so it will change as it always has. But what a perfect scam to get people to give tax money and pay higher prices to make the climate stop changing!

The impacts of climate change are...whatever you want them to be because there is no testable definition of Climate Change. Nowhere is there a statement of what the climate would have been to serve as the control. So, this is a superb scam-hotter/colder/wetter/dryer/more/less—anything can be 'change' because there is

Actually, theories are hypothesis that make predictions and are tested based on future occurences-either in an experiment or observation. And by the way, some of the cutting edge physics work asserts gravity is not 'real' in that it may not be an actual force but a byproduct of other factors. That is why gravity is

Well, schools today cannot teach Johnny to read, but they can certainly indoctrinate Johnny. So much anger that the world may not be doomed. I did touch a nerve. It seems peculiar that people can get so upset over a theory with so little predictive value. Are all of you String Supporters ,too? Am I about to be

No, the citation is to look at the actual data for the last 16 years. The data is available to examine. The issue is not why it took the Mail to publicize the data release. Sadly, we live in an era where the Mail and the National Enquirer often break unpopular stories to the public that the big media ignore on

A "denier" is a religious term. Scientists refute hypothesis as the basis of research. Science exists to refute ideas that 'believers' believe in. io9 is supposed to be a science site-not a religious site. The Met has simply said they did not break out the data and they made no comment on the data. They do not refute

The Met did release the data and there has been quite a lot of discussion . There is no statistically significant warming in 16 years. That is the data. In fact, even io9 ran some stories last year that warming had stopped and there was research as to why, including that cooling could be due to increased particulates