Rein in the bad science.
Plus, is falsifiability critical to science?
Yes.
Thoughts on the modern version of it. What’s horrible is that children like Greta Thunberg are being terrified by leftist propaganda.
What’s going on with the sun, and what does it mean for climate hysteria?
This is indeed an extraordinary claim. We’ll see, I guess.
We should have had one by now.
Another reason to move out, I guess. It would be a natural disaster on top of the unnatural one that is California voters.
…recognize their own names, even if they don’t bother to respond.
[Update a few minutes later]
OK, statements like this never make any sense to me:
Saito says she thinks feline pets learn to recognize their names because of what is in it for them. “I think cats associated their names with some rewards or punishments,” she says—adding that she thinks it is unlikely the cats understand their names are attached to them. “There is no evidence that cats have the ability to recognize themselves, like us,” she explains. “So, the recognition about their name is different from ours.”
My emphasis. Gee, every time I see a cat ignore itself in the mirror, instead of treating the image like another cat, I think that’s evidence of ability to recognize itself.
I suppose it’s possible that this is an April Fools post, but I don’t think Leonard would do that.
What is the plausible worst case?
This is great science writing. And if this happened today, unlike an excess of plant food in the atmosphere, it probably really would wipe out humanity, or at least a great portion of it.
We could be looking a lot harder for these things, and learning how to deflect them, but Congress would rather build a big monster rocket.
It’s not consistent with the scientific method. I agree.