In which we may not be able to predict natural variability.
Gee, just like now. This is profoundly ignorant of history. Does he imagine anyone predicted the Medieval Warm Period? Or the Little Ice Age? Has he ever heard of the Dust Bowl?
In which we may not be able to predict natural variability.
Gee, just like now. This is profoundly ignorant of history. Does he imagine anyone predicted the Medieval Warm Period? Or the Little Ice Age? Has he ever heard of the Dust Bowl?
…says that Trump can’t permanently break the Republican Party.
I hope he’s right.
I’ve uploaded the Powerpoint to the site.
It’s an outgrowth of my “SLS Roadblock” project, which I’m figuring out how to either wrap up or extend.
[Update a while later]
Erratum: At the time I originally created these charts, for the FISO telecon at the end of January, Dana had proposed the Space Settlement bill. He has since actually introduced it.
…and Andy Jackson is replaced by Harriet Tubman. I’m actually surprised. This makes too much sense for this administration.
I love this: Replacing the genocidal founder of the racist Democrat Party with a gun-toting black Republican woman. https://t.co/nS1KPx4Hnl
— Apostle To Morons (@Rand_Simberg) April 20, 2016
[Afternoon update]
Oh, good lord, Ben Carson is an historical idiot:
Ben Carson criticized the decision to replace former President Andrew Jackson with Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill on Wednesday, saying Jackson was a “tremendous president.”
“I love Harriet Tubman. I love what she did. But we can find another way to honor her,” the former presidential candidate and retired neurosurgeon said. “Maybe a $2 bill.”
What part of Jackson’s presidency does Carson like the best? The hogs in the White House? The slave owning? The ethnic cleansing of the southeast? The founding of the racist Democrat Party?
We are not “supposed to be a democracy.”
My thoughts on Trump’s historical ignorance, and how he’s running for the wrong political party.
I’ve had my differences with him over the years, but he has a piece in the WSJ with which I basically agree. I’d say the only thing he gets wrong was that it was Apollo itself that set us on the wrong path. The Shuttle was just a symptom of Apolloism.
[Behind the paywall, but do a Google search for “Mission to Nowhere” and it should come up]
Of course, the media has developed a “strange new respect” for him.
The NASA History Office has issued a new book, that is quite long, but has some interesting-looking essays in it.
Why it’s time to dispel the myths about it.
Long past time, I’d say. The Guardian has had surprisingly good science and technology coverage lately.
In comments I was asked why Cruz should be preferred. This seems like a pretty good argument to me.