Your husband doesn’t have to earn it, ladies.
Sadly, this will come as a shock to a lot of modern American women.
Your husband doesn’t have to earn it, ladies.
Sadly, this will come as a shock to a lot of modern American women.
Professor Mann libeled Andrew Bolt, who demanded and got an apology. Mark Steyn has the details, along with some discussion on Mann’s colleagues’ apparent discomfiture with him and the hockey stick.
Over an Space News, Donald Robertson has an op-ed that could be a summary of my book, though he doesn’t mention it.
Over a hundred published papers have had to be withdrawn because they turned out to be computer generated:
Labbé emphasizes that the nonsense computer science papers all appeared in subscription offerings. In his view, there is little evidence that open-access publishers — which charge fees to publish manuscripts — necessarily have less stringent peer review than subscription publishers.
This sort of thing is why I pay no attention to warm mongers who tell me to publish in a peer reviewed journal. Peer review, to the degree that it’s done with any rigor at all, turned out to be “pal review” in climate science, as revealed by the CRU emails.
Why we lost it, and why we’re continuing to lose it, despite many trillions of dollars. The only way to win the war on poverty is to end the war on the market and economy.
They had a tough day in court. I wonder if any administration has lost as many court cases as this one?
It’s part of the upscale left’s war on science.
(Libertarian) John Mackey is getting rich satisfying a niche.
Why it continues to be unpopular:
“Current and former administration officials . . . have been surprised at how steadfast the opposition has remained,” the Washington Post reported last summer, quoting MIT economist Jonathan Gruber saying, “It used to be you had a fight and it was over, and you moved on.” But few have moved on, for reasons which are not all that hard to tease out: It’s not working out, in fact it’s a disaster; it’s blowing holes in the federal budget; the win-to-lose balance is way out of kilter, as many more people are hurt than helped by it. Obamacare may collapse on its own for practical reasons, but there is a fourth strike against it that adds a dimension of weakness no comparable measure has faced: Much of the country believes it’s a fraud, passed dishonestly, and not deserving of moral authority. In short, they find it nearly illegal, highly immoral, and possibly fattening. And their minds won’t be changed.
Nor should they be. When you cram the biggest crap sandwich in the history of the world down the county’s throat on a lying, corrupt partisan basis, you deserve to lose credibility and power. Read the whole thing, though.
…is more reliable than the climate models.
No surprise here. The climate models are crap.
Did the IRS target Christine O’Donnell and leak her IRS records to the press?
I have absolutely no reason not to believe it.