Kim Stanley Robinson says they’re impossible.
I call Clarke’s Law about distinguished scientists, even though he’s just a fiction writer.
Kim Stanley Robinson says they’re impossible.
I call Clarke’s Law about distinguished scientists, even though he’s just a fiction writer.
Google is committing $50M to conquering it. Considering how much it costs (as the article points out), this is chump change.
Is it time to end it?
Yes. It’s as worse-than-worthless as the climate models, in that it provides far too many false positives. And as we saw with Climategate, it’s too easy for it to become “pal review.”
Thoughts from Bob Zimmerman on the tremendous uncertainty.
The models are worse than worthless as a guide to policy.
How he went from climate promoter to climate skeptic.
It’s amazing how pathetic the warm mongers’ “arguments” are. It’s one of the ways you can tell it’s not science; it’s ideology and religion.
[Update a while later]
Bjorn Lomborg on the trivial effects of current climate proposals. But the economic impacts would be far from trivial.
…seems to have general rejuvenating effects on mice.
And human trials start next year.
Paul Ehrlich, on Mark Steyn’s latest.
I wonder if there’s a catch? If not, this would be revolutionary.
…to tell our bodies how to manufacture their own medicine.
Cool, if it works. Faster, please.
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/44302/title/The-6-000-Calorie-Diet/. Particularly the praise of it. There are no lessons to be learned from it except don’t eat a lot of crap. Calories are totally irrelevant, but it seems to be the focus of the study.