I predict that the time will be exactly 2:43, twice during the next 24 hours.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Gaslighting 1924
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
- Analyzing Big City Crime
- UK Migration Caused By Global Warming
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
- Seventeen Years Of Fun
- The Importance Of Good Tools
- Temperature Shifts At Blue Hill, MA
- CO2²
- Time Of Observation Bias
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Back To The Future
- “records going back to 1961”
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Gaslighting 1924
- arn on Gaslighting 1924
- Gordon Vigurs on Gaslighting 1924
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- conrad ziefle on Climate Attribution Model
- Ohio Cyclist on Climate Attribution Model
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- Bob G on Fact Checking NASA
- arn on Climate Attribution Model
Did you adjust for TOBS? 😉
What a pair!
Ray Pierre and Naomi!
If a rock was present they could claim the intelligence of a rock in the group.
And if you only looked at the clock at 2:43, you’d have yourself a nice trend. A cherry-flavored one. People might even pay you for it. Just make them forget about the cycle between the 2:43s.
I predict you can get lots of funding if you suggest that your predictions will lead to the destruction of mankind. It worked for Ehrlich and he wasn’t even right once on any given day. 🙂
What happens if the clock stops?
Then the clock is still correct twice A day, like the IPCC.
LOL…..:)
Where’s the link to the Clock model
Naomi Oreskes’ observation that: “climate scientists are so busy talking about stuff they don’t understand
Did I cut and paste that Oreskes quote correctly?