Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 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”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
- Historical Weather Analysis With Visitech
- “American Summers Are Starting to Feel Like Winter”
Recent Comments
- arn on Fact Checking NASA
- Gordon Vigurs on Fact Checking NASA
- Bob G on Fact Checking NASA
- Bob G on Fact Checking NASA
- arn on Fact Checking NASA
- conrad ziefle on Fact Checking NASA
- conrad ziefle on Fact Checking NASA
- arn on Fact Checking NASA
- Bob G on Fact Checking NASA
- Bob G on Fact Checking NASA
It’s actually not a terrible theory, considering.
Neither was his notion that a warmer, CO2-enriched Earth would be better for people and for plants.
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
It’s pretty elaborate, given the evidence available at the time, & no more “scientific” than an Edgar Rice Burroughs novel. I mean, it’s all very well & good for scientists to speculate like they’ve been eating jimson weed, but it would be polite for them to mention the fact before attaching their name to the output.