-
-
Replying to @DanielleFong
@DanielleFong Hard to pwn someone by citing the discredited IPCC.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @DanielleFong
@DanielleFong Sorry, it's hard to point out how discredited the IPCC is in 140 characters. But it is, to anyone who understands science.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Rand_Simberg
@DanielleFong And I've always counted Jerry Brown as someone who doesn't understand science.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Rand_Simberg
@DanielleFong And I would add that I greatly admire you, and would never condescend to you with a term like "darling."2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Rand_Simberg
@Rand_Simberg but the measure of models with significant anthropogenic climatological effects is much greater than that which show no effect2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @DanielleFong
@DanielleFong I would say that I find your worship of models (that have failed to conform with empirical evidence) very disturbing. ;-)7 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Rand_Simberg
@Rand_Simberg but what are you going to do -- just not model it? When you can see the potential for a massive scale effect? Unwise...1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DanielleFong
@DanielleFong I have no objection to modeling. It's a useful exercise. I have a huge objection to think that current models reflect reality.6 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@Rand_Simberg the point is like decision making and public policy. The effect is probably massive and bad, and we know what causes it.
-
-
Replying to @DanielleFong
@DanielleFong Well, we disagree on both the "probably" and that we know that. My confidence is much lower, and doesn't justify policy props.0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.