They say an optimist looks at a glass and says it's half full, while a pessimist would say it's half empty. So how would you classify the person who labeled this? A super-pessimist! -via Arbroath
This is clearly labeled by a pessimist. They want the can emptied out when half full because it will surely be dirtier to pick up a full can spilled over.
Unless you are playing at the wording of the label, then my answer is that it was labeled by a pessimist who thinks that a half full can of garbage is basically not a full effort and isn't worthy of keeping it around.
"This doesn’t outlaw the measurement or reporting of sea-level rise. It only says how state agencies will or will not do it."
But they HAVE to use the long-discredited hockey stick model that the one true scientific authority tells them to use, otherwise they're being not just stupid, but evil. They're murdering millions of dollars in grant money! Don't you care about that?
This doesn't outlaw the measurement or reporting of sea-level rise. It only says how state agencies will or will not do it. I don't see what the problem is. We didn't like the state agencies (or federal agencies for that matter) doing this in the first place.
Shades of Shrodinger's Cat, rising sea levels haven't risen if they aren't measured. Extrapolating potential rise in sea level using century old data is just dumb, no matter what side of the arguement you take.
Yeaaah! What a great idea that is. I've always said: don't just let anyone measure stuff when they want to, there would be chaos. What we need is one government-authorized committee per thing to measure in the universe. And only when they're asked to by the government. Also, don't let those "scientists" fool you with their statistical analysis and fancy "exponential growth" mumbo-jumbo! Everyone knows nature always behaves linearly. So be a real scientist: draw a straight line through a graph! That's how science works, innit?
Comments (2)
Unless you are playing at the wording of the label, then my answer is that it was labeled by a pessimist who thinks that a half full can of garbage is basically not a full effort and isn't worthy of keeping it around.
But they HAVE to use the long-discredited hockey stick model that the one true scientific authority tells them to use, otherwise they're being not just stupid, but evil. They're murdering millions of dollars in grant money! Don't you care about that?
FALSE. But by all means, continue your argument.
What a great idea that is.
I've always said: don't just let anyone measure stuff when they want to, there would be chaos. What we need is one government-authorized committee per thing to measure in the universe. And only when they're asked to by the government.
Also, don't let those "scientists" fool you with their statistical analysis and fancy "exponential growth" mumbo-jumbo! Everyone knows nature always behaves linearly. So be a real scientist: draw a straight line through a graph!
That's how science works, innit?