No, it is just the funny way the Supreme Court works.
They ruled 9-0
But there was a 8-1 split on the reason why.
"Actually, it wasn’t much of a case: 8-1, with Alito concurring in part and concurring in the judgment overall. "
In other words, he "testified" on the matter, and thus could not claim 5th midstream.
We should have never given them guns... made them stick with a whistle and nightstick.
They are paid from our taxes, so how could their actions be considered copyrighted?
Eventually, citizens will record everything, and what you are suggesting is going to pass.
If the government can record anywhere, we the people should be recording anywhere.
I was thinking Ginsberg was the pod person.
Who will watch the watchers?
However, in this case, the Supreme Court was 8-1, and the opinion amounted to "WTF is wrong with you? Of course you need a warrant, asshat!"
Again, it talking about changes around the end of the 90 and the 00's, this shows a smoothing of the 20s to 40s spike in temperatures, erasing the heat wave of the 30s, and making the temperature record look like it slopes up in the 20th century, rather than spiking in the 30s, dipping in the 70s, and then climbing back up in the 90s and 00s.
You will also note that the EPA did not get the message about Global warming.
No I don't remember, even my great grandfather was but a gleam in my great great grandfather's eye.
Beans. Lots of beans.
Methane is more powerful than CO2
Obviously you would not look at the actual article and graphs presented, or you would know the smoothing is done on pre-1970s data, not 2000-2007 data.
Goddard's site shows the current NOAA chart, and the previously published NOAA chart.
The "smoothing" to fit the AGW story is pretty evident, and he is using THEIR data, so there is no "denying", just your projection.
I am saying we should not expect it to be 50/50%.
Equal is not the same as equitable.
Man, we so missed out on the "Internet of Buggy Whips".
We have a equal opportunity Calculus class -- it's fully integrated.
