I would have included Herb Sutter. But maybe that's just my C++ bias.

Not lied so much as made use of computer models that bear no relation whatsoever to reality. There's a lot of it about in environmental "science".

Indeed. Or perhaps the stuff wasn't there in the first place.

A software project that actually ends? What kind of crazy company do you work for?

I think I would give up my 20 days to get paid twice as much. At least for a few years, or until I'd paid off my mortgage.

You don't need a union to GTFO of your job and go work somewhere else where the pay and conditions are more suited to the kind of lifestyle you want.

That's the most amazing thing to me, compared to here in the UK. I get 20 days paid holiday a year and my company is not considered the most enlightened when it comes to this. I know people who get 30. I also work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. As a software developer I can't imagine staying an extra 3 hours a day just to make it up to the US average and actually getting any more work done than I do now. I mean my brain is burnt out by around 4pm in any case.

Yes, there's no question that cannot be truthfully answered with a cursory googling is there Ginger.

It's actually worse than that. They "adjust" the past record to make it look cooler and therefore to make current temperatures look even more "unprecedented". NOAA has done this with the US land temperature record with gusto.

Also, you'll get modded down for doubting AGW here on slashdot. It's a wedge issue for Marxists you see.

I don't think you can have it both ways (though of course you will try to). If climate change is within the bounds of natural variation (which it is) then you have absolutely no justification for asserting that it's man-made. This is the fundamental error in your thinking. Worse, you put forward no fact that would falsify the hypothesis that it is man-made, which makes your assertion unscientific as well.

Wrong. The current climate change is man-driven.

An assertion for which there's no evidence whatsoever, given that the current climate change is well within the range of natural variation. Of course you could manufacture some evidence by "adjusting" real world data, but that's not quite the same as the real thing is it.

Hoax is the wrong word to use. A better phrase would be "malicious deception".

Agree. They've probably gone to find new breeding grounds to get away from all of the biologists and global warming botherers who keep disturbing them.

It's Hanlon's Razor.

They have absolutely no problem finding your tax records when you're in arrears, alas.