Scientific model, not scientific fact. They are attempting to extrapolate future temperatures using previous temperatures. Fact only happens after.

And I don't think you caught my Michael Mann hockey stick reference. He lied, proving your argument wrong.

Hockey sticks? If the Heartland Institute is biased at least taxpayers don't have to subsidize their hypothetical lies. What's worse? A private entity lying to you or a government entity you pay for and are supposed to be able to trust lying to you?

Following the link to their demo provides an explanation of their product. At the bottom of their explanation it has a link to their website. To follow the link to their website they use a windows editor context to press the cntrl key to follow the link. My joke was about an OS specific context to perform a simple function.

Do I open up my Galaxy Note 3's pen context to perform a Microsoft Windows function or do I just use terminal to cntrl+ click?

That's the point. Who would buy a home with no road to it? There is a market based solution for everything.

Additionally, who said anything about forced by the government? Would you buy a house where the developer failed to build roads? Oh sorry a market regulated self truth. I forgot, these things only magically occur by Fiat.

I like how you don't see the difference in Federal governmentabs local. No one minds having local governments mandate this, you could always move. We can't be American and move out of Obamacare.

How is my ancestors building civilization having anything to do with my subsidizing people currently who live in the society my ancestors built?

Even since the forties, maybe thirties, when a developer wants to build X amount of homes then they are required to build the roads around each home. I know you didn't think when you just shut down his answer but the government didn't just come in and build roads around each home. Plus most proper highways were built by companies as turnpikes long before the freeway system.

Since you thought it was easier to ignore what I said after my first sentence (maybe that's all you bothered to read or maybe something ideologically different from what you believed caused some type of mental blockage) I thought I'd provide a quick excerpt from Justice Alito today who essentially made the exact same argument I did. "A corporation is simply a form of organization used by human beings to achieve desired ends," he wrote. "And protecting the free-exercise rights of corporations like Hobby Lobby, Conestoga and Mardel protects the religious liberty of the humans who own and control those companies."

I apologize. I noticed in my post that I failed to clarify. I meant the employers freedom of speech to run their business as they want.

This is a dead topic. Since no one else will receive the benefit of my post I'll just summarize really quick.

Corporations are a free expression of how individuals want to conduct business and earn a profit. Recent Supreme Court decisions especially have been expanding the individuals ability to exercise free speech in any organized manner.

Let me turn that around on you and ask how surveillance of your employees is regulated under interstate commerce?

I have to unfortunately agree. Laws that encroach on private business' ability to run their busyness as they like is encroaching on the First Amendment. We don't need good and bad private business laws. That's their business.

Naw. Ever have a depressing single person coffee break? Imagine a coffee social. Hiring a competent manager that can record you coming in at 9:04 and forcing you to break at 11:04 is soul crushing. I'd rather act like I'm having a socializer for fifteen minutes.