What I'm saying is very simple. Science is the application of the scientific method. The scientific method is very well defined. Forming a hypothesis and then claiming your statistical model predicts what your hypothesis says is not an application of the scientific method. That misses several key steps.

Feel free to react with further hostility, logical fallacies, and sticking words in my mouth if you like.

Nope. It is statistics. Science involves experimentation with a control group. Building statistical models is not science.

Nice, an experiment. So if you could just show me where your control group is. You know, the control group that had no increase in CO2 and no increase in warming? Because, if you don't have one, how do I know some other factor didn't cause the warming you observed?

This is exactly what I pointing out. You feed data into a statistical model and call it science. You haven't conducted an experiment with a control group. You have no scientific proof. You have nothing but a statistical correlation.

And you missed the scientific experiment step. Your assertion that (hypothesis + prediction + observation = science) is wrong.

While I agree with most of your post, what you describe here is not science. That approach turns science on its head. The scientific method begins with a reasoned hypothesis, followed by a prediction based on the hypothesis, and an experiment to prove or disprove this prediction. Climate "science" on the other hand does exactly what you describe here. It looks at past data and attempts to fit it to a hypothesis. That's not science at all. That's little more than a statistical model. These guys believe they have their answer and are trying to fit all observations to it.

The most non-science part of Climate "science" is the regular refrain that "There's a consensus, therefore, anthropogenic global warming is proven." If anyone so much as expresses doubt about this form of proof, that person is attacked. I believe this sums up my opinion of that succinctly.

In this specific instance perhaps, but I wouldn't say nobody. Remember Popcorn Time?

I don't think it's realistic at this point to expect much change from the government. Unarmed black men die by cop in the streets and that's all part of the plan it seems. Even the black president appears to do nothing but pay lip service to the problem. Internet freedom seems downright secondary when unarmed kids are being shot by cops regularly.

To the point, I think what we are witnessing is the end of what we currently understand as the internet. Net neutrality wouldn't be an issue if it weren't for the ISP monopolies in the first place. NSA spying and weakening encryption standards leaving the whole system backdoored. DMCA is the icing on the cake, destroying free speech one github repo at a time.

I fully expect wireless mesh networks to be the next generation of internet. People will laugh about the days when we were so stupid to trust Facebook servers with so much as a password. They will of course, use something similar to SSH, where the client holds the key and the password. The idea that one company could have stood as a gatekeeper between you and your pizza order from the shop on the corner will seem like pure stupidity.

It is stupidity. There's absolutely no reason those pizza order packets need to travel thousands of miles from my handset, up to a cloud server, where it's intercepted and inspected by the NSA before it is passed down another wire belonging to another ISP who's going to charge a fee or slow the order down, just to reach a pizza shop a mile or two down the road. (assuming that pizza shop didn't get an illegitimate DMCA takedown over a photo of a cheese pizza). It is simply ridiculous when every square mile of modern civilization is saturated with wireless radios. I'm sitting in range of 16 wifi access points right now. Everyone I know carries a phone with not only wifi, but bluetooth, and LTE too.

This is dumb. And when enough of us developers step back, and think, and see how very dumb it is... we will create a new solution. The dim witted management in the form of government will proceed to try to screw up our new internet as best they can, until they succeed and we start the process all over again.

You must be new here :)

I think you missed a memo. While it may be that most of the heat does go into the oceans, not enough of it has been going in there to explain the recent global warming 'pause' that climatologists are unable to explain.

lol. Says the moron who couldn't figure out Acrobat runs on neither ChromeOS or Linux.

You go ahead and take several screenshots of partial pages and then go into an image editor to stitch them together though. Hey, maybe you can even break out your iPhone and take pictures of your screen. That'll be even better, because you'll add an extra step or two between you and a final product.

I'll just print them, thanks.

Many states have locked PDF forms that can only be filled with Adobe Acrobat. The PDF can't even be saved once filled, so an electronic backup is out. The only backup available is a printed one. You're not going to be able to fill and print them on a Chromebook, even with Linux.

Sorry. I don't trust other people with my tax returns.

Is computer illiterate? Buy her or pops a Chromebook and they can't do their taxes on it.

Anyway, computer illiterate parents are not the market where Chromebooks are selling. Most are landing in the hands of computer illiterate children via schools looking for a "cheap laptop." Schools love them. They are inexpensive and low maintenance. You don't need IT with Chromebooks and that's exactly what schools want to hear. Too bad the kids can't really use Chromebooks to learn anything about computers.

20 years ago, Microsoft sold US education policy makers on the concept that "learning computers" meant learning the MS Office suite. That has produced a generation which is completely deficient in general computer knowledge. Tech giants are now flailing around trying to encourage kids to code now, because of the rarity of truly educated computer users.

Chromebooks will be the final nail in the coffin for US tech labor. "Computer people" in the US will be even more rare. Doing anything beyond web browsing and email is difficult on a Chromebook. I've used one as a daily driver for more than a year now. My C720 is my only laptop. I've installed Chrubuntu and chroots using Crouton. I've done Android development on it. You might think that would serve as proof that kids *can* use them to learn, but it is not the case.

My productivity has easily been a quarter of what it was on a 'real' laptop. I rarely do anything in linux on it, because every time I boot it up, I have a chrome window with my top 8 websites staring at me. Oh, hey, let me check the news on (HN | CNN | Slashdot | etc) really quick before I start work. 3 hours later, I'm bored with laughing at stupid pictures on imgur and wondering what it was I had planned to work on today. Even when you do want to work, the hardware is cheap, so everything takes just a little longer. Let me switch back to chrome and check email really quick while this thing compiles... Okay, that was funny cat picture... well, will you look at the time! I guess I will work some tomorrow instead.

And then there's the problem with Chrome's habit of autoupdating itself. Every auto update has the potential to hose your chroot environment. Meaning, oops, that autoupdate just blew your afternoon. Time to spend several hours reinstalling ubuntu and all the developer tools that took ages to set up properly.

In short, I wouldn't recommend a Chromebook as a real computer any more than I'd recommend an iPad. It is not a producer device. It's designed to allow passive consumption of whatever garbage lies on the web. I'll be getting myself a new 'real' laptop for xmas.