- If you like your doctor, you can keep him
- If you like your plan, you can keep it
What he didn't say at the time because it was a very very basic assumption was that if your doctor/plan MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARDS of the ACA you can keep them.
Those minimum things are what the ACA was about. If a plan doesn't meet the ACA then no it shouldn't have been allowed to continue. It was the entire point of the legislation, to get a bare minimum of reasonable insurance to people. Not 'catastrophic only' coverage cheapo plans that existed previously because those same people simply were left to die by the insurance companies.
We know for a fact we are seeing more methane seeps in places that it is warming and in places we didn't seem them before.
We know for a fact that increasing the temps around methane hydrates will cause them to release.
We know for a fact that more methane in the atmosphere will increase temperatures.
While you might not be able to explicitly prove it just yet, the signs are clearly there that we're treading on pretty thin ice.
Now, if you want to prove why this won't cause warming, please do. But me thinks you (and anybody else since they haven't) simply can't.
Are there finer details of the process that aren't yet understood? Sure. That doesn't negate the overall theory and overwhelming body of evidence that supports the theory. Just saying 'its normal, nothing to see here' isn't credible when you see significant changes.
The science is settled but you can continue tilting at windmills.
The question for Twitter is not, "should we censor"; they do that every day when they stop people distributing wares and malware through their system. The question is "should we give resources to help these people who have a very clear bad aim"
The content of the links Twitter is taking down isn't on or hosted by Twitter and aren't being tweeted by the terrorists. They are being tweeted by regular Twitter users. As such, pulling those links *is* censorship. As I've said, don't force the content down people's throats with auto play but simply require an active action for it to be played. Then it's completely in the hands of the user as to whether they view the material or not.
The VERY NEXT SENTENCE:
He is more interested in what will happen as the world warms. “It becomes interesting only if you have a catastrophic release,” he says.
emphasis mine. i.e. it's slow now but if temps go up it becomes catastrophic.
I'm all in favor of requiring an active action to view the video. Rather than Twitter taking down links, just modify them to require a click before it plays so people who don't want to see it aren't forced to experience it. But blocking it? simply won't work.
Increase the speed limits? Then there will be idiots driving even faster.
Yes there will. Simply changing the rules without adequate training after decades of an undesirable behavior isn't going to change said behavior overnight.
Trying to change a systemic behavior in a system as vast and (in the US) as untrained as the driving public isn't a small undertaking.
That said, this magical thing called 'software' can also be hacked to do things that aren't intended by the developers so it's not a panacea, but it will still be a far bit better than humans at following the rules of the road as conveyed to it - even through the normal posted speed limit signs.
Europe on the other hand is at no risk from the flooding. So the threat to air travel in Europe, based on the 2010 experience, is significant.
Add to that the factor that European air travel is probably orders of magnitude greater than Iceland's...
And just like you, the author's works can provide for his family after death, assuming he's been investing his money into retirement/life insurance. But a one hit wonder who kicks the bucket the next day? That 'pension' is going to be might small...