Truth is, hardly any self-proclaimed AGW 'sceptic' is actually a sceptic. Most of them are True Believers, repeating oft-debunked nonsense in hope of making it stick.

Despite their failures, they've turned record profits several times the last few years. I'm not arguing that Ballmer has been a great CEO, just that he hasn't been running the company into the ground like some claim. Although Windows 8 seems like a nice try.

If stock price is anything to go by, then Microsoft has been a stable multi-billion dollar corporation throughout Ballmer's reign. Microsoft needs to change, but their presumed failure has, so far, been a mighty success compared to most other survivors of the .com crash.

Torture was in fact illegal. It was just approved by the government.

What makes you believe Samsung will be any more open source friendly than Google? They have no history of that, quite the contrary. Also, https://developer.tizen.org/forums/sdk-ide/tizen-sdk-licensing-makes-whole-tizen-not-open-source

Wrong. There was one article. One. That's not harping. If there were more than one, then surely they would have been escavated by the denialists by now. Yet they cling to that Newsweek article as if it were referenced by everyone else, every day.

As for scientific articles, you've got access to Google Scholar right now, and guess what? It's got year delimiters. If you want to "teach the controversy", at least use readily available data. Here is a review article to get you started. It's a review article, an overview of the then current research on the subject, so you'll see that it actually has something to say about soot and aerosols:

Several studies in the past have concluded that if these aerosols were distributed uniformly over the earth they would increase the earth's overalll albedo by scattering sunlight and thereby cause a general cooling (Rasool & Schneider 1971, Yamamoto & Tanaka 1972, Bryson & Wendland 1975, Budyko 1977). The reason why this is almost surely not the case are summarized by Kellogg, Coakley & Grams (1975) (see also Kellogg 1977), and they are briefly restated. First, such industrial aerosols (and the same would apply to agricultural slash-and-burn smoke) do not remain airborne in the lower levels of the atmosphere for more than about five days on average (Moore, Poet & Martell 1973). That means they are a regional phenomenon and are limited for the most part to the land areas where they were created.

I'm a bit impressed that the referenced article by Yamamoto and Tanaka (1972) is also freely available on the interwebs, and can be found here. And even that one accepts global warming due to CO2, and the local variability of aerosols.

It's not a view, it's a claim: "like the world did [worry about global cooling] when I was back in highschool in the 70's". Your claim is false, it's proven false, it's known to be false. Fascists never were overly preoccupied with the truth, a trait they have in common with you. However, I don't find that a reason for calling you, or people like you, fascist. You're just a dishonest prick. A common liar.

It is. It makes them feel 1337. The illusion of control.

STFU. Seriously. That's one single article in the non-peer reviewed journal Newsweek. That's also all you can find from the 70s. Most people who care to know already knows this, most probably you too. I refuse to believe you're not deliberately perpetuating a long debunked myth for the purpose of propaganda. In other words, you're dishonest prick. I hope you're ashamed of yourself. I know your mother should be.

If the 31 dollars were profits on the 30 dollars you spent, then you certainly didn't become poorer. Money isn't wealth.

Always eager to do Apple's PR work, aren't you?

Usually, there will be an early comment with a much needed correction to the summary. Slashdot summaries are more unreliable than Fox News.