Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Well you know... (Score 1, Troll) 499

I'm going to need a bit more context and proof than that. I've seen many false quotes attributed to him (just like I've seen many false quotes attributed to Obama, GW Bush, Clinton, and other public figures). In particular, that quote without context is cut/pasted all around the pro-legal-marijuana sites but they don't have more than what's there. Nor can I find the segment in particular for that date on Limbaugh's site (though that may be just because it's from several years ago).

Is there audio anywhere so I can tell if he's joking? Or if it's part of a bit he's doing?

(Personally, I don't care if marijuana is legal, I just like to have my facts right.)

Comment Doesn't run at all (hoax) (Score 0) 104

Note how any time there is motion you only see a portion of the object. The arm movements and in-traffic video are clearly CGI, and the raise/lower video could be done by a crane from above since everything above the legs is cropped out.

And while we see the gatling barrels spinning, I don't see anything being fired out.

In other words, this is a sculpture, not a mech. I doubt it's anything other than an elaborate miniature plus a fake cockpit.

Comment Re:Not Published = Trash (Score 1) 474

Precisely. Watts explicitly followed Muller's BEST model. He has pre-publication papers up for download and has submitted to peer review.

If you dismiss Watts, you have to dismiss BEST as well.

Furthermore, Muller answered Maddow by saying BEST has not addressed surface stations at all. So it's quite possible that both Muller and Watts are right.

Comment Re:About time.. (Score 1) 278

Right, but since the gas got into the water before fracking, and gets into the water where no fracking is occurring, it's pretty odd to claim that the one causes the other. "Gasland" is another pseudo documentary which is about agenda, not documentation.

Comment Re:Muller is not a skeptic, he's a good scientist (Score 1) 776

I really don't know how Muller got tagged as a skeptic of GW. He's criticized two pieces of bad science:
- the hockey stick that turned out to not be real, and
- the "hide the decline" part of the climate emails

In the second criticism he explicitly said the data show warming, and so scratched his head as to why people did the data hiding in the first place. His statement at the time was simple: "You can't do this in science."

This current stuff about the press release vs. proper review is annoying, but I respect Muller as a scientist enough that I'll take what he says seriously, even though I don't believe in AGW (or even GW for that matter).

Oh blah. I didn't realize I wasn't signed in for the above post. Anyone with mod points, I hope you'll read it and consider it for a +1 or two.

Slashdot Top Deals

HELP!!!! I'm being held prisoner in /usr/games/lib!

Working...