You are correct. It's mostly Liberals who have bought up the coastline, so when they get flooded, that'll solve a bunch of problems.

OMG the sky is falling! Meh, don't buy on the coast line and you'll be fine.

Clearly designed by someone who doesn't like pick-up trucks. Hopefully Ford will get something normal into the market in the near future.

Yep, transparency, just like the non-impeachment hearings. Neither political party is transparent in any common-sense definition of the word. Anything used for public policy decisions should be completely transparent to the public, regardless of political bias. If you are truly basing your science on good data, what do you have to hide?

As a remote software developer (mostly to skip commuting 4 hours a day in the horrible Boston traffic), it's annoying to no end when fellow remote team mates do not respond in a timely manner. Yes, everyone is busy, but with the multitude of communication options - email, IM, text, phone, etc... there is no excuse for not responding within an hour at the most (except during sleep hours). Most of the time it's often a yes/no or one-liner answer that is being requested, not a novel. However, response time is often days, if ever, for a lot of remote people (irregardless of age) I have worked with, if I don't hound them. Communication is a key area companies need to set strict expectations/policies for with remote work-forces and enforce those policies. To me, async seems to be an excuse to be lazy, goof-off, or procrastinate, and does more damage to the efforts to encourage more remote work flexibility, than it helps the average remote worker.

Let me get this straight... The "environmentalists" created a regulation that ships have to use a device (that the "environmentalists" require to be used) to curb pollution, and the device itself creates more pollution? And the choices are to dump the pollution into the sea or store it in containers? Where are the containers going to go, and what do you think will happen to the waste in the containers (hint they'll leak and leach into the environment)? On top of that we just had a report not that long ago that after years of "environmentalists" telling us to recycle to save the planet, come to find out it is just getting dumped in China, Africa, or the ocean.

It is actual results like this, that cause common-sense people to doubt climatology science and "green" environmental practices. Rather than beating people down with useless regulations, how about we put the money into actual technology that will solve the problems, not just shift them to another location or generation? That is why I agree with efforts like Tesla (electric cars and solar panels) and Blue Straws (made from corn) that use real science to solve environmental problems.

Take that report and then adjust for land size and cost that it takes for a comparable solar/wind project to a nuclear one and then adjust for red tape time and cost imposed on nuclear projects, and then nuclear becomes a lot more cost effective and easier to locate and build. You could even build nuclear plants under the ocean, so land resources aren't wasted, and they are away from civilian populations, but no one's done that yet (except for submarines).

It's Google's search engine so it's their rules... Don't like it, start your own search engine... Another millennial thinking they are entitled to something... Just because you have a website doesn't mean you are entitled to it being listed anywhere. The fact that search engines list you at all, without paying for the service, is a generous offering they provide. It's not a monopoly either because there are plenty of other search engine options, including the first open "all text" web crawler, https://www.webcrawler.com/ that is still in existence today.

Let's see, bribe psychopaths and criminals to not be evil... How has that worked out for the US historically, in say places like Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Afghanistan, etc... Not so well I think. So why should we expect that kind of failed policy to work in society at large? How about we just teach people skills, that allow them to employ themselves, and not rely on the government or corporations?

And in further news, the sky is blue. Of course climate change is going to cause weather changes. That's commonsense. The debate is what caused the climate change - the natural evolution of the climate (gradual warming as we emerge from the last ice age, which takes thousands of years to occur; the earth was much warmer than it is now, during the dinosaur era before the ice age) or man-made influences? For me, there are merits to both theories, but no definitive evidence to choose one over the other as "the cause". In my opinion, the weather isn't any different than it was during the '80s. If anything, we actually have more frequent drier winters. For example, we only had one major snowstorm last year. This year is more the norm - hence the term "Hardy New Englanders". The excitement comes from weather folks trying to drum up advertising revenue by hyping the storms, and migration of southern folk to the Northeast, for better job opportunities, and they can't handle the weather.

Are you that naive that you don't think they have that data already, through you paying taxes to the IRS, you know, the info on your W2 form? They simply are filling a bureaucratic requirement, and soliciting data that legally binds Google to the data, for which they can then be legally accountable for. Plus if the get it in one big data snapshot, it makes it easier to analyze. I thought Googlers were supposed to be the smart ones?

And there you go. 120,000 years ago, before cars and industrial CO2 sources, the earth was warmer than it is now. The earth goes through natural warming and cooling cycles. There is no magic mystery. Which makes complete commonsense, as it would have to of been warmer to support large roaming reptiles, and of course we have evidence of glacial periods, where the earth was much colder. It's not denial. It's let's see what the historical record truly is, when the scientists actually have the tools to gather real evidence, and not just make conjecture, in order to make plausible, a specific political agenda.