Well, I dunno. It seems like blaming Fitbit for Pebble's financial failure.
Let's take a consequentialist view of matters. If the rule is you have to buy the whole business and continue to operate it, even though it's losing money, Pebble goes out of business and it's customers and debt holders suffer. If you can sell of just the good bits without the obligation to continue running the failing as before, the customers suffer but the debt holders get some relief. Which approach is better?
Everyone hates the RIAA, but the fact is without the marketing by these entities you would never have found your "favorite" bands.
We'd have to make do with "favorite" (why the scare quotes?) bands we find ourselves.
Well, it's actually $3.75 billion. And it's not one, but two aircraft, so that's 1.875 billion apiece. That's to ensure the executive branch can function in a military crisis while one of the planes is being service.
Deduct 375 million apiece for the airframe, and we're talking 1.5 billion dollars in customization for each aircraft, including aerial refueling capabilities, which on a two-off job is a craft job; no economies of scale. Add defense and countermeasure capabilities that Air Force is extremely close-lipped about. Is there a actual escape pod on Air Force One like in the movie? Well probably not, but I'm sure the idea was at least contemplated. However it's pretty certain that if someone locks onto AF1 with a targeting radar the aircraft will have options that a stock 747-8 doesn't.
Next outfit each one so it can function as a replacement for the West Wing and the Situation Room for up to two months -- that's a deducible requirement based on the known fact that the aircraft stores 2000 meals for 100 people. That means three-of-a-kind electronics and communications systems (one for each airframe and one for the actual White House).
Is 3.75 billion too much for that? Probably. But it's hard to think of any weapon development program since WW2 that is less extravagant.
By that standard 127 million for an orbital repair robot is an almost inconceivable bargain, even if you factor in a 5x cost overrun.
I'm not silencing any skeptics. I'm stripping credulous people of the conceit that they're skeptics.
"Qualification" means conditions you set on the belief, without which you are willing to withdraw your belief.
They refuse to release un-'adjusted' data sets, even going so far as to attempt to use copyright claims on publicly-funded research
Knock yourself out. However unadjusted data is pretty useless for drawing conclusions from.
I think you meant to spew at someone else.
The history of greenhouse effect theory is interesting and well worth reading up on. It was first raised as a possibility in the 1890s, but rejected quickly based on two erroneous beliefs: (1) that the oceans would rapidly absorb any increase in atmospheric CO2 and (2) that the absorption spectra of water vapor and CO2 mostly overlapped. Together these implied that CO2 could not increase in the atmosphere, and even if it did it could not capture any heat that water vapor wouldn't have anyway.
There are a lot of twists and turns in the story, which Wikipedia does a pretty good job of summarizing. I highly recommend reading that article.
The difference is my belief is falsifiable. So in that respect I think you're belief system resembles faith more than than mine.
I have no problem with my belief system, which is evidence-based and falsifiable. I do have to live with people who are intellectual sheep but who've been deluded into believing they're free-thinkers.
Saying that is so doesn't make it so. There's overwhelming empirical evidence that the Earth has been warming since middle of the twentieth century, particularly from around 1970 onward. This is shown both in the surface instrumental record and in the satellite record.
Matter cannot be created or destroyed, nor can it be returned without a receipt.