Who will compel Norwegian scientists to "stop the political science"?
Heat goes on: Earth headed for warmest year on record
- Thread starter futurecurrents
- Start date
An even more interesting issue is that rate at which new species are arising, and the relationship between this being rate and the rate at which they are discovered. The two rates must be related but what is the relationship?
Which new species are those, viruses, bacteria and bugs?
We are of course discovering new species all the time. But what we don't have a good handle on is what is the rate of new species formation. The rate at which we discover them could be greater or less than the rate at which they form. Is it greater or less, or even about the same? It would help of course if we knew how new species arise. Although evolution within a rapidly reproducing species is easily observable, no one has yet observed the formation of a new species. That raises a most interesting question? (I won't, however, bother to ask it.)
Hell on Earth.
That's not true.
WASHINGTON — New carbon emissions standards that were proposed last year for coal-fired power plants in the United States would substantially improve human health and prevent more than 3,000 premature deaths per year, according to a new study.
The health benefits of the rule would be indirect. While carbon emissions trap heat in the atmosphere, which contributes to a warming planet, they are not directly linked to health threats. Emissions from coal-fired power plants, however, also include a number of other pollutants, such as soot and ozone, that are directly linked to illnesses like asthma and lung disease.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/05/h...ecommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine&_r=0
The health benefits of the rule would be indirect. While carbon emissions trap heat in the atmosphere, which contributes to a warming planet, they are not directly linked to health threats. Emissions from coal-fired power plants, however, also include a number of other pollutants, such as soot and ozone, that are directly linked to illnesses like asthma and lung disease.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/05/h...ecommendation&src=rechp&WT.nav=RecEngine&_r=0
These are the same Norwegian Scientists who spent who spent £40m and 10 years on research trying to make a Donkey feel shame.
http://www.guyjest.com/norwegian-scientists-blow-40m-10-years-shaming-donkey/
The good news is ... that after they failed to make the donkey feel shame the scientists shipped him over to the U.S. where he is running as a Democrat for national office.
The Norwegian government has defunded several bogus scientific studies recently including "Gender Ideology" after widespread condemnation of the scientists. "The decision was made after the Norwegian State Television had broadcasted a television documentary in which the hopelessly unscientific character of the NIKK and its research was exposed."
http://www.menshealthaustralia.net/content/nordic-countries-defund-gender-ideology.html
The only reason that this particular "political science" is moving forward is because Norway desires to lay claim to parts of the Arctic. They are competing against Russia, Canada, the U.S. and others to claim Arctic areas and natural resources. This "arctic melting" expedition is a thinly disguised attempt to further Norway's claims in the Arctic - it has nothing to do with "climate change" except as an excuse to be there.
Last edited:
Beside the fact that the purpose of testing the hypothesis is above your reasoning power, you're attacking the messenger. A typical rightie tactic.