Haha but also fuck off with this alt-right adolescent edgelord act. This stuff is well documented and not limited to *thumbs through Dictionary of Reliable Digs at Liberals* the Guardian.Here we have a classic example of a liberal attempting to handle cognitive dissonance of clashing evidence: he uses recourse to a "disinformation campaign" which he has learned all about from reading The Guardian
You first, cos the null hypothesis is that CO2 does nowt and we've got nothing to do with it.And please, tell me what "clashing evidence" there is here. I'm all ears.
might have been me?who was it on here who had the plandemic theory that we need 90% cull because of climate change and that's what the corona's really about? I think it was you biscults, but could be wrong
Pretty much why the football hasn't been cancelled; there would be hell to pay if that were pulled.
Is that the real Hawkins or the replacement?
CO2 strongly absorbs in the thermal infra-red. This was known in the 19th century.You first, cos the null hypothesis is that CO2 does nowt and we've got nothing to do with it.
Are you saying it isn't true? This is a new low, even for you.I'm so convinced by that random factoid from a century during which people said and did things that we now know to be largely wrong.
Problem is that everyone's body is different, so trials should try to pick out risks for individuals within smaller and smaller groups-with-commonalities, rather than stating that 'this works overall for the average' from a study of a large lump of people - a problem with 'evidence-based medicine' overriding your long-standing personal doctor's view.
have you read libidinal economy?Lyotard knew this he speaks on it extensively on The Postmodern Condition