On the importance of distinguishing them.
As noted, that this was published in Nature may be an indication that there are growing cracks in the wall of the hysteria.
On the importance of distinguishing them.
As noted, that this was published in Nature may be an indication that there are growing cracks in the wall of the hysteria.
Why robots can’t outrun the fastest animals.
As usual, it’s unlikely that this will pan out, but it’s certainly worthy of further investigation.
Seems to have previously unknown benefits to the brain.
The problem with this article is that (a) they don’t really describe what the “fasting-style diet” is, in terms of how long the fast, or what days they do it, and (b), as with most nutrition studies, it’s probably based on self reporting, and it’s not clear that there are any controls.
I do suspect, though, that we didn’t evolved to three squares a day, which would have been hard as hunter gatherers, which is one of the ways that agriculture screwed up our health, though it allowed the existence of orders of magnitude more unhealthy people.
I personally fast almost every day until evening. Dinner (or supper, depending on your local vernacular) is my literal breakfast, though I don’t have bacon and eggs then.
“How I fell out of love with academia.”
Science is badly broken, as is university research (of course, lots of things about universities are badly broken).
It’s out and available for free on line. Spread the word.
The debate rages on.
[Via Phil Metzger, who has significantly contributed to the debate]
An interview with Judith Curry.
No, but what Professor Mann did is. An illogical, misinformed editorial at Science.
[Update a while later]
A few more thoughts on the case from Will Bates.
[Friday-morning update]
The latest over at Mark Steyn’s place: “So the net result of Mann vs Simberg is that Mann owes Simberg $8,587.64. Pay up, you deadbeat.”
Well, he actually owes it to both me and CEI, and we have to split it, so he only owes me a little over four times the (soon to be likely reduced) judgment. Here is our latest filing.
[Late-morning update]
The battle between skeptics and climate “dictators“: “Skepticism is a necessary aspect of the scientific discovery process. During the trial, however, skeptics such as Curry were not allowed to testify, despite her having prepared a 54-page report for the court on the hockey stick science, which was highly critical of Mann’s work.”
Judy did testify, but only as a fact witness, not an expert witness.
[Early-afternoon update]