Arnold Kling says we are all wrong about it.
Well, maybe someone is right, and we just haven’t heard from them.
…is flawed. Which doesn’t differentiate it from any of California’s other frameworks.
Why didn’t the Romans have one?
Before I read it, the first thing I thought was this: “How are engineers to do experiments and calculations without any concept of the experimental method, and without anything close to the mathematical tools that are available today to any fifth-grader?”
As he notes, they didn’t have Arabic numerals, they didn’t have zero, they didn’t have negative numbers, or complex numbers. They had no higher math, and no way to get to it with their numbering system. One of the foundations of the industrial revolution was the invention of calculus, and understanding of physics, including thermodynamics. That was all happening in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The other thing that was happening was the invention of capitalism in the coffee houses of London and Amsterdam (which wouldn’t have happened had coffee not become a thing in the wake of opening the New World). It’s not clear how, even had Rome not fallen, how they would have ever had those foundations.
[Update a while later]
Link is fixed now, sorry.
No, we can’t conclude anything about climate change from them.
“In fact the most recent (2021) report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) does not support the common claims about drought, floods, hurricanes and other severe weather events. Not only does the last IPCC report find no clear trends, it offers “low confidence” in predictions of future trends.”
An attempt to replace journalists goes awry.
Hard to argue.
You don’t say. And as noted, there will probably be no political accountability, let alone anything more severe.
And like all leftist fantasies, a perfectly predictable, and predicted one.
It’s a must not read.
Are they a mirage?