I think they're in there. Just a little late and not as clear. Check the title of the article linked in the tweet.
US, Australia new C-17 maintenance arrangement enhances readiness, cooperation
Back in the 90's I had a rogue Geology prof who theorized that the industrial revolution and burning fossil fuels might be the thing saving us from another ice age from lack of carbon.
Carbon is constantly being captured from the atmosphere and turned into coral reefs and plants and stuff that keeps it earthbound. By burning things, we release it back.
I don't friggin know what the truth is because it's so political, but seems like we could at least consider that he may have been partially right.
I hate the proposition that the "experts" are the climate scientists. They wouldn't have become "climate scientists" if they hadn't bought into the dogma.
It's like going to a priest to find out whether or not there's a god. They've already bought into one side of the argument. You won't get an unbiased response.
I know. And they've so polluted the debate and the data that it's hard to find rational discussion.
Yup. I can't blame people who disagree with the "settled science" if they just pick a different area of academia to spend their time on so they aren't constantly harrassed.
Nothing new. Academia has always had its fascist elements. But it still sucks.