But it is better to say that experimental physics is based on the collection of data about a particular phenomenon, and fitting those data to mathematical models to test how well their predictions hold. And that is not analogy.
technically analogy has a broad definition that applies anytime you compare two things.
The people who believe climate change the least are those that typically live in the middle of America i.e. the least to be directly affected. I assure you that when you speak to Pacific Islanders from Cook Islands, Fiji etc they very much believe climate change is real and are desperate for action to be taken.
If you really want things to change help change the politicians in the US. Because China is doubling down on solutions and we really need the US to be doing the same.
I hadn't heard this. can you give some examples, please?
Ironically, it gave me some comfort to know that the issue was as politically impossible to pass then as it is now. It gives me hope that it could be passed knowing that opinion, not a cabal of interests, stands in the way.
as I've become more open to other people's political worldviews, I've come to understand that any extant political 'movement' (for lack of a better term) has advocates (and opposition) in both categories you mention: interested beneficiaries and prescriptive advocates.
after that, echoing another top-level comment: take calculus and physics. take 2 semesters of each.
after those 3 classes, you'll know more math than 90% of the world's population. more importantly you'll be prepared to move on to differential equations, linear algebra, and vector calculus.
they were, as I said, "black body radiators" which are not theoretically ideal black bodies, but still manage to radiate black body radiation.
Unfortunately this "nonsense" is the explanation that any economist would give you.
Maybe you can be the first one to propose a revolutionary alternative theory, but I haven't read it :)
that doesn't support your novel assertion.
> Unfortunately this "nonsense" is the explanation that any economist would give you.
lots of people running around hn espousing their own particular viewpoint as mainstream econ. are you guys working together or is it just a few guys attempting to take advantage on a non-econ crowd?
> Maybe you can be the first one to propose a revolutionary alternative theory, but I haven't read it :)
well you're obviously not very well read if you think commodity money is a revolutionary alternative theory :). I'd suggest starting with introductory econ textbooks and setting your own prejudices aside until you're better informed.