vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"Oh, yeah, my mistake.  My statement would apply if that was ""dew point"" instead of ""heat index"".  Haha, this is the most ridiculous back-and-forth because I'm sure we're both in agreement.  Hopefully someone will find it useful!"
1. It was the late 1960's to the 1970's. 2. It was completely media hype and mostly present in popular literature. 3. It was never a widespread conjecture among the scientific community or the scientific literature of the time. Between 1965 to 1979, [7 articles predicted cooling and 44 predicted warming.](http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1)  Even though most articles predicted warming, only the ones that predicted cooling got media attention.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I just saw the following statement in your reply which is inaccurate:  &gt;Bjartr mentioned the heat index being 102°F. This would mean you'd have to get your skin temp higher than 102°F which would mean your core temp is even higher (dangerously high).  Not sure if you momentarily confused heat index with dew point or what.
"Ive got a lengthy reply for you, but I forgot to hit send. Anyway...  Honest question without entrapment. Do you really believe this ""anti science"" rhetoric? You must see that a good bit of that comes from a liberal media pushing an agenda. What has he actually done that is oppositional to science?  As a data point the largest hit to NIH funding came during the Obama years. Granted they cleverly hid it in sequestration so they weren't left holding the bag, but they also didn't spend considerable political capital defending it. Not exactly a pro science move in any pragmatic sense.  NASA funding increased 800 million. NSF is up 100 million. Collectively agencies are up 14 million from 2015. Data here  https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/fedfunds/2015/html/FFS2015_DST_003.html  Ultimately you have to admit the rapid expansion of entitlements lobbied for by democrats will necessarily create budgetary pressure on non defense spending. The assumption being that budgets of grant agencies is the primary mechanism by which government exerts control over science."
I'm pretty sure you already know this, so I'm probably just wasting time. You know, I can't think of a better analogy to the whole global warming debate than this 97% number. A misleading statistic that means nothing is used to mislead the public. The origin of this number was a survey of over 10,000 Earth scientists in climate related fields a few years back. First, it was a non-scientific survey, and only 3000 people bothered to respond. The two questions were: The first: “When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?” Few would be expected to dispute this…the planet began thawing out of the “Little Ice Age” in the middle 19th century, predating the Industrial Revolution. (That was the coldest period since the last real Ice Age ended roughly 10,000 years ago. 97% of skeptics would answer yes to this. The 2nd: Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?” So what constitutes “significant”? Does “changing” include both cooling and warming… and for both “better” and “worse”? And which contributions…does this include land use changes, such as agriculture and deforestation? Once again, many skeptics would answer yes. Surprisingly, of the 3000 respondents, only 82% answered yes to both questions So there is your real consensus. Well, this wasn't acceptable of course, so they waded through the 3000, and found 79 that they classified as climate scientists. 76 of 79 responded yes to the first question. 96.4 % (What the heck, we have real published scientists who don't even think the earth has warmed?) So then 2 of the 3 who answered no to the first question didn't answer the second question. I think it is fair to say that if they think there was no warming, then they didn't feel that mankind had contributed. But for the survey, they just reported 75 of 77 (97% plus) responded yes to the 2nd question.
&gt; Earth has witnessed a surge in average temperature at a rate that’s unparalleled in the last **10,000** years  not true  e.g. how long have we had thermometers?  how long have people measured?  who has certified accuracy of the instruments?  how many times have the climate types been caught manipulating/falsifying the available data?
102° that is nothing. During summer months, it reaches 120° in my area and 130° in others. No air or airflow other than small fans. OSHA has no heat regulations so we are told to deal with it and drink water.
"**[Risikostyring](http://dymanassociates.blogspot.nl/)** skal håndtere usikkerhet og omfatter tiltak å identifisere, vurdere,overvåke og redusere virkningen av risikoene for bedriften. En god risikostyringsplan med aktuelle risk management strategier kan minimerekostbar og stressende problemer, og kan også redusere forsikringskrav og bonuser.Det er fem trinn til å utvikle din risikostyringsplan. **TRINN 1: DEFINERE RISIKO SAMMENHENG** Identifisere hvor eller under hvilke omstendigheter risikoen inntreffer. For eksempel, enbestemt arbeidsstedet, avdeling, fungerer delen, detaljhandel butikk gren, eller etteruvær. **TRINN 2: RISIKOIDENTIFIKASJON** Identifisere risikoer som kan påvirke oppnåelse av virksomhetens mål. Beskrive risiko. Hva kan skje? Vurdere hvordan og hvorfor det kan skje. Beskriverkonsekvensene av risiko-hva skjer hvis risikoen oppstår? -Systematisk arbeid gjennom hver funksjon eller en scene av driften og identifisere hvasom kan skje for hver funksjon. -Foreta en gjennomgang av poster og rapporter for å finne ting som har gått galt isiste. -Analysere dine systemer og prosesser for å identifisere kritiske punkter. -Brainstorm med ansatte eller kollegaer.
"&gt; 100% Chance of Crisis, Worse Than 2008: Jim Rogers  He also called it in 2011 that it was going to be 2012 or 13. He was wrong.  [""In 2002 it was bad, in 2008 it was worse and 2012 or 2013 is going to be worse still – be careful,""](http://www.cnbc.com/id/45219555)"
Fully refurbished to factory standards. The Alcatel 2021I Dual Stage Rotary Vane Pump is coupled with a NW25 Inlet Flange and NW25 Outlet Flange. This Alcatel Rotary Vane Pump has a peak pumping velocity of 14.6 CFM and a final pressure of 1 x 10-3 Torr. It has been thoroughly examined and is ready for broad range of applications within the research and industrial industries.
I can't even bring myself to list how MANY times your statement has been disproved by actual scientists. Regardless of amount it is still very dangerous, specially if you are subjected to it multiple times a year. It just adds to the already high levels from flying.  Also, isn't limited but not as common as you are lead to believe.
&gt; 90% CO2 emitted 100 years has already sunk, absorbed by biota and oceans.  I understand your point.  You believe the US is less responsible for temperature increases than the proportion of its total emissions since most of those emissions are no longer in the air.  So, does that mean you also believe China is less responsible for ocean acidification than the proportion of its total emissions since most of those emissions have not been absorbed by the oceans?
Regardless of the reason, the models are now outside of their own 95% probability range. There may be a valid reason. It is also possible that the models just overstate the warming that CO2 causes.  But the odds stand at 20-1 that by their own parameters  the models are overstating the warming.  Interestingly enough, natural cycles like El Nino were put forth as a possible explanation for the warming in the 80's and 90's.  That explanation was not accepted by alarmists at the time. They have long resisted using natural cycles to explain the pause, because they then have to admit it played a large role in the warming as well. But when you get desperate....
Things we should all understand:  * The Federal Reserve will not engage in QE3 or QE4 or any kind of QE. - Inflation is too high and the economy would be harmed rather than helped.  * The Federal Reserve will not raise rates until 2013-2014. - Ben has been pretty adamant and clear about this. What I'm concerned about is that they keep pushing back the date. Interest rates should have been raised last year.
A company in Dubai, UAE concluded a huge Jet Fuel Deal within a week with their supplier in Singapore by availing Letter of Comfort - Bank Comfort Letter aka MT799 from Bronze Wing Trading LLC. Reach out to us to get your required BCL, we will complete your deal in one banking day.
"It is your name, or the fictitious name under which you operate. For example, if your freelance front end is called ""Zolani the 13th, LLC"", then that's the name you want to appear on the check, and not ""Mr. John Zolani Doe"" that is written in your birth certificate."
"&gt;in contradiction to all the climate models.  Please, explain to me how and why climate models (remember, climate is at LEAST 30 years) are supposed to capture short term weather trends?   Do you use a calendar to tell time?   (Oh, and by the way, [the models that capture ocean trends best also captured the ""pause.""](http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/jul/21/realistic-climate-models-accurately-predicted-global-warming) So you're wrong on pretty much every level.)"
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](http://timharford.com/2017/08/what-we-get-wrong-about-technology/) reduced by 97%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; So sophisticated is Rachael that she is impossible to distinguish from a human without specialised equipment; she even believes herself to be human.  &gt; &amp;quot;If 11th-century Europe had little use for paper,&amp;quot; writes Mark Kurlansky in his book Paper, &amp;quot;13th-century Europe was hungry for it.&amp;quot; When paper was embraced in Europe, it became arguably the continent&amp;#039;s earliest heavy industry.  &gt; If human skills are now so valuable, that low-end growth seems like a puzzle - but the truth is that many distinctively human skills are not at the high end.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6wyvcy/what_we_get_wrong_about_technology/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~201126 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **human**^#1 **paper**^#2 **technology**^#3 **invention**^#4 **more**^#5"
Wij leveren u eerste klas ovengedroogd openhaardhout dat goed brandt en weinig rookt. Het haardhout wat nadat het is gekloofd en gestapeld in de boxen gedrurende een paar dagen in de oven gedaan. Door de hoge temperaturen verdamt het vocht uit het hout.
Als we thuis zijn, willen we onthaasten en moeilijk gedoe voorkomen. Waarom zou je moeite doen ijsblokjes maken als je gekoeld water hebt in de watercooler. De cooler heeft ook de optie tot heet water en bied ons nog meer comfort. Dit vermindert de inspanning koffie of thee te maken, omdat we heet water uit de cooler kunnen tappen.
"Reddit has what is informally called the ""1 in 10"" rule. That is, it's generally considered OK to submit your own material or material you are promoting as 1 in every 10 submissions. Accounts that only submit for commercial reasons are likely to get labeled spam and possibly deleted.  More definitions of what is considered spam on Reddit can be found [here](http://www.reddit.com/help/faq#Whatconstitutesspam)."
"Your conclusion there is very wrong. Labeling laws are never designed to intentionally mislead. Yes, sometimes they fail, and can often be abused, but generally speaking the majority of our labeling laws are pretty good. There are plenty of issues, but it's an extremely complex thing, and there are bound to be issues. Most at least have a reasonable justification.   Though not all. See also ""natural"" versus ""artificial,"" which is a crock of shit."
"Your counterexample of Deserved"" is telling. There are two distinct lines of thought in justice: punitive and preventative. Punitive focuses on retribution, while preventative focuses on isolation or elimination of an individual from a situation where it can do further harm.""  [Deserves got nothing to do with it.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpDkYZWeeVg),is this both?"
Marijuana is completely illegal within National Parks under federal law. You can actually go to jail for possession of if it's your second offense. First offense is usually a several hundred dollar citation.   Edit: why am I getting down-voted for warning people?
"&gt; Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body.  suppression of posts from ""spammy cheater"" websites? Totally counts as censorship.  Yes, they are the result of bot/spam abuse; and that result = censorship."
Morally it is stealing.  Legality is another issue.  It's really no different then some of the other BS businesses do to people every day: exploit a loophole in order to take advantage of other person (yes, target is legally a person).
"Anticompetitive behavior is only illegal if a monopoly does it, and amazon is not a monopoly. But with billions in the bank, they can act like one indefinitely, which makes me wonder if we should rethink those laws.    Edit: ""only illegal if a monopoly does it"" might not be accurate in this case. It might just be that American courts are reluctant to take action against this sort of thing."
I think he means you aren't legally obligated to show the receipt.  However, I'm not sure that store workers know the exact laws, and I don't know what your luck would be refusing to show them.  My guess is refusing would get you in an awkward argument and managers would be called and it wouldn't be worth the hassle compared to just showing the receipt in the first place.
How so? Just because you can't test for something means it should be thrown out of consideration?  Now I don't think that cheating the Antibiotic-free classification is rampant but I would consider the possibility in my purchases. I'm more likely to buy from a vendor that is known to work closely with its suppliers to maintain quality than ones who have not. If I see something  with an organic label selling below market cost from a questionable vendor, I won't have blind faith that the product is what it alleges to be.