Considering some of the things climate-change deniers argue or repeat, I doubt this chatbot will make a lot of difference to people that willfully ignore credible evidence while making claims that seem superficial or blatantly false.
Tired of responding to climate change deniers on Twitter, this man created @AI_AGW, a bot that responds for him http://j.mp/b9HfV7— Stephen Miller (@miller_stephen) November 05, 2010
Most people have heard of the Richter Scale for measuring the ‘size’ or ‘strength’ of an earthquake. This scale is quantitative and based on the amount of energy released by an earthquake.
The inferred energy of a quake is a function of both the amplitude and the duration of a single wave. The seismogram below shows waves with a wide range of amplitude (up to +/- 350) and duration (the first big wave cycle – up, down, back to zero – started just after 8 minutes on the chart and ended nearly 40 seconds later; other waves lasted only seconds).
So when you do all the math, here is what you get.
One unit on the Richter Magnitude Scale corresponds to a tenfold increase or decrease in the amplitude of the wave on the seismogram – 350 in this example would become either 3500 or 35! This change, when summed over all the wavelengths and wave types, translates to a 30 times increase in energy.
So a seismograph (the instrument) that recorded a 1 cm deflection on a seismogram (the tracing) for a magnitude 5 earthquake would show a 100 cm deflection for a magnitude 7 quake that released 30×30 = 900 times as much energy. You do the math for a magnitude 8 quake!
However, the strongest earthquakes aren’t necessarily the deadliest. From Voice of America:
Throughout history, the most powerful earthquakes have not necessarily been the deadliest. The deadliest earthquake of modern times was recorded in 1556 in central China. More than 830,000 people were reported killed in that quake, which had an estimated magnitude of 8.
During the 2008 presidential campaign, Senator McCain attacked government spending on research type projects, and he continues that theme in his top ten porkiest projects. I wonder what type of programs besides defense spending would Republicans support. Besides cutting taxes for corporations and the wealthy, restricting civil rights, and deregulating—do Republicans actually make policy?