R Tyner

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson @sophaller @Riley_Gaines_ @stoolpresidente The white shadow on red/blue background is great...but instead of pointing, why not have the shadow be in a position of just shooting (hands still up waiting for the swish), making a lay-up, or something related to B-ball?

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@wise145485 @BretWeinstein It just means they are propagandized, insecure, afraid, or complicit in deception/evil

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@JonSnyderHQ @MaryBowdenMD @HawleyMO Proof was made public back in 2021/2022. I didn't save it, but you can look it up. Naomi Wolf studied the Pfizer links. RFK Jr's 2021 book "The Real Anthony Fauci", has 10-12pgs of references; NOTHING he wrote has been formally refuted, or corrected. The documentation stands true

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@JonSnyderHQ @MaryBowdenMD @HawleyMO He was the highest paid government official ever. He agreed to continue. Gain function research for DoD on foreign soil (China) after Obama banned it in the US. He got massive financial kickbacks from Pfizer - and possibly also Moderna

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@SenatorDurbin It is a shame that you LIE so boldly! Fauci KNEW what he was covering up - and documented in on a gov (public) computer! He clearly doesn't care about people and hasn't seen patient clinically in 40+yrs!

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@sarahehunt01 What kind of person would make fun of these cute letters home from camp???

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson He is horrid. Those of us who sought real science at the time, did not learn anything new this year. People were discussing the lab leak from China, & our Army biomed lab in Wuhan that shut down at the end of 2019, by spring 2020 - but they were quickly silenced - by both parties

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson Agreed. And we should care about children being tortured & killed both inside and outside the womb. All life is sacred.

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@bloom_always @KarlWuckert He had a meeting scheduled, (about his will) the Monday after he was killed

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@MaryBowdenMD Yikes! That's just a serious lack of understanding of major public AI engines

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@ValerieAnne1970 Pls link the study

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson Seems this would be a nuanced discussion - you've likely had them! God managed everything fine w/o our involvement, but if humans messed things up, then we may have a role. There's a lot of science on the importance of fire to western ecosystems...but everything's about balance.

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson @ACCAction The ACC paper is pathetic. It diregards MAJOR problems w/DCs rammed into communities w/o local input. It's ANTI-Conservative for big Gov to overrule Local control!
ACC used subjective single-opinion articles to "refute" professional publications w/numerous germane citations.

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson I showed a couple professional colleagues the ACC paper - and they also immediately saw gaping holes in its flow, references & reasoning. It looked AI-written, as if designed to push a narrative - perhaps politically, vs objectively researching anything. I'm embarrassed for ACC.

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson Sorry my replies got un-ordered wrt the awful ACC doc. Past 3 days I was in a conf w/industry (big defense, UxV, small hydro, & R&D companies), Fed gov agencies, & academia. Lots discussion of AI uses/potential/issues- incl very REAL damage to enviro/people thru poor placement

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson This is an extraordinary unprofessional and unscientific paper, full of inconsistencies, hand waving issues away w/o addressing them, citing unprofessional opinion articles w/no explanation. Some graph sources are unexplained acronyms or AI. It looks pretty, but earns an "F".

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson (1 of 3) This is a deeply flawed paper. We can discuss, but here's just two examples:
1. Pg 3 summary, para 5 states: "Land use impacts require careful siting, not blanket restrictions." OK, great, but nowhere does she address the fact that careful siting has NOT occurred, thus

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson sentences suggest suggest that paper is wrong based on 2 single-authored, unscientific substack articles w/no references (& no explanation why she prefers them over the pro paper). Her 4th sentence needs, but lacks a citation. Her 5th sentence offers what "could" happen (uncited)

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson HARMING people...resulting in blanket restrictions as communities react to bad behavior, to prevent it in their towns.
2. Pg 11, para 3 (water use). Her 1st sentence cites a multi-authored, professional, peer-reviewed, accepted & published paper w/numerous references. Her 2nd/3rd

[R Tyner @TynerRD]

@Rob_Sisson @ACCAction FALSE. I invite you to join me & a realtor in south/southwest Ohio. The problems are VERY real, and devastating to those effected. NIMBY folks benefit; rural people & wildlife suffer great harms; promised jobs evaporate. (*This is true for the newer, large data centers