Coldest Spot On Planet Earth Identified

Thorfinn.au sends this news from NASA: "What is the coldest place on Earth? It is a high ridge in Antarctica on the East Antarctic Plateau where temperatures in several hollows can dip below minus 133.6 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 92 degrees Celsius) on a clear winter night. Scientists made the discovery while analyzing the most detailed global surface temperature maps to date, developed with data from remote sensing satellites including the new Landsat 8, a joint project of NASA and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Ted Scambos, lead scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colo., joined a team of researchers reporting the findings Monday at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco. Researchers analyzed 32 years' worth of data from several satellite instruments. They found temperatures plummeted to record lows dozens of times in clusters of pockets near a high ridge between Dome Argus and Dome Fuji, two summits on the ice sheet known as the East Antarctic Plateau. The new record of minus 93.2 C was set Aug. 10, 2010."

Comments

Epic Fail.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

The forgot to check the hearts of the congresscritters voting to end unemployment benefits as a Christmas gift, after having to cut the school lunches and food stamps. They would find it way colder than Antarctica.

Re:Epic Fail.

[Brett Buck]

Yes, because 99 weeks of warning that the benefits would run out simply aren't enough. Hey, here's an idea that will no doubt go over well in this venue - let's just pay people indefinitely! Why should it ever run out?

Re:Epic Fail.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes.

And, instead, they should vote to stop spending money on meaningless research like this. I mean really: Who cares. Science should just go get a job and support /itself/ for a change. It's not like science ever helped anyone. Stupid americans.

Re:Epic Fail.

[Scottingham]

I hope your house gets overrun by rioters.

Re:Epic Fail.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://capitolcommentary.com/2010/08/18/do-unemployment-benefits-increase-unemployment/

Anecdote evidence, I have friend who has turned down several offers, that while they don't pay quite as much initial as he would was making at his last job they do pay better then unemployment*. But It's less work to meet the requirements for "looking for a job" then it is actually work a job. Keep in mind that people won't be going hungry though they might have to downgrade their lifestyle to live on welfare. I don't make as much money as he did but I am better off financially because he has lived a lifestyle with the goberment and parents as his only safety nets. You start to feel stupid for being financial responsible though I realize I could claim Unemployment regardless of my savings. Ideally, yes we could offer long time unemployment issuance with a good pay but only if people weren't smart, lazy, greedy as I like to say.

*Some of this required moving and a few of them where through friends.

Re:Epic Fail.

[ackthpt]

The forgot to check the hearts of the congresscritters voting to end unemployment benefits as a Christmas gift, after having to cut the school lunches and food stamps. They would find it way colder than Antarctica.

Well, yes, now Maggie Thatcher is gone. My, but her heart was cold as the depths of space itself.

Re:Epic Fail.

[MrNJ]

There are no guarantees in life...

Yet disproportionate number of UI recipients find jobs within 1 month prior or after their benefits end date.

Re:Epic Fail.

[NatasRevol]

You haven't raised a family with today's costs on $67k/ year. You could probably buy a house for less than that when you started a family. Now, that'd be a mobile home with no extras.

Shit, I make 3/4 of what my father did when he was working, but I'm a LOT poorer.

Re:Epic Fail.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet disproportionate number of UI recipients find jobs within 1 month prior or after their benefits end date.

What exactly is a "disproportionate" number, and why is it disproportionate? Please, hard facts only, and none of this "well, just look at the number. It's obvious they were just sitting on their asses."

After all, "40% of all 'sick' days are taken on either a Monday or a Friday" sure looks like proof of sick day abuse. But once you realize that there are 5 working days in a week, and 2/5 == 40%, it actually makes perfect sense that, on average, 40% of all sick days will be taken on either a Monday or a Friday.

Re:Epic Fail.

[tchdab1]

I wonder how Switzerland's guaranteed minimum income initiative is working out? Is everyone quitting their jobs to live in minimal-standards misery?

Re:Epic Fail.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

We have been systematically funneling money away from people who would spend 90% to 100% of their income (the poor) towards the ones who would save/invest 90% to 99% of their income (the rich). We tax physical labor more (earned income tax) and treat investment income (dividend, capital gains) leniently. This has been going on for 30 years. Under the guises of Supply-side economics, trickle down theory or Reganomics. The result is capital markets are sloshing with excess investment. Companies are sitting on 2 trillion dollars of cash not knowing what to do or where to invest.

The solution is to pay attention to Demand-side economics, where we stop coddling the rich (the self proclaimed job creators) and tax them. If you believe in free markets, you should know that if this captialist won't create the job another capitalist will come along and create that job. They keep telling labor, "If A does not do the job, B will. No one is indispensable". Same thing is true for them too. If A is not willing to invest when there is a job to be done, B will. No single capitalist is indispensable. We have excess capital, and lack of demand. Create demand, jobs will follow.

Of course, all it takes is a few well placed media stories about "gun control" or "gay agenda" or "baby murders" and all the people who actually would stand to gain, gain a lot in fact, would vote against their own best economic interests.

Re: Epic Fail.

[nbritton]

Giving people a stipend like Sweden is one of the better ideas I've heard in a long time, instead of working to further a few individuals private interests, people would now have the time to dedicate to their own interests, which would be much more diverse and generally non-profit motivated. Myself, for instance, would use my time to further medical research in compounds that can't be patented.

Socialism isn't the answer, but at the same time capitalism isn't ether. We control the world at this point in our evolution, cooperation is critical now, and there is no other way forward.

Re:Epic Fail.

[NatasRevol]

You might try having more than one person.

Try having a wife & two kids, thus 2 cars, saving for 2 colleges, and a wife who grew up poor and so wants to spoil her children. I live near enough to schools for my kids to walk to elementary, middle & high school. Thus housing is pricier than if I lived a few miles away.

But yeah, $67k/person would be fucking awesome. Our household income would be $268k! Sweet!

Re:Epic Fail.

[seven of five]

The only cure for ignorance is education. Therefore, I recommend you find out first hand what it's like to be laid off and hunt for a job for months on end before passing judgement on others.

Re:Epic Fail.

[NatasRevol]

If companies can't invest in themselves, maybe they're not very good at what they're doing.

Re:Epic Fail.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Someday you would realize, your job is created by the people consuming the product you make. If this particular investor did not create your job, some other investor would. That is the free market theory. No particular employee, including you is indispensable. No particular employer, including me, is indispensable. There is excess capital right now in the world financial market. They don't know what do with or where to invest. They chase the latest fad and create booms, bursts and bubbles. There is no one willing to borrow my money. They are offering me 2% or less for 2 year bonds. Supply side has run its course. Creating more incentives for investments would be very counter productive. There was a time, when we needed to encourage investments, may be 30 or 40 years ago. But right now we need to stop coddling the investors and job creators and fund the consumers, the demand siders to create long term prosperity.

I have tons of investments, not quite 1 percenter but quite high and getting there. And real long term viability of my investments, not next quarter or year or even decade depends on not screwing the economic base of this country.

Re:Epic Fail.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the coldest spot on Earth is inside my ex-wife's chest.

Re:Epic Fail.

[the eric conspiracy]

That's true even in the short term. Asset prices are quite high right now, and growth fairly low. All this points to likely lower than historical averages on returns over the next decade.

Obviously this means that lowering taxes on the wealthy or on corporations will do nothing. What needs to be done is raise taxes on the wealthy to fund things like infrastructure projects and increase the flow of money to lower and middle class people. This should result in an increased standard of living for all citizens.

Re: Epic Fail.

[JeffAtl]

That might work well in small european states, but in the US that sort of thing would only result in the recipients having more children and in immigration fraud.

Re:Epic Fail.

[JeffAtl]

I wonder how Switzerland's guaranteed minimum income initiative is working out? Is everyone quitting their jobs to live in minimal-standards misery?

If the guaranteed minimum initiative only results in minimal-standards misery, then what good is it really?

Re:Epic Fail.

[espiesp]

" and a wife who grew up poor and so wants to spoil her children"

There is your problem, and is exactly what the parent poster was trying to point out. $67k is a fair amount of money to live on, even for a small family, in many areas - if you are fair with spending it.

The whole "kids are expensive" thing is really blown out of proportion also. If you take away most of the video games, ipods, ipads, laptops, cell phones, name brand fancy clothes, etc, they really aren't that expensive to tag along and mooch. Wives on the other hand, THEY are expensive!

Re: Epic Fail.

[TapeCutter]

It doesn't matter what you call the system, if the gap between rich and poor is small (say a factor of 10) then people are generally happier. Obscene disparities in wealth do nothing but fuel revolutions. The "American dream" boils down to wanting to be mega-rich, they want the wealth gap because they believe they are "exceptional" and will one day leap across it in a single bound. The US would probably work a lot better for everyone if it simply stopped arguing with itself about money.

One of the major reasons why an American can pay up to 10X as much as an Australian for inferior health care, is that the American system is obsessed with finding and eliminating people who are "getting something for nothing". Not just the government but also the hospitals and private insurance companies. There's a veritable army of government and private accountants all spending $5 to save $0.50. Here in Oz the doctor bills the government directly. It's the doctors and hospital admins who are monitored for fraud by cheap automated statistical analysis.

Re:Epic Fail.

[NatasRevol]

Everything you want to take out?

Yeah, that's called life.

Re:Epic Fail.

[Reverand Dave]

What's a disproportionate number? I hope you're leaning toward a small number because I somehow doubt that you're going to be able to provide reliable sources for your assertion. People falling off of the roles of UI doesn't mean they got a job. Some go to school and some find less legitimate ways to try and support their family. When you go to jail, you don't get on the UI roles either. Also people getting a job doesn't mean they have a job sufficient to feed their family or one that is well met with their education. It could mean that they went from being pharmacy techs to pizza slingers.

While you're correct there are no guarantees in life that doesn't make its ok for rich lawyers disconnected from the populace they are intended to serve to suddenly yank the carpet out from under a bunch of unfortunate people. Not everyone on UI are mooches, some have just fallen on hard times and need a hand. There's no reason for such poverty in a country as rich as ours, especially since so many of the people yanking the supports from the bridge purport to follow the teachings of Christ at a time of year when we're all forced to endure their inane bullshit.

Re:Epic Fail.

[Anonymous Coward]

People are irrational. Media Moguls are no better that drug lords. Crime pays. The good are hoodwinked into doing nothing due to an artificial christian morality that confuses pacivity with morality. The courts and legal framework do the same.

We need a new religion. Stop with this cristian morality. We need the old Norse Gods. None of this crap about turning the other cheek, or calling upon the law to handle our problems. We need new Gods that encourage the people to lop off the heads of evil doers with two handed battle axes.

No one is special, and you always deserve what you get. If you are poor it is your fault for being poor. If you are a slave it is your fault you are a slave. If you are dead that is your fault too. If my country is overrun by retards gang stars, and lawyers, that is my fault, because I didn't kill enough of those fuckers.

-Peace

Re:Epic Fail.

[ChrisMaple]

If video games, ipods, ipads, laptops, cell phones, name brand fancy clothes are life to you, your life is as shallow as dew.

Re:Epic Fail.

[roman_mir]

1. Savings is where investments come from, if you want a stagnating or a shrinking economy, you should be reducing the savings pool, which by the way is exactly what has been happening since 1971, when the US took the world off the gold standard by defaulting on the gold dollar.

2. The money that is 'sloshing around' is not coming from savings, it's coming from the Federal reserve and all of the inflation that it is creating, (which is what is destroying real savings by making it impossible to earn interest).

3. Companies are not sitting on billions or anything like that, most companies don't sit on cash, they see the inflation and use the money to buy back their own stock or they buy government bonds (not US gov't bonds) or other currencies, like the UK pound or Swiss Franc for example.

4. There is no such thing as 'demand side economics', legitimate demand can only exist where there is legitimate production. 2 sides are trading because they expect something in return for their productive output that is not just inflated currency or their own money, stolen from them in taxes that went to other side as subsidies. Money is a store of value, medium of exchange and unit of account, that means that money is really claim on future consumption. Exactly what future consumption can you claim from anybody that lives off of subsidies and doesn't have to produce for living?

5. The rich are not "self proclaimed job creators", they are actual job creators, and the proof is in the pudding, by pushing for more collectivism, your society has pushed away the savings and investments to other nations, that are now much more productive and that's where 'the rich' are actually creating jobs.

6. You do not have capital. You are mixed up, confused, ignorant of the reality, there is no capital. Capital is savings, savings come from over-production and under-consumption. USA has been running 500 BILLION USD / year trade deficits, what under-consumption, where is this over-production? There is no capital, what you mistake for capital is inflation - fake money that is pumped into the system by gov't printing bonds and by the Fed creating fake currency out of their ass and this ends up bidding up prices ON EXISTING ASSETS, on existing houses, on existing pieces of art, on existing commodities, on anything that exists already, but where is this productivity? There is no productivity. Productive nations do not run trade deficits for decades, they can actually feed themselves by paying for the stuff they import with real exports. That's not the reality of America. The reality of America is that very few if any jobs are actually created, there is complete lack of savings, nobody wants to create new jobs there and it's for a good reason. Collectivism - too much gov't, too many regulations, too much taxation, too much inflation, too much of all of it and absolutely no individual freedoms anymore. Why would anybody want to actually risk their own savings and invest in that nonsensical regime? I wouldn't.

Re: Epic Fail.

[ChrisMaple]

Here in Oz the doctor bills the government directly. It's the doctors and hospital admins who are monitored for fraud by cheap automated statistical analysis.

Hooray for Australia! It's discovered a hidden technique to suppress any innovation that a bureaucrat doesn't like.

Re:Epic Fail.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

They have been peddling this crap for three decades. Poor are not able to climb out of poverty, our infrastructure is crumbling, our trade imbalance is getting wider. More bold faces and capital letters are not going magically resurrect the utter colossal failure of Reganomics, trickle down economics, or supply side.

The money paid by the consumers are what is paying for the cost of production, profit of the investors and wages of the employees. If there is a profit to be made, somebody will. That is the foundation of the free markets. We cut the taxes, we encouraged investment, all those traitors who took all the money invested in Bangladesh and Bangkok. They say with straight face, we will invest where the wages are low, pollution controls are non existent, where the profits will be high. We should tell them, go live there, or pay taxes here.

If we tax the rich, we can make sure the money is spent inside USA creating more jobs. If we give them tax cuts, they will invest elsewhere. They have broken their side of the contract. They want tax cuts, and low wages and no pollution control, no job safety, no unions. The demands of the rich are endless. It is folly to give in to them.

Re:Epic Fail.

[dudpixel]

These things represent enjoyment, and fun. If your life is about anything else, then you can keep it. No one cares about your superiority when you're dead.

Re:Epic Fail.

[Anonymous Coward]

Minimal-standards misery is better than utter and complete misery (say sleeping in a ditch and looking for food in back-alley trashcans).

Re:Epic Fail.

[Anonymous Coward]

It failed with only 1/3 of the vote.

Re:Epic Fail.

[rhodium_mir]

Same guy, backup account.

Sounds legit...

Re:Epic Fail.

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder why you posted that comment, and why it's voted up. This is an article about the coldest spot on earth.

Re:Epic Fail.

[DNS-and-BIND]

Gosh, silly me, coming in to a Slashdot discussion about Antarctica and here we are again with the standard left-wing talking points, including the one that people who don't agree with us are stupid. Thanks for contributing to a greater scientific understanding of extreme cold weather.

Re:Epic Fail.

[NatasRevol]

Well, let's see.

My older kid bought his own iPhone, pays for half his data plan, and pays for all his own games. Wears target brand clothes, pays extra if he wants name brand.

My younger kid is the same, but with his iPod.

Yeah, shocking that kids like playing with video games/computers.

But please presume to know me.

Oh, BTW, both my kids are grade accelerated while still getting As, top of their age groups in competitive AA hockey, and can have intelligent conversations with adults.
I'm guessing you didn't have that broad a life in middle school.

Still shallow?

Re: Epic Fail.

[Anonymous Coward]

yea. still shallow. go brag about your kids elsewhere, nobody gives a fuck.

Re: Epic Fail.

[NatasRevol]

LOL at such bitterness or is it jealousy?

Re:Epic Fail.

[smithmc]

Seriously? If you want better than minimum-standards misery, you go get get a friggin' job and earn more than the minimum. The minimum is there to ensure you don't starve to death during your job search.

Re:Epic Fail.

[fatphil]

> we need to stop coddling the investors and job creators and fund the consumers

The notion that the business owners are the job creators is a myth. I run a business, and I want as *few people as possible* on my payroll - just enough to do the work for my clients, not one more - as every single one eats away my bottom line. In reality everyone does think this way - just check how share prices change after the announcement of layoffs.

The real job creaters are indeed the consumers who drive up demand so much that more employees are absolutely necessary in order to satisfy it.

Don't try talking about this at TED, as they'll censor you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRJL33CfDfQ

Re:Epic Fail.

[volmtech]

You forgot globalization. There is tremendous demand in the US for smart phones and flat screen TVs, yet no one in the US makes them, the jobs were created in China. We even import much of our food from China. A poor person will buy two cheap things from China instead of one quality item made in America. Raise tariffs and wall off the border. The capitalist will have to build factories here and hire Americans. Well paid workers can afford well made goods. In 1965 most people had a car and a television, both American made.

Remember, you get less of what you tax and more of what you subsidize. Tax the rich, you get less rich, subsidize the poor, you get more poor. Go ahead, gut that golden goose, then you can get ALL the gold in there.

Re:Epic Fail.

[Anonymous Coward]

As time passes, we as humans become more numerous, more things are automated and less people are needed to perform actual work.

How do you propose having a job will be a valid requirement for being able to live a decent life in the (fairly near, actually) future?

No, really. I'm curious.

Re:Epic Fail.

[smithmc]

As more things become automated, people will find new things to do. Unemployment didn't increase when we stopped making buggy whips, those people went to work making cars. As we develop new technologies, people will be needed to work in those new technologies, until they become sufficiently automated, by which time other technologies will be new. Eventually, we will need people to travel to and colonize new planets.

I'm surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

I would have guessed "inside Dick Cheney's heart".

Re:I'm surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

That was the researchers' first thought too. But no matter how long they spent looking for it, they just could not find the damn thing, apparently it resides at a "secure undisclosed location".

Re:I'm surprised...

[NoNonAlphaCharsHere]

They said "coldest", not "evilist".

Re:I'm surprised...

[ackthpt]

I would have guessed "inside Dick Cheney's heart".

Ah, but his burns with capitalism! Nothing, but nothing warmed the cockles of his heart like the 8 billion no-bid contract given to the company he was once CEO of.

Re:I'm surprised...

[ScentCone]

Nothing, but nothing warmed the cockles of his heart like the 8 billion no-bid contract given to the company he was once CEO of.

Name one other company that even offered (let alone could deliver - never mind competitively, price-wise) what Haliburton specialized in doing. Please, go ahead.

While you're hunting down that non-existent company, please also discuss on the no-bid contract awarded to the company that so gloriously just executed Healthcare.gov, despite there being all kinds of competition (to say nothing of companies with competent track records) willing and able to do the job.

Re:I'm surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

My left asscheek can offer better services than Halliburton provided. Specifically, my left asscheek offers the services of "stay at home and don't go around the world murdering hundreds of thousands of people for a quick buck." If the US had been using my left asscheek's services instead of Halliburtons, we, and the whole world, would be in better condition today. Yes, Halliburton offers all sorts of unique services for hoovering up your tax money --- which everyone would be far better off not calling on.

Re:I'm surprised...

[CanHasDIY]

I would have guessed "inside Dick Cheney's heart".

Which one? The bastard goes through 'em like Paul Reubens goes through Kleenex.

Re:I'm surprised...

[ackthpt]

Nothing, but nothing warmed the cockles of his heart like the 8 billion no-bid contract given to the company he was once CEO of.

Name one other company that even offered (let alone could deliver - never mind competitively, price-wise) what Haliburton specialized in doing. Please, go ahead.

While you're hunting down that non-existent company, please also discuss on the no-bid contract awarded to the company that so gloriously just executed Healthcare.gov, despite there being all kinds of competition (to say nothing of companies with competent track records) willing and able to do the job.

And WHY do you think Haliburton was in a position to provide all of those services, hmmm? Former CEO is the power behind the throne and it has always looked to me like Dick passed them a note, upon being elected to the VP office, "You guys be ready. We'll find a reason to go in and had a very, very big order for services. I'll never believe they weren't positioned for the day they'd be called upon, with the understanding they would be called upon.

Re:I'm surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, Haliburton is still one of the top Oil-Field Services Companies, if that's what you mean. Which it isn't, of course, but thought I'd get that in.

Re:I'm surprised...

[ScentCone]

So, basically your theory is something out of a bad Clive Cussler story, even though that company had been doing exactly the same sort of work since the 1920's. Just like Cussler, you should do more research if you want your fiction to be the least bit plausible.

Re:I'm surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, christ. Who let the bleating retard in?

Re:I'm surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

What about Haliburton's no bid contracts in the Balkans under Bill Clinton?

And that they came in under estimate and returned several billion dollars to the government?

Bleating Retard says what?

Re:I'm surprised...

[Anonymous Coward]

Aaaah a libtard speaks.

Does your mother know you are posting things and not doing your homework.

Cool!

[jonyen]

That's a great place for a datacenter!

Re:Cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

and all frigid women

Re:Cool!

[Charliemopps]

Our data centers on snow covered mountains are the hardest to keep cool. Snow is an excellent insulator.

Re:Cool!

[fluffythdestroy]

They got weather stations that wont work properly. I highly suspect the datacenter can do better

Re:Cool!

[cyn1c77]

Snow is an excellent insulator, but also really likes to keep things at 0 C or colder. So if you put your heat exchangers on the roof, you can basically guarantee that they will always be exchanging heat with an atmosphere that is 0 C or colder.

If you are more intelligent with your design and run your heat exchangers hot enough to melt any snow, you can then radiate directly into the antarctic air and really dump some serious heat quickly.

Re:Cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you think will happen to all the runoff, Einstein? You'll wind up with your radiator encased in an ice bubble, and a foot of water in your datacenter.

Re:Cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it the snow or the altitude that's causing your cooling woes (or maybe both)? Cooling performance will be negatively impacted with increased altitude and lower air pressure. Telecom equipment environmental operating requirements (like those defined in GR-63/NEBS, for example) often allow equipment to be derated when operated above certain altitudes (e.g. 1800m in the NEBS case).

Re:Cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

Then build it above ground in a manner that snow would be hard to accumulate surrounding the building?

Re:Cool!

[TapeCutter]

That is basically the GP's point, a snow covered data centre is like an igloo, the heat generated by the servers/people inside can't escape so it becomes a lot warmer that the surrounding ice, but due to the large amount of ice it's thermal inertia ensures the walls don't melt. You need to get past the ice to dissipate the heat effectively. Old English pubs with 3 foot thick stone walls don't need heaters when full for exactly the same reason.

Re:Cool!

[Charliemopps]

um... it doesn't stay winter forever.

Re:Cool!

[mjwx]

Our data centers on snow covered mountains are the hardest to keep cool. Snow is an excellent insulator.

Why do you have datacenters on snow covered mountains, do you work for a bond villain?

Re:Cool!

[cellocgw]

um... it doesn't stay winter forever.

except in pre-wardrobe Narnia, and quite possibly in Westeros, starting somewhere in Book 5.

Re:Cool!

[mcgrew]

um... it doesn't stay winter forever.

It does in Antarctica, dufus.

Re:Cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

The water will run down the side of the building and ice up when it hits the ground.

Pretty sure my basement is colder

[igaborf]

I may have to get a pair of wool socks.

Re:Pretty sure my basement is colder

[ackthpt]

I may have to get a pair of wool socks.

Wigwams at CostCo. $12 for a set of 3 pair!

I do not work at CostCo, nor own stock, I merely worship there

Visit East Antarctic Plateau!

[CaptainStumpy]

Guaranteed coolest vacation you will ever take

F?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, you'd think a site calling itself "news for nerds" would use scientifically sound units to report on a scientific result.

Re:F?

[Anonymous Coward]

But then the nerds would have nothing to argue about, and nerds love arguing about pedantry.

I'd guess that the units thing was deliberate, just to keep them happy that they've got some nits to pick.

Re:F?

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. If I had written it, I would have used the Rankine scale to keep everyone happy.

Re:F?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, you'd think a site calling itself "news for nerds" would use scientifically sound units to report on a scientific result.

You mean Planck units? Certainly not something based on an arbitrary choice like the freezing and boiling point of H2O. At least an alien life form would likely arrive at Planck units and understand their significance. There's no telling whether or not they'd think water was the most important thing, or how they'd chop it up into degrees since they probably decided to use something much more "scientific" like a hexidecimal numbering system, and chop it up into 0x100 degrees. Once again though, that assumes they regard H2O phase transitions as the best m measure...

Re:F?

[Anonymous Coward]

Try this and this for your 'arbitrary choices.' The 273.16 factor is historical rather than arbitrary and has the neat advantage of avoiding all the shitty weird constants you need to make imperial units do anything of value.

Makes sense...

[Anonymous Coward]

My ex-wife always said she wished she could live in the Antarctic.

That is fucking cold.

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Considering CO2 freezes at -78C... Yikes. That's cold...

Re:That is fucking cold.

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering CO2 freezes at -78C... Yikes. That's cold...

Sounds like a good place to set up a mars simulator.

Re:That is fucking cold.

[bill_mcgonigle]

Wow. So, what happens the atmospheric CO2 in that case? Would it precipitate as "dry ice" snow?

Re:That is fucking cold.

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a colder spot on earth, but it is not natural:
http://www.phys.ufl.edu/microkelvin/

Re:That is fucking cold.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law

It is close to being able to create solid CO2, but the pressure at the altitude might have caused it to remain a cold gas. I'm also not sure how much CO2 is at that location. It isn't China bad down there.

Re:That is fucking cold.

[careysub]

Wow. So, what happens the atmospheric CO2 in that case? Would it precipitate as "dry ice" snow?

Vapor pressure of carbon dioxide at -100 C: 100 mm. Actual partial pressure of CO2 on average in Earth's lower atmosphere: 0.3 mm. Partial pressure of CO2 in exhaled breath: 38 mm. So no, no dry ice snow - the vapor pressure is still too high. At around -110 C the possibility of "dry ice frost breath" becomes possible. It would have to be near -140 C before CO2 would start condensing out of the air.

Re:That is fucking cold.

[amaurea]

CO2 freezes at 78 C at a partial pressure of 1 atmosphere. That means that if the atmosphere were 100% CO2, and we were at sea level, but still at -93 C, then there would be CO2 snowing out of the atmosphere. However, the partial pressure of CO2 is much lower than 1 atmosphere simply because so little of the atmosphere is CO2. Since only 0.0397% of the air is CO2, and the local pressure (due to the high altitude) is about 0.65 atm, the partial pressure will be 2.6e-5 atmospheres. At that partial pressure the CO2 freezing temperature is less than -140 C (I couldn't find a diagram that went quite far enough down in pressure).

The physical reason for this is that there are two competing processes involved. CO2 molecules bumping into a solid speck of CO2 and getting stuck (freezing), and CO2 molecules shaking loose from a solid (sublimation). But the former process proceeds faster the more CO2 gas there is, i.e. the more often these collisions happen. Hence the dependence on the partial pressure.

Re:That is fucking cold.

[wonkey_monkey]

CO2 freezes at 78 C

I think you accidentally a -.

Re:That is fucking cold.

[TheSync]

But if you filled a balloon full of CO2, then would it start to freeze at this cold location?

Re:That is fucking cold.

[amaurea]

Yes. I think you would end up with the balloon shrinking until all the CO2 has been converted into a small lump of dry ice.

Re:That is fucking cold.

[kaatochacha]

I sense a kickstarter....

Re:That is fucking cold.

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought millimetres were units of length

Re:That is fucking cold.

[fatphil]

Do you get confused by both one pound's force and one millimetre of pressure, or are you capable of seeing the implicit dimensioned constant in one but not the other? (I appreciate that's not a dichotomy - perhaps both confuse you, in which case you should probably read a bit more.)

Re:That is fucking cold.

[Anonymous Coward]

What the hell is a "pound"?

Re:That is fucking cold.

[mdsolar]

On the other hand, the brightness temperature of the sky is even lower so using mirrors might allow some passive condensation.

Re:That is fucking cold.

[coinreturn]

What the hell is a "pound"?

It's what I do to the face of smartass AC's.

Re:That is fucking cold.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure you do, mr pseudonymous brave guy.

On the plus side: Free Dry Ice!

[Flyskippy1]

Well, as this is cold enough for Carbon Dioxide to freeze, I imagine it gets a cool witch's cauldron effect when it warms up for the summer...

Re:On the plus side: Free Dry Ice!

[tchdab1]

I too was wondering if it snows CO2 flakes.

How long can you survive there?

[mtthwbrnd]

If an average man were naked at that spot - how long until he dies?

Re:How long can you survive there?

[Anonymous Coward]

You wouldn't die, you would just wait for cryogenics to catch up.

Re:How long can you survive there?

[barakn]

At temperatures even warmer than that, people need special snorkels with heat exchangers to avoid freezing their lungs. Death would be by asphyxiation in mere minutes unless blood freezing in the skin caused some sort of high blood pressure event that triggers a heart attack first.

Re:How long can you survive there?

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh, I just got a funny flashback of some folks giving pretty much similar description about things that happen in +100C.

What's is the resolution of this satellite?

[Anonymous Coward]

How small of a pocket can we detect?

How long until AGW Deniers cite this...

[george14215]

as proof of their position? Cue them in 3, 2, 1...

Re:How long until AGW Deniers cite this...

[Anonymous Coward]

What will it take to get warmers to take a second look at their theory and say "maybe we need to re-evaluate what's happening" instead of "settled science"? A fucking 100 foot tall glacier about to run into your house?

Re:How long until AGW Deniers cite this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Go home Al Gore. You're drunk.

Re:How long until AGW Deniers cite this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wuh-oh, someone has some mommy and daddy issues.

Re:How long until AGW Deniers cite this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Everybody does. "Dysfunctional family" is redundant.

But my issues have nothing to do with the rampant faggotry evident in the AGW community.

Despite my trolling, you know I make a good point. You know it, and so do all the AGW Nancy-boys who read it.

You think you are being witty on insightful in some way by saying "Wuh-oh" but in reality, you say nothing other than that you have nothing to say.

Re:How long until AGW Deniers cite this...

[scorp1us]

Actually, they did the reverse... There was a record temperature reading from about 100 years ago in Libya. This wasn't convenient because we should be setting high temperature records now, not 100 years ago... so they found a way to discredit it and get a modern death valley reading in place.

Re:How long until AGW Deniers cite this...

[Anonymous Coward]

You make no point, other than reveal your ignorance and total lack of ability to express yourself in anything other than a juvenile manner, it seems you need to deal with your latent gay urges better.

Re:How long until AGW Deniers cite this...

[Anonymous Coward]

There is nothing latent about my gay urges. Where is there anything "latent"? Where am I denying anything? Where am I saying I am some kind of mach man? Nowhere.

I am well aware of my gay side. I am well aware of the potential for almost everyone to be pansexual. That does not prevent me from calling flaming faggotry, flaming faggotry.

You, on the other hand, are stuck with "comebacks" that are so stale as to be worthless. But you don't seem to realize that. You somehow thing you are throwing out zingers, but all you are doing is behaving like a faggot.

Coldest *Natural* Spot...

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty sure we've made colder temperatures in labs...

correction. . . .

[jafac]

uh, you meant on a clear SUMMER night, right?

Re:correction. . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

Seasons are relative. Because it's summer where you live, it doesn't mean it's summer everywhere. August is winter in Antarctica.

Re:correction. . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

August is winter at the South Pole. It took them a few months to release their findings or to get media attention.

Re:correction. . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

Summer starts in the southern hemisphere in ten days, Mr. Van Winkle.

Coldest spot on earth is inside Dick Cheneys heart

[JoeyRox]

But unfortunately due to a combination of global warming and Cheney's gay daughter coming out, Cheney has lost the world record to East Antarctic Plateau.

My ex-wife's heart

[bstarrfield]

Certainly the coldest spot on earth... just saying.

Re:My ex-wife's heart

[Anonymous Coward]

Were you married to Ann Coulter? Gross...

Re:My ex-wife's heart

[Anonymous Coward]

If he was, he wouldn't be referencing her heart as the coldest spot on Earth. Evidence suggests it would be her vagina.

No slashdot article can be complete...

[tompaulco]

No slashdot article can be complete until the remark about how much colder that place was before AGW kicked in.

Re:No slashdot article can be complete...

[tlhIngan]

No slashdot article can be complete until the remark about how much colder that place was before AGW kicked in.

Actually, it could be *warmer* before AGW.

AGW has an annoying effect of moving weather away from moderation to extremes. So the cold gets colder, the warms get hotter, the temperate drier or wetter (droughts/floods), etc.

That's the main effects of climate change - the weather starts hitting the extremes. You get drought, followed by extensive flooding, followed by drought, etc. Summers get hotter still, winters get even colder.

Re:No slashdot article can be complete...

[Anonymous Coward]

AGW has an annoying effect of moving weather away from moderation to extremes.

But apparently only on planet Earth, because all observable planets, besides earth, show the exact opposite happening.

Re:No slashdot article can be complete...

[RichMan]

Please exaplin "because all observable planets, besides earth, show the exact opposite happening" because as far as I can see Jupiter has one heck of a violent storm problem.

The center of the planet is molten. Space is cold. Air temperature is primarly affected by 1) solar input from ground heat and 2) radiative loss to space at altitude. More ground warming means more air rising, which means more cold air falling somewhere else. Making one spot hot is going to push more air up at that point, to balance that more cold air is going to "fall" somewhere else. One dynamic is that land cools quicker than water so we get arctic outflows. The world could get warmer and north america get colder due to all the cold air getting dumped on NA which is ideally shapped for north south air circulation.

Re:No slashdot article can be complete...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, fruitcake, Let's take a look at the planets of our solar system:

Planet:Mercury;Atmosphere:None;TemperatureGradient:Extreme;

Planet:Venus;Atmosphere:Extreme;TemperatureGradient:None;

Planet:Earth;Atmosphere:Earth;TemperatureGradient:Earth;

Planet:Mars;Atmosphere:Earth-;TemperatureGradient:Earth+;

more atmosphere = more uniform temperatures seasonally and pole-to-pole. Not a difficult concept to grasp for people like physicists or astronomers that understand how atmospheric pressure works. Thanks for the really shitty explanation on why you can tell me that there are no trees in this lush forest -- I've only heard it a hundred thousand times from people much smarter than you, but were trying to sell me something.

Re:No slashdot article can be complete...

[Anonymous Coward]

Jesus Christ, you've provided absolulely nothing to back your statement up, you've just listed a bunch of planets and said "See? I win!"

You remind me of a guy who once told me that acrylic paint wasn't water based, because his shirt was made of acrylic and it didn't dissolve in the rain, therefore he wins.

My exes soul

[Anonymous Coward]

beats that

Surface temps - radiated temps.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow. So, what happens the atmospheric CO2 in that case? Would it precipitate as "dry ice" snow?

Ecellent question.

If it's atmospheric temps then "dry ice" shoud precipictate. Yes?

Then again, if it's radiated temps, that's differnet. Yes?

With or without

[justthinkit]

With or without a woman present?

Re:With or without

[c0lo]

With or without a woman present?

This pops into my mind a new sense for "frigid woman", one that I'm pretty sure I dislike more than the common one.

That was a dumb response

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you think will happen to all the runoff, Einstein?

It runs down the drains that double as the heat exchangers and off the building?

Are you really that dumb or do you beat yourself in the head with rocks every day to meet your personal goal?

Re:That was a dumb response

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you really that dumb or do you beat yourself in the head with rocks every day to meet your personal goal?

Modded you up for supplying my new sig

From a friend of someone down there

[G3CK0]

A friend of a friend just posted this on FB and I thought it was really interesting: "We know someone who is down there right now. They actually have to have heaters in their refrigerators to keep them from getting too cold."

Re:From a friend of someone down there

[hubie]

A friend of mine winter-overed twice in Antarctica. They would play soccer at the South Pole and every now and again they would have to throw the ball in the microwave to warm it up and re-inflate it. Also, on New Years Eve they would go out every hour and have a drink at midnight in a different time zone. :P

Re:From a friend of someone down there

[Anonymous Coward]

Antarctic winter is in January now? Damn you, global warming!

Re:From a friend of someone down there

[hubie]

Sorry, winter-overed in this context means you were down there a whole year as opposed to just the summer months when all the researchers come down.

Re:Almost the coldest

[DarwinSurvivor]

I'll see your cryonics and raise you "a fraction of a Kelvin".

You're doing it wrong.

[Anonymous Coward]

Open the window!

This Proves Global Warming is a LIE!

[0xG]

Of course, I don't think so.
But someone from the deep south is bound to say it (and be interviewed on Fox as an "expert").
So I thought I'd beat them to it...

Re:This Proves Global Warming is a LIE!

[bigwheel]

Well, at least a few of us are wondering how much fanfare there would be if they discovered a record high.

Disclaimer: This is not the deep south. But with double-digits below zero F every night for the past week, some global warming would be kind of nice. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJUFTm6cJXM

Re:This Proves Global Warming is a LIE!

[tomofumi]

One is 'global', one is a 'spot' only ;)

Re:This Proves Global Warming is a LIE!

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoever moderated this flamebait has their sarcasm metre broken.

It would have to precipitate first.

[Anonymous Coward]

It gets well below zero in the deserts of Africa, but there's not enough water to precipitate out, therefore no snow.

Same here.

Cold isn't enough: more CO2 than it can hold at that temperature is needed.

Re:Almost the coldest

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but they don't keep Spot on ice there.

Evidence that cannot be explained

[Anonymous Coward]

It's already had 100+ years of second lookings. All that's needed is evidence that cannot be explained by the physics.

Nothing even approaching that has ever happened.

Even the "last 15 years it's been flat!" bullshit (it hasn't been flat, for a start) doesn't. Because for such a short period, the error in determining the trend is still easily within the IPCC trend calculations. Therefore doesn't prove them wrong.

But I notice that you didn't answer the question, but merely ignored it and made it those who accept reality's "problem" to address, yet failed completely to say why it needs "a second look". Why not take a first look, moron?

Not a silent 'C'

[Anonymous Coward]

How can an expert on the subject not know how to pronounce the continent's name? The first 'C' in Arctic (and Antarctica) is NOT silent!

Does the record count?

[Anonymous Coward]

Does the record count if it was measured by a satellite instead of by a ground station? What are the rules, anyway?

Re:my girlfriend's vagina!

[careysub]

And we have suspicions as to why...

Re:Coldest spot on earth is inside Dick Cheneys he

[careysub]

I take exception to this. As of 24 March 2012 we can state for a fact that Dick Cheney now has a normal human heart: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dick-cheney-receives-heart-transplant/

Mining CO2

[Anonymous Coward]

So why doesn't someone just mine the dry ice that should exist at the spot?

Re:So, surmised, not identified

[Anonymous Coward]

Relax, everything will be ok.

Re:So, surmised, not identified

[xevioso]

You are a complete idiot.

Re:Almost the coldest

[DarwinSurvivor]

My rubidium collection is named Spot, you insensitive clod!

Coldest spot on earth?

[wcrowe]

Maybe. But they need to take a measurement from the center of my ex-wife's heart before they put down any records.

Re:So, surmised, not identified

[wonkey_monkey]

Quick! Call Ted Scambos, lead scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center, and tell him he's made a terrible mistake!

I mean, sure, it's possible that J. Random Slashdotter doesn't actually have anything more than a monkey's grasp of atmospheric science, and therefore no idea what he's talking about, but hey, what are the chances of that, amiright?

Typos

[amaurea]

Oops, that was supposed to be "-78 C" and "2.6e-4 atmospheres".

Re:So, surmised, not identified

[holophrastic]

The chances are about 10% that he's entirely wrong, and about 20% that he's a little wrong, for something like this. You'd probably be surprised if you ever actually gathered the success rate of these sorts of things. That's why the headline is incorrect. It's not conclusive. It's speculative. Good speculation, but still totally non-conclusive.

Q: Coldest Spot On Planet Earth

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

A: Ex-Wife's Bedroom

Re:Q: Coldest Spot On Planet Earth

[tangle001]

A: Ex-Wife's Bedroom

Ah. Now the use of the creepy atmospheric music in the video makes sense.

They found my ex-wife's vagina?

[Anonymous Coward]

They found my ex-wife's vagina? I got penal frostbite every time I hit it.

Re:Holey Fuck Batman

[Anonymous Coward]

There are lots of penis enlargement ads on the web, why not try one of them instead of flashing around your tiny dick in your posts?

Now we have proof

[philpraxis4440]

Now we know: Climate change and temperature rise is now proven to be a myth!!... right? ;-)

meh

[slashmydots]

I'm from Wisconsin. It was 3 today. Yeah, 3F. I didn't bother to put my 2nd glove on for a run between buildings in the snow in 20 MPH winds because I was eating a donut. I would, I guess, consider that location "cold." We played airsoft one time in -11 real and -28 wind chill temps and it was only a little chilly. I have a feeling Packer fans could still go shirtless in this "coldest location" as long as they had soup or cappuccino in a thermos.

Re:meh

[IndustrialComplex]

Yes, I'm quite sure you would be fine. Why, in 100 years time, we could probably find your body in remarkable condition.

Celsius

[Barryke]

> minus 133.6 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 92 degrees Celsius)
minus 92 degrees Celsius (minus 133.6 degrees Fahrenheit)

There i fixed that for you.

Does that change over time? (location)

[AndreyWelsh]

Does that location ever change or always stays there?

Re:Coldest spot on earth is inside Dick Cheneys he

[AndreyWelsh]

oh no [satiric]

But they were most shocked...

[WillyWanker]

...to find one of Dick Cheney's summer mansions built there. Apparently it's his favorite home away from home where he's free to let it all hang out. His tentacles, that is.