Slashdot Mirror


Greenland Ice Sheet Not Covered In Soot

An anonymous reader writes with word of a a new study of the Greenland ice sheet led by Dartmouth adjunct assistant professor Chris Polashenski, which maintains that the darkening sensed there by satellites is not caused by dust and soot deposited by forest fires and industry, but rather by the slow degradation of the sensors on the satellites themselves. [Polashenski] and his colleagues analyzed dozens of snow-pit samples from the 2012-2014 snowfalls across northern Greenland and compared them with samples from earlier years. The results showed no significant change in the quantity of black carbon deposited for the past 60 years or the quantity and mineralogical makeup of dust compared to the last 12,000 years, meaning that deposition of these light absorbing impurities is not a primary cause of reflectivity reduction or surface melting in the dry snow zone. Algae growth, which darkens ice, also was ruled out as a factor. Instead, the findings suggest the apparent decline in the dry snow zone's reflectivity is being caused by uncorrected degradation of sensors in NASA's aging MODIS satellites and that the declining trend will likely disappear when new measurements are reprocessed.

119 comments

  1. so this is how.... by ganjadude · · Score: 2, Funny

    this is how they will explain away the other post from earlier stating that ice is growing. Blame the sensors!

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    1. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I am on the fence with which way it is (probably is). Go slow double check your readings. That is science. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary care.

      But here is one thing *I* do know. Pollution is bad for us both economically and physically. Do not do it. Everyone is better off for it if you dont do it or make it not happen in the first place. How is this hard to understand? Pollution even from a pure 'capitalist' POV is waste. Waste costs you money because by the very definition you are WASTING something.

    2. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You can get paid for posting on here? How do I get in on this?

    3. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then try living in feces for a week.

    4. Re:so this is how.... by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      one mans feces is anothers mans fertilizer

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    5. Re:so this is how.... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Feces don't pose too much of a problem to the rest of the planet. Ok, as long as we don't overdo it in one location, but in generally nature has pretty well adapted to dealing with the shit. Literally. If suddenly we were to produce a thousand times as much shit, we may well see the relevant organisms dealing with it multiply likewise and and equilibrium will establish soon.

      I highly doubt that this would be the case if we decided to multiply our output in industrial waste.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please. The scientists have already voted so minor bits of data that disagrees isn't significant.

    7. Re: so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Feces is bad for you. So bad that if you don't have a shit within a week you will die.

      That's what you just said??

    8. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the use of fertilizer has been well-established to cause many problems.

    9. Re:so this is how.... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Apparently nobody has ever seen snow or ice. In Alaska, when the snow falls in October, some of it doesn't melt until spring. But as it starts melting, it turns black and muddy. Dust and such from 6 months starts melting to the top as the snow/ice above melts. When exposed, the dark particles heat faster, melting down rough texture. This makes for more pits, shadows and such that makes it look darker. Nothing brightens up the melting ice like a fresh coat of snow.

    10. Re:so this is how.... by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Downmod this, paid shill.

      If you're expecting to be a highly paid minion, at least tell us who you're shilling for!

    11. Re:so this is how.... by x0ra · · Score: 1

      So what are you waiting to pass a law forbidding people to defecate ?

    12. Re:so this is how.... by Layzej · · Score: 1

      Greenland ice is not growing. In fact the decline in volume is accelerating: https://andthentheresphysics.f...

      I think maybe the article you were looking at was regarding antartica?

    13. Re:so this is how.... by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      Greenland ice is not growing. In fact the decline in volume is accelerating

      They said the same thing about Antarctic ice volume. Repeatedly. They were even saying it after those alarmists got themselves stuck in the growing ice in 2013 and needed an international rescue effort. They were saying it until this week.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    14. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to broaden your understanding of what "pollution" is.
      OK Ill bite since you want to put words in my mouth. Pollution is taking useful materials and then throwing them into the environment with no regard for how they should be used.

      I will even use your strawman argument.

      If you take a shit in the middle of your living room everyday eventually you will have a problem of pollution and waste. If you take treat it and reuse it. It is no longer pollution but a useful item and no longer pollution. In fact untreated human waste is not used directly. Typically it is stored for a short period of time and 'aged' then used. Straight from the ass does not act as fertilizer (and will in fact kill most plants). Most of the times it is mixed with hay or other biodegradable items.

      However, most municipalities. Just scrape it off a large drum after getting the water out and take it to the dump. Most fertilizer is either bat guano or petroleum by products. Humans do not shit enough to be in useful amounts to be re-used. Swing by a treatment plant for tour. They will show you it all in its nasty glory and what happens to everything at every stage.

      Or were you trying to tear down my argument that pollution is bad for you? In fact not shitting for a week would be polluting your body with waste which would kill you like you point out.

      You are also being *very* disingenuous comparing me taking a shit (which can be reused) to a coal fired plant that burns several thousand metric tons of coal every day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

      Explain to me how pollution is good again? I am hanging on every word here. Some pollution is going to occur. It must. But we can control what we do if we can re-use the waste even better. Pollution is the definition of waste (both economically and physically). I can reuse the waste you call out. But under very specific conditions. Re-using the co2 from a coal fired plant is harder. You are literally arguing that pollution is OK because I sometimes take a shit? Is that really your argument? Or am I misunderstanding you?

    15. Re:so this is how.... by Rei · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't get this. These conversations always summon these sorts of people:

      "The sensors are wrong and the scientists aren't doing any sort of correction to remove bad data or adjust the data to cancel out the errors - GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE" .... people who then in an unrelated article proceed to argue:

      "The scientists are applying so-called "correction factors" to the data rather than using the raw data, so that they can make up whatever they want - GLOBAL WARMING IS A LIE!"

      I wish they'd make up their minds.

      --
      "Oh, goodness. Look at my wrist, I have to go." "But what about your clothes?" "I don't love these."
    16. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These conversations always summon these sorts of people:

      Because this is just embarrassing. Your global warming theory is based on data from... old CCDs? Really?

      And how many trillions of dollars do we need to spend to take action demanded by "settled science" like this?

      Extraordinary claims don't require extraordinary proof, but extraordinary demands do.

    17. Re:so this is how.... by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      If it's good enough for the British Royals, it's good enough for us!

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    18. Re:so this is how.... by Layzej · · Score: 1

      Are you sure? Here's a NASA paper from 2012 that says: Mass Gains of the Antarctic Ice Sheet Exceed Losses. Same title as the current study. You may be thinking of the Arctic, which is losing volume at an accelerating rate: http://neven1.typepad.com/blog...

    19. Re:so this is how.... by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Your global warming theory is based on data from... old CCDs? Really?

      No, just your strawman.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    20. Re:so this is how.... by TapeCutter · · Score: 0

      No, I have been following this argument for 30yrs, the data itself said the same as NASA and the IPCC - "stable or slightly decreasing", with better measurements and longer satellite records it turns out it's slightly increasing. The numerous permanent ice shelves in Antarctica that have been lost over the last couple of decades have not suddenly reformed because of this new paper, the antarctic peninsula is still melting at an alarming rate. Sea ice behaves very differently at the north and south pole, paid propagandists have been using that knowledge to confuse laymen for 20yrs, educate yourself and find out who is really using you.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    21. Re:so this is how.... by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      this is how they will explain away the other post from earlier stating that ice is growing. Blame the sensors!

      NASA will just do one of its famous "adjustments" to the observations, like it has for the land-temperature network. If you cool the past and heat the present one time for an adjustment, you have randomly selected one of the six possibilities. When you do it ten times in a row, the odds of that being a random correction are one in 6^10 = 60-million.

    22. Re:so this is how.... by dave420 · · Score: 1

      You seem to be confused about sea ice and land ice. It's not too surprising - those who attack climatology don't usually understand it.

    23. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are already numerous and extensive laws controlling defecation.

    24. Re:so this is how.... by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      To be fair, many people who defend the climatologists don't really understand much of it either. Even the climatologists seem to not understand how science works. Repeatability is important, but yet there appears to be a major refusal to share the data so that others can run models. Also, the appeal to consensus is repugnant, a consensus means nothing in science.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    25. Re:so this is how.... by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      FTFA:

      "the apparent decline in the dry snow zone's reflectivity is being caused by uncorrected degradation of sensors"

      If you can't calibrate your instruments, is it really such excellent science?

      C'mon, man.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    26. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dave420: Your primitive attempts at written speech confuses us. English motherfucker: Do you speak it? You can't write it.

    27. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nobody can decipher your trollspeak dave420. What are you trying to say (english please)? Surely a climatologist like you (you are one, right?) can do that!

    28. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coren22 a climatology expert speaks! Coren22 you're a professional climatologist, right? If not, please: STFU wannabe!

    29. Re:so this is how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coren22 looks more like a professional liar who got his ass kicked here for lying http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

  2. Retractions from the pro-Global Warming crowd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    One of the most important parts of performing real science is the act of critically reviewing past results when new evidence comes to light or new observations are made, and admitting that earlier conclusions may have been completely wrong.

    Now that there's evidence to suggest that at least some of their claims may be wrong, will we actually see those who support the notion of "global warming" (or "climate change" or whatever it is being called today) review their work, and admit that they were wrong if it turns out that they were? Will we see retractions and apologies from them?

    1. Re:Retractions from the pro-Global Warming crowd? by ganjadude · · Score: 0

      you expect them to admit that? no, instead they will double down based on past experiences

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    2. Re:Retractions from the pro-Global Warming crowd? by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, they claim to have found a slight accounting error in the work that attributes the inputs for the observed sea level rise, it was found with new satellites, improved data resolution, and longer time scales. That small portion of the rise must now be accounted for 'elsewhere', it probably won't be until we make similar measurement improvements 'elsewhere'. Remove the politics and this paper is only interesting to beancounter geeks, it does not challenge existing theories or observations, let alone disprove them. Most importantly, it does not change the observed sea level rise.

      This paper is actually a continuation of the valuable and ongoing work that the 'climategate' beat up was desperately trying to discredit and disrupt via character assassination. ie - Robust climate data. Climate data sets are collected, cleaned, maintained and published by NASA and other organisations, here's a list of the main data sets used by climate researchers. The IPCC does not perform or fund research or data collection, it summarises existing peer-reviewed publications into various reports aimed at different audiences.

      Anyone who genuinely wants to debunk global warming should start here, trust me, climate scientists will respond with collective sigh of releif should anyone succeed.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    3. Re:Retractions from the pro-Global Warming crowd? by BCGlorfindel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Anyone who genuinely wants to debunk global warming should start here, trust me, climate scientists will respond with collective sigh of releif should anyone succeed.

      RealClimate.org maybe wouldn't be the best place to start. There's a lot of very aggressively close minded chaps dominating the forums. I know, who'd have thought that could happen on an internet forum?

      Real climate is also co-founded by Michael Mann, whom I really take some issue with. Tell me I'm making a mountain out of a mole hill, but his paleo reconstructions of temperature have really bothered me in the past. Nothing to do with the results, not as much to do even with his methodology now that his later work is addressing and correcting problems. The presentation and usage of the 'hide the decline' trick in graphs is just disgusting. When your paleo reconstruction ends around 1900, just end the graph there. If your paleo reconstruction doesn't show the same temperature rise since 1900 as instrumental, then show that too. What you DO NOT DO, is paste in the instrumental record with a thick enough line to hide the paleo reconstruction since 1900. Even further, don't point to the overlapped instrumental part of the graph as startling and clear evidence of an abrupt trend in the data starting at 1900.

      If your wanting to have an open and honest discussion about the evidence, that's a difficult environment. Even scientists with a decent publishing record within the field like Lindzen are put under a microscope for criticism for not conforming to the 'consensus'. Even researchers widely embraced and accepted like Mauritsen have their results heavily disputed and interpreted there. When statisticians like McShane and Wyner take issue with the statistical methods in Mann and others work, Mann takes to his blog for the 'final' word while leaving out any response to their real and legitimate questions and arguments. I'm not anticipating that it's going to be a particularly receptive audience as you seem to believe.

    4. Re:Retractions from the pro-Global Warming crowd? by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      Great post, for some reason it didn't get modded up.

    5. Re:Retractions from the pro-Global Warming crowd? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're whining about one "summary" graph? If it bothers you so much, why not graph the raw data yourself in separate graphs to show us this alleged "disparity"?

    6. Re:Retractions from the pro-Global Warming crowd? by BCGlorfindel · · Score: 1

      You're whining about one "summary" graph? If it bothers you so much, why not graph the raw data yourself in separate graphs to show us this alleged "disparity"?

      I referenced a heck of a lot more than that, but yes the summary graph is manipulative and not helpful to understanding or learning the actual proxy results. Look at the summary graph, the first impression it gives anyone and everyone looking at it is that the proxy data confirms that temperatures since 1900 are unprecedented. If you graph the actual data as you reference, it actually shows that the period 960-1000 was warmer than the last 40 years. The same higher temps are seen from 872-882, and again from 585-604.

      That ties directly into the other point I made particularly with Mann and not RealClimate in general. When statisticians like McShane and Wyner pointed out that their take on the data and analysis shows VASTLY less confidence in the signal than Mann, Mann strikes back from his blog more than the actual academic record. The grossest example is McShane and Wyner's criticism of Manns absence of and frequent misapplication of error bars on his reconstructed data. Mann ignores this critique entirely, preferring to go on the offensive in critiquing their understanding of proxy data sources...

      So yeah, I kinda stand behind my statements and opinion of Michael Mann.

  3. Great lesson about... by r-diddly · · Score: 2

    ...observation of the truth. You're always looking through a sensor of some type.

  4. Ground truth by mspohr · · Score: 1

    I live near a large lake which has a number of buoys which sense temperature and water quality. NASA (JPL) uses this "ground truth" to calibrate their satellites temperature readings, etc.
    Sounds like they need to do some "ground truth" for Greenland to recalibrate things.

    --
    I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    1. Re:Ground truth by ScentCone · · Score: 0

      It's not necessary. The science is Settled.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:Ground truth by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 2

      What? You mean you can't just say "satellites" and magically your data becomes the gold standard? You mean you actually need to calibrate your satellite data to ground stations? Impossible.

      Next you're going to tell me that the buoys need to be taken out and calibrated to a NIST-traceable reference once or twice a year. That's crazy talk. Science=magic, and you must believe!

  5. Photos of Greenland's "Dark Snow" .. by nickweller · · Score: 2

    These surface images do seem to show lots of " Dark Ice

    1. Re:Photos of Greenland's "Dark Snow" .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And if you read the article you link to, they are due to wildfires in Canada, something that has happened since long before humans were around. The increased warming is likely more than made up for by the cooling while the soot was in the air. Another cause of this kind of phenomenon is volcanic eruptions.

      So, move on, nothing to see here.

    2. Re:Photos of Greenland's "Dark Snow" .. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      "Dark Snow" is not caused by anything climate related. This is the result of allegations that Silicon Valley and Greenland do not have enough diversity. Activists in the US for more diversity charged that Greenland had way to much white snow, and Silicon Valley didn't have enough dark Computer Scientists working there.

      So Greenland, for their part, introduced the "Dark Snow". A noble an politically correct to do. We'll see what Silicon Valley comes up with . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:Photos of Greenland's "Dark Snow" .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That there are natural wildfires, does not mean that human beings cannot create artificial wildfires, or even conditions similar to natural ones, through artificial means.

      So continue on, seeing nothing.

    4. Re:Photos of Greenland's "Dark Snow" .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >motherjones.com
      wew lads

  6. Ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Morons

  7. Sensorship is wrong, okay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The sensors are climate deniers!

  8. Global warming has been changed to Climate Change by Trachman · · Score: 2, Informative

    Conveniently Global Warming initiative somehow morphed into the Climate Change, or, more accurately, fight against Climate change. I have to believe that every educated person will agree that the only thing that is constant it is change itself, including climate. Climate is changing slowly, also changes in cycles and has many variables. And yes, human are f***king up the biosphere.

    NASA has issued new study saying that Antarctica stated that since 1992, a lot of ice has been added to the continent this is the link to NASA: https://www.nasa.gov/content/g...

    Most cynical opponents to those who were pushing Global Warming were citing that it was about the money and carbon tax in the particular.

    I am convinced that in my lifetime I will see another initiative related to the fight against Global Cooling. As such Climate Change is much more convenient because bureaucrats can fight any change irrespective of the direction of the change.

  9. "99%"of the scientists were non-existant by Trachman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Do you expect Retractions? There will be none. Part of the reasons is because those "99% of the scientists were non-existing from the beginning.

    What you witnessed is a classical social manipulation, human tendency to conform and to be part of the group. If television tells you that "99% of the scientists" believe that Global warming is real, then you will probably accept additional carbon taxes easier.

    The problem is that most of the scientists do agree that humanity is changing the earth. You no longer need to be a scientists to see that. For example, in Europe there are no more large populations of bears, tauruses, wolves and wild horses. These animals became extinct before industrial revolution. Last mammothes on Earth died when humans already knew how to write. Heck, some of the rhinoceros will probably be extinct this decade.

    However most of discussions were about a) bankrupting US coal industry and closing coal factories (while China opens new coal electric plant almost every week) and b) imposing additional taxes on the taxpayers of industrialized nations.

    1. Re:"99%"of the scientists were non-existant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Carbon taxes? That's just an instrument to get around to carbon credits and a carbon trading market.

      Market speculation thrives on abstraction. If you have to take physical possession of commodities in order to trade them, you can't speculate much, because you're hauling around tons of grain or metals. If you can trade ownership of commodities that other people store and use, then you can speculate much more and make more money. If you trade the future ownership of commodities rather than present, it gets even more abstract and more profitable.

      So, what's the next step? How do you create a really abstract commodity to trade? Easy: find an invisible, hard-to-measure "commodity" that's part of every process in some way -- industry, agriculture, breathing human beings, whatever -- and trade a derivative financial product of that "commodity": the carbon credit. Think the oil market is fucked up? Wait until you see what the new Enron of the carbon credit market will do. Goldman Sachs will be trading derivatives of your very breath and they will make a killing on it, muppet.

    2. Re:"99%"of the scientists were non-existant by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

      Good point. Fee and dividend!

      --
      .: Semper Absurda :.
    3. Re:"99%"of the scientists were non-existant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You claim there are fewer Tauruses in Europe?
      Are you talking about the Ford model or the astrological sign?

    4. Re:"99%"of the scientists were non-existant by delt0r · · Score: 1

      Wolf populations are bouncing back in a big way. To the point you need to know about them even in the black forest last time i was there. Bears are also coming back in the south east.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
  10. Adding heat and heat trapping gases to a system... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Does nothing!" says the low level systems administrators. They love their jobs in suburban office parks.

  11. Really? by campuscodi · · Score: 1

    Who's stupid enough to believe this paid-for study?

    1. Re:Really? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      What is wrong with it?

      Even if it is paid for, that in and of itself is not enough reason to dismiss it out of hand. Neither is it being negative to some beliefs you hold.

    2. Re: Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is stupid enough to believe this paid-for study?

      Pretty much anyone who reads the actual study and realizes that it has a very narrow focus wil be comfortable with its actual conclusion.

      The actual stupid people are the ones who respond to the misleading slashdot summary without reading the actual article. That applies to almost every article, I know, and yet I persist.

    3. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All studies paid for. Who is out there doing studies for free? Do you work for free?

  12. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    humans are responsible for maybe .001% of fucking up the biosphere. One volcanic eruption does far more damage than decades of human activity does.

    It is a certainty that we will see another initiative related to fighting Global Cooling, because our politicians always have to have a boogeyman in order to have a reason to spend more of our money. Global warming/cooling, ISIS/Al Qaida, etc. it's all fabricated bullshit to spend more money.

  13. Re: B... b... b.. but... climate change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Acid rain is less of a problem now because we actually did something about it. Sulphur dioxide emissions in the US were cut in half resulting in less acidic rain.

  14. Dark-er by jklovanc · · Score: 2

    Go anywhere that ice melts slowly and you will see that kink of darkness in the fall. That dark layer is covered up by snow next year.The question is whether or not the snow is darker that is was. Has that darkness been increasing? One set of photographs will not tell us that and even photographs over they years will not usually suffice as exposures, contrasts, medium will make a difference. To make a valid comparison there needs to be a common reference that is in all the pictures so that the brightness measurements can be calibrated. I seems that the satellite did not do that.

  15. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Do you know WHY the ice in one part of Antarctica is expanding? It's because fresh water from the ice melting on the land is flowing in to the ocean. It has a higher freezing point, so it forms ice more easily.

    You've made the common reactionary fallacy that one (albeit wrong) argument against something discredits all the many ones that back it.

  16. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One volcanic eruption does far more damage than decades of human activity does.

    Are you one of those people who thinks a volcanic eruption releases more carbon dioxide than human industry?

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/earthtalks-volcanoes-or-humans/

  17. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by ganjadude · · Score: 2

    he said it does far more damage. not only focusing on a single output.

    --
    have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  18. Then start fighting real pollution you moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But here is one thing *I* do know. Pollution is bad for us both economically and physically.

    Then why are you not fighting pollution, instead of CO2 which plants need to live?

    The whole problem I have with you WarmMongers is that you in fact have essentially ended the fight against real pollution to tilt against the CO2 windmill, all for the sake of making a few people (not you BTW) rich.

    The EPA flooded a whole Colorado river system with toxins but people like you won't say boo about that because the EPA is on your "side". I'll bet you totally ignored THAT story despite countless river species outright kills and hundreds of miles of riverbank poisoned. That you dare to speak against pollution is frankly sickening.

    1. Re:Then start fighting real pollution you moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The EPA flooded a whole Colorado river system with toxins

      ...by accident, when trying to clean up a hazardous site left behind by a mining company that long abandoned any responsibility. Once the capitalist parasite has extracted its target's wealth, it moves on, leaving a dessicated husk for others to clean up afterward. Thus, the circle of decline is repeated, until the .1% have all the money and the rest of the world is their slave.

    2. Re:Then start fighting real pollution you moron by camg188 · · Score: 1

      Once the capitalist parasite has extracted its target's wealth, it moves on...

      They went out of business. I guess they didn't extract enough wealth.

    3. Re:Then start fighting real pollution you moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ...by accident

      No, by incompetence.
      They did not drill a test hole to verify water levels before trying to install a drainage pipe. They did drill test holes in the other mines where they installed drainage pipes.

    4. Re:Then start fighting real pollution you moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They went out of business. I guess they didn't extract enough wealth.

      Going out of business is akin to molting a shell. The shell may be dead, but the creature lives on.

    5. Re:Then start fighting real pollution you moron by conquistadorst · · Score: 1

      Then why are you not fighting pollution, instead of CO2 which plants need to live?

      The whole problem I have with you WarmMongers is that you in fact have essentially ended the fight against real pollution to tilt against the CO2 windmill, all for the sake of making a few people (not you BTW) rich.

      So why can't you do both? I seriously doubt there were many so-called environmentalists that didn't say "boo". Anyone I know thought it was a complete disaster, environmentalist or not. Unfortunately there are tens of thousands of disasters like this, both big and small, short and long. The great lakes, oceans, farm run off, on and on and on... nearly all environmentalists care about all of them so I have no idea what you're getting "sickened" at. Either way, I hope you would at least admit that if the current estimates of warming, 2-3 degrees in the next 50-100 years, if "true", would inflict far more damage globally than one river locally? Even if it's not during our lifetimes.

      Of course plants need CO2 to live, exactly who is advocating taking it all away? The argument is about moderation, not complete elimination? Not sure if you're just being deliberately facetious there or what.

    6. Re:Then start fighting real pollution you moron by conquistadorst · · Score: 1

      I don't know much of anything about that mining company specifically but just want to remind everyone that just b/c a company goes out of business it doesn't mean the participants didn't have a good run while it lasted. You'd hope someone founding or running a company would throw everything they had into it to make it work. But it's certainly not uncommon to see exactly the opposite, people extracting so much wealth out of the business that it's driven into the ground.

  19. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by fyngyrz · · Score: 3, Informative

    No. The ice is thickening. Not running into the water. The edges, in fact, are retreating due to shelf collapses (which may well be the normal course of things... we don't have any kind of a baseline si that we can tell.)

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  20. Sense or? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Picard: Are we sure the alien planet is gonna be poisoned by ass gas?

    Data: Sensors confirm.

    Riker: Run a level 5 diagnostic just to be sure.

    Data: Running...oh yes. Sensors are old pieces of crap. Correcting...ah, nothing wrong with the planet.

    Picard: Very good. I am beaming down for my vacation at Hedonism XVII. I heard they have androids in the form of ancient 21st century supermodels. Riker, you have the con. Cara, here I come!

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:Sense or? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't help but read that in Patrick Stewart's American Dad voice.

  21. Oh this is classic! by p51d007 · · Score: 0

    Bet the media, who most likely trumpeted the alarm about man made global warming, causing "soot & dust" to melt the ice, WILL NOT BE RUNNING THIS STORY, that it was the SENSORS being the problem.

    1. Re:Oh this is classic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blaming the sensors is just like blaming the media. It sounds good, but I doubt that is the problem. It just fools the right-wingers who want to believe that they have been right all along.

      NASA has flown the Ice Bridge missions over Greenland, with different sensors. The NGA and other governments also have satellites in orbit that could collaborate this. Even when the next mission goes up and this is proven to be wrong, all it does is exactly what the dirty energy fossil fuel companies want, it sows some doubt and will prevent anything from getting done for a few years.

  22. Watch the snow outside in winter by FeelGood314 · · Score: 2

    As it melts it gets darker. The water flows through the snow to the bottom while the impurities generally stay on the surface. When we get the next snow fall the snow is bright and white again and then as it melts it gets darker again.

    Now if the second melt doesn't melt all of the second snow fall be for another fall and you dig into the snow you will see two bands where the previous melts extended to.
    However if a melt melts all the way past the last snow fall you will notice the snow surface suddenly get darker when all the impurities of the layers meet.
    So if the snow has been melting faster on greenland than it has been accumulating I would expect the snow to be getting darker and the darkness "jumping" each time the melting reaches then next melt band.

    At least that is my experience watching our weird Ottawa winters.

  23. Re: B... b... b.. but... climate change by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

    Sulphur dioxide emissions in the US were cut in half resulting in less acidic rain.

    Using a cap-and-trade system, as a matter of fact.

    --
    .: Semper Absurda :.
  24. Jew weather weapons - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fake argument dumb down distraction bs. Over half all bs comments are computer generated so idiots think there a more people reading or commenting than there are. On this bogus 'article' like every other propaganda bs idiots call 'media' - this 'greenland' and all 'climate' bs is jew bs to Distract from the fact of jew weather and physical assault chemtrail weapons.
    The mass pollution is from jew 'corporations' and mass population breeding immigrants being swarmed in by fraud jew 'government'. All 'weather' is directed by Jew weather weapons, we are being sprayed with nano chip CHEMTRAILS. All 'climate change' spew is distraction put out by the massive JEW cabal. So called 'government' is a jew fraud and has been from the start. After real men fought and died to get rid of the scum jew british part of the jew tribe bogus 'taxation', idiots here allowed the scum jews like 'washington' and the rest of the fraud 'founders' to made up their bogus 'constitution' fraud to set up fraud 'government' to 'tax' dupes and get themselves trillions in weapons, from the fraud 'govt' fraud 'federal reserve', every fraud 'war', the scum 'social' schemes, all of it a setup to get a mass of weapons to slaughter other races for jew world takeover. Now you're being SPRAYED by the mass murdering jew tribe.
    Most 'whites' in fraud 'government', liar 'media' liar 'scientists' 'dokters' fraud 'lawyers' 'judges' are Not nordic whites they are 'white' skin ashkenazi JEW race. So-called 'scientists' and 'media' spew 'climate change' are Lying JEWS and co-cons. They fake 'debate' to dumb down their scum weapons system, the assault on us by weather and on us physically, the jew CHEMTRAILS and TOWERS everywhere control and force 'climate, drought, storms, floods, lightning, and earthquake. The jew fraud 'government' spraying us with nano chips designed so when you breathe the nano chips, nano sythetic fungus and other nano particles they self assemble into 'morgellons' fiber optics inside of you, but don't form inside of the scum ashkenazi jews, they are race, a separate genetic group. The nano chip fiber optics so the jews control everyone else by 'wireless' 'Ipv6 internet of things', 'smart grid', scum 'wireless' are a mass weapon system, You are the kill and slavery target. The fibers in you now, done and continue to form with every breath you take. So called 'morgellons' was proven in study, they had to link it to lyme so there was something known, but that is only a tiny fraction part of the makeup. The so called 'lyme' fraction was also made in a lab. On cause, they could not say it's coming from our being sprayed or it would not have been published. The jews control all 'science' publications. There will be no more studies. If you're a drooling idiot who sits on your ass 'demanding' more 'proof' you deserve to be slaughtered and will be slaughtered. You are not owed anything. Your scum ignorance of the mass fraud 'govt', 'wars', 'bailouts' the mass scum immigration, you sit on your ass trained to swallow jew bullshit 'served' to you every day while you never bothered to SEE what's in your FACE. For your ignorance YOU are now being SPRAYED for slavery and extermination by the massive scum jew tribe.

    Virtually everything on the net is put out by them including the 'chemtrail' sites, 'jew truther' sites, all of it, thousands of bs sites to 'lead the opposition' so whatever 'level' of duped you still are, whatever is left you don't know they work to divert, distract, subvert. Don't expect the web to 'save' you. It's always been on you to grow up and make your own tribes in REAL LIFE. I put a few comments here but you are not going to 'fight' or stop them on the web. Use the web to spread info to those you know, tell them to do the same and get Off the web. Stop hiding behind idiot 'tech', get Off the web, give info to real people, handing out paper notes. Stop being a chicken shit afraid to meet real people in your own area. You cannot make a tribe 'online' to take real action. Here is a note to hand out -
    ------
    We are bei

  25. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - Also, jew trolls will probably jump on to distract from my post. 'anti semite' 'racist' 'tin foil hat', snivel bullshit or useless bs to distract. Get it straight 90% of all shit comments you see on the web are jews or computer generated bs posts. They do anything to distract so you Fail to get off your ass. Keep sitting and you deserve what you get. The info I post is for those who are enraged by the assaults on us and want to fight instead of die, who know freedom is nature anarchy and tribes, Not scum jew 'government' Not forced scum jew 'communist' shit, it's bashing down scum jew fraud 'government' 'states', scum jews and all parasite and immigrant parasite scum. Don't focus 'everywhere' focus where You Are. Make your own tribes. If there were enough tribes you could shut down the scum jew 'airports' THAT is where the mass of immigrants are swarming in. The fraud jews and co-frauds fake yammer 'close the borders' for two decades while idiots still buy their shit to distract from the AIRPORTS and their bullshit 'legal' immigration' attack is where the scum jew 'govt' is flooding them. The most important is to inform others using notes, now. Do it every day. For a couple of hours you could also hold up a sign by the road. For immigration hold up a sign by the road that says 'Stop ALL immigration NOW' and 'thezog.info'. But as or even more dire is our being sprayed assaulted with their scum nano chip chemtrails, hold up a sign, short simple, 'chemtrail virus' or 'nano chip chemtrails' and 'thezog.info' - isn't as much info but people will put it together, many know something's wrong but fail to see it's the massive scum JEW tribe behind it all. You reach larger numbers using a road sign, those who don't know it's the jews will at least get the core. By far using notes is better, you reach a medium number of people if you make the effort and with the note in the post above they would have the dire information so there is no dumbing down the danger, no denying the facts. Most of the masses are willful idiots, by giving out notes, those who want to fight to live have information on who is behind our destruction and can inform by passing on the information, and for those who are lazy scum idiots once you hand them info you take away their scum denial. Anyone who denies or refuses to give others info and do their part are the enemy the same as the scum jew 'govt' 'media'
    'corporations', your scum jew 'neighbor who does the 'holo' snivel, anyone in the tribe and anyone who denies or refuses to do anything is the enemy. Keep going until you find others like yourself.
    Go where there are crowds, two people can hand out a hundred notes in an hour, the note in post above written to self replicate, directs to pass it on, otherwise idiots decide because you hand them a note that 'someone else' is 'handling it'. That's why the massive scum jew tribe all over 'media', all 'corporations' all the fake 'opposition' groups do their fake 'argue' bs so scum dupes think because someone is bitching on the radio they don't have to do anything. Idiots to stupid to see that two hundred years of bogus 'founders' lies and jew yammer bullshit 'media' never does anything because That's what it's for, to distract and divert idiots, tell idiots 'write to cognress' 'join our group', 'donate' all bs to subvert idiots now the mass jew tribe and their scum co-frauds in 'govt' are assaulting us, spraying you, flooding in more parasites, getting ready for the big cull. Being able to line this out took years and work and experience and sacrifice including by others. There is no 'easy way' out, your scum breeders and their breeders ignored it all, now you have to get off your ass if you want to live. I've handed you the tools, use them or you will die and deserve to die. Life is only for those who fight and conquer, the scum jews have nearly conquered you, they chipped you they're going to kill you and the chips enslave the rest. Get off your ass, take back the power water companies and farms they stole, bash down scum fraud 'governme

  26. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by buchner.johannes · · Score: 4, Informative

    Conveniently Global Warming initiative somehow morphed into the Climate Change, or, more accurately, fight against Climate change. I have to believe that every educated person will agree that the only thing that is constant it is change itself, including climate. Climate is changing slowly, also changes in cycles and has many variables. And yes, human are f***king up the biosphere.

    Your stage of denial is 3, and you are implying a appeal to nature fallacy. Here are the relevant links:
    http://grist.org/climate-energ...
    http://grist.org/climate-energ...

    NASA has issued new study saying that Antarctica stated that since 1992, a lot of ice has been added to the continent this is the link to NASA: https://www.nasa.gov/content/g...

    See here: http://grist.org/climate-energ...

    Most cynical opponents to those who were pushing Global Warming were citing that it was about the money and carbon tax in the particular.

    ... are you arguing that now? Do you think scientists are warning about human-made global warming for money and the carbon tax?

    I am convinced that in my lifetime I will see another initiative related to the fight against Global Cooling. As such Climate Change is much more convenient because bureaucrats can fight any change irrespective of the direction of the change.

    Here is some information about various cooling claims:
    http://grist.org/climate-energ...
    http://grist.org/climate-energ...
    http://grist.org/climate-energ...
    http://grist.org/climate-energ...

    --
    NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  27. shill bs- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only paid jew trolls mocks scum getting 'paid' and pretend to 'want to get paid' to post bullshit, millions of scum jews Are paid by jew fraud 'government' and their scum 'holo' fraud, all the bogus 'media', fraud 'alternative media' 'sports' 'cooking' millions of jews and israelis posting comments all distraction while the tribe finishes its takeover an world cull plans. Over half all bs comments are computer generated so idiots think there a more people reading or commenting than there are.
    click show all comments button - Also slide bar over otherwise or there are still hidden posts. See - jew weather weapons - post

  28. Re: B... b... b.. but... climate change by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    Capn' Trade?

    Is that the cereal that abrades off the skin on the roof of your mouth?

  29. Re: B... b... b.. but... climate change by reve_etrange · · Score: 1

    Woosh. Pun?

    --
    .: Semper Absurda :.
  30. Green Land by lombokwander · · Score: 1

    The global warming effect ! www.lombokwandertour.com

  31. Somehow? - Here's how.... by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

    Conveniently Global Warming initiative somehow morphed into the Climate Change

    Yes the US government deliberately changed the terminology in the early 2000's, both phrases are technically correct but have different meanings, both phrases have been (properly) used by researchers since the 1950's. Frank Luntz (GWB's political advisor) suggested the change in official communications to sow doubt about the science in a now infamous memo. It backfired, so the GOP tried to pin the charge of "doublespeak" on the scientists.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    1. Re:Somehow? - Here's how.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, for mod points. This Luntz character is basically evil. Look up the report he wrote for Netanyahu, it'll really help you see through all the linguistic smoke and mirrors that seems to be what politics has degraded to.

    2. Re:Somehow? - Here's how.... by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Conveniently Global Warming initiative somehow morphed into the Climate Change

      Yes the US government deliberately changed the terminology in the early 2000's

      The IPCC was formed in 1988.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
  32. Debunk this. by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    Debunk this - smarter people with far more resources than you have tried and failed.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    1. Re:Debunk this. by buchner.johannes · · Score: 1

      I am unsure what should I debunk and what I am failing in. The report you refer to is very insightful though (I am looking at http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessm... ). I don't see anything I should disagree with? They report human-made global warming and its measurable effects. Thanks for the resource, it is very detailed and interesting.

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  33. Re: You must admit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Must? Says who?

    I would instead point you at all the evidence of political manipulation by industry to discredit the scientific process, and cause you to come to that conclusion... but it would be a waste of my time because you've decided you'd rather not change your behaviour.

  34. Misread headline by tomhath · · Score: 1

    Greenland Ice Sheet Not Covered In Soot

    Somehow read that as "Not Covered in Snot".

  35. Re:Jew weather weapons - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh. Oh dear. Better give up on that posting on the internet idea, huh?

  36. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's interesting how even in the face of absolute proof your hippy-scare-tactics are wrong, you debate the matter with rhetoric.

  37. Is Global Warming Dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Seriously, is GL dead? This research coupled with some some stuff I read last week (not the anti-GL hack sites either), it appears that Global Warming is cooling down. I sense Al Gore is quietly backing down.

  38. If I understand this correctly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    NASA or some other agency/political group made some alarmist statement that the ice on Greenland was getting darker without bothering to ask anyone on Greenland what they were seeing?

  39. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    humans are responsible for maybe .001% of fucking up the biosphere.

    Citation needed.

    One volcanic eruption does far more damage than decades of human activity does.

    Volcanoes worldwide, including undersea volcanoes, release between 145 and 260 million tons of CO2 every year. The Taichung Power Plant in Taiwan, the largest coal-fired power plant, releases 40 million tons of CO2 every year. That's 1 powerplant releasing between 15% to 27% of the total volcanic output of the planet. China releases over 10 billion tons of CO2 every year. That's at least 38 times as much as all volcanic activity.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  40. It's a pretty major fuckup by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

    ...to not know those sensors were degrading, and just goes to show that much of whats passed off as "science" is actually social manipulation.

    Normally, when someone makes dire claims, and is incompetently wrong, there's some sort of consequences for the people making the claims.

    I doubt this incident will sway many people, as people in general tend towards a childish conformity, and the internet helps maintain that with the same tired crap as always; superstition, fear, and rage.

  41. Coren22 "security guru" wannabe fails security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU say "hosts=bad" (but they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE vs. threats:

    "So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)

    Hypocrite - You use admin priv admitting it

    &

    How else can I programmatically update hosts minus it in Windows?

    ---

    "Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)

    You FINALLY later admit there's no other way!

    FACT:

    Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best one) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!

    ---

    Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security-> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...

    Oliver Day (Symantec) does-> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit-> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    ---

    * HOW MANY SECURITY PROS DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUTTA YOU?

    ---

    Those security pros INCLUDE me: I work w/ guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!

    I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (Even showing you HOW to migrate a hosts across an enterprise-> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )

    I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES using CIS Tool (who took fixes from me http://slashdot.org/comments.p... - bonus) http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

    You told me you learn from guides?

    I write good ones that MILLIONS USE & was PAID FOR IT http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn...

    + WARES TO PROTECT USERS that are endorsed & hosted by security pros -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...

    You did all that? No!

    (& that's ONLY a SMALL part of what I could put out)

    APK

    P.S.=> You're all TALK -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" in security... apk

  42. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by Kim0 · · Score: 1

    A former musician, Coby Beck, writes about climate on Grist, and you want us to accept him as an expert on climate.
    That is stupid.

    I am a physicist, a real expert on stuff like that, and I know that the global temperature has not increased for almost 20 years.

  43. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by avgjoe62 · · Score: 1

    I am a physicist, a real expert on stuff like that, and I know that the global temperature has not increased for almost 20 years.

    Really? NASA Link for Average Global Temperature since 1884

    Have you read this Scientific American article from 2010?

    Or maybe you haven't seen this NOAA Graphic that says, "August 2015 average global land and ocean temperature was the warmest August since records began in 1880."

    --

    How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?

  44. Coren22's desperation, lies, & libel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I guess we should avoid your crap, it looks like it is marked as malware. Good luck getting that removed." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Monday November 02, 2015 @03:52PM (#50850445)

    False positive: I've wrote 'em long ago, no response vs. 60++ REPUTABLE sources (not nobodies) below that fries you Coren22!

    Is that YOUR fake site for MORE LIES Coren22?

    Lying about me LIKE YOU DID HERE punk? -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ??

    ---

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus per this VERY recent testing of them all http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    &

    It's safe proven by 57 antivirus programs recently in BOTH its 64-bit model https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    +

    Its 32-bit model too https://www.virustotal.com/en/...

    More "SALT IN YOUR WOUNDS" -> http://f.virscan.org/APKHostsF...

    APK

    P.S.=> /.'ers say my work is good too:

    "his hosts program is actually pretty good" - by xenotransplant (4179011) on Monday August 10, 2015 @03:34PM (#50287195)

    "I like your host file system." - by Karmashock (2415832) on Wednesday September 09, 2015 @03:57PM (#50489401)

    "APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works." - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015 @11:30AM (#50736071)

    "his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources" by alexgieg (948359) on Friday September 25, 2015 @09:57AM (#50596461)

    "

  45. Re:Global warming has been changed to Climate Chan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amicusnycl sourcecode needed from you that you wrote blowhard. Why'd you run from apk's fair challenge to you http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ? Is it since you're lame lying ass can't backup his bullshit and your lying mouth wrote checks your lying ass can't cash? Yes.

  46. jew bs- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    distraction scum jew. I post the facts and links so others can use the net to send them to others then get OFF the web and use the info and notes/links to meet others and make tribes to stop your scum tribe. You want dupes stuck 'living' on the web so they fail to meet real people and make tribes to stop you before your tribe finishes the coming cull. fuck off.

    - others, see jew weather weapons post above. use the info. use the notes to hand out, no one will do it for you -

  47. English motherfucker: Do you speak it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trying to read the fucked up way you write's confusing: Your primitive grunts != human language! Dear slashdot: Make a translator program for dave420 trollspeak please! The moron doesn't know how to write! I read and understand everyone else here but not his hieroglyphic troll encryptions he thinks are intelligible written words!

  48. Coren22 proven a LYING punk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "APK doesn't think that DNS servers are worth running and seems to believe that somehow Microsoft Active Directory can run without DNS." - by Coren22 (1625475) on Tuesday October 27, 2015 @12:58PM (#50811615)

    Where'd I say AD will run minus DNS Coren22? I've said AD = internal network DNS dependent as far back as 2007 http://forums.tweaktown.com/wi...

    (Searching this in BOLD "To warn users who have ActiveDirectory/AD LAN-WAN setups to NOT use external DNS servers!" referring to OpenDNS suggestions for those using AD stupid in the POSTS BEFORE IT in my security guides for users (geared to stand alone single machines no less), & right there on that page proves it stupid - so even if you posted as myself someplace here on /. "impersonating me", I have your ass NOW, shithead!)

    I've also stated MANY TIMES I use remote DNS in OpenDNS @ home (but not @ work on AD networks + exchange/outlook: Free OpenDNS model doesn't work with AD dependent Exchange + Outlook specifically you lying little imbecile).

    I also don't hardcode in "every site there is under the sun" is why, so I have to use DNS, but OpenDNS & rarely.

    I also RARELY MISS A LOOKUP since I put where I spend a good 95++% of my time online in my favorite sites into hosts @ the TOP of hosts for utmost LOCAL FASTER RESOLUTION SPEEDS and more reliability vs. Open DNS (not OpenDNS) resolvers being abused, Kaminsky redirect poisoned DNS servers (of which 99.999% of ISP DNS are not proofed against to this very day even though a patch exists which OpenDNS uses), rogue DNS servers, and yes ROUTERS with bushwhacked by malware DNS settings (happening a LOT lately).

    Hardcodes in hosts are faster than remote DNS, waste less resources than local dns in power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other I/O by FAR considering ALL THE PARTS of such a setup in programs, data, I/O, & power (especially if setup as a separate machine).

    APK

    P.S.=> You're a disgusting liar... apk