It is clearly not hypocritical since Canada is not telling anyone what to do so telling others to leave us alone is perfectly reasonable and a completely different case than a country constantly meddling in the affairs of other countries then complaining when those countries try the same thing. This is pretty clear so I conclude that you're trolling. Bad troll! Bad troll!
It is not necessarily hypocrisy unless "they" and "we" are identical in all respects relevant to the topic at hand. I believe that the GP was basing his comments wrt that point and is therefore not being hypocritical.
I hope so too. And a charge on bandwidth? I believe that has already been suggested so I wouldn't be too surprised to see it appear in legislation in the not too distant future.
That is a very good description of one of the major problems of any scientific endeavour that might have a direct impact on human life within a time limit that average persons can see as being relevant to them.
Aside from convincing you of the absence of bias we might also expect governments and quasi-governmental organizations, like public schools, why they continue to hold up Al Gore's film as representing the truth of the matter when it has claims that are clearly not justifiable. How many hundred feet of water would New York be covered by?
Similar? That isn't being the same. And have similar sorts of misbehavior been going on at other research centers? The public cannot be blamed for asking why they should trust any of the groups.
And some of those defending this have brought up the "scientists are 90% sure that...." to try to lend credibility to the "results" and I keep wondering what this is supposed to mean. Are 90% of scientists 100% sure of one set of ideas about global warming? Because 10% of researchers disagreeing is a non-trivial amount of disagreement. Are 100% of scientists 90% sure that they are right? What does it mean to be 90% sure?
I can't help but contrast this with what has happened with the fears around the search for the Higgs Boson and the fears of some that the Earth would be destroyed. The scientists involved were able to describe why it wasn't a reasonable fear - not by denying it but by explaining the mechanics involved, the probabilities of problems and why micro black holes would not be likely to swallow up the Earth. The whole thing had such a different flavor about it compared to how the global warming issue has been handled.
I don't find your characterization of the events in question to be consistent with a viewpoint that values "science" and the scientific method. The actions and attitudes revealed in "climategate" are antithetical to science and the proper practice of science research. The amazing thing is that (following a thorough investigation of course) all those involved haven't been disciplined or terminated (if the local rules of tenure allow).
What expert knowledge do you need to judge something when the problem is that someone has knowingly been less than honest, tried to cover their tracks etc. etc.??????
but sometimes you've got to recognize that someone who studied climatology for X years might actually know a thing or two that you can't pick up from reading a blog.
Which has nothing at all to do with what had been going on in the current scandal. Deliberate falsification/misrepresentation, suppressing contradictory data and/or expert opinion, attempting to destroy the evidence of your wrongdoing etc. etc. etc. is an entirely different matter. If you can't trust someone not to lie to you then it hardly matters that they have greater expertise than you in field X.
Teaching people ways to break down problems into smaller problems, ones that they are hopefully more familiar with, is one of the most important things you can teach someone. I keep doing this with a young friend of mine who frequently asks "how can you do that in your head?" because it seems impossibly hard to her. I've watched her gradually learn to do it herself... it's a very rewarding feeling to see her get better and better at it. And it's amazing that she was never taught this in public school.
The problem was I wanted one that did duplex scanning (not just duplex printing) and the Brother while being many hundreds of dollars was still a lot cheaper than the cheapest Canon (or any other) printer that handled duplex scanning, all of which were out of my price range.
Although in the long run a laser will be cheaper there are still things to watch out for. I bought a Brother color laser and after some reasonable number of pages it began to streak black toner and then eventually claim it needed a new cartridge. It had probably printed the rated capacity of the cartridge so fair enough.
Then I was told that while other lasers dumped waste toner to a reservoir after each print, the Brother printers (and I don't know if this is true) used a charge to suck unused toner back into the cartridge until the ratio of waste toner to good was high enough that it couldn't print reliably. Disappointing but still ok I guess. So I put in a new cartridge. Having done virtually no color printing and having no status messages about them I left those alone. Three days later it is telling me to replace all three color toner cartridges... hmmmm feels like something is wrong here but I have yet to figure out the cause and the cure.
Yeah, cause what possible damage could a healthy young woman do to a guy's skull with nothing but a 4 foot long steel club for a weapon? Why she was probably barely able to shatter the safety glass on the vehicle. Let's hope she doesn't get mad at one of her kids one day, eh?
There is a really big aluminum smelter a few hundred miles from me. Pretty much 0 tonnes of CO2 were dumped into the atmosphere to make the energy to refine the bauxite. It does use a huge amount of electricity which is generated nearby from hydroelectric facilities built specifically for that purpose.
Although now they are finding it more profitable to just sell the electricity than to make the aluminum and sell that.
Having *any* humidity at all where molten metal runs, any metal, not just aluminum, will produce large quantities of steam, which will expand explosively throwing molten metal all around.
Yes, it is easy to see this if you pour water onto molten mercury, or vice versa.
And it's worth pointing out that in the show the character being quoted never hit his wife and in fact spent a lot of time begging and toadying toward her.
Well if you could get it to grow around some tomato and lettuce and then squeeze in between two slices of bread before hpping onto your plate...mmmmmmmmm bacon!
Slashdot Mirror
It is clearly not hypocritical since Canada is not telling anyone what to do so telling others to leave us alone is perfectly reasonable and a completely different case than a country constantly meddling in the affairs of other countries then complaining when those countries try the same thing. This is pretty clear so I conclude that you're trolling. Bad troll! Bad troll!
It is not necessarily hypocrisy unless "they" and "we" are identical in all respects relevant to the topic at hand. I believe that the GP was basing his comments wrt that point and is therefore not being hypocritical.
I hope so too. And a charge on bandwidth? I believe that has already been suggested so I wouldn't be too surprised to see it appear in legislation in the not too distant future.
That is a very good description of one of the major problems of any scientific endeavour that might have a direct impact on human life within a time limit that average persons can see as being relevant to them.
Aside from convincing you of the absence of bias we might also expect governments and quasi-governmental organizations, like public schools, why they continue to hold up Al Gore's film as representing the truth of the matter when it has claims that are clearly not justifiable. How many hundred feet of water would New York be covered by?
Similar? That isn't being the same. And have similar sorts of misbehavior been going on at other research centers? The public cannot be blamed for asking why they should trust any of the groups.
And some of those defending this have brought up the "scientists are 90% sure that...." to try to lend credibility to the "results" and I keep wondering what this is supposed to mean. Are 90% of scientists 100% sure of one set of ideas about global warming? Because 10% of researchers disagreeing is a non-trivial amount of disagreement. Are 100% of scientists 90% sure that they are right? What does it mean to be 90% sure?
I can't help but contrast this with what has happened with the fears around the search for the Higgs Boson and the fears of some that the Earth would be destroyed. The scientists involved were able to describe why it wasn't a reasonable fear - not by denying it but by explaining the mechanics involved, the probabilities of problems and why micro black holes would not be likely to swallow up the Earth. The whole thing had such a different flavor about it compared to how the global warming issue has been handled.
I don't find your characterization of the events in question to be consistent with a viewpoint that values "science" and the scientific method. The actions and attitudes revealed in "climategate" are antithetical to science and the proper practice of science research. The amazing thing is that (following a thorough investigation of course) all those involved haven't been disciplined or terminated (if the local rules of tenure allow).
What expert knowledge do you need to judge something when the problem is that someone has knowingly been less than honest, tried to cover their tracks etc. etc.??????
but sometimes you've got to recognize that someone who studied climatology for X years might actually know a thing or two that you can't pick up from reading a blog.
Which has nothing at all to do with what had been going on in the current scandal. Deliberate falsification/misrepresentation, suppressing contradictory data and/or expert opinion, attempting to destroy the evidence of your wrongdoing etc. etc. etc. is an entirely different matter. If you can't trust someone not to lie to you then it hardly matters that they have greater expertise than you in field X.
Not saying this is what happened to the climate data,
Well that's good because what you described is nothing like what is supposed to have happened in this case.
If you can falsify any of the theories by experiment, people will pay attention to you, regardless of politics.
If you can get published. Suppressing publication of contradictory theories/evidence seems to have been part of the problem here.
And why would EBCDIC make audio any harder to implement than on an ASCII or UNICODE based OS/machine?
You didn't see the IBM JCL manual????? You poor so and so.... your whole brain must have been all like
//SYSIN DD DUMMY
And don't forget guns and ammo! The more people you kill the greater the reduction in the harmful impact on the biosphere by humanity!
Teaching people ways to break down problems into smaller problems, ones that they are hopefully more familiar with, is one of the most important things you can teach someone. I keep doing this with a young friend of mine who frequently asks "how can you do that in your head?" because it seems impossibly hard to her. I've watched her gradually learn to do it herself... it's a very rewarding feeling to see her get better and better at it. And it's amazing that she was never taught this in public school.
The problem was I wanted one that did duplex scanning (not just duplex printing) and the Brother while being many hundreds of dollars was still a lot cheaper than the cheapest Canon (or any other) printer that handled duplex scanning, all of which were out of my price range.
This seemed to be the case with a Brother all-in-one I had. I guess it must be legal to do this but it sure as hell shouldn't be.
Although in the long run a laser will be cheaper there are still things to watch out for. I bought a Brother color laser and after some reasonable number of pages it began to streak black toner and then eventually claim it needed a new cartridge. It had probably printed the rated capacity of the cartridge so fair enough.
Then I was told that while other lasers dumped waste toner to a reservoir after each print, the Brother printers (and I don't know if this is true) used a charge to suck unused toner back into the cartridge until the ratio of waste toner to good was high enough that it couldn't print reliably. Disappointing but still ok I guess. So I put in a new cartridge. Having done virtually no color printing and having no status messages about them I left those alone. Three days later it is telling me to replace all three color toner cartridges... hmmmm feels like something is wrong here but I have yet to figure out the cause and the cure.
Yeah, cause what possible damage could a healthy young woman do to a guy's skull with nothing but a 4 foot long steel club for a weapon? Why she was probably barely able to shatter the safety glass on the vehicle. Let's hope she doesn't get mad at one of her kids one day, eh?
(And no, I do not consider a cow a steak. If you place one on your plate you will quickly understand why.)
I've seen wolves that would disagree with you. Of course they didn't use plates... is that the critical difference?
There is a really big aluminum smelter a few hundred miles from me. Pretty much 0 tonnes of CO2 were dumped into the atmosphere to make the energy to refine the bauxite. It does use a huge amount of electricity which is generated nearby from hydroelectric facilities built specifically for that purpose. Although now they are finding it more profitable to just sell the electricity than to make the aluminum and sell that.
Having *any* humidity at all where molten metal runs, any metal, not just aluminum, will produce large quantities of steam, which will expand explosively throwing molten metal all around.
Yes, it is easy to see this if you pour water onto molten mercury, or vice versa.
And it's worth pointing out that in the show the character being quoted never hit his wife and in fact spent a lot of time begging and toadying toward her.
Since the parent is modded "Informative" I do have to say: what utter BS!
Well if you could get it to grow around some tomato and lettuce and then squeeze in between two slices of bread before hpping onto your plate...mmmmmmmmm bacon!
Yeah... not like weak and helpless companies like Kraft foods.