Another solid piece of evidence that the Moon landings were real is provided by the still ongoing Lunar Laser Ranging experiment. It uses reflectors left by Apollo 11, 14 & 15 to measure the distance to the Moon.
Ooh, you awakened the pedant in me. I doubt you could achieve orbit around the Moon on human power alone.
According to the Wikipedia article on orbital speed orbital velocity for a circular orbit where the orbiting body's mass is small compared to the body being orbited is approximately equal to sqrt(u/a) where u is actually the Greek letter mu and the standard gravitational parameter and a is the length of the semi-major axis which for a circle is the radius. So the SGP for the Moon (from the Wikipedia article) is 4,902.7779 (km^3 sec^-2) and the Moon's mean radius is 1737 km so adding 3 km to clear the mountain peaks would give you sqrt(4903/1740) = an orbital velocity of 2.82 km/sec or 10152 km/hr. That would be pretty difficult to achieve on human power.
You just exhibit your ignorance. Temperatures are still rising, the science now says hurricane numbers don't necessarily change, just the strength may change and 2 years of non-rising sea level is meaningless.
Maybe there are more than two sides but I'm on the side of science. Science isn't always totally clear but it gives better answers than any other side.
If I had mod points to give you'd get a +1 Insightful. The idea that so many scientists across so many disciplines from around the world could maintain such a conspiracy for so long is absurd. Do people really believe the so many scientists are willing to risk their scientific reputations for political aims? Anyone who proves them wrong would destroy them and would be up for a Nobel Prize.
Are we so terrorized by terrorism that we are willing to put up with anything to avoid it? How far do we want to go to prevent terrorism. Should we just accept that sometimes it's going to happen despite our best efforts? It sucks if you happen to be a victim but terrorism can never do enough take down a country unless it overreacts and spends itself to death trying to counter it.
I'm not saying we should do nothing to fight terrorism but how far should we go?
The one dollar bill is the thing we should really be eliminating. They're expensive to produce relative to their value (nearly 10 cents a bill) and the average lifetime is 42 months before they wear out. The dollar coin lasts 25 times as long and the buying power of one is similar to what a quarter was when I was a kid. It would save money to eliminate the dollar bill and use dollar coins instead.
The biggest reason there have been no new nuclear plants has more to do with the fact that it was cheaper to build a coal plant than it does with red tape.
They get value for those higher taxes, mostly free education for as far as they can go, universal medical coverage for nearly half of what Americans pay per person on average, unemployment and retirement coverage. It mostly works out pretty well for them.
You're probably right. I try to be optimistic. The difference between humans and other species is we have the ability to look at the future with some understanding of what is likely to happen and even affect how the future turns out.
"Hide the decline" refers to the fact that some tree ring series stopped matching with temperature changes in the 1960's after having matched for the previous 100+ years. The speculation is that the change in tree rings had a lot to do with industrial pollution but I'm not aware that anyone has studied this intensely yet. Since they had good accurate data from actual thermometers then they just used that. The decline in tree ring data was openly and fully disclosed and discussed in the relevant peer reviewed papers. Nobody was hiding anything, just removing confusing and useless data from the graphs they made of it.
GPS uses a very low power signal from the orbiting satellites. Trying to add filters for the Lightsquared band to that would reduce the signal strength even more. Lightsquared's signals would have been terrestrial in origin and 100 times the signal strength of the the GPS signal. It's just not a workable combination.
Anthony Watts proposes to create a new Web site devoted to accessing the new temperature data from NOAA’s web site...
Oh man, I'd love to see that. But Watts would probably bury it after he saw the results. An analysis by NOAA a few years back using Watts own list of well sited and poorly sited weather stations found that actually the corrections applied to the poorly sited stations caused a slightly smaller warming trend than from the well sited stations.
The first person to talk about global warming from increased CO2 was Svante Arrhenius in 1896. Long before Al Gore was even born.
if the quantity of carbonic acid increases in geometric progression, the augmentation of the temperature will increase nearly in arithmetic progression.
2 out 3 of the major temperature records (3 out of 4 if you count BEST) show that 2005 and 2010 are tied for the warmest years on record. I wouldn't call that cooling for the better part of a decade. The HADCRUT3 record still has 1998 as the warmest year but the new HADCRUT4 temperature analysis that does a better job of including the polar temperatures will change that. Climate SCIENCE shows no indication of a cooling trend.
The real "AGW alarmists" are those who say responding to global warming will destroy the economy, cost an insane amount of money and reduce us all to living an 18th century lifestyle if not a caveman lifestyle. Most people who are concerned about the effects of global warming are realistic enough to realize it will take 30-40 years to wean ourselves from dependence on fossil fuels and the sooner and more strongly we put our effort into that the better the ultimate result will be.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, some of them are libertarians. However I think the correlation between creationism and global warming "skepticism" is very high.
Faith in a creator(aka god ) is inverse of science.
The two things are orthogonal.
Another solid piece of evidence that the Moon landings were real is provided by the still ongoing Lunar Laser Ranging experiment. It uses reflectors left by Apollo 11, 14 & 15 to measure the distance to the Moon.
Ooh, you awakened the pedant in me. I doubt you could achieve orbit around the Moon on human power alone.
According to the Wikipedia article on orbital speed orbital velocity for a circular orbit where the orbiting body's mass is small compared to the body being orbited is approximately equal to sqrt(u/a) where u is actually the Greek letter mu and the standard gravitational parameter and a is the length of the semi-major axis which for a circle is the radius. So the SGP for the Moon (from the Wikipedia article) is 4,902.7779 (km^3 sec^-2) and the Moon's mean radius is 1737 km so adding 3 km to clear the mountain peaks would give you sqrt(4903/1740) = an orbital velocity of 2.82 km/sec or 10152 km/hr. That would be pretty difficult to achieve on human power.
If they get a special copyright it should cost them. How about 10% of the gross proceeds from the special copyright paid to the Federal Government?
You just exhibit your ignorance. Temperatures are still rising, the science now says hurricane numbers don't necessarily change, just the strength may change and 2 years of non-rising sea level is meaningless.
Maybe there are more than two sides but I'm on the side of science. Science isn't always totally clear but it gives better answers than any other side.
How ironic considering that iPad's are made in China.
Several leading climate scientists have published an open letter (PDF) to the Heartland Institute.
If I had mod points to give you'd get a +1 Insightful. The idea that so many scientists across so many disciplines from around the world could maintain such a conspiracy for so long is absurd. Do people really believe the so many scientists are willing to risk their scientific reputations for political aims? Anyone who proves them wrong would destroy them and would be up for a Nobel Prize.
And your post is pretty much the definition of a conspiracy theory.
The terrorists won when the US passed the USA PATRIOT Act too. If they "Hate our freedom" our reaction is to reduce our freedom?
Are we so terrorized by terrorism that we are willing to put up with anything to avoid it? How far do we want to go to prevent terrorism. Should we just accept that sometimes it's going to happen despite our best efforts? It sucks if you happen to be a victim but terrorism can never do enough take down a country unless it overreacts and spends itself to death trying to counter it.
I'm not saying we should do nothing to fight terrorism but how far should we go?
The one dollar bill is the thing we should really be eliminating. They're expensive to produce relative to their value (nearly 10 cents a bill) and the average lifetime is 42 months before they wear out. The dollar coin lasts 25 times as long and the buying power of one is similar to what a quarter was when I was a kid. It would save money to eliminate the dollar bill and use dollar coins instead.
The biggest reason there have been no new nuclear plants has more to do with the fact that it was cheaper to build a coal plant than it does with red tape.
They get value for those higher taxes, mostly free education for as far as they can go, universal medical coverage for nearly half of what Americans pay per person on average, unemployment and retirement coverage. It mostly works out pretty well for them.
I agree.
You're probably right. I try to be optimistic. The difference between humans and other species is we have the ability to look at the future with some understanding of what is likely to happen and even affect how the future turns out.
"Hide the decline" refers to the fact that some tree ring series stopped matching with temperature changes in the 1960's after having matched for the previous 100+ years. The speculation is that the change in tree rings had a lot to do with industrial pollution but I'm not aware that anyone has studied this intensely yet. Since they had good accurate data from actual thermometers then they just used that. The decline in tree ring data was openly and fully disclosed and discussed in the relevant peer reviewed papers. Nobody was hiding anything, just removing confusing and useless data from the graphs they made of it.
GPS uses a very low power signal from the orbiting satellites. Trying to add filters for the Lightsquared band to that would reduce the signal strength even more. Lightsquared's signals would have been terrestrial in origin and 100 times the signal strength of the the GPS signal. It's just not a workable combination.
Anthony Watts proposes to create a new Web site devoted to accessing the new temperature data ...
from NOAA’s web site
Oh man, I'd love to see that. But Watts would probably bury it after he saw the results. An analysis by NOAA a few years back using Watts own list of well sited and poorly sited weather stations found that actually the corrections applied to the poorly sited stations caused a slightly smaller warming trend than from the well sited stations.
The first person to talk about global warming from increased CO2 was Svante Arrhenius in 1896. Long before Al Gore was even born.
if the quantity of carbonic acid increases in geometric progression, the augmentation of the temperature will increase nearly in arithmetic progression.
2 out 3 of the major temperature records (3 out of 4 if you count BEST) show that 2005 and 2010 are tied for the warmest years on record. I wouldn't call that cooling for the better part of a decade. The HADCRUT3 record still has 1998 as the warmest year but the new HADCRUT4 temperature analysis that does a better job of including the polar temperatures will change that. Climate SCIENCE shows no indication of a cooling trend.
The real "AGW alarmists" are those who say responding to global warming will destroy the economy, cost an insane amount of money and reduce us all to living an 18th century lifestyle if not a caveman lifestyle. Most people who are concerned about the effects of global warming are realistic enough to realize it will take 30-40 years to wean ourselves from dependence on fossil fuels and the sooner and more strongly we put our effort into that the better the ultimate result will be.
I like that analogy.