No, the datasets are "cleaned" to remove obviously erroneous data and correct for known errors. Reducing uncertainty improves the results and gives the scientists more confidence in their results.
In a normal year volcanoes emit about 1% as much CO2 as human emissions. Even such a large eruption as Pinatubo in 1991 only added 0.2% to that. Water vapor is strictly limited by temperature and can't drive climate change. The Sun's output absolutely has an effect on climate. It's just that it hasn't changed enough to account for the global temperature changes we've seen. We've had very good measurements of the Sun's output from satellites since the 1980's Those issues have all been examined by climate scientists and factored in.
If you compared the results you get from their "cleaned" datasets to the results you would get from the raw data the difference would hardly be detectable to a layman. The "cleaned" data is just a little more accurate which helps reduce uncertainty.
Peer review is merely the first step in reviewing new science. It makes sure there aren't any obvious errors and that the research was done in a sound fashion. Once it passes peer review then it's open for kudos or pot shots from any qualified scientist.
Proper procedures will counter most of the fraud possibilities with paper ballots. Pre-stuffing should by countered by multiple poll workers verifying that the ballot box is empty before the poll opens. Post-stuffing should be countered by placing a tamper-proof seal on the ballot box when the poll closes. A proper chain of custody record of voted ballots should prevent most opportunities for shenanigans. It may not be perfect but at least it requires a whole lot more effort to mess with paper ballots than with an electronic record.
Perhaps unemployment officially peaked at about 7% under Bush but the economy was shedding over 800,000 jobs a month (IIRC) when he left office and that's something Obama wasn't going to turn around instantly no matter what he did. I'd have to give Obama at least a 6 month pass on that after he took office.
llegal aliens have a number of ways to slip through the cracks and vote.
LOL. If I were in the country illegally the last thing I'd want to do is draw attention to myself by voting. Seriously, can you point to even one instance of enough illegal voters voting to change an election? Maybe in an election decided by one or two votes but not likely.
True, but that's a mind boggling time in the future. Even the 4 or 5 billion years the Sun has left is pretty unimaginable to most people. We might as well hang around to the end. Who knows, we might find a way to get around the heat death of the universe but even if we don't we'll have fun trying for the next 10^100 years.
The fundamental basis of morality is the Golden Rule. The way I learned it was "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." but sometimes it's stated in the negative sense like "Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself.". The Golden Rule is based in the instinctual empathy that most humans (and many animals) have (with the exception of psychopaths and to and extent sociopaths).
But morality is a human concept. The natural world is fundamentally amoral. Maybe in the evolution of animals a certain morality gets built in because it is beneficial to the species but that's just natural selection doing its job.
I think you're right, the $240 billion is probably and estimate of the total cost and may be on the high side depending on a lot of factors. But you can't tell me that the total cost of Fukushima is not going to be higher than the $375 million limit of private liability in the Price-Anderson Act and no doubt several multiples of that.
No private insurance company is willing to take on the potential liability of a nuclear plant without government guarantees to back them up.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the datasets are "cleaned" to remove obviously erroneous data and correct for known errors. Reducing uncertainty improves the results and gives the scientists more confidence in their results.
Raw data from NOAA and the GISS has been available online nearly forever (in internet terms). It doesn't contradict the CRU data.
Ok, you've destroyed tree ring proxies, now you need to move on to ice cores, coral, lake sediments, glaciers, boreholes & stalagmites.
To another scientist the differences are not significant enough to substantially change their conclusions. It's just fiddling around with the edges.
In a normal year volcanoes emit about 1% as much CO2 as human emissions. Even such a large eruption as Pinatubo in 1991 only added 0.2% to that. Water vapor is strictly limited by temperature and can't drive climate change. The Sun's output absolutely has an effect on climate. It's just that it hasn't changed enough to account for the global temperature changes we've seen. We've had very good measurements of the Sun's output from satellites since the 1980's Those issues have all been examined by climate scientists and factored in.
If you compared the results you get from their "cleaned" datasets to the results you would get from the raw data the difference would hardly be detectable to a layman. The "cleaned" data is just a little more accurate which helps reduce uncertainty.
And if there was any actual evidence to back up your assertions you might have a point that people would listen to.
Peer review is merely the first step in reviewing new science. It makes sure there aren't any obvious errors and that the research was done in a sound fashion. Once it passes peer review then it's open for kudos or pot shots from any qualified scientist.
A dollar shouldn't be a relevant unit of power in a democracy.
Good luck with that after the SCOTUS's Citizen's United decision.
You're probably right, a President doesn't have as much ability to affect the economy as most people think.
You know, I voted for Ford over Carter. That was the last Republican I've voted for for President (although I did vote for independent John Anderson).
Proper procedures will counter most of the fraud possibilities with paper ballots. Pre-stuffing should by countered by multiple poll workers verifying that the ballot box is empty before the poll opens. Post-stuffing should be countered by placing a tamper-proof seal on the ballot box when the poll closes. A proper chain of custody record of voted ballots should prevent most opportunities for shenanigans. It may not be perfect but at least it requires a whole lot more effort to mess with paper ballots than with an electronic record.
When was the last time a Republican didn't explicitly or implicitly say that lowering ("job killing") taxes would solve all of our problems?
Exit polls don't mean squat.
You know, before the advent of DRE electronic voting machines exit polls were in general remarkably accurate reflections of the actual voting.
Correlation is not causation but it makes you think.
The stimulus wasn't big enough and included too much tax break and not enough actual stimulus.
Perhaps unemployment officially peaked at about 7% under Bush but the economy was shedding over 800,000 jobs a month (IIRC) when he left office and that's something Obama wasn't going to turn around instantly no matter what he did. I'd have to give Obama at least a 6 month pass on that after he took office.
s/way/say/
He has spent more during his first two years than ALL of the previous presidents combined.
Why should I believe a single thing you way when you spout ridiculous shit like that?
llegal aliens have a number of ways to slip through the cracks and vote.
LOL. If I were in the country illegally the last thing I'd want to do is draw attention to myself by voting. Seriously, can you point to even one instance of enough illegal voters voting to change an election? Maybe in an election decided by one or two votes but not likely.
True, but that's a mind boggling time in the future. Even the 4 or 5 billion years the Sun has left is pretty unimaginable to most people. We might as well hang around to the end. Who knows, we might find a way to get around the heat death of the universe but even if we don't we'll have fun trying for the next 10^100 years.
The part that really cinched it was deleting messages out of Millie Dowler's VM so they could listen to new ones. That was outrageous!
Funny is right.
Ok, but what private enterprise is going to fund something like the LHC the the Hubble Telescope to name a couple of things?
The fundamental basis of morality is the Golden Rule. The way I learned it was "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." but sometimes it's stated in the negative sense like "Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself.". The Golden Rule is based in the instinctual empathy that most humans (and many animals) have (with the exception of psychopaths and to and extent sociopaths).
But morality is a human concept. The natural world is fundamentally amoral. Maybe in the evolution of animals a certain morality gets built in because it is beneficial to the species but that's just natural selection doing its job.
Dang, I read the headline and thought "There's our portal into the galactic internet".
I think you're right, the $240 billion is probably and estimate of the total cost and may be on the high side depending on a lot of factors. But you can't tell me that the total cost of Fukushima is not going to be higher than the $375 million limit of private liability in the Price-Anderson Act and no doubt several multiples of that.
No private insurance company is willing to take on the potential liability of a nuclear plant without government guarantees to back them up.