It's become obvious that Ebola is relatively easy to contain once you get on top of it. It can't be transmitted except by direct contact with someone who's sick with it. Zika on the other hand is carried by mosquitoes and anywhere the type of mosquitoes that can carry it are endemic it will be a threat. That includes much of the southern USA. Ars Technica had a recent story about how Zika may infect nerve cells in any age person. Link.
If you have automatic payments set up then call your bank and tell them to cancel the automatic payments. Don't depend on the service provider to do it.
On the other hand, some (a lot?) of people now have 50% more purchasing power, and money is moving around way more than before. Which, if I'm not mistaken, will generate demand, which will generate jobs...
Way too many people nowadays believe that jobs come from letting (financial) business have a lots of money, while in the real world the jobs come from tasks that need to be done -- a.k.a. demand.
Exactly this. Where do businesses expect to sell their products if too few people make enough money to buy them?
You are making the assumption that since increasing CO2 is a natural feedback of rising temperatures it's not possible for changes in CO2 levels unrelated to temperature changes to affect temperature. I'd like to see you try and justify that stance scientifically.
That is also pointless. We also know that over the extended record, CO2 follows temperature, and that temperature variability is such that a 40 year term is completely insufficient to draw any sort of conclusion.
I'm done, you obviously don't have anything scientific to add.
You really should take the time to listen to this lecture at the annual AGU meeting in 2009 by Richard Alley:
The difference between maximum extent and minimum extent in the Arctic each year is around 8 or 9 million km^2 which would put in the size of countries like the USA or Brazil.
If you paid any attention to the science you would know that the planet finished warming up after the last ice age about 8,000 years ago and had been slowly dropping toward the next one since then.
The cold freshwater melt is heavier than the surrounding seawater and sinks straight to the bottom starting many of the worldwide ocean currents.
Actually fresh water is less dense than saltwater and it can form a cap over it that disrupts currents. It's cold saline water sinking in the ocean that drives some currents.
Thank you for the explanation for us common folk.... When you say "Each year arctic ice the size of a country melts," would that country be Vatican City or Russia? "Country" is not a very common measurement of mass in my limited, common experience.
The variation between the Arctic winter maximum sea ice extent and the summer sea ice extent minimum is around 8 or 9 million km^2 each year which would put it in the size range of the USA, Brazil and Australia.
Why would you allow abortion in the case of rape? That seems inconsistent to me. If you're going to allow it for rape then you should allow it in cases where birth control failed too.
You know there are a couple of places in the Bible that imply life doesn't begin until you're first breath. Personally for me it's a matter of when a fetus is able to survive on it's own rather than as a parasite on a woman. Given modern medicine that's a kind of fuzzy definition but it's what I believe. Did you know that some 60-70% of fertilized eggs spontaneously abort within the first couple of weeks? That's a lot of embryo souls in heaven.
Since when is a seat on the Supreme Court reserved for someone of a particular political bent?
Since the SCOTUS started writing laws.
Try as I might I can't make sense of that.
Abortion is legal in the US, not because of an act of Congress, but because of the SCOTUS.
I see abortion as a matter of personal freedom and privacy which is well within the purview of the SCOTUS.
Yes, of course it is. I want a SCOTUS that respects the Constitution and the freedoms that we hold dear.
Me too. I guess we just have different views of what that means.
John Roberts is a traitor to the US, his siding with the liberals on ACA thus forcing citizens to buy a private product from a private company will be (or should be) looked at in 50 years as one of the gravest mistakes of our era.
Hopefully in 50 years it will be looked on as the first step to universal coverage like practically all the other first world countries already have.
The mention of clothes got me wondering about laundry on the ISS. So I looked it up and there is no laundry on the ISS. Everything they wear is delivered to the station and once it becomes to pitted out to wear they put it in the trash which is loaded in a Progress capsule. Once the Progress capsule is full it is deorbited to burn up in the Earth's atmosphere. So I guess we're all breathing the ISS's burnt up dirty laundry.
The President has the power to prioritize what an agency does. He's told INS/ICE to concentrate on criminals. Seriously trying to deport all "illegals" would probably require an order of magnitude increase in the INS/ICE budget. Congress may balk at that. I doubt that banning all Muslims would pass muster with the Supreme Court. He can renegotiate trade deals but they still have to pass Congress. As CiC he still has to work within the budget and authorizations that Congress gives him. Obama has tried to get a new authorization for use of force against ISIS but Congress refused.
Congress hasn't abdicated anything. They can pass a law that overturns any action an executive branch agency has taken. They can't micromanage everything so they set out general principles in the laws that create these agencies and let them worry about the details.
I'm happy with the FCC's net neutrality rules but in my opinion they didn't go far enough. What needs to happen is to separate the access providers (the wires/fibers to your home) from the content providers. Then regulate the access providers as a common carrier providing nondiscriminatory access to the content providers who are completely deregulated to let them compete with each other.
If Trump somehow gets elected President I think he'll be very frustrated. A corporation is essentially a dictatorship and as the head of one you can make decisions and make them stick. The President, while having plenty of power can't force Congress to do anything. He can't force the Supreme Court to agree with him.
We don't have a measurement of the entire ocean, so it's quite possible for heat from the areas of the ocean we don't have good measurements for (say, the deep ocean beneath the thermocline) to be transferred to the atmosphere, and no sign of it will show up in our limited measurements of ocean heat content.
Since the early 2000s about 4000 ARGO floats have been measuring the oceans to a depth of 2000 meters which is below the thermocline most of the time. Your claim the heat might be in the deep ocean is speculation without any evidence to back it up.
Slashdot Mirror
It's become obvious that Ebola is relatively easy to contain once you get on top of it. It can't be transmitted except by direct contact with someone who's sick with it. Zika on the other hand is carried by mosquitoes and anywhere the type of mosquitoes that can carry it are endemic it will be a threat. That includes much of the southern USA. Ars Technica had a recent story about how Zika may infect nerve cells in any age person. Link.
If you have automatic payments set up then call your bank and tell them to cancel the automatic payments. Don't depend on the service provider to do it.
On the other hand, some (a lot?) of people now have 50% more purchasing power, and money is moving around way more than before. Which, if I'm not mistaken, will generate demand, which will generate jobs...
Way too many people nowadays believe that jobs come from letting (financial) business have a lots of money, while in the real world the jobs come from tasks that need to be done -- a.k.a. demand.
Exactly this. Where do businesses expect to sell their products if too few people make enough money to buy them?
You are making the assumption that since increasing CO2 is a natural feedback of rising temperatures it's not possible for changes in CO2 levels unrelated to temperature changes to affect temperature. I'd like to see you try and justify that stance scientifically.
That is also pointless. We also know that over the extended record, CO2 follows temperature, and that temperature variability is such that a 40 year term is completely insufficient to draw any sort of conclusion.
I'm done, you obviously don't have anything scientific to add.
You really should take the time to listen to this lecture at the annual AGU meeting in 2009 by Richard Alley:
"The Biggest Control Knob: Carbon Dioxide in Earth's Climate History"
It's nearly an hour long but it covers over 4 billion years of how carbon dioxide relates to the climate.
The difference between maximum extent and minimum extent in the Arctic each year is around 8 or 9 million km^2 which would put in the size of countries like the USA or Brazil.
If you paid any attention to the science you would know that the planet finished warming up after the last ice age about 8,000 years ago and had been slowly dropping toward the next one since then.
Whenever I hear about the NIPCC report I think of Nipsey Russell. They're both pretty humorous.
The cold freshwater melt is heavier than the surrounding seawater and sinks straight to the bottom starting many of the worldwide ocean currents.
Actually fresh water is less dense than saltwater and it can form a cap over it that disrupts currents. It's cold saline water sinking in the ocean that drives some currents.
Thank you for the explanation for us common folk.... When you say "Each year arctic ice the size of a country melts," would that country be Vatican City or Russia? "Country" is not a very common measurement of mass in my limited, common experience.
The variation between the Arctic winter maximum sea ice extent and the summer sea ice extent minimum is around 8 or 9 million km^2 each year which would put it in the size range of the USA, Brazil and Australia.
Why would you allow abortion in the case of rape? That seems inconsistent to me. If you're going to allow it for rape then you should allow it in cases where birth control failed too.
Unfortunately for you a substantial portion of the population does not agree with you.
You know there are a couple of places in the Bible that imply life doesn't begin until you're first breath. Personally for me it's a matter of when a fetus is able to survive on it's own rather than as a parasite on a woman. Given modern medicine that's a kind of fuzzy definition but it's what I believe. Did you know that some 60-70% of fertilized eggs spontaneously abort within the first couple of weeks? That's a lot of embryo souls in heaven.
Since when is a seat on the Supreme Court reserved for someone of a particular political bent?
Since the SCOTUS started writing laws.
Try as I might I can't make sense of that.
Abortion is legal in the US, not because of an act of Congress, but because of the SCOTUS.
I see abortion as a matter of personal freedom and privacy which is well within the purview of the SCOTUS.
Yes, of course it is. I want a SCOTUS that respects the Constitution and the freedoms that we hold dear.
Me too. I guess we just have different views of what that means.
John Roberts is a traitor to the US, his siding with the liberals on ACA thus forcing citizens to buy a private product from a private company will be (or should be) looked at in 50 years as one of the gravest mistakes of our era.
Hopefully in 50 years it will be looked on as the first step to universal coverage like practically all the other first world countries already have.
:)
Meh, almost kinda sorta... He was fine in the past for non-SCOTUS positions, but he is too liberal to replace Antonin Scalia.
Since when is a seat on the Supreme Court reserved for someone of a particular political bent?
Your comment that SCOTUS is already too far left is just your personal opinion.
When the previous two seats that Obama filled came up Merrick Garland was a name that Republicans like Orrin Hatch mentioned.
According to Wikipedia it's spelled Pavlof. It's located pretty far out on the Alaska Peninsula.
A vacuum would certainly remove any water but I think grease and oil have nonvolatile components that would remain behind.
The mention of clothes got me wondering about laundry on the ISS. So I looked it up and there is no laundry on the ISS. Everything they wear is delivered to the station and once it becomes to pitted out to wear they put it in the trash which is loaded in a Progress capsule. Once the Progress capsule is full it is deorbited to burn up in the Earth's atmosphere. So I guess we're all breathing the ISS's burnt up dirty laundry.
Anyway they apparently have enough underwear to change it every 3 or 4 days but I have to think it smells like a gym in the ISS. Here's a story about the astronauts dirty laundry.
And to ignore everybody else. Obama straight-up doesn't care about enforcing the borders. The donors want cheap labor and the Democrats want voters.
You know that "illegal" immigration has gone down under Obama don't you?
The President has the power to prioritize what an agency does. He's told INS/ICE to concentrate on criminals. Seriously trying to deport all "illegals" would probably require an order of magnitude increase in the INS/ICE budget. Congress may balk at that. I doubt that banning all Muslims would pass muster with the Supreme Court. He can renegotiate trade deals but they still have to pass Congress. As CiC he still has to work within the budget and authorizations that Congress gives him. Obama has tried to get a new authorization for use of force against ISIS but Congress refused.
Congress hasn't abdicated anything. They can pass a law that overturns any action an executive branch agency has taken. They can't micromanage everything so they set out general principles in the laws that create these agencies and let them worry about the details.
I'm happy with the FCC's net neutrality rules but in my opinion they didn't go far enough. What needs to happen is to separate the access providers (the wires/fibers to your home) from the content providers. Then regulate the access providers as a common carrier providing nondiscriminatory access to the content providers who are completely deregulated to let them compete with each other.
If Trump somehow gets elected President I think he'll be very frustrated. A corporation is essentially a dictatorship and as the head of one you can make decisions and make them stick. The President, while having plenty of power can't force Congress to do anything. He can't force the Supreme Court to agree with him.
We don't have a measurement of the entire ocean, so it's quite possible for heat from the areas of the ocean we don't have good measurements for (say, the deep ocean beneath the thermocline) to be transferred to the atmosphere, and no sign of it will show up in our limited measurements of ocean heat content.
Since the early 2000s about 4000 ARGO floats have been measuring the oceans to a depth of 2000 meters which is below the thermocline most of the time. Your claim the heat might be in the deep ocean is speculation without any evidence to back it up.
Posting to kill an Underrated mod.