There is a difference between a personal email account, and the publicly funded account of a person who is FULLY AWARE that all their emails via this account are subject to FOI requests prior to sending their first email.
yeah, because "I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year 'reconstruction'." would mean something entirely different if it was in context.
I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about. They are linking a PUBLICLY broadcast SSID to a GPS location. They AREN'T letting people in to view your homemade porn collection.
What they are recording is the equivalent of your house number. You seem to think that they are opening up your home made porn stash to the world. They are simply logging where the AP "AnonymousCoward" is located then using that location to triangulate where you are when you use your phone.
Professor Aizenberg added: "The lubricating film is locked in place so it does not mix with liquids placed on the surface. By carefully selecting the lubricant we impregnate the pores with, it means we can repel a broad spectrum of liquids.
it shouldn't be an issue.
regardless, it will have to pass FDA testing prior to being used as food packaging.
Professor Aizenberg added: "The lubricating film is locked in place so it does not mix with liquids placed on the surface. By carefully selecting the lubricant we impregnate the pores with, it means we can repel a broad spectrum of liquids.
... is a terrible misnomer. If anything it is dealkylation, but the ocean swings through larger pH changes over the course of the day than are predicted with the worse case doom and gloom fairy tales.
4) Climate has been hotter and colder. Yes, it was colder during the ice age, and hotter 4 billion years ago. Would you have liked to live in either of those time periods? The climate is changing. It is scientific fact that we have a hand in it. If it changes too much, many, many people will die. We should therefore attempt to prevent it from changing. This is really straightforward stuff.
It was also hotter during the medieval warm period around 1000 years ago. I wouldn't have wanted to live then, because I enjoy my indoor plumbing, but more to the point, civilization boomed during that time period, so I'm willing to bet that the people of that time were pretty happy that the climate was warmer rather than cold like it was during the little ice age when civilizations suffered.
The scientific fact that we have is that the climate has ALWAYS changed. It is pure insanity to think that we should, or can, prevent it from changing.
Quick, paint everyone with healthy skepticism with the false accusation that they are on the pay roll of some fossil fuel company, because there is no possible way that people trying model the entire earth and all its climate systems could possibly be in error.
I mean, after all, every single one of their predictions have come true right? RIGHT???
Is it just me, or have climate "scientists" completely missed that whole recalibrate step when observations haven't met their hypotheses? Instead they just assume that they are still right, but there is some poor excuse like "missing heat" and continue merrily on their way.
ocean acidification is a brutal misnomer. If anything it is dealkylation. The oceans are plenty basic, and will be for quite some time. They can also survive far wider swings in pH over the course of a single day than has been predicted by even the worst fearmongering stories, and come out unscathed.
I don't have the same experience as you. If one follows my method, you land directly on the Pepsi Google+ page. No extra clicks, a lot less typing, and so much easier than typing out a complete url address.
When I use the link I gave, or if I type +pepsi into google, it does exactly what it is supposed to do, and takes me directly to the Pepsi Google+ page.
But then, I seem to be aware of how to use the internet.:P
See elsewhere from other posters for numbers. The original questions were silly, and deserving of equally silly answers.
If I am underestimating scale, that means that using geothermal is even LESS of problem than I am implying. Basically geekoid, I think you and I are on the same page, that there is essentially no way that we are going to cause the oceans to boil or our core to stop spinning by using geothermal.
Again, it is a false metaphor. You are talking about taking a substance which is acutely toxic to the body, and raising it to a lethal level instantaneously, then implying that if we continue to raise CO2 levels it will have the same dramatic effect of destroying the system.
If we instantaneously raise CO2 levels to some extreme value, then yes, it may cause serious harm to the earth. The key there is instantaneously. The reality is that we are slowly, and steadily raising the CO2 levels and life on this earth has this crazy habit of adapting to changes as evidenced by the fact that life has gone through multiple warm periods and ice ages and yet still exists.
Slashdot Mirror
There is a difference between a personal email account, and the publicly funded account of a person who is FULLY AWARE that all their emails via this account are subject to FOI requests prior to sending their first email.
yeah, because "I’m sure you agree–the Mann/Jones GRL paper was truly pathetic and should never have been published. I don’t want to be associated with that 2000 year 'reconstruction'." would mean something entirely different if it was in context.
except not.
I don't think you have a clue what you are talking about. They are linking a PUBLICLY broadcast SSID to a GPS location. They AREN'T letting people in to view your homemade porn collection.
What they are recording is the equivalent of your house number. You seem to think that they are opening up your home made porn stash to the world. They are simply logging where the AP "AnonymousCoward" is located then using that location to triangulate where you are when you use your phone.
well, since it says in TFA:
Professor Aizenberg added: "The lubricating film is locked in place so it does not mix with liquids placed on the surface. By carefully selecting the lubricant we impregnate the pores with, it means we can repel a broad spectrum of liquids.
it shouldn't be an issue.
regardless, it will have to pass FDA testing prior to being used as food packaging.
From TFA:
Professor Aizenberg added: "The lubricating film is locked in place so it does not mix with liquids placed on the surface. By carefully selecting the lubricant we impregnate the pores with, it means we can repel a broad spectrum of liquids.
OCEAN ACIDIFICATION
... is a terrible misnomer. If anything it is dealkylation, but the ocean swings through larger pH changes over the course of the day than are predicted with the worse case doom and gloom fairy tales.
If you can get past the paywall, I suggest you have a look at this:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2011.02583.x/abstract
4) Climate has been hotter and colder. Yes, it was colder during the ice age, and hotter 4 billion years ago. Would you have liked to live in either of those time periods? The climate is changing. It is scientific fact that we have a hand in it. If it changes too much, many, many people will die. We should therefore attempt to prevent it from changing. This is really straightforward stuff.
It was also hotter during the medieval warm period around 1000 years ago. I wouldn't have wanted to live then, because I enjoy my indoor plumbing, but more to the point, civilization boomed during that time period, so I'm willing to bet that the people of that time were pretty happy that the climate was warmer rather than cold like it was during the little ice age when civilizations suffered.
The scientific fact that we have is that the climate has ALWAYS changed. It is pure insanity to think that we should, or can, prevent it from changing.
Quick, paint everyone with healthy skepticism with the false accusation that they are on the pay roll of some fossil fuel company, because there is no possible way that people trying model the entire earth and all its climate systems could possibly be in error.
I mean, after all, every single one of their predictions have come true right? RIGHT???
Awwwwww, how cute, the AC is offended.
The use of a :P as a sign that I'm just giving a friendly ribbing is lost on this one.
warmer air absorbs and carries more water.
I suggest that you do some reading on partial pressures.
Is it just me, or have climate "scientists" completely missed that whole recalibrate step when observations haven't met their hypotheses? Instead they just assume that they are still right, but there is some poor excuse like "missing heat" and continue merrily on their way.
ocean acidification is a brutal misnomer. If anything it is dealkylation. The oceans are plenty basic, and will be for quite some time. They can also survive far wider swings in pH over the course of a single day than has been predicted by even the worst fearmongering stories, and come out unscathed.
Well, I have no idea where along the way you are screwing things up, but it works fine and dandy for me.
Then you are still doing it wrong. You are supposed to click the link ;)
Darn ACs, you just can't teach them anything.
Not for me, straight to the Pepsi Google+ page.
I don't have the same experience as you. If one follows my method, you land directly on the Pepsi Google+ page. No extra clicks, a lot less typing, and so much easier than typing out a complete url address.
When I use the link I gave, or if I type +pepsi into google, it does exactly what it is supposed to do, and takes me directly to the Pepsi Google+ page.
But then, I seem to be aware of how to use the internet. :P
using Google, you're doing it wrong.
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=%2Bpepsi
using Google, you're doing it wrong.
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=%2Bpepsi
See elsewhere from other posters for numbers. The original questions were silly, and deserving of equally silly answers.
If I am underestimating scale, that means that using geothermal is even LESS of problem than I am implying. Basically geekoid, I think you and I are on the same page, that there is essentially no way that we are going to cause the oceans to boil or our core to stop spinning by using geothermal.
Again, it is a false metaphor. You are talking about taking a substance which is acutely toxic to the body, and raising it to a lethal level instantaneously, then implying that if we continue to raise CO2 levels it will have the same dramatic effect of destroying the system.
If we instantaneously raise CO2 levels to some extreme value, then yes, it may cause serious harm to the earth. The key there is instantaneously. The reality is that we are slowly, and steadily raising the CO2 levels and life on this earth has this crazy habit of adapting to changes as evidenced by the fact that life has gone through multiple warm periods and ice ages and yet still exists.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Who let Al "several million degrees" Gore onto Slashdot?
I guarantee that many many many many many many generations from now, the kids of the kids of the people of that time will not have to worry about it.
I think you need to get a grip on scale.