If you have a better idea of how to go about believing in something, I'm eager to hear it.
Here's a few methods that I know don't work:
1) Believe based on the evidence and arguments you hear. Sounds reasonable, right? Unfortunately, for any field of sufficient complexity, laymen like us don't have the ability to evaluate the evidence and arguments in context, because we are too ignorant. I don't care if this has been your hobby for a few years, or that you are a brilliant person. Unless you actually have a degree in this stuff, you aren't going to be a great judge of arguments.
2) Believe based on a particular expert. But when there are many experts, there is no reason to believe in any particular one.
3) Believe based on the personalities involved. Don't trust Al Gore? Logically, it shouldn't make a difference, since many more people are involved beside Al Gore.
So, please tell me the method you use to believe, that is better than scientific consensus.
I didn't point you to that site to show you that there's support out there for Mann, but to give info about the controversies in question.
Your point about not listening to a person defending themselves is not logical. Of course you want to listen to the person defending themselves. How else would you discover the truth of any particular argument? But the fact that they attempt rebut an argument against them is not so surprising, as you point out. The interesting part is how they do it. Is it with facts? With threatening lawsuits? With wild allegations?
I find the argument coherent and fact-based.
Also, I find it not likely that Mann is alone defending himself here. RealClimate is more than just Mann, so you shouldn't be concerned that it's just Mann defending his reputation, without other scientists agreeing with him.
Well, it's run by scientists who know more than any of us, which is why it is useful to link to them.
There are also scientists who know more than any of us that oppose global warming, but there are much fewer of them. Therefore, it seems clear that we should believe the majority, since we ourselves are not experts. Linking to some of those experts is the correct thing to do here.
And, from working in academia as a programmer, I can tell you that the quality of engineering is in general low, because most of the time you don't have professional software engineers working on the product. Unfortunate, but there's not enough money for anything more than an RA, which are often inexperienced.
Since they are legally obligated to shut down accounts that match terrorist names, I wouldn't bet on it stopping (or being substantially different with other services).
I believe that Dr. Nielsen is talking about Google AdWords (and it's equivalents), not the straightforward search & indexing. Blocking with robots.txt will do nothing positive for anyone, and is basically irrelevant to the article.
Re:Here's what's really going on:
on
RFID Cookware
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Actually, cast iron has wonderfully even heating, better than almost anything else out there. However, because of it's poor conductivity, you have to let it sit on the stove for a bit for the temperature to even out.
One of the best restaurants in the world, The French Laundry, uses induction stoves instead of gas stoves.
All of the features available for any other editor? Not even close, man. The most useful features are nowhere to be found on other major editing plaforms. For example, Emacs has a command to delete to the end of the line. So useful! A while ago I tried to find an equivalent in IntelliJ without success. Also, another little great command: move the current line up to the previous line, doing the right thing with whitespce. Not to mention comment formatting. I haven't seen a modern environment that does those things.
When you add macros, dynamic expansions, tags, and other stuff, it's far and away the best editor out there.
For bringing more people to Linux, I saw Hooray for unhappiness. here's how I think the whole process works:
Step 1 - Cluelessness - Buy Windows 95 Step 2 - Anger - Buy Windows NT Step 3- Unhappiness - move to Linux Step 4 - Confusion - move to Macintosh Step 5 - Bankruptcy - move to Tibet and become a Buddhist monk.
You heard it hear first, folks. move to Tibet now before the rush comes in!
What science fiction should be striving for is not more scientifically accurate stories. What is more important is the kind of stories that investigate the effect of technology on man, or the type that deals with interspecies communication. That's real science fiction.
Who are the greatest sci-fi authors? In my, and many other opinion, the two great ones are Stanislaw Lem and Philip K. Dick. While they do try and make their stories as realistic as possible, they do not attempt to restrict themselves to the known.
Take Lem's "Fiasco". Lem posits "sidereal" technology, which enables the protaganists to do all sorts of extremely advanced stuff. The technology is never explained, but it serves as crucial to the plot. And yet the book is not about it, either, it is merely a plot device to what is really important: showing the futility in trying to communicate with alien intelligences.
Yeah, but Ebert was also one of the very few critics who liked Evil Dead II. Also one of the first film critics to really understand what a masterpiece 2001 is.
So I guess you have to take the good with the bad with him. If you read the reviews, you'll probably have a good idea if you'll like the film or not.
Controlling trains is harder than you may think. Looks how much trouble they had in San Francisco, when their newly computerized, comparitavely simple Muni lines had a famous meltdown. Thousands were trapped in the subway, due to glitches in the software. Even when not melted down, the lines was extremely slow for a long time, even in the subway portion.
instead of clear, easy to read maps, you get fuzzy pictures where in some cases you can't even see the road. for instance, where i live just looks like a mass of trees and apartment buildings. a note to google - a map should have street names.
this is an interesting feature, but make it optional, and not the default. i enjoyed the previous maps much more.
sorry about the lack of caps, my shift key is mysteriously nonfunctioning as of 5 minutes ago.
This article sort of looked like bullshit to me, especially the cold fusion part. Notice how they hint that cold fusion has been replicated, but don't actually go out and say so. Then they quote an "Engineer" saying the evidence is strong, like they couldn't find any scientist that would support their claim. So I asked at the Straight Dope Message Board about the cold fusion, and got some interesting answers. What I learned basically confirmed that (to the knowledge of that fairly well informed board), yes, cold fusion still is unlikely and unreplicated.
Slashdot Mirror
They do, the gdata APIs, which is what I believe this tool is based off of.
An overview all the different APIs is here:
http://code.google.com/more/
You may want to try it again. They have been working on performance for quite a while now, and recently made some substantial improvements.
If you have a better idea of how to go about believing in something, I'm eager to hear it.
Here's a few methods that I know don't work:
1) Believe based on the evidence and arguments you hear. Sounds reasonable, right? Unfortunately, for any field of sufficient complexity, laymen like us don't have the ability to evaluate the evidence and arguments in context, because we are too ignorant. I don't care if this has been your hobby for a few years, or that you are a brilliant person. Unless you actually have a degree in this stuff, you aren't going to be a great judge of arguments.
2) Believe based on a particular expert. But when there are many experts, there is no reason to believe in any particular one.
3) Believe based on the personalities involved. Don't trust Al Gore? Logically, it shouldn't make a difference, since many more people are involved beside Al Gore.
So, please tell me the method you use to believe, that is better than scientific consensus.
Your comment only makes sense if you don't believe in science.
I didn't point you to that site to show you that there's support out there for Mann, but to give info about the controversies in question.
Your point about not listening to a person defending themselves is not logical. Of course you want to listen to the person defending themselves. How else would you discover the truth of any particular argument? But the fact that they attempt rebut an argument against them is not so surprising, as you point out. The interesting part is how they do it. Is it with facts? With threatening lawsuits? With wild allegations?
I find the argument coherent and fact-based.
Also, I find it not likely that Mann is alone defending himself here. RealClimate is more than just Mann, so you shouldn't be concerned that it's just Mann defending his reputation, without other scientists agreeing with him.
Well, it's run by scientists who know more than any of us, which is why it is useful to link to them.
There are also scientists who know more than any of us that oppose global warming, but there are much fewer of them. Therefore, it seems clear that we should believe the majority, since we ourselves are not experts. Linking to some of those experts is the correct thing to do here.
Can you explain how having your email leaked makes you an unreliable source? I'm not getting it.
Most of your assertions have been debunked a long time ago. To take just one example:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/myths-vs-fact-regarding-the-hockey-stick/
And, from working in academia as a programmer, I can tell you that the quality of engineering is in general low, because most of the time you don't have professional software engineers working on the product. Unfortunate, but there's not enough money for anything more than an RA, which are often inexperienced.
Your post above is an excellent example of the Appeal to Authority Fallacy.
So, you have an opinion that these guys shouldn't have had a suspension? I'm curious, is it that:
1) What they said wasn't grossly racist and offensive?
or
2) What they said was grossly racist and offensive, but once they are hired they can't possibly be fired or have any disciplinary action.
or
3) They are supposed to be grossly racist and offensive, so any complaints about it should be ignored.
Since they are legally obligated to shut down accounts that match terrorist names, I wouldn't bet on it stopping (or being substantially different with other services).
Don't be an idiot. Crichton knows nothing about Global Warming. He's been completely debunked.
I believe that Dr. Nielsen is talking about Google AdWords (and it's equivalents), not the straightforward search & indexing. Blocking with robots.txt will do nothing positive for anyone, and is basically irrelevant to the article.
Actually, cast iron has wonderfully even heating, better than almost anything else out there. However, because of it's poor conductivity, you have to let it sit on the stove for a bit for the temperature to even out.
One of the best restaurants in the world, The French Laundry, uses induction stoves instead of gas stoves.
That's odd. Bill Gates spoke to me, and now I have TWO unibrows!
All of the features available for any other editor? Not even close, man. The most useful features are nowhere to be found on other major editing plaforms. For example, Emacs has a command to delete to the end of the line. So useful! A while ago I tried to find an equivalent in IntelliJ without success. Also, another little great command: move the current line up to the previous line, doing the right thing with whitespce. Not to mention comment formatting. I haven't seen a modern environment that does those things.
When you add macros, dynamic expansions, tags, and other stuff, it's far and away the best editor out there.
I had the same problem. Try using canalphones. It lets you block out the outside noise, so you can maintain a low volume.
For bringing more people to Linux, I saw Hooray for unhappiness. here's how I think the whole process works:
Step 1 - Cluelessness - Buy Windows 95
Step 2 - Anger - Buy Windows NT
Step 3- Unhappiness - move to Linux
Step 4 - Confusion - move to Macintosh
Step 5 - Bankruptcy - move to Tibet and become a Buddhist monk.
You heard it hear first, folks. move to Tibet now before the rush comes in!
What science fiction should be striving for is not more scientifically accurate stories. What is more important is the kind of stories that investigate the effect of technology on man, or the type that deals with interspecies communication. That's real science fiction.
Who are the greatest sci-fi authors? In my, and many other opinion, the two great ones are Stanislaw Lem and Philip K. Dick. While they do try and make their stories as realistic as possible, they do not attempt to restrict themselves to the known.
Take Lem's "Fiasco". Lem posits "sidereal" technology, which enables the protaganists to do all sorts of extremely advanced stuff. The technology is never explained, but it serves as crucial to the plot. And yet the book is not about it, either, it is merely a plot device to what is really important: showing the futility in trying to communicate with alien intelligences.
Yeah, but Ebert was also one of the very few critics who liked Evil Dead II. Also one of the first film critics to really understand what a masterpiece 2001 is.
So I guess you have to take the good with the bad with him. If you read the reviews, you'll probably have a good idea if you'll like the film or not.
Controlling trains is harder than you may think. Looks how much trouble they had in San Francisco, when their newly computerized, comparitavely simple Muni lines had a famous meltdown. Thousands were trapped in the subway, due to glitches in the software. Even when not melted down, the lines was extremely slow for a long time, even in the subway portion.
Ah, I see you can switch between the two. Awesome. But really, the graphical map should be the default, it is much more useful.
instead of clear, easy to read maps, you get fuzzy pictures where in some cases you can't even see the road. for instance, where i live just looks like a mass of trees and apartment buildings. a note to google - a map should have street names.
this is an interesting feature, but make it optional, and not the default. i enjoyed the previous maps much more.
sorry about the lack of caps, my shift key is mysteriously nonfunctioning as of 5 minutes ago.
They still charge to post (although you can have a temporary 3 month trial membership).
This article sort of looked like bullshit to me, especially the cold fusion part. Notice how they hint that cold fusion has been replicated, but don't actually go out and say so. Then they quote an "Engineer" saying the evidence is strong, like they couldn't find any scientist that would support their claim. So I asked at the Straight Dope Message Board about the cold fusion, and got some interesting answers. What I learned basically confirmed that (to the knowledge of that fairly well informed board), yes, cold fusion still is unlikely and unreplicated.