You want to know how I know we are truly screwed? Simply read the division and absolute total lack of understanding of natural systems within this forum. Its astounding that supposedly educated people can know so little. We're screwed. [Human populations explicitly. The furry creatures of the planet are wringing thier hands at glee at the demise of Homo sapiens. I can't blame them.]
I'm a Canuck living overseas. I'll gladly pay Canadian taxes for the health care and education alone. Canadians look south and see low taxes. What do they get south of the border? Bush, Bud(weiser) and backruptcy (cannot afford medical bills, or thier education). Gimme Canadian women and beer 8 days a week!
Lots I want to reply to... Probably the best source for scientific data and reliable modelling comes from the intergovernmental panel on climate change [ipcc.ch]. The last full report was from 2001 and is fully available on line and for free. I stupidly bought the books. The amount of synthesis of data performed is HUGE and from literally thousands of scientists in the field. It is truly the definitive work in progress. Due to the nature of science and the complex chaotic mechanisms of climate the models cannot be 100% conclusive; however, the four prospective models used have hypothesized the expected changes since 2001 fairly well. The four models assumed different scenarios of human responses to climate change. The four models being a reduction in CO2 emissions, constant increases, moderate increases and large increases in CO2 emissions. The effects of these models are classified according to a likelihood scale and associated percentages. Since the publication of the report, we have had 5 years to compare and contrast the models with reality. The modelling has done quite well. I suggest anyone who is interested read the synthesis report. The rest would take you a year or so to read:) Since the report, due to the political tenderness of the topic, if anything, has been underreported and cautiously forwarded. It seems that one area that was underestimated in impact was the positive feedback mechanisms invovled in lost albedo and permafrost thaw. Also, the effects due to water vapor and cloud formation are still difficult to understand and predict. As a teacher, I agree that we MUST listen and respond to the experts in the field and not political/religious/uninformed theorists. IE> michael Creighton and his ' State of Fear'. Some of the scientists he interviewed respond to his book at realclimate.org as well as a 'book report' in science magazine. Both are telling of the political nature of the topic. Finally, we need to consider the larger manifestitions of 'global warming' with respect to increases in ocean acidity, altered weather patterns with respect to agriculture, etc. It is the unpredicatable spinoffs of global warming/climate change that will threaten society. Lack of food, lack of clean water and the wars associated with future conflicts we need to worry about.
The problem isn't the energy to power cars. The problem IS the car. Its an 19th century tech that should have died years ago. Its hugely inefficient. The only reason it continues to success is for convenience. Poor reason to piss the planet away.
I'll agree with the author and put it simply this way. People, stop believing and admiring the opinion of the news anchors who know almost NOTHING about the scientific process. Idiots watching Fox, CNN, MSNBC provide to much authority to these brainless hacks who take good science and absolutly butcher it. The main stream news media are into info-tainment. Stop using them as your critical analysis providers and turn on your own brains. In Canada the other day the MSNBC employees were discussing how they need to drop a bomb on a Palestinian protest that was occuring. It was downright racist and NEVER should have been allowed on TV. Due to Canada's anti-hate laws if they can, this guy might get 5 years prison. I'm hoping he gets nailed!
It amazes me that people so poorly understand science that they take the word of a 'news' person over a peer reviewed journal. The stupidity of the average human is astounding.
You yanks are f***ed for another four years, you have no faith in your electoral system, your voting system, yer stuck in iraq, got a huge budget deficit, dollar dropping like a rock, huge trade deficit...ouch. Think its bad now? Wait until the middle east decides that oil can be bought with euros! [funnily enough iraq did this in 2002! Looky what happneed to them!] Who is number 2 in recoverable oil reserves - Yepp. Canada! I'm so glad I'm a canuk. [hrmmmm then again maybe were part of this axis of evil...] G
The answer is simple, its called the precautionary principle. If you don't know what it will do then you better not mess it up in the first place. Too late!
Its mass not weight. Its the most massive atom not the heaviest. The heaviest is near some black hole in the highest gravitational field currently unknown to man. Not quite sure how Einstein would state it. Something about its acceleration in the bending of the spacetime in that location....
To Slahsdot; Considering the current administration's track record on accountability and conflict of interest, it wouldn't surprise me if Kellogg, Brown and Root were awarded the e-voting contract as a 'security' measure. Forget a paper trail, those can be dangerous to national security.
'there has been no agreement either'
Ahem...sure there has! One of the original designers of the GMO said he wasn't surprised. The butterfly being harmed was of a very similar species that the pesticide resistant plant was trying to protect itself from. These resistences aren't magic missiles they will harm any appropriately similar species. Just need the right lock and key so to speak.
If the original 'scientist' isn't surprised what does that say about HIS ethics. "Who cares what insects it harms - I did waht I was paid to do'
Gimme a break. Its all about money!
You seem to know alot but seem to apply it in the wrong manner.
Fact: old trains of 'genetically modified foodstuffs' WERE hybrids which you are correct are often sterile. However, the new strains of soy, wheat and others ARE truly manufactured to prevent seends from developing and the farmer must buy the seeds every year. Often, if the seeds are not modified in this manner, corporations force farmers to sign binding agreements preventing the farmer from collecting the seeds to replant. Corporations are interested in profit not saving lives.
Fact 2: People starve NOT due to lack of food but lack of money. (Nature- May issue of 2000 I can't remember the week forgive me). Bangladesh for example had its most productive growth period a few years ago, lots of food but no one could afford it since they all lost thier homes in a flood. COPRORATIONS give ^&*) all about people. They are driven by profits.
Fact 3: Studies have shown (forget which journal I read it in) that 'roundup ready' soy STIMULATES the use of herbicides by farmers. The corporations KNOW this hence why Monsanto (who produces round-up) also enginerred round-up ready soy. THE WANT PROFIT! Noot onlt do they sell more soy, they sell more round-up.
Near fact unstubstantiated last I heard: An Albertan farmer using a new tri-herbicide resistant seed type has shown that the three genes offering resistance to three different herbicides has been transferred to 'weeds' within a short 3 year period. The chances of this occurring by known methods of natural genetic transfer inter-species is quite low. Yet 3 different resistences were transferred in 3 years. Highly unlikely say the corps, yet it happenned. So much for less pesticide use...all we did was encourage NEW pesticide development..hence more corporate profit.
Fact 4: People in support of GMO's are fools. They belive corporate fud about reducing human nutrition related deaths. Wake up, if this was true, Africa would have been supplied with anti-aids drugs already. The ONLY fact - corps want profit and will do ANYTHING to get it. Case in point, Nestle, who supplied TONNES of dehydrated baby food to Africa. Spread fud about how it is more nutritious than breast milk and pushed it on the uneducated masses. Not only is it LESS nutricious, it provides NO immunological protection to the baby, AND mothers had to use contaminated water to rehydrate the food.
Tell me ONE...just ONE story of a corporation doing something to truly , altruistically help people and I might be nicer to the in the future. Until then I think Nike, Nestle, Monsanto, Weyerhauser, Coca Cola, etc can goto hell. Thats what they deserve.
Flame me all you want...I just don't understand how supporters of corporate fud can be so blind.
Considering Alberta has opened the door to a two tier helath system a majority of Albetan citizens are against, and that Ralph 'I been in politics for 20 years and know better than my voters' Klien has permitted this opening upon the backs of Albeta's lower economic classes, I consider this a sin against democracy. Instead of increasing the gap between 'haves' and 'have nots' lets eliminate it!
Slashdot Mirror
Clearly the intelligent design crowd is pushing the greatest science [non-science truly] hoax of all time.
Read the substantiated facts:o ved_05Feb.pdf IPCC science summary v4. asp refutation of M.C's state of fear:
2 _18.jpg
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/docs/WG1AR4_SPM_Appr
http://www.realclimate.org/
http://www.wunderground.com/education/928.asp links to governmental agencies opinions.
http://www.wunderground.com/education/hoax.asp refutation of unsupportive satellite data:
http://www.wunderground.com/education/stateoffear
Distribution of EMS produced by our local star:
http://www.tak2000.com/data/planets/solar-rad.gif
or
http://www.eas.slu.edu/People/CEGraves/Eas138/fg0
You want to know how I know we are truly screwed? Simply read the division and absolute total lack of understanding of natural systems within this forum. Its astounding that supposedly educated people can know so little.
We're screwed. [Human populations explicitly. The furry creatures of the planet are wringing thier hands at glee at the demise of Homo sapiens. I can't blame them.]
I'm a Canuck living overseas. I'll gladly pay Canadian taxes for the health care and education alone. Canadians look south and see low taxes. What do they get south of the border? Bush, Bud(weiser) and backruptcy (cannot afford medical bills, or thier education). Gimme Canadian women and beer 8 days a week!
Lots I want to reply to... :)
Probably the best source for scientific data and reliable modelling comes from the intergovernmental panel on climate change [ipcc.ch]. The last full report was from 2001 and is fully available on line and for free. I stupidly bought the books. The amount of synthesis of data performed is HUGE and from literally thousands of scientists in the field. It is truly the definitive work in progress. Due to the nature of science and the complex chaotic mechanisms of climate the models cannot be 100% conclusive; however, the four prospective models used have hypothesized the expected changes since 2001 fairly well. The four models assumed different scenarios of human responses to climate change. The four models being a reduction in CO2 emissions, constant increases, moderate increases and large increases in CO2 emissions. The effects of these models are classified according to a likelihood scale and associated percentages. Since the publication of the report, we have had 5 years to compare and contrast the models with reality. The modelling has done quite well. I suggest anyone who is interested read the synthesis report. The rest would take you a year or so to read
Since the report, due to the political tenderness of the topic, if anything, has been underreported and cautiously forwarded. It seems that one area that was underestimated in impact was the positive feedback mechanisms invovled in lost albedo and permafrost thaw. Also, the effects due to water vapor and cloud formation are still difficult to understand and predict.
As a teacher, I agree that we MUST listen and respond to the experts in the field and not political/religious/uninformed theorists. IE> michael Creighton and his ' State of Fear'. Some of the scientists he interviewed respond to his book at realclimate.org as well as a 'book report' in science magazine. Both are telling of the political nature of the topic.
Finally, we need to consider the larger manifestitions of 'global warming' with respect to increases in ocean acidity, altered weather patterns with respect to agriculture, etc. It is the unpredicatable spinoffs of global warming/climate change that will threaten society. Lack of food, lack of clean water and the wars associated with future conflicts we need to worry about.
The problem isn't the energy to power cars. The problem IS the car. Its an 19th century tech that should have died years ago. Its hugely inefficient. The only reason it continues to success is for convenience. Poor reason to piss the planet away.
FUCKT
shit
Cock
BallS
Whore
Bastard
Tit
C**
self censorship at work
I'll agree with the author and put it simply this way.
People, stop believing and admiring the opinion of the news anchors who know almost NOTHING about the scientific process. Idiots watching Fox, CNN, MSNBC provide to much authority to these brainless hacks who take good science and absolutly butcher it. The main stream news media are into info-tainment. Stop using them as your critical analysis providers and turn on your own brains.
In Canada the other day the MSNBC employees were discussing how they need to drop a bomb on a Palestinian protest that was occuring. It was downright racist and NEVER should have been allowed on TV. Due to Canada's anti-hate laws if they can, this guy might get 5 years prison. I'm hoping he gets nailed!
It amazes me that people so poorly understand science that they take the word of a 'news' person over a peer reviewed journal.
The stupidity of the average human is astounding.
James L
You yanks are f***ed for another four years, you have no faith in your electoral system, your voting system, yer stuck in iraq, got a huge budget deficit, dollar dropping like a rock, huge trade deficit ...ouch. Think its bad now? Wait until the middle east decides that oil can be bought with euros! [funnily enough iraq did this in 2002! Looky what happneed to them!]
Who is number 2 in recoverable oil reserves - Yepp. Canada! I'm so glad I'm a canuk. [hrmmmm then again maybe were part of this axis of evil...]
G
The answer is simple, its called the precautionary principle. If you don't know what it will do then you better not mess it up in the first place. Too late!
Its mass not weight. Its the most massive atom not the heaviest. The heaviest is near some black hole in the highest gravitational field currently unknown to man. Not quite sure how Einstein would state it. Something about its acceleration in the bending of the spacetime in that location....
To Slahsdot;
Considering the current administration's track record on accountability and conflict of interest, it wouldn't surprise me if Kellogg, Brown and Root were awarded the e-voting contract as a 'security' measure. Forget a paper trail, those can be dangerous to national security.
George Orwell
'there has been no agreement either' Ahem...sure there has! One of the original designers of the GMO said he wasn't surprised. The butterfly being harmed was of a very similar species that the pesticide resistant plant was trying to protect itself from. These resistences aren't magic missiles they will harm any appropriately similar species. Just need the right lock and key so to speak. If the original 'scientist' isn't surprised what does that say about HIS ethics. "Who cares what insects it harms - I did waht I was paid to do' Gimme a break. Its all about money!
You seem to know alot but seem to apply it in the wrong manner. Fact: old trains of 'genetically modified foodstuffs' WERE hybrids which you are correct are often sterile. However, the new strains of soy, wheat and others ARE truly manufactured to prevent seends from developing and the farmer must buy the seeds every year. Often, if the seeds are not modified in this manner, corporations force farmers to sign binding agreements preventing the farmer from collecting the seeds to replant. Corporations are interested in profit not saving lives. Fact 2: People starve NOT due to lack of food but lack of money. (Nature- May issue of 2000 I can't remember the week forgive me). Bangladesh for example had its most productive growth period a few years ago, lots of food but no one could afford it since they all lost thier homes in a flood. COPRORATIONS give ^&*) all about people. They are driven by profits. Fact 3: Studies have shown (forget which journal I read it in) that 'roundup ready' soy STIMULATES the use of herbicides by farmers. The corporations KNOW this hence why Monsanto (who produces round-up) also enginerred round-up ready soy. THE WANT PROFIT! Noot onlt do they sell more soy, they sell more round-up. Near fact unstubstantiated last I heard: An Albertan farmer using a new tri-herbicide resistant seed type has shown that the three genes offering resistance to three different herbicides has been transferred to 'weeds' within a short 3 year period. The chances of this occurring by known methods of natural genetic transfer inter-species is quite low. Yet 3 different resistences were transferred in 3 years. Highly unlikely say the corps, yet it happenned. So much for less pesticide use...all we did was encourage NEW pesticide development..hence more corporate profit. Fact 4: People in support of GMO's are fools. They belive corporate fud about reducing human nutrition related deaths. Wake up, if this was true, Africa would have been supplied with anti-aids drugs already. The ONLY fact - corps want profit and will do ANYTHING to get it. Case in point, Nestle, who supplied TONNES of dehydrated baby food to Africa. Spread fud about how it is more nutritious than breast milk and pushed it on the uneducated masses. Not only is it LESS nutricious, it provides NO immunological protection to the baby, AND mothers had to use contaminated water to rehydrate the food. Tell me ONE...just ONE story of a corporation doing something to truly , altruistically help people and I might be nicer to the in the future. Until then I think Nike, Nestle, Monsanto, Weyerhauser, Coca Cola, etc can goto hell. Thats what they deserve. Flame me all you want...I just don't understand how supporters of corporate fud can be so blind.
Considering Alberta has opened the door to a two tier helath system a majority of Albetan citizens are against, and that Ralph 'I been in politics for 20 years and know better than my voters' Klien has permitted this opening upon the backs of Albeta's lower economic classes, I consider this a sin against democracy. Instead of increasing the gap between 'haves' and 'have nots' lets eliminate it!