If you understood the science, you wouldn't have many other questions. Of course now is when you tell me you don't have time for that and you shouldn't need to know in order to understand.
Guess what. The reason you don't understand is because you don't know how to. The glaring shame of AGW skepticism is the blind acceptance of most other scientific research that serves to benefit. When the science shows a real issue, a sudden burst of disbelief arises. How much do you know about cell phones? Medications? Automobiles? Energy production?
I bet you don't know much about how much of that works, either, and if you placed as much ignorant skepticism effort into it, you could come up with a bunch of questions whose answers are beyond your comprehension.
I'm not saying you should accept scientific theories outright, but its a bit hypocritical to do so when the theories benefit you and raise doubt when they do not. Did you think I wasn't going to call you on that? Do you think it isn't blatantly obvious that AGW skeptics are merely skeptics of inconvenience? I can't trust you if you can't be consistent. I won't place credit in your disbelief simply because I know you don't do it with stuff that you enjoy.
This is an issue of what can be installed on federal computers? I believe there should be a list of what is allowed and everything else is disallowed. And NO ONE has admin access to their computer.
Come on people - federal security! Why the hell are they running MS OSes anyway?
The government is only echoing the science. The 'corporations' that you suggest want to profit from AGW theory are only doing business as usual (but you should know that there are far more that will spread misinformation and inject doubt where it isn't necessary because their stake in the concept is loss).
Big bang theory and AGW theory are both very well founded. Most scientists would speak of the big bang as if it were what happened, not noting the 'theory' of it. You're downplaying the way science is discussed among scientists. Everything in science is a theory; that is one of the fundamental aspects of the scientific method. But when you've pretended it doesn't happen in everything else, and that it is only happening with AGW theory, then you find a whipping boy to support your preconceived belief and distract your criticism away from the data and toward the insignificant flaws of character.
Nobody is saying you are absolutely wrong, they are saying that it is extremely likely that you are. Sometimes they forget to say how likely it is and go with an assumption of 99.9999% being 100% truth. Its a shame that instead of attempting to discern this insignificant flaw in discussion, you focus on it as a point to refute the theory.
All the while having no heavily backed/evident theory of your own; all the while forgetting to be as skeptical of other science that you conveniently accept. I bet you used a cell phone today and assumed it was safe... please...
WTF is 'Custom Software'??? What are the definitive characteristics of Custom Software and non-Custom Software?
This is totally bogus, and a blatant demonstration of the ability of business to pervert political processes.
Software is software. I don't know why or how they even feel validated in taxing software at all, aside from a sales tax, let alone specifically discriminating certain software and alleviating tax burden on other software.
I'm a scientist and I have an education in biology. This does not serve to be directly relevant, but gives me a level of understanding of complex ecological systems, the implications of changing environments, etc. And by being involved in science as a whole, what I learn is how the scientific process is carried out and what it means to become a credited/established scientist. It means you've done your job very well for a long time.
By understanding how science works and how the heads of research get to where they are, I am made much more confident in their work/theories.
Surely it is possible to inject doubt, but when the doubt has no alternative theory, or comes from people of much lower credential and usually much lesser relevant education/experience, I am forced to go with people who have demonstrated a high level of integrity and have established themselves as people I can generally trust.
Most people who understand how science works were not even bothered by the 'they discarded data' climategate b.s. That was clearly an exaggeration of what is actually quite routine in science. To a person who does not understand *why*, it seems alarming, and thus the exaggeration and misinterpretation gets echoed and gains some form of undue significance.
WTF is a trillion anymore? US Citizens pay about 1.5 trillion per year for healthcare. In the last year and a half between Bush's bank bailout and Obama's big stimulus, they spent about 1.5 trillion.
At the rate we're going, I'll be wiping my ass with a billion dollar bill when I'm 50.
Its really time to start investing in highly productive scientific products such as massive rollout renewable energy generation and robotics. It may take trillions to pay people to protect those lands, but given an army of Wall-E robots, it would simply cost us energy. Obviously we'd have to have a social stake in the robots for it to work like that; a private business would try to profit so hard that it would probably equate to having paid humans to do it.
I'm sure people would give you answers but you won't have enough education to understand it. Thus they will reword the answers to something you *could* comprehend, but then you will discard it for its lack of details. Then they will explain in details (scientific papers) and it won't make any sense to you.
It is your fault you can't understand complex science. It is also your fault that the message you get is not convincing enough. The actual messages going around are very convincing to those who can understand them. Sadly, and to your own disgruntle, you make no effort of your own and likely deliberately inject doubt because *this* science implies a change in your lifestyle that is detrimental.
I bet you don't doubt Splenda. I bet you don't doubt your medications. GTFO.
If the science doesn't make sense to you, get an education in the related science. These scientists have tried to translate the complexity of their work to meet the needs of the simple and ignorant minds.... But in doing so, the message (by requirement of the recipient) is so dumbed down it is hard to believe. That is the fault of the recipient not having the capacity to understand; not the fault of the scientist to whom the recipient cannot communicate on an even plane.
I find it comical that people only doubt science when it is inconvenient. I find it comical that they demand clearer explanations but make no effort of their own to make themselves capable of receiving the clearer explanation.
How do you explain the big bang to a 3 year old? "A bunch of stuff blew out of a tiny spot, and over a long long time it became the universe; everything around us." But I'm sure a physicist explaining it to another physicist would be a bit deeper.
The people who are not sure are not sure because they don't know enough to have confidence. Sadly these same people conveniently have assurance from other things to which they are ignorant. For some reason when a product of science may have a negative implication to the person, insecurity ensues...
What debate? Nearly all people with enough education to understand the science do not agree there is anything worth debating. By and large the mass of people who think there even is a 'debate' are misled by propaganda and also likely poorly educated in sciences.
If there was a debate, it is this: Well Demonstrated/Evaluated Theory VS. Ignorant Doubt Discarding Evidence and Providing No Viable Alternative Hypothesis.
This is exactly what I thought. You should have a sense of moral code and ethics by puberty. If you don't have ethics at 20, you probably won't have ethics at 30, 40, or 50, or until you've somehow been influenced or compelled to change.
This is awesome, kudos to the guy who pulled it off.
Its also pretty sad that the engineers at NASA never thought of it...
I think the NASA engineers should buy the pics off him for the price they would have expected to pay out to make it happen under their own over-expensive though processes.
I disagree, and while I don't have the time or energy to debate the topic or provide reference, I would like to say that you might not know enough about biochemistry. Since I won't be providing reference right now, I will default to saying 'we will have to agree to disagree', since you also have provided no evidence.
But that all said, what we're discussing is beside the point. The fact remains that organic (except in the early-mid 1900s when that's basically all there was) produce was an expensive niche market, and has been driven to popularity by consumer activism, interest, and deliberate consumption.
Aside from the electronics, much of that stuff can be bought locally. And if you change your personal culture, the culture around you will change too.
Buying Organic is a great example of similar markets and competition. It used to be ridiculously expensive to buy organic --- and now because demand has increased, entrepreneurs have stepped in to supply and compete and the price of organic produce is drastically lower now than before.
Don't just roll over simply because the task looks daunting. Chip away at it piece by piece. This applies to many large barriers in life... Losing weight... Education... Savings...
Think in the long term, and always live the life you would like to see, not the life you're being given.
In Europe 24% of your income did not go to social healthcare. STFU. It may have been your taxes, but it wasn't all for social healthcare. That, plus your evidence is anecdotal and irrelevant at best.
You're a troll and what you've posted is misinformation. I do not believe you because what you've said is a misrepresentation of reality.
If you can't argue honestly, why argue? You're like the Fox News you likely enjoy: spewing B.S. loudly because most viewers are too ignorant to discern truth. People who will want to agree with your point will read it and believe you, despite its fallacy. People who care about truth will see how ridiculous you are and either ignore you or do as I am.
I wish you were a better person; I wish you were honest. If you could argue honestly, I would listen. The only people you will influence are the ignorant.
The promise of SINGLE PAYER (Obama + many dems) was one of the biggest pros of those candidates. Once elected, their insurance-company constituents made sure that it wasn't even considered.
60-70% of americans consistently poll to want single payer. If you are against it, it is likely you don't understand it. Learn and spread the word. Demand Single Payer.
I hope they leave. WE THE PEOPLE don't need any more "I ON MY OWN" people walking around thinking foolishly that they did it all on their own and don't need anyone.
If you don't want or need your fellow countrymen (who make up this great country), then please GTFO.
I'm young and healthy. But I don't plan on being a jerk. Quit telling people I'm going to be a jerk and screw the system. I'm not. Quit assuming I, and others, are going to screw the system simply because you probably would, or enjoy fantasizing it.
Here's something funny: if everyone jointly pays for healthcare and everybody gets treated health costs go down. This is because no one puts off going to the doctor because of expense. Cancers are caught sooner, infections are treated before the victim starts coughing up blood. What selfish libertarians like yourself don't realise is that a persons health is mostly unrelated to their choices. No one chooses to get prostate cancer, no one chooses to get bitten by a rabid dog.
The more ridiculous thing is that the costs for all (including the libertarians and republitards) would go down dramatically. But they refrain... why? FOR SPITE.
It's like watching some fool shoot himself in the foot trying to look tough with a gun. Get over yourselves. Single Payer is awesome. Quit acting butthurt just because it wasn't your idea and you're so self-interested that all the good ideas gotta come from you.
Here's enough polls to shut your misinformation up. Quit lying. Most everyone I've ever talked to about healthcare, and understands what Single Payer is, is totally for it.
Single Payer does not affect healthcare at all. It simply removes profit the transaction between the person and the provider.
Most people in their 50s and 60s (but not yet 65) are waiting very eagerly to hit 65 and finally feel safe with healthcare.
I know this by talking to them. Healthcare is something you should talk and learn about with your fellow people. This is a big topic and it affects all of us. We are in a country together and we are in health/sickness together. I think one of the reasons many people oppose health care reform is simply due to their isolation from others and lack of regard for fellow citizens. If you're not trying to help your fellow citizens, what is the point of being a countryman?
Slashdot Mirror
If you understood the science, you wouldn't have many other questions. Of course now is when you tell me you don't have time for that and you shouldn't need to know in order to understand.
Guess what. The reason you don't understand is because you don't know how to. The glaring shame of AGW skepticism is the blind acceptance of most other scientific research that serves to benefit. When the science shows a real issue, a sudden burst of disbelief arises. How much do you know about cell phones? Medications? Automobiles? Energy production?
I bet you don't know much about how much of that works, either, and if you placed as much ignorant skepticism effort into it, you could come up with a bunch of questions whose answers are beyond your comprehension.
I'm not saying you should accept scientific theories outright, but its a bit hypocritical to do so when the theories benefit you and raise doubt when they do not. Did you think I wasn't going to call you on that? Do you think it isn't blatantly obvious that AGW skeptics are merely skeptics of inconvenience? I can't trust you if you can't be consistent. I won't place credit in your disbelief simply because I know you don't do it with stuff that you enjoy.
This is an issue of what can be installed on federal computers? I believe there should be a list of what is allowed and everything else is disallowed. And NO ONE has admin access to their computer.
Come on people - federal security! Why the hell are they running MS OSes anyway?
ECHO.
The government is only echoing the science. The 'corporations' that you suggest want to profit from AGW theory are only doing business as usual (but you should know that there are far more that will spread misinformation and inject doubt where it isn't necessary because their stake in the concept is loss).
Big bang theory and AGW theory are both very well founded. Most scientists would speak of the big bang as if it were what happened, not noting the 'theory' of it. You're downplaying the way science is discussed among scientists. Everything in science is a theory; that is one of the fundamental aspects of the scientific method. But when you've pretended it doesn't happen in everything else, and that it is only happening with AGW theory, then you find a whipping boy to support your preconceived belief and distract your criticism away from the data and toward the insignificant flaws of character.
Nobody is saying you are absolutely wrong, they are saying that it is extremely likely that you are. Sometimes they forget to say how likely it is and go with an assumption of 99.9999% being 100% truth. Its a shame that instead of attempting to discern this insignificant flaw in discussion, you focus on it as a point to refute the theory.
All the while having no heavily backed/evident theory of your own; all the while forgetting to be as skeptical of other science that you conveniently accept. I bet you used a cell phone today and assumed it was safe... please...
Wow. Shame on me for not RTFA.
Thanks for clearing that up.
WTF is 'Custom Software'??? What are the definitive characteristics of Custom Software and non-Custom Software?
This is totally bogus, and a blatant demonstration of the ability of business to pervert political processes.
Software is software. I don't know why or how they even feel validated in taxing software at all, aside from a sales tax, let alone specifically discriminating certain software and alleviating tax burden on other software.
It looks like some people need a talking to.
I'm a scientist and I have an education in biology. This does not serve to be directly relevant, but gives me a level of understanding of complex ecological systems, the implications of changing environments, etc. And by being involved in science as a whole, what I learn is how the scientific process is carried out and what it means to become a credited/established scientist. It means you've done your job very well for a long time.
By understanding how science works and how the heads of research get to where they are, I am made much more confident in their work/theories.
Surely it is possible to inject doubt, but when the doubt has no alternative theory, or comes from people of much lower credential and usually much lesser relevant education/experience, I am forced to go with people who have demonstrated a high level of integrity and have established themselves as people I can generally trust.
Most people who understand how science works were not even bothered by the 'they discarded data' climategate b.s. That was clearly an exaggeration of what is actually quite routine in science. To a person who does not understand *why*, it seems alarming, and thus the exaggeration and misinterpretation gets echoed and gains some form of undue significance.
WTF is a trillion anymore? US Citizens pay about 1.5 trillion per year for healthcare. In the last year and a half between Bush's bank bailout and Obama's big stimulus, they spent about 1.5 trillion.
At the rate we're going, I'll be wiping my ass with a billion dollar bill when I'm 50.
Its really time to start investing in highly productive scientific products such as massive rollout renewable energy generation and robotics. It may take trillions to pay people to protect those lands, but given an army of Wall-E robots, it would simply cost us energy. Obviously we'd have to have a social stake in the robots for it to work like that; a private business would try to profit so hard that it would probably equate to having paid humans to do it.
I'm sure people would give you answers but you won't have enough education to understand it. Thus they will reword the answers to something you *could* comprehend, but then you will discard it for its lack of details. Then they will explain in details (scientific papers) and it won't make any sense to you.
It is your fault you can't understand complex science. It is also your fault that the message you get is not convincing enough. The actual messages going around are very convincing to those who can understand them. Sadly, and to your own disgruntle, you make no effort of your own and likely deliberately inject doubt because *this* science implies a change in your lifestyle that is detrimental.
I bet you don't doubt Splenda. I bet you don't doubt your medications. GTFO.
If the science doesn't make sense to you, get an education in the related science. These scientists have tried to translate the complexity of their work to meet the needs of the simple and ignorant minds.... But in doing so, the message (by requirement of the recipient) is so dumbed down it is hard to believe. That is the fault of the recipient not having the capacity to understand; not the fault of the scientist to whom the recipient cannot communicate on an even plane.
I find it comical that people only doubt science when it is inconvenient. I find it comical that they demand clearer explanations but make no effort of their own to make themselves capable of receiving the clearer explanation.
How do you explain the big bang to a 3 year old? "A bunch of stuff blew out of a tiny spot, and over a long long time it became the universe; everything around us." But I'm sure a physicist explaining it to another physicist would be a bit deeper.
The people who are not sure are not sure because they don't know enough to have confidence. Sadly these same people conveniently have assurance from other things to which they are ignorant. For some reason when a product of science may have a negative implication to the person, insecurity ensues...
What debate? Nearly all people with enough education to understand the science do not agree there is anything worth debating. By and large the mass of people who think there even is a 'debate' are misled by propaganda and also likely poorly educated in sciences.
If there was a debate, it is this: Well Demonstrated/Evaluated Theory VS. Ignorant Doubt Discarding Evidence and Providing No Viable Alternative Hypothesis.
Funny, I did think about ethics when I was 20.
Then again, I wasn't a piece of scum.
This is exactly what I thought. You should have a sense of moral code and ethics by puberty. If you don't have ethics at 20, you probably won't have ethics at 30, 40, or 50, or until you've somehow been influenced or compelled to change.
This is awesome, kudos to the guy who pulled it off.
Its also pretty sad that the engineers at NASA never thought of it...
I think the NASA engineers should buy the pics off him for the price they would have expected to pay out to make it happen under their own over-expensive though processes.
I disagree, and while I don't have the time or energy to debate the topic or provide reference, I would like to say that you might not know enough about biochemistry. Since I won't be providing reference right now, I will default to saying 'we will have to agree to disagree', since you also have provided no evidence.
But that all said, what we're discussing is beside the point. The fact remains that organic (except in the early-mid 1900s when that's basically all there was) produce was an expensive niche market, and has been driven to popularity by consumer activism, interest, and deliberate consumption.
Aside from the electronics, much of that stuff can be bought locally. And if you change your personal culture, the culture around you will change too.
Buying Organic is a great example of similar markets and competition. It used to be ridiculously expensive to buy organic --- and now because demand has increased, entrepreneurs have stepped in to supply and compete and the price of organic produce is drastically lower now than before.
Don't just roll over simply because the task looks daunting. Chip away at it piece by piece. This applies to many large barriers in life... Losing weight... Education... Savings...
Think in the long term, and always live the life you would like to see, not the life you're being given.
In Europe 24% of your income did not go to social healthcare. STFU. It may have been your taxes, but it wasn't all for social healthcare. That, plus your evidence is anecdotal and irrelevant at best.
Way to prove you're not a jerk, jerk.
No, better yet. Way to prove that I will be. (Which you failed to do.. you simply assume I would.)
You're a troll and what you've posted is misinformation. I do not believe you because what you've said is a misrepresentation of reality.
If you can't argue honestly, why argue? You're like the Fox News you likely enjoy: spewing B.S. loudly because most viewers are too ignorant to discern truth. People who will want to agree with your point will read it and believe you, despite its fallacy. People who care about truth will see how ridiculous you are and either ignore you or do as I am.
I wish you were a better person; I wish you were honest. If you could argue honestly, I would listen. The only people you will influence are the ignorant.
The promise of SINGLE PAYER (Obama + many dems) was one of the biggest pros of those candidates. Once elected, their insurance-company constituents made sure that it wasn't even considered.
60-70% of americans consistently poll to want single payer. If you are against it, it is likely you don't understand it. Learn and spread the word. Demand Single Payer.
I'm LMFAO over here. Those are some awesome animal metaphors. Please give me more!
I hope they leave. WE THE PEOPLE don't need any more "I ON MY OWN" people walking around thinking foolishly that they did it all on their own and don't need anyone.
If you don't want or need your fellow countrymen (who make up this great country), then please GTFO.
I'm young and healthy. But I don't plan on being a jerk. Quit telling people I'm going to be a jerk and screw the system. I'm not. Quit assuming I, and others, are going to screw the system simply because you probably would, or enjoy fantasizing it.
Here's something funny: if everyone jointly pays for healthcare and everybody gets treated health costs go down. This is because no one puts off going to the doctor because of expense. Cancers are caught sooner, infections are treated before the victim starts coughing up blood. What selfish libertarians like yourself don't realise is that a persons health is mostly unrelated to their choices. No one chooses to get prostate cancer, no one chooses to get bitten by a rabid dog.
The more ridiculous thing is that the costs for all (including the libertarians and republitards) would go down dramatically. But they refrain... why? FOR SPITE.
It's like watching some fool shoot himself in the foot trying to look tough with a gun. Get over yourselves. Single Payer is awesome. Quit acting butthurt just because it wasn't your idea and you're so self-interested that all the good ideas gotta come from you.
If you want to be alone, get out of OUR country.
Here's enough polls to shut your misinformation up. Quit lying. Most everyone I've ever talked to about healthcare, and understands what Single Payer is, is totally for it.
Single Payer does not affect healthcare at all. It simply removes profit the transaction between the person and the provider.
http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html
nite.
Most people in their 50s and 60s (but not yet 65) are waiting very eagerly to hit 65 and finally feel safe with healthcare.
I know this by talking to them. Healthcare is something you should talk and learn about with your fellow people. This is a big topic and it affects all of us. We are in a country together and we are in health/sickness together. I think one of the reasons many people oppose health care reform is simply due to their isolation from others and lack of regard for fellow citizens. If you're not trying to help your fellow citizens, what is the point of being a countryman?