I did specify that we confine out polls to those people who hold doctorate's degrees, did I not? One certainly does NOT survey every engineer on the planet regarding quantum mechanics theory. For that matter, I could honestly pass myself off as a "field engineer". I can do the job better than many men who are paid for the job. This does not in any way, shape, or form put me into the quantum mechanics business.
You may wish to double check those ice core data. At least twice in history, CO2 levels have shot up higher than they are today, in very short periods of time. Something that isn't clear, is whether CO2 levels preceded temperature increases, or the other way around.
And, no, solar activity has NOT been dismantled. It HAS been cast into disrepute by the "consensus". But, popular opinion does not make science.
Meteorological services and climate are effectively one and the same. Your LOCAL meteorologist may be only a weatherman. Climatologists start out as a simple meteorologist, and works his way up. Meteorology is the front end of climatology. They aren't seperate feilds of study - they are the same thing, with a different emphasis. So, let's take a survey of everyone in the field, who has a doctorate's degree within the field. I'm tired of hearing the "elite" who belong to this "consensus".
As for you numbers - what is incomprehensible? Must I hold your hand, while I spell it out? A select few persons happen to publish to a select few publications, that are recognized and used for evidence by the alarmist crowd, or, mob.
OF THOSE select few, the overwhelming majority are in almost total agreement.
Now, can you see a problem with your statistics? Might you begin to recognize that your sample population is to small?
A hypothesis is more of a "What if" and "I think that". A hypothesis isn't marketed to the masses. A hypothesis doesn't form a political platform. And, "jumping to conclusions" does not constitute a hypothesis. Go back and study that dictionary.
Acidification may or may not be affected by carbon. It likely is, to some small extent. But, the major causes of acidification is pollution, in the form of human waste and sewerage, and agricultural runoff. Turning the oceans into a cesspool was never a good idea.
You could possibly be right - I am looking at to small a database. But, people like you refuse to look at the data, however large or small the data set. With a name like yours, I feel comfortable telling you to pull your head out of your ass, get some fresh air in your lungs, and LOOK AROUND! Oxygen deprivation is not conducive to drawing scientific conclusions.
One more time: Anonymous Coward won't recognize any expert who disagrees with his opinion. Hell, global warming COULD BE all man's fault, but that dosn't change the fact that the Anonymous Cowards of the earth won't hear any evidence that might repudiate their pre-formed opinions. Good grief......
"75 of 77 climate scientists who are active publishers on climate change said yes."
Re-read that sentence. Read it again, carefully. One more time, please. Can you see now, that only certain select scientists are being held forth as an example of some "consensus"? A poll of ALL meteorological scientists might have more meaning. Can you see this now?
If my brother and I agree that we constitute a superior race, and ignore the opinions of anyone not in our little (very little) clique, does our opinion become valid?
"All scientists who we, the doomsaying activist crowd, choose to give any credibility, are in agreement."
There you go. I fixed that leading statement for you.:)
The observations aren't in question. It's the CONCLUSIONS that are debatable. Man most certainly has affected the biosphere in adverse ways. But, to claim that man is solely responsible for global warming is preposterous. To claim that man has contributed to global warming is a reasonable statement. But, now we need to determine HOW MUCH he has contributed. For those who have missed it, Mars is also undergoing global warming. There have been a couple articles regarding warming on other bodies in our system. Jumping to conclusions is NOT IN THE PROVINCE OF SCIENCE, but rather it is a tactic of politicians, and grant chasers.
Correct. Music is, of course, artificial. Children are forced to sit in school, and learn how to read this cryptic language so that they know when to make flat noise and sharp noise, according to the beat dictated in the cryptic language. Then, parents are forced to sit an an auditorium while listening to those horrid little children screeching and caterwauling a song, which you will never be able to enjoy again after being subjected to such auditory torture. It should be noted that autidorium and sanitorium are spelt very much alike - intentionally.
back to Windows. Hmmmm, which flavor? I could choose W98, for it's lack of security model, or WXP (sp1) for it's failure to adhere to common sense security model, or Vista for it's infuriatingly intrusive security, or Win7 for it's unique beta insecurities. I KNOW!! I'll do ALL OF THEM AGAIN!!! (Who wants to be left out of the newest viral infection, anyway?)
I've scrolled through the comments, and find a lot of meaningful commentary, insightful comments, some trolling, etc.
WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS, where can I download it? I visited the Digital Zone site, but see no links to download. I'll reserve judgement on something new, until I can test drive it......
Disagree that spam is a techno problem. It is a people problem. The wife used to open every mail, open every attachment, and click on every link. Well, maybe I exxagerate - there isn't enough time in anyone's life to click on EVERYTHING that comes into a spambox... All the same, my sons and I have done our best to educate her, with good results. She has finally learned to delete most of the spam without ever looking at it. Even better, she has learned to use filters, meaning she never even sees most of the spam. My own inbox only sees a half dozen spams each week, on average, simply because I don't sign up for every worthless offer I stumble across. Having a secretive nature pays off sometimes. Educating people to be secretive and selective would end the spam problem.
There is nothing hypothetical about the rape song. Listen to the lyrics, Guns & Roses sings it. I trashed my kid's CD's years ago. But, you help to demonstrate that there is something wrong with our society. I DO believe in personal choice and personal responsibility - I vote Libertarian when I can. But, our society holds no one personally responsible. Limited censorship MIGHT be acceptable, if it controls those who don't control themselves. Actually, there is little that is entertaining about our entertainment media. 75% of it could be trashed, and society would benefit from it. "Satisfy the desires of the masses" is not what we have today. "Satisfying the desires of the lowest common denominator" would be more on target.
How about majority rules? If 100% of women are repulsed by a song about rape, and 45% of men find it to be offensive, then the song shouldn't be made. I think that if more than 10% of people find that a song IS NOT offensive, then it should be allowed. How is that for a pretty liberal standard? You can't possibly claim such a standard to be oppresive. At the same time, we could clean up an awful lot of pure trash. Your only valid objection to that idea would be that polls are easily manipulated. To bad there is no "perfect" solution. Meanwhile - those who don't believe that our songs, movies, games, and other entertainment have no effect on how some people conduct themselves really don't have a clue. Granted, watching and listening to gangbangers celebrating a rape won't motivate MOST people to commit rape, there are those few.
I thought this was a freindly discussion. Ranting? Please, don't denigrate people just because you don't understand what they have said - asking for clarification is far more suitable. As for the "rant" - you need to reexamine the license under which you installed your codecs on Linux. Yes, music plays with no problem - BUT - you clicked away a window which warned you that use of those codecs MAY VIOLATE the laws where you live. MP3, as you point out, is proprietary. Just imagine that RIAA and associates buys out the MP3 rights. Then, they petition Congress to enact a new law protecting their proprietary rights to MP3. Immediately thereafter, you either delete your collection of MP3's on your Linux machine - or you break the law. Far fetched, you say? Go ahead, say it. Saying so doesn't change the possibility, or even the probability that RIAA has taken such a scenario under consideration. Try installing another Linux in a VM, and be VERY CAREFUL NOT TO wave away any popups warning of possible legal problems. You will certainly not be able to play your iMusic, and likely not be able to play your MP3's either.
O Rly? Look closely. I'm not familiar with emusic, to be honest, but iTunes is less free of DRM than most people seem to think. For starters, they use a proprietary format, right? What happens if/when they yank support for the format? Not likely to happen anytime soon, true. But - do you expect to live more than a decade longer? And, would you like to use your purchased music some day, maybe play it for your grandchildren? iTunes can be shut down, and support for it ended, just as Atari and others have been shut down.
Millions have already witnessed what happens when a company and/or a format is abandoned. iTunes and/or Emusic can pocket their profits to date, cancel all obligations, and walk away - leaving you with - what, exactly? Granted, if you run Linux, the DRM in your music files means almost nothing. But, it is ILLEGAL, according to the recording industries, to circumvent that DRM, no matter that you have already paid for the music.
See my post above: "And, I haven't even begun to evaluate the truly "pop" drivel listened to by the mindless hordes......" It would seem you like the mindless drivel? Britney is a skanky ho, like so many of the other "pop" figures.
Many people would disagree with that assumption. Perhaps you have never listened to the lyrics of songs which celebrate the joys found by a gang of boys raping a young girl? I mean, really LISTEN to the music, huh? There is a LOT of trash out there that NEVER should have been written, sung, recorded, or distributed. And, I haven't even begun to evaluate the truly "pop" drivel listened to by the mindless hordes......
Pentests? Real pentests are done by the fine people at Remote Exploit, and other Linux distributions. If Microsoft had real pentesters, they would fix the code so that virii can't run. The basic security model of the file system itself would begin to resemble Ext3 file system. Permissions would be granted on an as-needed basis, and there would be nags when people attempted to run programs as Administrator. Really, boot a *nix machine up as root, and try to run Xchat. You'll be told in no uncertain terms that you're an idiot, LMAO On Windows, Admin is God, and no one is there to remind God that he's an idiot.
Sorry, but Vista is to XP what ME was to 98. XP turned out to be the REAL upgrade to 98, just as Win7 will turn out to be the REAL upgrade to XP. Both ME and Vista were red herrings, tossed into the mix as a test. The sad thing is, the public PAID FOR Microsoft's testing, in both cases.
that Win7 is a hybrid of Vista and XP SP3, with some minor upgrades, and some tweaking thrown in. Now, don't get me wrong - I am learning to LIKE Win7! As a hybrid, it has the best of XP, it has what little good there was in Vista, and it really is tweaked to run nicely. While I don't recognize it as a "new" operating system, I do see it as more than a minor update. It actually WORKS, on machines that Vista refused to work on. All of that said, it is just as obvious that Microsoft is going to charge about triple Win7's real value, or more. Basic should sell for about 25 bucks, and Ultimate should sell for about 50, no more than 75 bucks. We shall wait and see how much the suckers end up paying. Personally, I'll pirate the final release to run in a VM inside of Linux, LMAOA
Slashdot Mirror
I did specify that we confine out polls to those people who hold doctorate's degrees, did I not? One certainly does NOT survey every engineer on the planet regarding quantum mechanics theory. For that matter, I could honestly pass myself off as a "field engineer". I can do the job better than many men who are paid for the job. This does not in any way, shape, or form put me into the quantum mechanics business.
You may wish to double check those ice core data. At least twice in history, CO2 levels have shot up higher than they are today, in very short periods of time. Something that isn't clear, is whether CO2 levels preceded temperature increases, or the other way around. And, no, solar activity has NOT been dismantled. It HAS been cast into disrepute by the "consensus". But, popular opinion does not make science.
One might theorize that nature created man because she wanted the earth to be paved. We are just a means to an end. Hmmmm. Scary thought, huh?
Meteorological services and climate are effectively one and the same. Your LOCAL meteorologist may be only a weatherman. Climatologists start out as a simple meteorologist, and works his way up. Meteorology is the front end of climatology. They aren't seperate feilds of study - they are the same thing, with a different emphasis. So, let's take a survey of everyone in the field, who has a doctorate's degree within the field. I'm tired of hearing the "elite" who belong to this "consensus". As for you numbers - what is incomprehensible? Must I hold your hand, while I spell it out? A select few persons happen to publish to a select few publications, that are recognized and used for evidence by the alarmist crowd, or, mob. OF THOSE select few, the overwhelming majority are in almost total agreement. Now, can you see a problem with your statistics? Might you begin to recognize that your sample population is to small?
A hypothesis is more of a "What if" and "I think that". A hypothesis isn't marketed to the masses. A hypothesis doesn't form a political platform. And, "jumping to conclusions" does not constitute a hypothesis. Go back and study that dictionary.
Acidification may or may not be affected by carbon. It likely is, to some small extent. But, the major causes of acidification is pollution, in the form of human waste and sewerage, and agricultural runoff. Turning the oceans into a cesspool was never a good idea.
You could possibly be right - I am looking at to small a database. But, people like you refuse to look at the data, however large or small the data set. With a name like yours, I feel comfortable telling you to pull your head out of your ass, get some fresh air in your lungs, and LOOK AROUND! Oxygen deprivation is not conducive to drawing scientific conclusions.
One more time: Anonymous Coward won't recognize any expert who disagrees with his opinion. Hell, global warming COULD BE all man's fault, but that dosn't change the fact that the Anonymous Cowards of the earth won't hear any evidence that might repudiate their pre-formed opinions. Good grief......
"75 of 77 climate scientists who are active publishers on climate change said yes." Re-read that sentence. Read it again, carefully. One more time, please. Can you see now, that only certain select scientists are being held forth as an example of some "consensus"? A poll of ALL meteorological scientists might have more meaning. Can you see this now? If my brother and I agree that we constitute a superior race, and ignore the opinions of anyone not in our little (very little) clique, does our opinion become valid?
"All scientists who we, the doomsaying activist crowd, choose to give any credibility, are in agreement." There you go. I fixed that leading statement for you. :)
The observations aren't in question. It's the CONCLUSIONS that are debatable. Man most certainly has affected the biosphere in adverse ways. But, to claim that man is solely responsible for global warming is preposterous. To claim that man has contributed to global warming is a reasonable statement. But, now we need to determine HOW MUCH he has contributed. For those who have missed it, Mars is also undergoing global warming. There have been a couple articles regarding warming on other bodies in our system. Jumping to conclusions is NOT IN THE PROVINCE OF SCIENCE, but rather it is a tactic of politicians, and grant chasers.
Correct. Music is, of course, artificial. Children are forced to sit in school, and learn how to read this cryptic language so that they know when to make flat noise and sharp noise, according to the beat dictated in the cryptic language. Then, parents are forced to sit an an auditorium while listening to those horrid little children screeching and caterwauling a song, which you will never be able to enjoy again after being subjected to such auditory torture. It should be noted that autidorium and sanitorium are spelt very much alike - intentionally.
back to Windows. Hmmmm, which flavor? I could choose W98, for it's lack of security model, or WXP (sp1) for it's failure to adhere to common sense security model, or Vista for it's infuriatingly intrusive security, or Win7 for it's unique beta insecurities. I KNOW!! I'll do ALL OF THEM AGAIN!!! (Who wants to be left out of the newest viral infection, anyway?)
I've scrolled through the comments, and find a lot of meaningful commentary, insightful comments, some trolling, etc. WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS, where can I download it? I visited the Digital Zone site, but see no links to download. I'll reserve judgement on something new, until I can test drive it......
Disagree that spam is a techno problem. It is a people problem. The wife used to open every mail, open every attachment, and click on every link. Well, maybe I exxagerate - there isn't enough time in anyone's life to click on EVERYTHING that comes into a spambox... All the same, my sons and I have done our best to educate her, with good results. She has finally learned to delete most of the spam without ever looking at it. Even better, she has learned to use filters, meaning she never even sees most of the spam. My own inbox only sees a half dozen spams each week, on average, simply because I don't sign up for every worthless offer I stumble across. Having a secretive nature pays off sometimes. Educating people to be secretive and selective would end the spam problem.
There is nothing hypothetical about the rape song. Listen to the lyrics, Guns & Roses sings it. I trashed my kid's CD's years ago. But, you help to demonstrate that there is something wrong with our society. I DO believe in personal choice and personal responsibility - I vote Libertarian when I can. But, our society holds no one personally responsible. Limited censorship MIGHT be acceptable, if it controls those who don't control themselves. Actually, there is little that is entertaining about our entertainment media. 75% of it could be trashed, and society would benefit from it. "Satisfy the desires of the masses" is not what we have today. "Satisfying the desires of the lowest common denominator" would be more on target.
How about majority rules? If 100% of women are repulsed by a song about rape, and 45% of men find it to be offensive, then the song shouldn't be made. I think that if more than 10% of people find that a song IS NOT offensive, then it should be allowed. How is that for a pretty liberal standard? You can't possibly claim such a standard to be oppresive. At the same time, we could clean up an awful lot of pure trash. Your only valid objection to that idea would be that polls are easily manipulated. To bad there is no "perfect" solution. Meanwhile - those who don't believe that our songs, movies, games, and other entertainment have no effect on how some people conduct themselves really don't have a clue. Granted, watching and listening to gangbangers celebrating a rape won't motivate MOST people to commit rape, there are those few.
I thought this was a freindly discussion. Ranting? Please, don't denigrate people just because you don't understand what they have said - asking for clarification is far more suitable. As for the "rant" - you need to reexamine the license under which you installed your codecs on Linux. Yes, music plays with no problem - BUT - you clicked away a window which warned you that use of those codecs MAY VIOLATE the laws where you live. MP3, as you point out, is proprietary. Just imagine that RIAA and associates buys out the MP3 rights. Then, they petition Congress to enact a new law protecting their proprietary rights to MP3. Immediately thereafter, you either delete your collection of MP3's on your Linux machine - or you break the law. Far fetched, you say? Go ahead, say it. Saying so doesn't change the possibility, or even the probability that RIAA has taken such a scenario under consideration. Try installing another Linux in a VM, and be VERY CAREFUL NOT TO wave away any popups warning of possible legal problems. You will certainly not be able to play your iMusic, and likely not be able to play your MP3's either.
O Rly? Look closely. I'm not familiar with emusic, to be honest, but iTunes is less free of DRM than most people seem to think. For starters, they use a proprietary format, right? What happens if/when they yank support for the format? Not likely to happen anytime soon, true. But - do you expect to live more than a decade longer? And, would you like to use your purchased music some day, maybe play it for your grandchildren? iTunes can be shut down, and support for it ended, just as Atari and others have been shut down.
Millions have already witnessed what happens when a company and/or a format is abandoned. iTunes and/or Emusic can pocket their profits to date, cancel all obligations, and walk away - leaving you with - what, exactly? Granted, if you run Linux, the DRM in your music files means almost nothing. But, it is ILLEGAL, according to the recording industries, to circumvent that DRM, no matter that you have already paid for the music.
See my post above: "And, I haven't even begun to evaluate the truly "pop" drivel listened to by the mindless hordes......" It would seem you like the mindless drivel? Britney is a skanky ho, like so many of the other "pop" figures.
Many people would disagree with that assumption. Perhaps you have never listened to the lyrics of songs which celebrate the joys found by a gang of boys raping a young girl? I mean, really LISTEN to the music, huh? There is a LOT of trash out there that NEVER should have been written, sung, recorded, or distributed. And, I haven't even begun to evaluate the truly "pop" drivel listened to by the mindless hordes......
Pentests? Real pentests are done by the fine people at Remote Exploit, and other Linux distributions. If Microsoft had real pentesters, they would fix the code so that virii can't run. The basic security model of the file system itself would begin to resemble Ext3 file system. Permissions would be granted on an as-needed basis, and there would be nags when people attempted to run programs as Administrator. Really, boot a *nix machine up as root, and try to run Xchat. You'll be told in no uncertain terms that you're an idiot, LMAO On Windows, Admin is God, and no one is there to remind God that he's an idiot.
Sorry, but Vista is to XP what ME was to 98. XP turned out to be the REAL upgrade to 98, just as Win7 will turn out to be the REAL upgrade to XP. Both ME and Vista were red herrings, tossed into the mix as a test. The sad thing is, the public PAID FOR Microsoft's testing, in both cases.
that Win7 is a hybrid of Vista and XP SP3, with some minor upgrades, and some tweaking thrown in. Now, don't get me wrong - I am learning to LIKE Win7! As a hybrid, it has the best of XP, it has what little good there was in Vista, and it really is tweaked to run nicely. While I don't recognize it as a "new" operating system, I do see it as more than a minor update. It actually WORKS, on machines that Vista refused to work on. All of that said, it is just as obvious that Microsoft is going to charge about triple Win7's real value, or more. Basic should sell for about 25 bucks, and Ultimate should sell for about 50, no more than 75 bucks. We shall wait and see how much the suckers end up paying. Personally, I'll pirate the final release to run in a VM inside of Linux, LMAOA