"I haven't listened to anything new by them since then." well then., by all mean go on about the new album. No need to have actual heard it. ha ha, no you can't be that pretentious, I kid.
*reads rest of the post* AH, apparently you can be the pretentious.
"Dont[sic] be a fucking feminist" so... she should just be in the kitchen all day? WTF
Women get treated far worse them men in dealerships. You were ignored, but where you treated like you where stupid? Talked down to? If you asked about an engine would they change the subject to talk about color? Where you hit on? Did someone imply you would get a better deal if you went to the back room for a bit?
You're post comes off making you look like a misogynistic idiot.
Oh, shut up. Listen you patronizing jerk, you aren't the only 'car guy', so get over yourself. I ave no idea why you think you won't be able to test drive.
Their sales paradigm is design to grab customers and fleece them for all they can, otherwise everything would be fixed price.
Close. The illegal broke fro the Church of England, because the Church of England was extreme* enough) and went to the Netherlands. Then they started to fears the would loose the English language, and went to America, landing on Plymouth Rock. After which the people from the new world and the local natives lived happily every after.
What you just built is a Tesla place you want. Not one good for most people. You need to have people on hand to answer the questions, because most people won't research data on line.
a) false. You had to have your device set to allow automatic pushes. 2) Hardly new. III) That's irrelevant to what happened. You putting this here tells me the only reason you are upset is because it's a group you don't like. I know, I now, it's quite fashionable to hate a guy who spends a shit load of money helping people.
but WHY did it collapse? was it distribution? poor messaging? slow communication?
A lot of those reason have been solved. Sometimes people see where a technology is going, and jump to the point, forgetting the need for infrastructure to support it. Once the technology infrastructure is in place, those things become marketable.
In short, you need to eat your meat before you can have you pudding.
Yes, public property should be devoid of all religious symbols. I don't care if you have a manger and the words Christmas on you property. To put it in a public space is to force a religion onto all the people.
We have Freedom of religion for a reason.
The military FORCING people to be christian and pray is a BAD thing. There has been a big push to get more religion(Christianity) into the military. The Mid-East used to be pretty free and open, then religious group started infecting the government, and withing a decade religion was forced onto all the people, and te countries generally stopped producing anything and became ces pools.
Remember, ISIS is claiming the are religiously oppressed because they can't make other people bent to their religion.
Religion alows the ignorant to think what they do is for God, therefore it's OK.
"As a mystic I have _knowledge_ by definition, aka experience." false. Completly and utterly false. Are you simple?
"Athiest[sic] telling other people what they can and cannot know is the height of ignorance and arrogance. " which is why we ask for proof.
"They are literally like the blind man telling those who can see color that they are delusional." so now you are saying you have special vision no one else has? Hoe convenient. You are simple.
Every religious conflict with science I have aver read about is due to people being ignorant of their own theology, and/or the history of their holy book.
False. Climate change is climate change, global warming id global warming. Anyone who says they are the same, or that it has been changed, is either a liar, or ignorant.
Probably ignorant. anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) is a fact. In fact, it's so simply even you could devise a test. 1) Visible light strikes the earth Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes 2) Visible light has nothing for CO2 to absorb, so it pass right on through. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes 3) When visible light strike an object, IR is generated. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes 4) Green house gasses, such as CO2, absorb energy(heat) from IR. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes 5) Humans produce more CO2(and other green house gasses) then can be absorbed through the cycle. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
Each one of those has been tested, a lot. You notice deniers don't actual address the facts of AGW? Don't have a test that shows those facts to be false? So now you have to answer: Why do you think trapping more energy(heat) in the lower atmosphere does not impact the climate?
That's what anthropomorphic climate change (ACC) is.
1. False. AGW has a set of tests and facts. Deniers refuse to accept them. These are tested and testable facts. 2. True about most thing, but frustrating when one side has fcts and the other side totlea argument in NU-UH! However this is irrelevant it happens in many field byu people who aren't the actual scienctist. No bearing on science. 3. False, again.
here: anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) is a fact. In fact, it's so simply even you could devise a test. 1) Visible light strikes the earth. Testable? Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. 2) Visible light has nothing for CO2 to absorb, so it pass right on through. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. 3) When visible light strike an object, IR is generated. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. 4) Green house gasses, such as CO2, absorb energy(heat) from IR. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. 5) Humans produce more CO2(and other green house gasses) then can be absorbed through the cycle. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes.
Each one of those has been tested, a lot. You notice deniers don't actual address facts of AGW? Don't have a test that shows those fact to be false? So now you have to answer: Why do you think trapping more energy(heat) in the lower atmosphere does not impact the climate?
That's what anthropomorphic climate change (ACC) is: the impact of AGW on the climate.
What mystical crap? anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) is a fact. In fact, it's so simply even you could devise a test. 1) Visible light strikes the earth 2) Visible light has nothing for CO2 to absorb, so it pass right on through. 3) When visible light strike an object, IR is generated. 4) Green house gasses, such as CO2, absorb energy(heat) from IR 5) Humans produce more CO2(and other green house gasses) then can be absorbed through the cycle.
Each one of those has been tested, a lot. You notice deniers don't actual address facts of AGW? Don't have a test that shows those fact to be false? So now you have to answer: Why do you think trapping more energy(heat) in the lower atmosphere does not impact the climate?
That's what anthropomorphic climate change (ACC) is.
I wish people would at least read the article before posting. If I can ever invent a way so that only people who have read the article can post, I'll be rich.
Slashdot Mirror
"I haven't listened to anything new by them since then."
well then., by all mean go on about the new album. No need to have actual heard it.
ha ha, no you can't be that pretentious, I kid.
*reads rest of the post*
AH, apparently you can be the pretentious.
Let her go by herself and see what happens.
"Dont[sic] be a fucking feminist"
so... she should just be in the kitchen all day? WTF
Women get treated far worse them men in dealerships. You were ignored, but where you treated like you where stupid? Talked down to? If you asked about an engine would they change the subject to talk about color? Where you hit on? Did someone imply you would get a better deal if you went to the back room for a bit?
You're post comes off making you look like a misogynistic idiot.
Oh, shut up.
Listen you patronizing jerk, you aren't the only 'car guy', so get over yourself.
I ave no idea why you think you won't be able to test drive.
Their sales paradigm is design to grab customers and fleece them for all they can, otherwise everything would be fixed price.
Close.
The illegal broke fro the Church of England, because the Church of England was extreme* enough) and went to the Netherlands.
Then they started to fears the would loose the English language, and went to America, landing on Plymouth Rock.
After which the people from the new world and the local natives lived happily every after.
I might have made up that last bit.
*eXtreme!
What you just built is a Tesla place you want. Not one good for most people.
You need to have people on hand to answer the questions, because most people won't research data on line.
I lawyers is needed if you have been wronged, to need to defend yourself.
A car salesman is needed when...well. never anymore.
a) false. You had to have your device set to allow automatic pushes.
2) Hardly new.
III) That's irrelevant to what happened. You putting this here tells me the only reason you are upset is because it's a group you don't like.
I know, I now, it's quite fashionable to hate a guy who spends a shit load of money helping people.
I will not be satisfied until Dice makes Beta the release.
Beta is awesome.
should have made it permanent and not removable, because fuck those whiners.
but WHY did it collapse? was it distribution? poor messaging? slow communication?
A lot of those reason have been solved.
Sometimes people see where a technology is going, and jump to the point, forgetting the need for infrastructure to support it. Once the technology infrastructure is in place, those things become marketable.
In short, you need to eat your meat before you can have you pudding.
Near as I can tell:
The product you link to is a extracorporeal cytokine adsorber.
With this product in the /. article, there is no excess cytokine to absorb.
"A good person will do good; a bad person may do good if the carrot (heaven), or stick (hell), is strong enough to deter them from acting bad"
no. A bad person will say that God wants them to do whatever bad they are doing.
It becomes an excuse.
Yes, public property should be devoid of all religious symbols.
I don't care if you have a manger and the words Christmas on you property.
To put it in a public space is to force a religion onto all the people.
We have Freedom of religion for a reason.
The military FORCING people to be christian and pray is a BAD thing.
There has been a big push to get more religion(Christianity) into the military.
The Mid-East used to be pretty free and open, then religious group started infecting the government, and withing a decade religion was forced onto all the people, and te countries generally stopped producing anything and became ces pools.
Remember, ISIS is claiming the are religiously oppressed because they can't make other people bent to their religion.
Religion alows the ignorant to think what they do is for God, therefore it's OK.
"As a mystic I have _knowledge_ by definition, aka experience."
false. Completly and utterly false. Are you simple?
"Athiest[sic] telling other people what they can and cannot know is the height of ignorance and arrogance. "
which is why we ask for proof.
"They are literally like the blind man telling those who can see color that they are delusional."
so now you are saying you have special vision no one else has? Hoe convenient.
You are simple.
atheism is not a religion.
The rest of your post is 3rd grade tripe.
Every religious conflict with science I have aver read about is due to people being ignorant of their own theology, and/or the history of their holy book.
Example: Bible literalists.
True, but getting those details doesn't change the fact that the horse is still running.
False. Climate change is climate change, global warming id global warming. Anyone who says they are the same, or that it has been changed, is either a liar, or ignorant.
Probably ignorant.
anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) is a fact.
In fact, it's so simply even you could devise a test.
1) Visible light strikes the earth Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
2) Visible light has nothing for CO2 to absorb, so it pass right on through. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
3) When visible light strike an object, IR is generated. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
4) Green house gasses, such as CO2, absorb energy(heat) from IR. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
5) Humans produce more CO2(and other green house gasses) then can be absorbed through the cycle. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
Each one of those has been tested, a lot. You notice deniers don't actual address the facts of AGW? Don't have a test that shows those facts to be false?
So now you have to answer:
Why do you think trapping more energy(heat) in the lower atmosphere does not impact the climate?
That's what anthropomorphic climate change (ACC) is.
How about you actual look at the science? please.
1. False. AGW has a set of tests and facts. Deniers refuse to accept them. These are tested and testable facts.
2. True about most thing, but frustrating when one side has fcts and the other side totlea argument in NU-UH! However this is irrelevant it happens in many field byu people who aren't the actual scienctist. No bearing on science.
3. False, again.
here:
anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) is a fact.
In fact, it's so simply even you could devise a test.
1) Visible light strikes the earth. Testable? Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes.
2) Visible light has nothing for CO2 to absorb, so it pass right on through. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes.
3) When visible light strike an object, IR is generated. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes.
4) Green house gasses, such as CO2, absorb energy(heat) from IR. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes.
5) Humans produce more CO2(and other green house gasses) then can be absorbed through the cycle. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes.
Each one of those has been tested, a lot. You notice deniers don't actual address facts of AGW? Don't have a test that shows those fact to be false?
So now you have to answer:
Why do you think trapping more energy(heat) in the lower atmosphere does not impact the climate?
That's what anthropomorphic climate change (ACC) is: the impact of AGW on the climate.
No, you do not need a control to draw conclusions.
What control do we use for the conclusion we have about gravity?
What mystical crap?
anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) is a fact.
In fact, it's so simply even you could devise a test.
1) Visible light strikes the earth
2) Visible light has nothing for CO2 to absorb, so it pass right on through.
3) When visible light strike an object, IR is generated.
4) Green house gasses, such as CO2, absorb energy(heat) from IR
5) Humans produce more CO2(and other green house gasses) then can be absorbed through the cycle.
Each one of those has been tested, a lot. You notice deniers don't actual address facts of AGW? Don't have a test that shows those fact to be false?
So now you have to answer:
Why do you think trapping more energy(heat) in the lower atmosphere does not impact the climate?
That's what anthropomorphic climate change (ACC) is.
How about you actual look at the science?
It's called the 'Mpemba effect '. You might want to look it up.
It doesn't apply here, but it's a real thing.
It's interesting science.
I wish people would at least read the article before posting.
If I can ever invent a way so that only people who have read the article can post, I'll be rich.
"...because all the models that predicted the future so far were wrong up to this point..."
No, that haven't been wrong.