"your model is valid but this particular premise is wrong"
Lomborg doesn't have a model.
no-one has yet said...here's where you made an error in a calculation" or "that reference you cite actually says something else
Do a little more research then. Theres reams of the stuff, including almost an entire edition of Scientific American.
(PS : you'll get more abundant critical responses (and politer ones, too) if you submit to peer review, something that Lomborg seems to think beneath him -- or too unprofitable.) http://www.mylinkspage.com/lomborg.html#WAS
50 years later all those tenured professors are forgotten and that lone voice is elevated to the status of Einstein.
Errant nonsense. Nearly all the breakthrough ideas of modern science have been made by scientists working within the fields. Sure, Einstein was a patent clerk.
But how about Dirac (University of Copenhagen)? Or Planck (University of Kiel). Schrodinger -- University of Stuttgart. Gell-Mann? Fermi? Feynmann? All career academics, and all their revolutionary breakthroughs accepted rapidly in the community, because they knew what they were talking about. Maybe we need someone with no knowledge of particle physics to tell them where they're going wrong.
Hell, can you name 5 Nobel Laureates in physics who weren't career academics?
What you attempt to paint as how things are done, is very much the exception. Lomborg is a kook.
I rather think I do. I attend 6-8 environmental conferences a year, and speak, in my own small capacity, at most of them.
Our knowledge isn't good enough to understand what triggers what.
Only if you close your eyes and ears to years of research, and an overwhelming scientific consensus. Go read the Kyoto report, or the opinion of the US Academy of Science, or the Royal Society of London. (I could go on). In fact, its very hard to find a contrary view from a source unfunded by vested interest.
adopting treaties like Kyoto would seriously hamper our economy.
And yet, almost every other country in the world has ratified it, and yet the recent performance of the US economy is no better than that of Australia, or the EU.
Do you often state opinions that are wholly contrary to the facts?
predict the state of weather a couple of years from now
Climate is not the same as weather. Climate is not the same as weather. Climate is not the same as weather.
Weather prediction like trying to approximate where all the eddies will appear when you pull the plug out of your bathtub. Climate prediction is estimating how long the tub will take to drain.
Well, we know that whichever of those is likely, the initial trigger will be greater atmospheric temperatures due to the greenhouse effect. So, how about a ratifying the global environmental protocol concerned with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions?
It does, and this gives an influx of fresh water in the Polar Oceans. In a normal freezing season, theres extensive rejection of brine, which produces dense, saline water, which sinks to form water masses usually called Deep Water and Bottom Water. These form a large part of the Thermohaline Circulation (THC), a global scale conveyor belt of water, of which large scale surface currents like the Gulf Stream are but a part. Turn off the dense water formation at the poles, and that may be enough to retard or stop the THC.
If that turns off, you switch off the major heat transport mechanism from the equator to the poles, and that means abrupt cooling for the mid-latitude and polar regions.
how little it knows about the future of climate change, and how hard it is to make these links with with anything close to the level of certainty policy makers and funders would like.
Thats a nice point. Sadly, the present policy makers' response to this is "Lets do nothing."
Cue the "Anthropogenic Climate Change is a liberal conspiracy to stop libertarians driving SUVs posts in 5.4.3.2.1..."
Lets throw in a few "Bjorn Lomborg (a statistician with no environmental science training, let alone numerical modelling or fluid dynamics) is right and everyone else was wrong" too. That'll be fun.
And some recycling of the "Wasn't everyone warning about Global Cooling 30 years ago?" posts (erm, no, frankly, though there were one or two apocalyptic popular science books on the subject).
... I'm having mine built right in to my tinfoil hat. That'll stop the CIA/NSA/MI6/CI5/Walmart from spying on me as I carry out my top level, high security, deeply private but basically non-existent personal life.
Re:State of the art?
on
Shrek 2 How-To
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Maybe thats true, but Shrek had many things that "Monsters Inc" and "Finding Nemo" didn't have. Such as a good script, and funny jokes.
paying for support or paying licencing fees amounts to the same - money spent on upkeep.
Well, yeah. But surely you're going to need to pay support cost on HPC Windows, too? Which would you rather pay for, support, or support plus licensing?
But not all Linux distros blow as hard as Debian unstable. There are plenty of Linux distributions optimised for cluster computing; very few (if any) charge a per-processor licensing fee, and most offer commercial support at competitive rates.
Gray never filed a patent, he attempted to file a caveat -- a warning that a patent was coming, on February 14, 1876. However, Bell had been in the same patent office earlier in the day -- Bell was the fifth applicant to be processed that day, Gray was 39th.
Bell was a Scot, resident in Canada. The invention of the telephone is disputed between him and some American called Gray, who may have been earlier than Bell, but was slower in filing his patent.
Heres a clue. In future, when attempting to be humourous, why not try to think of some new, original jokes, rather than copy and paste someone elses (that wasn't all that funny in the first place)?
Bernoulli's principle is a theorem of inviscid flow.
The aerodynamic lift felt by a wing are modulated by, and to a certain is consequence of, Prandtl boundary layers. Sure, they're related (away from the boundary layers, the flow is almost inviscid), and the pressure drop will be a contributory factor, but the experiments I've seen, in a Hall cell, suggest that purely inviscid lift is not enough.
But, anyway, thats not entirely relevant, since in the original article on knuckleballs they *explicitly* refer to equal transit times, which is utter rubbish.
Additionally, for knuckleballs (as distinct from rapidly rotating pitches) the alignment of the seams, and the turbulent wake are the what determine the wake, and thats essentially chaotic. Which is why Bob Uecker said
"The best way to catch the knuckleball is to wait for it to stop rolling, then pick it"
But by 1934, Germany was already a totalitarian state, and Hitler had already shown that he crushed his enemies rapidly and ruthlessly. They 1934 election result is wholly and entirely untrustworthy. Prior to the terror, in the last free elections (1933), only about 1/3rd of the electorate voted for Hitler, and he was Hindenburg's anointed succesor running on a moderate ticket (at least in comparison to '34) albeit one filled with crude and vile anti-semitism.
Re:Perfect games more common now than before
on
The Physics of Baseball
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Interesting. My opinion is slight contrary. In the past, before the advent of specialist relief pitchers and muscled up middle infielders, pitchers knew they were supposed to go 9 innings. Thus, when faced with weaker hitters, they'd coast. (Don't believe me? Read Christy Mathewson's "Pitching In A Pinch").
Since genuine home run hitters were few and far between, having a guy on first just meant you'd bear down on the next guy that much harder, as the run would only score on a long double or a triple. So, you could complete the game, but at the cost of a few extra base runners.
These days, nearly everyone fancies themselves as a home run threat, so you've got to get everyone out.
Well, I've a doctorate in applied maths; work in computational fluid dynamics and have lectured on chaos theory, differential equations and statistical mechanics.
Planes do not fly because of Bernoulli's principle (its boundary layer effects and wing vortices) Curve balls do not curve because of Bernoulli's principle (its the Magnus effect, which is related to Bernoullis, but requires viscosity) Knuckleballs do not flutter because of Bernoulli's principle, (its due to the turbulent wake and the asymmetric shedding of vortices because of the orientation of the seams.)
Slashdot Mirror
(PS : you'll get more abundant critical responses (and politer ones, too) if you submit to peer review, something that Lomborg seems to think beneath him -- or too unprofitable.) http://www.mylinkspage.com/lomborg.html#WAS
But how about Dirac (University of Copenhagen)? Or Planck (University of Kiel). Schrodinger -- University of Stuttgart. Gell-Mann? Fermi? Feynmann? All career academics, and all their revolutionary breakthroughs accepted rapidly in the community, because they knew what they were talking about. Maybe we need someone with no knowledge of particle physics to tell them where they're going wrong.
Hell, can you name 5 Nobel Laureates in physics who weren't career academics?
What you attempt to paint as how things are done, is very much the exception. Lomborg is a kook.
Do you often state opinions that are wholly contrary to the facts?
The villain would have to dump *fresh* water, to inhibit polar sinking and bottom water formation.
Climate is not the same as weather.
Climate is not the same as weather.
Weather prediction like trying to approximate where all the eddies will appear when you pull the plug out of your bathtub. Climate prediction is estimating how long the tub will take to drain.
Well, we know that whichever of those is likely, the initial trigger will be greater atmospheric temperatures due to the greenhouse effect. So, how about a ratifying the global environmental protocol concerned with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions?
For a start...
Tampa, huh. Theres an NHL team in bloody Phoenix now. Whats the next NHL expansion: the Death Valley Penguins?
It does, and this gives an influx of fresh water in the Polar Oceans. In a normal freezing season, theres extensive rejection of brine, which produces dense, saline water, which sinks to form water masses usually called Deep Water and Bottom Water. These form a large part of the Thermohaline Circulation (THC), a global scale conveyor belt of water, of which large scale surface currents like the Gulf Stream are but a part. Turn off the dense water formation at the poles, and that may be enough to retard or stop the THC.
If that turns off, you switch off the major heat transport mechanism from the equator to the poles, and that means abrupt cooling for the mid-latitude and polar regions.
Cue the "Anthropogenic Climate Change is a liberal conspiracy to stop libertarians driving SUVs posts in 5.4.3.2.1..."
Lets throw in a few "Bjorn Lomborg (a statistician with no environmental science training, let alone numerical modelling or fluid dynamics) is right and everyone else was wrong" too. That'll be fun.
And some recycling of the "Wasn't everyone warning about Global Cooling 30 years ago?" posts (erm, no, frankly, though there were one or two apocalyptic popular science books on the subject).
... I'm having mine built right in to my tinfoil hat. That'll stop the CIA/NSA/MI6/CI5/Walmart from spying on me as I carry out my top level, high security, deeply private but basically non-existent personal life.
Maybe thats true, but Shrek had many things that "Monsters Inc" and "Finding Nemo" didn't have. Such as a good script, and funny jokes.
Gray never filed a patent, he attempted to file a caveat -- a warning that a patent was coming, on February 14, 1876. However, Bell had been in the same patent office earlier in the day -- Bell was the fifth applicant to be processed that day, Gray was 39th.
Source : Library Of Congress
Bell was a Scot, resident in Canada. The invention of the telephone is disputed between him and some American called Gray, who may have been earlier than Bell, but was slower in filing his patent.
The people aren't in China. The machines are in China, the people are, in the main, in the USA.
Heres a clue. In future, when attempting to be humourous, why not try to think of some new, original jokes, rather than copy and paste someone elses (that wasn't all that funny in the first place)?
Just an idea.
Thats from the book (which, bizarrely, I have on my desk because I bought it on Ebay three days ago)
The aerodynamic lift felt by a wing are modulated by, and to a certain is consequence of, Prandtl boundary layers. Sure, they're related (away from the boundary layers, the flow is almost inviscid), and the pressure drop will be a contributory factor, but the experiments I've seen, in a Hall cell, suggest that purely inviscid lift is not enough.
But, anyway, thats not entirely relevant, since in the original article on knuckleballs they *explicitly* refer to equal transit times, which is utter rubbish.
Additionally, for knuckleballs (as distinct from rapidly rotating pitches) the alignment of the seams, and the turbulent wake are the what determine the wake, and thats essentially chaotic. Which is why Bob Uecker said
But by 1934, Germany was already a totalitarian state, and Hitler had already shown that he crushed his enemies rapidly and ruthlessly. They 1934 election result is wholly and entirely untrustworthy. Prior to the terror, in the last free elections (1933), only about 1/3rd of the electorate voted for Hitler, and he was Hindenburg's anointed succesor running on a moderate ticket (at least in comparison to '34) albeit one filled with crude and vile anti-semitism.
Interesting. My opinion is slight contrary. In the past, before the advent of specialist relief pitchers and muscled up middle infielders, pitchers knew they were supposed to go 9 innings. Thus, when faced with weaker hitters, they'd coast. (Don't believe me? Read Christy Mathewson's "Pitching In A Pinch").
Since genuine home run hitters were few and far between, having a guy on first just meant you'd bear down on the next guy that much harder, as the run would only score on a long double or a triple. So, you could complete the game, but at the cost of a few extra base runners.
These days, nearly everyone fancies themselves as a home run threat, so you've got to get everyone out.
Just a thought.
Planes do not fly because of Bernoulli's principle (its boundary layer effects and wing vortices)
Curve balls do not curve because of Bernoulli's principle (its the Magnus effect, which is related to Bernoullis, but requires viscosity)
Knuckleballs do not flutter because of Bernoulli's principle, (its due to the turbulent wake and the asymmetric shedding of vortices because of the orientation of the seams.)