Play the ball, not the man. Yes, volcanoes do affect climate, so do solar cycles, but these are accounted for in the models. The results of the models are still very close to what we've been observing.
Are you saying that the conclusion that most people agree upon is correct or that having more people understand an issue is helpful to the overall dialog on the issue?
If you are saying former then I would say that is a classic logical fallacy.
If the latter then I would agree with you.
I'd say both, really. I realise that having a lot of people think something doesn't make it right, but if you show your idea to enough people, at some point you start to think that all the holes must have been found by at least one of the eyes that looked at it.
To do that we must have access to the process and a seat at the table.
There has been a concerted effort lately to shut out "deniers" from all such discussions. They are being blacklisted from media. Blacklisted from science conferences. Blacklisted in science journals.
The process is very transparent. Even with the whole "climategate" bullshit a few years ago, there was nothing that wasn't open and honest apart from a couple of informal emails using words that the MSM didn't like. To be accepted to a science journal or conference you need to be doing science, not just spouting a conspiracy theory.
A bunch of other shit.
Politics are shit. Anything politics gets into, whether it's office politics, politics in sport or national politics, the fact that it exists will be a drag on what you want to achieve. That doesn't mean that the underlying thing stops being important. Your job isn't meaningless because your manager is trying to get himself more power. Sport isn't less fun because a player went to another team for a bullshit reason. Just like carbon dioxide won't magically change it's IR spectrum because some greedy politicians are sticking their noses in.
How is it not falsifiable? If the measured temperature was different from what the model predicted then we'd decide that model is no good and throw it out. Look at the graphs here. The yellow and blue lines are ridiculous, so those models have been falsified. The models trending with the temperatures are still considered to be good. Weather patterns that we know about and can monitor and account for are not "ad hoc special pleading." They are part of what's required to model temperatures.
Their response was to release a whole load of data. Your response to that was to come back and say that it wasn't enough. They did a bunch more studies and found the same thing over and over again, and you clearly think that it's still not enough.
blindly accept everything you tell us here on out or be labeled a "denier"
Don't blindly accept anyone's word for anything. It isn't the easiest thing in the world to understand, but having more people who do understand it will let us make sure we're doing the right thing.
... is to give over our wealth and power to some select group of people that will save the world...
There will always be shysters. Did bridges become a ridiculous concept when the Brooklyn Bridge was "sold" or do people just need to be a little bit more careful?
You need either a materials science class or a reading class...
Diamonds are not tough in that they can be crushed and they do not appreciably deform. Anvils are tough in that they can be repeatedly hit with a hammer, which will create dents etc. but will not fracture the metal.
100% agree. So often, I will get home after my 30 minute drive home from work and find 5 missed calls from my wife and she's mad at me for not answering my phone. What possibly came up in those 30 minutes that is so urgent? Usually she wants me to pick something up on the way home, as though the 3 minutes to the store is suddenly too difficult to do as a standalone trip.
I wondered about that too. In the video I watched it looked like they left her with the transparent skull exposed. I'm not sure if they went back later to put the hair on or not. If they did put skin on later I'm not sure if it would grow hair or not. Failing that, they do make some very nice and very well fitting wigs for cancer patients, so I imagine they'll fit her with one of them.
They've only just done it. How do they know how it turns out long term? They probably expect it to turn out well, but to say that it often works well is massively jumping the gun.
a) From the pictures it doesn't look like it goes high enough for a parachute to be effective. b) If there's a fire I'd assume that the parachute would be compromised by the heat.
As I mentioned on Soylent, you only need a little helium to get it off the ground in the first place, then it can generate its own hydrogen or hot air to keep itself aloft for extended periods.
Do we want to say "no, you can't be wrong about this anymore."
In some cases, yes. Of course, people aren't born knowing everything so we'll have to make some exceptions for people who are still learning. The people I have a problem with are those who should know better, who have been arguing the same points for years, who have been hearing the same rejections of their arguments over and over, yet keep luring in the weak with their lies. I'm thinking more of the Jenny McCarthy or Ken Ham type of person, rather than some hippy who thinks this weeks herbal supplement will help him.
Yes, good ideas need to be constantly challenged, we can't just sit back on our dogma and continue to assume that we know everything about the world. These arguments for "holistic medicine" have been answered many times. The fact that some people refuse to listen and keep yelling doesn't mean that they suddenly have new ideas. It is possible that some alternative medicine will be found to be effective and will replace some currently accepted methods, but continuing to harp on about techniques that have never shown any promise doesn't help anyone.
I don't want to come off sounding like I endorse the practice of randomly fucking up people's brains, but this is how we get an understanding of how the brain really works. We'll try this to see what happens, then we'll think about the brain some more and we'll try something else to see what happens and eventually we'll work out what's actually going on.
Slashdot Mirror
Play the ball, not the man. Yes, volcanoes do affect climate, so do solar cycles, but these are accounted for in the models. The results of the models are still very close to what we've been observing.
Are you saying that the conclusion that most people agree upon is correct or that having more people understand an issue is helpful to the overall dialog on the issue?
If you are saying former then I would say that is a classic logical fallacy.
If the latter then I would agree with you.
I'd say both, really. I realise that having a lot of people think something doesn't make it right, but if you show your idea to enough people, at some point you start to think that all the holes must have been found by at least one of the eyes that looked at it.
To do that we must have access to the process and a seat at the table.
There has been a concerted effort lately to shut out "deniers" from all such discussions. They are being blacklisted from media. Blacklisted from science conferences. Blacklisted in science journals.
The process is very transparent. Even with the whole "climategate" bullshit a few years ago, there was nothing that wasn't open and honest apart from a couple of informal emails using words that the MSM didn't like. To be accepted to a science journal or conference you need to be doing science, not just spouting a conspiracy theory.
A bunch of other shit.
Politics are shit. Anything politics gets into, whether it's office politics, politics in sport or national politics, the fact that it exists will be a drag on what you want to achieve. That doesn't mean that the underlying thing stops being important. Your job isn't meaningless because your manager is trying to get himself more power. Sport isn't less fun because a player went to another team for a bullshit reason. Just like carbon dioxide won't magically change it's IR spectrum because some greedy politicians are sticking their noses in.
How is it not falsifiable? If the measured temperature was different from what the model predicted then we'd decide that model is no good and throw it out. Look at the graphs here. The yellow and blue lines are ridiculous, so those models have been falsified. The models trending with the temperatures are still considered to be good. Weather patterns that we know about and can monitor and account for are not "ad hoc special pleading." They are part of what's required to model temperatures.
Why can't they take the data from the 70s, 80s, 90s feed it into their software and predict the 00s?
That's exactly what they do. https://www.skepticalscience.c... What did you think they were doing?
The hockey stick program also works with basket ball scores. It's all about acquiring grant funds by scaring rubes.
There's more money in predicting basketball scores, if they were looking for the money there are many easier ways to get it.
It's turned into religion by people who are too invested in the outcome. If I thought it was real I'd head the parade.
What would if take to convince you that it's real?
Didn't they do a trial of that and found that it really didn't do anything? Marine animals came out and ate the algae, converting it all back to CO2.
Their response was to release a whole load of data. Your response to that was to come back and say that it wasn't enough. They did a bunch more studies and found the same thing over and over again, and you clearly think that it's still not enough.
blindly accept everything you tell us here on out or be labeled a "denier"
Don't blindly accept anyone's word for anything. It isn't the easiest thing in the world to understand, but having more people who do understand it will let us make sure we're doing the right thing.
... is to give over our wealth and power to some select group of people that will save the world...
There will always be shysters. Did bridges become a ridiculous concept when the Brooklyn Bridge was "sold" or do people just need to be a little bit more careful?
For $10 a month you don't get everything you've ever wanted. That's like going to McDonalds and complaining about the lack of lobster on the menu.
The probability of me breaking my arm last year are 0, but the insurance company still wants me to pay them. It's a complete injustice.
Now that I see you do know what you're talking about, I apologise for insulting you in reply to your other comment.
You need either a materials science class or a reading class...
Diamonds are not tough in that they can be crushed and they do not appreciably deform.
Anvils are tough in that they can be repeatedly hit with a hammer, which will create dents etc. but will not fracture the metal.
I guess you could make it work, but for safety systems you want things to be a simple as they can be so there's less chances for it to go wrong.
100% agree. So often, I will get home after my 30 minute drive home from work and find 5 missed calls from my wife and she's mad at me for not answering my phone. What possibly came up in those 30 minutes that is so urgent? Usually she wants me to pick something up on the way home, as though the 3 minutes to the store is suddenly too difficult to do as a standalone trip.
I wondered about that too. In the video I watched it looked like they left her with the transparent skull exposed. I'm not sure if they went back later to put the hair on or not. If they did put skin on later I'm not sure if it would grow hair or not. Failing that, they do make some very nice and very well fitting wigs for cancer patients, so I imagine they'll fit her with one of them.
They've only just done it. How do they know how it turns out long term? They probably expect it to turn out well, but to say that it often works well is massively jumping the gun.
a) From the pictures it doesn't look like it goes high enough for a parachute to be effective.
b) If there's a fire I'd assume that the parachute would be compromised by the heat.
As I mentioned on Soylent, you only need a little helium to get it off the ground in the first place, then it can generate its own hydrogen or hot air to keep itself aloft for extended periods.
Links are always nice. Since I'm linking to SN, I'll also shout out to Pipedot, S'qute and Technocrat.
Actually, if you have an article like that, please share it, I'm sure a lot of people here would find it very interesting.
*warrant
Do we want to say "no, you can't be wrong about this anymore."
In some cases, yes. Of course, people aren't born knowing everything so we'll have to make some exceptions for people who are still learning. The people I have a problem with are those who should know better, who have been arguing the same points for years, who have been hearing the same rejections of their arguments over and over, yet keep luring in the weak with their lies. I'm thinking more of the Jenny McCarthy or Ken Ham type of person, rather than some hippy who thinks this weeks herbal supplement will help him.
Yes, good ideas need to be constantly challenged, we can't just sit back on our dogma and continue to assume that we know everything about the world. These arguments for "holistic medicine" have been answered many times. The fact that some people refuse to listen and keep yelling doesn't mean that they suddenly have new ideas. It is possible that some alternative medicine will be found to be effective and will replace some currently accepted methods, but continuing to harp on about techniques that have never shown any promise doesn't help anyone.
You won't be able to heel-toe anymore though, as if that's something a Tesla driver ever needs to do.
Given the lack of gears, I'm going to say confidently that they do not need to heel-toe.
I don't want to come off sounding like I endorse the practice of randomly fucking up people's brains, but this is how we get an understanding of how the brain really works. We'll try this to see what happens, then we'll think about the brain some more and we'll try something else to see what happens and eventually we'll work out what's actually going on.
It's scary how I am not nearly as worried about government spying, I simply accept it as part of life. But Google really scares the shit out of me.
That is very scary. The government will lock you up if they think you're a threat to them. Google is just trying to sell you stuff.