You never took statistics and probability did you? One data point does not make a trend. Yeah, we had a "three sigma" year, but it doesn't mean that the sky is falling.
Tell me, did Californians start running around screaming "environment!" after the 1989 earthquake?
"Looming climatic chaos?" You have got to be joking.
There's so much evidence that what we are doing to the climate is going to cause big changes
Cite please? It's the height of vanity to think that anything like us could effect world climates with any significant effect. All the power ever produced by mankind (including nuclear weapons) probably wouldn't equal one hurricane.
or if Golf stream going North gets replaced with a freezing stream coming straight from the Arctic
Do you even understand the mechanism that causes the Gulf stream to rotate clockwise around the North Atlantic? Why do you think that eastern Asia has warm water like we have here in Florida, but California has cold water, like people have in Europe?
I mean, just look at a satellite photo of Earth, and then tell me humans can't have any impact on a global scale
Hed Herring. Nobody doubts that urban areas are visible at night due to lighting. It's a very large stretch to jump from that to "people are EEEVIL." Using your own argument, I add this extension: the Democrats are at fault. Since the people that voted for Kerry live in the areas that show up on your satellite photos, THEY must be the ones responsible for Global Warming and the Death of The Environment.
No, you're the pig-headed one for (assuming you're not American) thinking that your national leaders are any different than the leaders of the United States. They are out to protect and promote their own country's interests, period. To do anything else would be derilection of duty. It is not in the United States' interest to sign a treaty like the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that does not have fair reciprocation between the signatories. Smaller, less-developed countries signed on not because they want a cleaner world, but becuase they see the KP for what it is-- free money for them!
This one has been tough. Next one can have 2 class-5 hurricanes hit at the heart of Florida. I guess that a job policy doesn't work by having workplaces available because of dead people, neither because large areas are devastated. US are powerful, nature is more. You can't stand against that.
What in the world did that mean? Really. I don't understand at all!
I don't think drivers CAN be.NET based, since they require access that the Framework doesn't allow or expose.
I have recently been toying with a.NET managed code interface for a parallel port I2C adapter. As near as I can tell, there's no facility for writing managed-code drivers under Windows. On Linux (or any other OS that can run Mono or dotGNU) I can make use of the/dev/ports and/dev/mem devices to implement my functionality (albeit slowly!).
No book on.NET I have ever seen includes information on device drivers. I don't think it can be done, at least not with.NET 1.1.
why can't they decide on a consistent form of voting?
Because the United States is not one country, but is a federation of fifty countries. Each country (called a "state") is completely at liberty to choose whatever method of appointing Presidential Electors as they want. According to the US Constitution, the People don't even have a say-- the Legislature of each State gets to choose the method of appointing Electors.
I don't think these guys are going to get very far with a Federal FOIA request. As many people do NOT remember, the United States is not one country; it's fifty little countries that have bound themselves together to further the common good of commerce and defense.
There are no Federal elections in the United States; all elections occur at the State level or below. Since the Federal Government doesn't run elections, they won't have any documentmation about them.
As a matter of fact, it's a historical accident that the People vote for President at all:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
Perhaps it would be better for everyone if the State legislatures just nominated the Electors themselves instead of leaving it to the People.
[I live in Brevard as well] You missed the best part-- unlike touchscreen panels, I don't have to wait for a voting booth to vote! I filled out my ballot standing in line and skipped the booth altogether! Much faster than doing it the "offical" way.:)
The Republicans have pressured the Earth into Deficit Spending. There's no other way to explain it. Expanding social programs like Housing and Eating have caused the Earth to pay out more wood, concrete and food that it can pay for.
Hi. I was one of a handful of people that voted for Howard Phillips in 2000. Up until the debates I was planning to vote for Michael Peroutka, although I am to this days registered as a Republican.
In a great many respects, I feel about the Republicans the way Ronald Reagan felt about the Democrats-- I didn't leave them, they left me! Although I was thrilled with the reforms that were made under the Contract With America, the past few years have been disappointing from a domestic agenda viewpoint. When I discovered the Constitution Party in 2000, I found its back-to-basics view of Federal government to be refreshing and exciting.
Anyway, here come the Democrats, 2004. They say Bush "lied" about Iraq, ignoring coroborating evidence from the United Kingdom, Russia and Israel. They say Bush is planning a "January Surprise" draft, which is utter nonsense. They clamor that more people will die because the ill-concieved "assualt weapons ban" expired. They have such venom for Bush personally that I am shocked.
I just do not undersand the bile and vented spleen at this man. Do I think all his policies are great? No. I'm not a fan of the PATRIOT Act. I'm not a big fan of the Department of Homeland Security (isn't that the job of the DoD?). I'm not a big fan of extra layers of govenment in general. But-- and here's the difference-- I do not think that Bush is the Devil himself [although, these Democrats might actually want an authentic Hellspawn for Commander In Chief]. I think Bush is a man of conviction and moral courage, upright, and respectable qualities. He does not sway back and forth with the whim of public opinion. He's overcome personal weakness and adversity to rise to Governor and then President.
Mike-- I hope you understand that although I am a fan of the Constitution Party and agree with most of the goals it strives for, I cannot stand idly by and let a man like George Bush be unjustly villified. I must, for conscious' sake, cast my ballot in favor of George Bush. I may not agree with all of his policies, but I must stand with the honest and upright.
Do you want proof that the tipping point exists? Do you want proof that the tipping point is a problem? Do you want proof that the tipping point has been reached? Do you want proof that the problem is imminent? Do you want proof that no other affect will appear which counteracts the tipping point?
I'm somewhat familiar with Catastrophe Theory. We have examples around here every year: smelly red tide fish kills. The Conventional Wisdom says that they are, like global warming, totally human-generated events: Nitrogen-rich domestic yard fertilizer runoff causes an explosion in the algae population. After this food supply is used up the algae die, consuming all the oxygen in the water and suffocating the fish.
[CRAP-- hit the wrong button, meant to hit PREVIEW!]
Anyway, I shall continue, this should take more than two minutes.
The bottom line is that there is a proponderance of evidence that the vast change in industry and global human activity has impacted our environment. Lakes are poluted, the oceans are polluted, even harmful chemicals are spreading through the arctic.
The scale of your first assertation is what I disagree with. I do not dispute that human activity such as damming rivers, draining swamps and clearing timberland change the local environment. I think it's the height of vanity to think that mere people could perform permanent damage to the Earth on a scale that environmentalists claim.
Species are dying, there is no question that these things are real. The only question is... what is going to happen?
So this didn't happen before the Industrial Revolution? Where can I go find an eighteenth-century Tyrannosaur?:^)
Finally, if the majority of humanity feels that the environment is important, then to preserve their interests (the planet), regulations must be established to prevent those who do not share their interests from attaining immense profits from destructively exploiting the planet.
I agree with your first point here, and am a member of that group: environmental quality is important. I do NOT think, however, that restrictive regulation how to go about it. Using automobiles as an analogy, note that nobody ever washes a rental car. Rental cars don't get vacuumed. Renters don't change oil. Want real conservation? Let people own their own land!
So as long as the scientists are out for debate on global warming, the government should treat it as seriously as if it were real... whether it is real or not.
Disagree completely. First of all, at least in the United States, it is out of the purview of the Federal Government-- it's not an enumerated power. [Now, if the States want to pass environmental laws, that's their business.]. Second, superstitious obsessions are in themselves distructive. To treat superstitious beliefs as real is to step away from science!
If you don't care, and again, I think that is a legitimate position, you should not be refuting the science and pretending that it is in the best interest of those who do care, but you should simply state "I don't care!"
Oh, but I do care! I care that each year a man with a gun comes and steals my money and spends it on programs that have no substantiated scientific basis! Yes, there's evedince that the environment is changing, but the causality has not been proven.
Do you want proof that the tipping point exists? Do you want proof that the tipping point is a problem? Do you want proof that the tipping point has been reached? Do you want proof that the problem is imminent? Do you want proof that no other affect will appear which counteracts the tipping point?
I'm somewhat familiar with Catastrophe Theory. We have examples around here every year: smelly red tide fish kills. The Conventional Wisdom says that they are, like global warming, totally human-generated events: Nitrogen-rich domestic yard fertilizer runoff causes an explosion in the algae population. After this food supply is used up the algae die, consuming all the oxygen in the water and suffocating the fish.
The main problem is that if the tipping point has been reached, then the first time you might get your 'hard evidence' is the entire population of Florida migrating north.
Tipping point? Proof, please?
Look, just because we had a three- or four-sigma year doesn't mean that it's the end of the world. Has anyone around here taken statistics? I would think that the crowd around here would be better educated.
The language of the article indicates that it's a sham: atmospheric CO2 levels jumped 4 PPM? Four Parts Per Million? First of all, they don't mention what the level was before. Is 4PPM isn't a large number. From a table I found through Google, 4 PPM would be a normal monthly swing.
This is just like the TV news reporting that "unemployment claims skyrocketed 1% this past month." Attaching such emotional language to tiny numbers illustrates their political bent.
I'm just always made so sad when the Constitution Party, the party that takes seriously the ideas of the Founding Fathers and the importance of limited constitutional governemnt loses to the socialists... Sigh.
The reason for high-voltage power distribution isn't load regulation as much as power loss. Wires are resistive and have losses that proportional to the square of the current (Pdiss= I^2 * R).
By distributing electric power at higher voltages, the same total power can be transmitted at a lower current (P= V*I), so that lower line-resistance losses are incurred, increasing efficiency.
We were, of course, some of the first people to know that the Messenger launch had occurred; with TS Alex to our northeast we had winds out of the north and the noise of the launch was exceptionally clear at our house. Woke me up with rattling windows and a low rumble.
My flying club just dropped $14k for a Garmin 430 GPS/NAV/COM radio we put in our Archer. There's absolutely no way that what's in that box is $14k worth of value. Try more like $2k of value as $12k of FAA red tape.
Slashdot Mirror
You never took statistics and probability did you? One data point does not make a trend. Yeah, we had a "three sigma" year, but it doesn't mean that the sky is falling.
Tell me, did Californians start running around screaming "environment!" after the 1989 earthquake?
"Looming climatic chaos?" You have got to be joking.
Cite please? It's the height of vanity to think that anything like us could effect world climates with any significant effect. All the power ever produced by mankind (including nuclear weapons) probably wouldn't equal one hurricane.
Do you even understand the mechanism that causes the Gulf stream to rotate clockwise around the North Atlantic? Why do you think that eastern Asia has warm water like we have here in Florida, but California has cold water, like people have in Europe?
Hed Herring. Nobody doubts that urban areas are visible at night due to lighting. It's a very large stretch to jump from that to "people are EEEVIL." Using your own argument, I add this extension: the Democrats are at fault. Since the people that voted for Kerry live in the areas that show up on your satellite photos, THEY must be the ones responsible for Global Warming and the Death of The Environment.
Oh, you mean like the green Eden that was Communist Eastern Europe? Ever heard of Chernobyl?
No, you're the pig-headed one for (assuming you're not American) thinking that your national leaders are any different than the leaders of the United States. They are out to protect and promote their own country's interests, period. To do anything else would be derilection of duty. It is not in the United States' interest to sign a treaty like the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that does not have fair reciprocation between the signatories. Smaller, less-developed countries signed on not because they want a cleaner world, but becuase they see the KP for what it is-- free money for them!
What in the world did that mean? Really. I don't understand at all!
I don't think drivers CAN be .NET based, since they require access that the Framework doesn't allow or expose.
.NET managed code interface for a parallel port I2C adapter. As near as I can tell, there's no facility for writing managed-code drivers under Windows. On Linux (or any other OS that can run Mono or dotGNU) I can make use of the /dev/ports and /dev/mem devices to implement my functionality (albeit slowly!).
.NET I have ever seen includes information on device drivers. I don't think it can be done, at least not with .NET 1.1.
I have recently been toying with a
No book on
Yet you give no links, and are too afraid to log in?
Meta-monkey-- how did the grandparent post get a +4:Insightful, while your post languishes? Oh, that's right, you're not toeing the Party line.
Somebody already answered your argument below. States aren't bound by the FEDERAL Freedom Of Information Act.
Because the United States is not one country, but is a federation of fifty countries. Each country (called a "state") is completely at liberty to choose whatever method of appointing Presidential Electors as they want. According to the US Constitution, the People don't even have a say-- the Legislature of each State gets to choose the method of appointing Electors.
There are no Federal elections in the United States; all elections occur at the State level or below. Since the Federal Government doesn't run elections, they won't have any documentmation about them.
As a matter of fact, it's a historical accident that the People vote for President at all:
Perhaps it would be better for everyone if the State legislatures just nominated the Electors themselves instead of leaving it to the People.
[I live in Brevard as well] You missed the best part-- unlike touchscreen panels, I don't have to wait for a voting booth to vote! I filled out my ballot standing in line and skipped the booth altogether! Much faster than doing it the "offical" way. :)
The Republicans have pressured the Earth into Deficit Spending. There's no other way to explain it. Expanding social programs like Housing and Eating have caused the Earth to pay out more wood, concrete and food that it can pay for.
Hi. I was one of a handful of people that voted for Howard Phillips in 2000. Up until the debates I was planning to vote for Michael Peroutka, although I am to this days registered as a Republican.
In a great many respects, I feel about the Republicans the way Ronald Reagan felt about the Democrats-- I didn't leave them, they left me! Although I was thrilled with the reforms that were made under the Contract With America, the past few years have been disappointing from a domestic agenda viewpoint. When I discovered the Constitution Party in 2000, I found its back-to-basics view of Federal government to be refreshing and exciting.
Anyway, here come the Democrats, 2004. They say Bush "lied" about Iraq, ignoring coroborating evidence from the United Kingdom, Russia and Israel. They say Bush is planning a "January Surprise" draft, which is utter nonsense. They clamor that more people will die because the ill-concieved "assualt weapons ban" expired. They have such venom for Bush personally that I am shocked.
I just do not undersand the bile and vented spleen at this man. Do I think all his policies are great? No. I'm not a fan of the PATRIOT Act. I'm not a big fan of the Department of Homeland Security (isn't that the job of the DoD?). I'm not a big fan of extra layers of govenment in general. But-- and here's the difference-- I do not think that Bush is the Devil himself [although, these Democrats might actually want an authentic Hellspawn for Commander In Chief]. I think Bush is a man of conviction and moral courage, upright, and respectable qualities. He does not sway back and forth with the whim of public opinion. He's overcome personal weakness and adversity to rise to Governor and then President.
Mike-- I hope you understand that although I am a fan of the Constitution Party and agree with most of the goals it strives for, I cannot stand idly by and let a man like George Bush be unjustly villified. I must, for conscious' sake, cast my ballot in favor of George Bush. I may not agree with all of his policies, but I must stand with the honest and upright.
I'm somewhat familiar with Catastrophe Theory. We have examples around here every year: smelly red tide fish kills. The Conventional Wisdom says that they are, like global warming, totally human-generated events: Nitrogen-rich domestic yard fertilizer runoff causes an explosion in the algae population. After this food supply is used up the algae die, consuming all the oxygen in the water and suffocating the fish.
[CRAP-- hit the wrong button, meant to hit PREVIEW!]
Anyway, I shall continue, this should take more than two minutes.
The scale of your first assertation is what I disagree with. I do not dispute that human activity such as damming rivers, draining swamps and clearing timberland change the local environment. I think it's the height of vanity to think that mere people could perform permanent damage to the Earth on a scale that environmentalists claim.
So this didn't happen before the Industrial Revolution? Where can I go find an eighteenth-century Tyrannosaur?
I agree with your first point here, and am a member of that group: environmental quality is important. I do NOT think, however, that restrictive regulation how to go about it. Using automobiles as an analogy, note that nobody ever washes a rental car. Rental cars don't get vacuumed. Renters don't change oil. Want real conservation? Let people own their own land!
Disagree completely. First of all, at least in the United States, it is out of the purview of the Federal Government-- it's not an enumerated power. [Now, if the States want to pass environmental laws, that's their business.]. Second, superstitious obsessions are in themselves distructive. To treat superstitious beliefs as real is to step away from science!
Oh, but I do care! I care that each year a man with a gun comes and steals my money and spends it on programs that have no substantiated scientific basis! Yes, there's evedince that the environment is changing, but the causality has not been proven.
I'm somewhat familiar with Catastrophe Theory. We have examples around here every year: smelly red tide fish kills. The Conventional Wisdom says that they are, like global warming, totally human-generated events: Nitrogen-rich domestic yard fertilizer runoff causes an explosion in the algae population. After this food supply is used up the algae die, consuming all the oxygen in the water and suffocating the fish.
asuffield: All I can say is +5: Insightful. I couldn't have said it better myself.
Tipping point? Proof, please?
Look, just because we had a three- or four-sigma year doesn't mean that it's the end of the world. Has anyone around here taken statistics? I would think that the crowd around here would be better educated.
The language of the article indicates that it's a sham: atmospheric CO2 levels jumped 4 PPM? Four Parts Per Million? First of all, they don't mention what the level was before. Is 4PPM isn't a large number. From a table I found through Google, 4 PPM would be a normal monthly swing.
This is just like the TV news reporting that "unemployment claims skyrocketed 1% this past month." Attaching such emotional language to tiny numbers illustrates their political bent.
The NEI doesn't seem to have any form of magnification; so we'll have a VERY SMALL picture of something VERY FAR away?
Actually, they are. They're more than two octaves apart. The span between 12 and 60Hz is an 80% bandwidth, a very wide range.
That's generally true here in the United States, as well.
I'm just always made so sad when the Constitution Party, the party that takes seriously the ideas of the Founding Fathers and the importance of limited constitutional governemnt loses to the socialists... Sigh.
The reason for high-voltage power distribution isn't load regulation as much as power loss. Wires are resistive and have losses that proportional to the square of the current (Pdiss= I^2 * R).
By distributing electric power at higher voltages, the same total power can be transmitted at a lower current (P= V*I), so that lower line-resistance losses are incurred, increasing efficiency.
We were, of course, some of the first people to know that the Messenger launch had occurred; with TS Alex to our northeast we had winds out of the north and the noise of the launch was exceptionally clear at our house. Woke me up with rattling windows and a low rumble.
My flying club just dropped $14k for a Garmin 430 GPS/NAV/COM radio we put in our Archer. There's absolutely no way that what's in that box is $14k worth of value. Try more like $2k of value as $12k of FAA red tape.