Fact: the weather (which believed to be in close association with the climate) has been responsible for more plane crashes in the last 10 years than al Qaeda.
Something that produces energy from the decay of radioisotopes is called a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) whereas a battery is an array of electrochemical cells for electricity storage.
You didn't read the article.
The batteries use Sulfur-35 which is a beta emitter. Aka, electrons. They do not use thermocouples at all.
I realise you didn't mean fascism literally, but if you meant fascism as in an overly paternalistic state I think Australia beats the States hands down. A lot of comes from risk mitigation strategies, but a lot of it is simply directed social policies. Ok, so Redbull has the same amount of caffeine as a can of coke. It's illegal to drive a car without a seat belt. Or a pogo stick without a helmet. Or buying a beer in a glass. Or any alcopop. Generally, if something is considered a vague risk its either banned outright or taxed out of existence as a knee-jerk reaction to quiet down the media.
In Australia, a good solid media beat up can lead to a bill in parliament to "fix" whatever is perceived to be a problem. And its not a single party to blame either, its just how things are done now.
The States is still the land of the *mostly* free.
If you are talking purely carbon dioxide, the prius will be effectively the same CO2 output on petrol or electricity.
This is because ~50% of electricity is generated by coal in the states, although it varies quite a lot between individual states.
However in a coal-loving country like Australia, especially a state like Queensland, the car will actually produce half the carbons burning petrol than it will on pure electric mode. (Queensland is 98% coal powered.)
So yeah, that warm and fuzzy feeling you have driving an electric car is shared by the planet, if you get my drift (and accept AGW theory).
Simple test: Can a politician can deliver a heart felt apology for mistakes made by the British Government and convince someone hearing it that its actually sincere.
In 50 years nobody has passed the test, I won't hold be holding my breath for this one.
Video games have no prison.
on
Virtual Bank Woes
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Because you'd think a virtual bank would be managed better than a real life bank. Apparently, they're managed the same way.
Would you?
The only reason real bankers aren't stealing billions is because they don't want to go to pound-you-in-the-ass federal prison.
Take that away and bingo, everyone's a Christopher Skase.
Perhaps they've made 100 years worth of improvements to the car from a reliability and usability point of view.
TFA is wrong in saying that 100 years ago steam cars were easier than petrol ICE cars, but that's not to say petrol ICE was easy. The management lingo term "turn-key" was invented a long time AFTER cars were invented that's for sure. Cause cars back then weren't exactly "turn-key" regardless of the engine under the bonnet.
This video of Jay Leno's sort of shows what steam cars were like, though this one is 1925.
And he also raises some interesting points, does the EPA do good science? Does the GISS do good science? What about the IPCC, NDCC, etc?
The later two are both funded primarily to study climate change, and in fact neither would exist without the theory. Isn't that a conflict of interest of the same order as the Tabacco Institute? (Not saying they are equivalents, just that the conflict of interests are pretty similar.)
Science is testing, testing and more testing. You eliminate variables, then you test some more.
You can then say if your data fits with your hypothesis. Then you submit it to a journal and people pick it to pieces to find the mistakes. They retest, they tweak, they report.
No theory should ever be considered absolutely concrete, and to be honest from what I've read (and I have read) there are many, many unknowns going on in the climactic systems that we haven't even begun to quantify. I think its arrogance alone that leads to this apparently unquestionable theory of human caused climate change. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying its not happening, I'm just saying we can't talk in absolutes. It's unscientific, and anyone who says it is absolute isn't a very good scientist.
To quote a sometimes controversial bloke from another time: "I have steadily endeavored to keep my mind free so as to give up any hypothesis, however much beloved and I cannot resist forming one on every subject, as soon as the facts are shown to be opposed to it." - Charles Darwin - Creator of the Darwin awards
Slashdot Mirror
Logic is sound.
If she gets her nuts out her face could blow up.
Fact: the weather (which believed to be in close association with the climate) has been responsible for more plane crashes in the last 10 years than al Qaeda.
It's a numbers game, really.
And this flight didn't originate in the US. The TSA is a US domestic organisation, so they have to rely on the departing countries security measures.
ignorance is bliss.
43 minutes of TV might be worth $0.68 cents to the station, but its worth a lot more than that to the advertisers. (Well, with ads anyway.)
He was just trying to avoid paying Oxford University Press by using a free alternative.
Something that produces energy from the decay of radioisotopes is called a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) whereas a battery is an array of electrochemical cells for electricity storage.
You didn't read the article.
The batteries use Sulfur-35 which is a beta emitter. Aka, electrons. They do not use thermocouples at all.
Read about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betavoltaics
I realise you didn't mean fascism literally, but if you meant fascism as in an overly paternalistic state I think Australia beats the States hands down. A lot of comes from risk mitigation strategies, but a lot of it is simply directed social policies. Ok, so Redbull has the same amount of caffeine as a can of coke. It's illegal to drive a car without a seat belt. Or a pogo stick without a helmet. Or buying a beer in a glass. Or any alcopop. Generally, if something is considered a vague risk its either banned outright or taxed out of existence as a knee-jerk reaction to quiet down the media.
In Australia, a good solid media beat up can lead to a bill in parliament to "fix" whatever is perceived to be a problem. And its not a single party to blame either, its just how things are done now.
The States is still the land of the *mostly* free.
Ha! And what about Kiwi fruit?
Yeah, but once the kiwi fruit appeared in Australia, it became Australian. Same with Russell Crowe, Sam Neill and Crowded House.
Probably why Apple is so keen to defend its logo.
so is that a defense if you drive through a kindergarten?
you know, i didn't have both hands on the wheel honest ... out of curiosity i mean...
*shifty eyes*
If you are talking purely carbon dioxide, the prius will be effectively the same CO2 output on petrol or electricity.
This is because ~50% of electricity is generated by coal in the states, although it varies quite a lot between individual states.
However in a coal-loving country like Australia, especially a state like Queensland, the car will actually produce half the carbons burning petrol than it will on pure electric mode. (Queensland is 98% coal powered.)
So yeah, that warm and fuzzy feeling you have driving an electric car is shared by the planet, if you get my drift (and accept AGW theory).
Actually in studies I think its shown that in co-ed schools the boys perform better, the girls perform worse.
Hemp seed is all well and good, but its a long way to the shop for a bag of Cheetos.
A 670kg payload ought to be enough for anybody.
Simple test: Can a politician can deliver a heart felt apology for mistakes made by the British Government and convince someone hearing it that its actually sincere.
In 50 years nobody has passed the test, I won't hold be holding my breath for this one.
Because you'd think a virtual bank would be managed better than a real life bank. Apparently, they're managed the same way.
Would you?
The only reason real bankers aren't stealing billions is because they don't want to go to pound-you-in-the-ass federal prison.
Take that away and bingo, everyone's a Christopher Skase.
Perhaps they've made 100 years worth of improvements to the car from a reliability and usability point of view.
TFA is wrong in saying that 100 years ago steam cars were easier than petrol ICE cars, but that's not to say petrol ICE was easy. The management lingo term "turn-key" was invented a long time AFTER cars were invented that's for sure. Cause cars back then weren't exactly "turn-key" regardless of the engine under the bonnet.
This video of Jay Leno's sort of shows what steam cars were like, though this one is 1925.
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/video_player.shtml?vid=213453
http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/06/27/2314213
That's the post the parent was referring to.
And he also raises some interesting points, does the EPA do good science? Does the GISS do good science? What about the IPCC, NDCC, etc?
The later two are both funded primarily to study climate change, and in fact neither would exist without the theory. Isn't that a conflict of interest of the same order as the Tabacco Institute? (Not saying they are equivalents, just that the conflict of interests are pretty similar.)
It shouldn't be a "belief". That isn't science.
Science is testing, testing and more testing. You eliminate variables, then you test some more.
You can then say if your data fits with your hypothesis. Then you submit it to a journal and people pick it to pieces to find the mistakes. They retest, they tweak, they report.
No theory should ever be considered absolutely concrete, and to be honest from what I've read (and I have read) there are many, many unknowns going on in the climactic systems that we haven't even begun to quantify. I think its arrogance alone that leads to this apparently unquestionable theory of human caused climate change. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying its not happening, I'm just saying we can't talk in absolutes. It's unscientific, and anyone who says it is absolute isn't a very good scientist.
To quote a sometimes controversial bloke from another time:
"I have steadily endeavored to keep my mind free so as to give up any hypothesis, however much beloved and I cannot resist forming one on every subject, as soon as the facts are shown to be opposed to it."
- Charles Darwin - Creator of the Darwin awards
Ending all wars and stabilizing human population
Aren't those near diametrically opposite actions? Last time I checked, wars or plagues are some of the best checks on population growth.
Yeah, but last time I checked wiping out the human race wasn't part of the green movement's long term goals.