There are many spectacularly successful cures for cancers that simply enable the body to reverse the process that started the tumor in the first place.
My father-in-law had a 10cm lung tumour last year and in 23 days the tumor shrank 50% and was gone in 60 days. The "magic"? The juice of 1.5kg of carrots daily.
Oncologists just laugh and shake their heads because their information network doesn't have room for anything outside the feeds from their petro-chemical overlords. Yes, I said it. They're just being kept in the dark on purpose, minions in the war for the financial exploitation of the world's ignoramuses.
Are these people really so dense, or do they just believe that we are?
There is no consensus by long stretch, regardless of how much they say there is. Until the science, not the waffling about how great these self-appointed pseudo-scientists are, is clear and more importantly, until their computer models actually match the temperatures measured (without blatantly hacking the numbers to suit their agenda), there will be no agreement and nothing is settled.
Attached to a report that once again the GLOBAL temperature of the world has broken a record again for the nth consecutive time you say "change? There is no change."
A record for the last 65 years... Uhm, the earth is older than 100 years
Much older.
So much older that these puny little 65 years can't even be shown on a timeline that shows the earth's total existence. That alone should tell you that the claim of a record is a nutter's claim. Yes, we may not have had thermometers all around earth at the time of the Romans or earlier, but we have scientific ways of determining a lot of data from the time. So, no, it's not a record. It's a little high in a lot of recent low, that's all.
And you question: who is to profit? Well the current energy producerrs (oil) are to profit from the status quo. Alternative energy producers from a change. Now who has the most money?
Of course all incumbents will protect their business as best they can and if a newcomer tries to steal their business with fraud and corruption they are entitled to defend themselves. The fact is that the incumbents also don't have clean hands, so it's a case of Dirty Harry versus Al Capone. The bigger gangsters win.
So then it all reverts back to science. Not reporting about science. Not court cases where a pseudo scientist tries to sue his critics for defamation. Not newspapers' interpretation of science. It's all about the actual science. And to learn who's talking trash and who's correct, you have to read the research and then the criticism/reviews.
Very little of the Anthropogenic Global Warming (incorrrectly renamed "climate change" by the media) is based on proven science and most of it is based on faulty climate models that have not even once been able to actually match measured temperatures, yet they are used to predict the catastrophic collapse of the world as we know it in a few (10, 20, 50 or 100) years.
It's a pompous and preposterous, extremely arrogant claim and even more so when they drive to impose taxes on those that are much poorer that the imposers (or should I rather say imposters?) and whose very livelihoods are seriously affected by the lack of consistent low cost energy that could be available to them otherwise.
Of course you didn't read any of the material that shows that the postulations that the climate models that are driving the climate change hysteria are built upon are wrong, did you? You also are not aware that the IPCC reports consistently say that we just don't know and that it's all speculation, but then the catastrophist media prophets simply cite the alarmist clauses out of context and all the non-reading (and thus practically illiterate) masses go: "Eeeeh, we're all gonna fry, we're all gonna die!"
You should start with the classic take of Chicken Little...:-P
the DCMA is broken in the first place. But you only have yourself to blame as a nation. The facists have silently taken over your country and you're letting them. What are you going to do about it?
Just because MS is noisy and nosey (requiring registration of their products) doesn't mean that they're the fastest growing or most popular overall. Ubuntu Linux is running on more than a billion devices already and that's a conservative estimate. Also, the other virtual machines solutions are fast, growing and free. Think Proxmox, LCX and more. Hey, even MS have embraced a lot of this, so it's time to rethink your assumptions, like you have with your Xen closing remark.
Below are some Ubuntu figures, check for the number of VM's fired up every minute. Seems AMD have a clue about what's happening in the market after all
That's what you say and is purely your subjective opinion. There are excellent ways of dealing with diseases, without using vaccines. Proper nutrition is a primary one. You probably know little about that topic, so I won't engage you any further.
You mentioned the problem quite neatly: "government-granted". The problem in the modern US is that the government has forgotten (conveniently) what it's mandate is and has taken on a life of it's own, serving only that one that can pay the most towards their election campaigns and other schemes. That's not capitalism were seeing any more, it's fascism.
The only role of government in communications is to facilitate the record keeping of where conduits and cables are underground and manage frequency (above ground). The granting of monopolies is never ever justified, albeit that in same cases defacto monopolies exists. If that is because of lack of competitors, then good for the one that has the monopoly. But if it is due to government regulation and meddling, then it must be destroyed!
1) Global Climate change is disruptive and people will unnecessarily die or live worse-off because of the resulting displacement of peoples.
Total speculation, solely based on computer models that are wrong from the ground up. Ignoring the laws of physics is always foolish, but none as much as what the warmist brigade is doing.
2) We can be carbon neutral in 30 years if we create large scale subsidies in existing state of the art in nuclear power. (oh and throw in a few renewable sources for up to about 30% of the total requirements)
And
3) If you think we can be carbon neutral and meet the energy needs of civilization with just subsidized renewables then you are the same as a "climate denier" because pretending to solve a problem (to get your extremely inadequate pet projects funded) is in effect no better than denying the problem and just waiting to run out of economically viable fossil fuels.
Carbon Neutrality is not based on science. It's based on the fertile imagination of a few, which a whole horde of lemmings following after, of which very few have actually taken the trouble to verify that the premise that underlies all the projections is valid. It turns out CO2 is a coolant, the greenhouse effect does not apply to an open system like a planet's atmosphere and there is no relationship with the amount of so-called greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and global temperature, except that eventually an increase in temperature is followed by 'n rise in CO2 level. The former is definitely not caused by an increase of the latter.
So in the end all this uproar about pre-industrial levels bla bla and climate bla bla and warming bla bla bla, is just a lot of hot air.
Temperature has gone up 0.20C in the past 18 years.
So what, even if it did, it's conclusively proven that CO2 is not the cause of temperature fluctuations. The earth's temperature is essentially a function of pressure of the atmosphere due to gravity, plus a little influence of the sun, it seems.
You're assuming that most people believe that CO2 is a poison and is going to fry us alive! On the contrary, by far the most of us know that this is a politically motived and threat-and-rewards-enabled charade, so we don't care one bit about this whole circus. EPA circus. IPCC circus. AGW circus.
You don't understand, yes, you're quite right. The premise of the whole emissions thing is wrong. CO2 is not a problem and neither are Nx gasses. Now unburnt fuel is a real problem, but that can be dealt with, it is being dealt with, in most modern cars.
The fact that VW cheated the system is cause for concern, but the ridiculous unscientific assumptions that the regulations are based on, they are real cause for concern!. Say No to COP21!
CO2 emissions of cars are pretty much irrelevant! CO, NO and NO2 are worse, but since they are heavier that air, they don't hang around for long either. It's their corrosive nature which may cause the only real problem in the long term, but that is hardly a big problem!
For 18 years the world has not warmed, yet CO2 has increased substantially. On the other hand, the amount of CO2 in the air is miniscule. Just understanding how little CO2 actually is in our atmosphere shows how totally ridiculous the claims of the catastrophic warmists are, but don't let logic and reason get in the way of a good witch hunt!
Just to stir the pot a little more: Say No to COP21! Think of the children!:-P How will they pay all the carbon tax their parents foisted on them??
Chromium uses roughly twice the memory on my Ubuntu desktop than Firefox! Similarly configured and similar plugins added... Firefox is relatively stable. I had some issues after installing the pepperflash implementation, but that's sorted now and it works just fine for me.
The fundamental premise that underlies the whole IPCC "science" is false. An atmospheric greenhouse does not exist, at least not in the way described by the greenhouse gas fear brigade. Yes, the science is clear and anyone taking the time to read it will see that the whole carbon reduction frenzy is nothing more than a circus for and of the bamboozled.
That's what happens when people start taking Salon seriously on matters of science, like climate and weather in this case. Hell, one can't even take the IPCC, who actually claim to be a science based club (rather than a political action committee, which they really are), seriously on their reports, so go figure!
Let's all welcome the USA to the rest of the world! We have been using ICD-10 for a long time and nothing has crashed, no end of the world meltdown has occurred and better stats are indeed the order of the day.
>>"If the science was as good as Mann and his bunch of lynch-mob fans have claimed, it would be indisputable"
Translation: if Mann can not convince unreasonable people, then this means he is factually in error.
Nope. There are no scientists that dispute the laws of gravity. They have been established solidly. There are however many learned and accredited scientists who do offer credible counter arguments, data and analysis to Mann's version of reality. There is a difference between the two and for good reason: The former is settled, the latter not even by a wild stretch of the imagination. The problem is, as soon as a scientist says there's something wrong with AGW theories, a plethora of shills, paid minions and other members of the afore-mentioned lynch mob, make such a racket that it is very difficult to hear and see common sense and proper debate with which the man in the street can make up his mind. It's the suppression of scientific dissent, the defunding threats and risk of getting fired, that is the true cause for concern, not the small chance that AGW might actually be happening. It's the killing-off of true science and the scientific method by "consensus science" at the hand of mass media that is alarming in every sense of the word.
Slashdot Mirror
There are many spectacularly successful cures for cancers that simply enable the body to reverse the process that started the tumor in the first place.
My father-in-law had a 10cm lung tumour last year and in 23 days the tumor shrank 50% and was gone in 60 days. The "magic"? The juice of 1.5kg of carrots daily.
Oncologists just laugh and shake their heads because their information network doesn't have room for anything outside the feeds from their petro-chemical overlords. Yes, I said it. They're just being kept in the dark on purpose, minions in the war for the financial exploitation of the world's ignoramuses.
Get started here... and many others.
Are these people really so dense, or do they just believe that we are?
There is no consensus by long stretch, regardless of how much they say there is. Until the science, not the waffling about how great these self-appointed pseudo-scientists are, is clear and more importantly, until their computer models actually match the temperatures measured (without blatantly hacking the numbers to suit their agenda), there will be no agreement and nothing is settled .
Wait, wait! Mix it with carbon to create a marvellous earth greening gas called CO2! It's hugely beneficial for life on earth!
Anecdotal. Do you have an analysis and explanation from Insurers?
I thought not.
Ugh. You have it pretty bad, don't you?
Attached to a report that once again the GLOBAL temperature of the world has broken a record again for the nth consecutive time you say "change? There is no change."
A record for the last 65 years... Uhm, the earth is older than 100 years
Much older.
So much older that these puny little 65 years can't even be shown on a timeline that shows the earth's total existence. That alone should tell you that the claim of a record is a nutter's claim. Yes, we may not have had thermometers all around earth at the time of the Romans or earlier, but we have scientific ways of determining a lot of data from the time. So, no, it's not a record. It's a little high in a lot of recent low, that's all.
And you question: who is to profit? Well the current energy producerrs (oil) are to profit from the status quo. Alternative energy producers from a change. Now who has the most money?
Of course all incumbents will protect their business as best they can and if a newcomer tries to steal their business with fraud and corruption they are entitled to defend themselves. The fact is that the incumbents also don't have clean hands, so it's a case of Dirty Harry versus Al Capone. The bigger gangsters win.
So then it all reverts back to science. Not reporting about science. Not court cases where a pseudo scientist tries to sue his critics for defamation. Not newspapers' interpretation of science. It's all about the actual science. And to learn who's talking trash and who's correct, you have to read the research and then the criticism/reviews.
Very little of the Anthropogenic Global Warming (incorrrectly renamed "climate change" by the media) is based on proven science and most of it is based on faulty climate models that have not even once been able to actually match measured temperatures, yet they are used to predict the catastrophic collapse of the world as we know it in a few (10, 20, 50 or 100) years.
It's a pompous and preposterous, extremely arrogant claim and even more so when they drive to impose taxes on those that are much poorer that the imposers (or should I rather say imposters?) and whose very livelihoods are seriously affected by the lack of consistent low cost energy that could be available to them otherwise.
Sigh.
Of course you didn't read any of the material that shows that the postulations that the climate models that are driving the climate change hysteria are built upon are wrong, did you? You also are not aware that the IPCC reports consistently say that we just don't know and that it's all speculation, but then the catastrophist media prophets simply cite the alarmist clauses out of context and all the non-reading (and thus practically illiterate) masses go: "Eeeeh, we're all gonna fry, we're all gonna die!"
You should start with the classic take of Chicken Little... :-P
the DCMA is broken in the first place. But you only have yourself to blame as a nation. The facists have silently taken over your country and you're letting them. What are you going to do about it?
This case goes in the dustbin with cold fusion, Vaccine-MMR-autism, and most of the anti AGW publications.
Sorry pal, but that last one has abundant scientific support and it's the AGW crowd that will be relegated to the trash can in due course.
Just because MS is noisy and nosey (requiring registration of their products) doesn't mean that they're the fastest growing or most popular overall. Ubuntu Linux is running on more than a billion devices already and that's a conservative estimate. Also, the other virtual machines solutions are fast, growing and free. Think Proxmox, LCX and more. Hey, even MS have embraced a lot of this, so it's time to rethink your assumptions, like you have with your Xen closing remark.
Below are some Ubuntu figures, check for the number of VM's fired up every minute. Seems AMD have a clue about what's happening in the market after all
http://blog.dustinkirkland.com/2015/12/more-people-use-ubuntu-than-anyone.html
http://articles.mercola.com/si...
That's what you say and is purely your subjective opinion. There are excellent ways of dealing with diseases, without using vaccines. Proper nutrition is a primary one. You probably know little about that topic, so I won't engage you any further.
The problem in the modern US is that the government has forgotten (conveniently) what it's mandate is
bah!
"what its mandate is..."
You mentioned the problem quite neatly: "government-granted". The problem in the modern US is that the government has forgotten (conveniently) what it's mandate is and has taken on a life of it's own, serving only that one that can pay the most towards their election campaigns and other schemes. That's not capitalism were seeing any more, it's fascism.
The only role of government in communications is to facilitate the record keeping of where conduits and cables are underground and manage frequency (above ground). The granting of monopolies is never ever justified, albeit that in same cases defacto monopolies exists. If that is because of lack of competitors, then good for the one that has the monopoly. But if it is due to government regulation and meddling, then it must be destroyed!
So what?
1) Global Climate change is disruptive and people will unnecessarily die or live worse-off because of the resulting displacement of peoples.
Total speculation, solely based on computer models that are wrong from the ground up. Ignoring the laws of physics is always foolish, but none as much as what the warmist brigade is doing.
2) We can be carbon neutral in 30 years if we create large scale subsidies in existing state of the art in nuclear power. (oh and throw in a few renewable sources for up to about 30% of the total requirements)
And
3) If you think we can be carbon neutral and meet the energy needs of civilization with just subsidized renewables then you are the same as a "climate denier" because pretending to solve a problem (to get your extremely inadequate pet projects funded) is in effect no better than denying the problem and just waiting to run out of economically viable fossil fuels.
Carbon Neutrality is not based on science. It's based on the fertile imagination of a few, which a whole horde of lemmings following after, of which very few have actually taken the trouble to verify that the premise that underlies all the projections is valid. It turns out CO2 is a coolant, the greenhouse effect does not apply to an open system like a planet's atmosphere and there is no relationship with the amount of so-called greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and global temperature, except that eventually an increase in temperature is followed by 'n rise in CO2 level. The former is definitely not caused by an increase of the latter.
So in the end all this uproar about pre-industrial levels bla bla and climate bla bla and warming bla bla bla, is just a lot of hot air.
Temperature has gone up 0.20C in the past 18 years.
So what, even if it did, it's conclusively proven that CO2 is not the cause of temperature fluctuations. The earth's temperature is essentially a function of pressure of the atmosphere due to gravity, plus a little influence of the sun, it seems.
Please provide proof.
You're assuming that most people believe that CO2 is a poison and is going to fry us alive! On the contrary, by far the most of us know that this is a politically motived and threat-and-rewards-enabled charade, so we don't care one bit about this whole circus. EPA circus. IPCC circus. AGW circus.
Yawn.
No, it means driving happily while the dumb schmucks at the EPA are snoozing in their recliners....
You don't understand, yes, you're quite right. The premise of the whole emissions thing is wrong. CO2 is not a problem and neither are Nx gasses. Now unburnt fuel is a real problem, but that can be dealt with, it is being dealt with, in most modern cars.
The fact that VW cheated the system is cause for concern, but the ridiculous unscientific assumptions that the regulations are based on, they are real cause for concern! . Say No to COP21!
CO2 emissions of cars are pretty much irrelevant! CO, NO and NO2 are worse, but since they are heavier that air, they don't hang around for long either. It's their corrosive nature which may cause the only real problem in the long term, but that is hardly a big problem!
For 18 years the world has not warmed , yet CO2 has increased substantially. On the other hand, the amount of CO2 in the air is miniscule. Just understanding how little CO2 actually is in our atmosphere shows how totally ridiculous the claims of the catastrophic warmists are, but don't let logic and reason get in the way of a good witch hunt!
Just to stir the pot a little more: Say No to COP21! Think of the children! :-P How will they pay all the carbon tax their parents foisted on them??
Chromium uses roughly twice the memory on my Ubuntu desktop than Firefox! Similarly configured and similar plugins added... Firefox is relatively stable. I had some issues after installing the pepperflash implementation, but that's sorted now and it works just fine for me.
The fundamental premise that underlies the whole IPCC "science" is false. An atmospheric greenhouse does not exist, at least not in the way described by the greenhouse gas fear brigade. Yes, the science is clear and anyone taking the time to read it will see that the whole carbon reduction frenzy is nothing more than a circus for and of the bamboozled.
Dr Christopher Essex says: "I have been at this for more than 30 years. I got to madness as a conclusion long ago. But now I have accepted that humans are inherently limited...". He wrote about it 10 years ago in his book Taken by Storm. Now Joseph E. Postma has come to the same conclusion.
Why don't people open their eyes, read the material, and stop this ridiculous scam?
That's what happens when people start taking Salon seriously on matters of science, like climate and weather in this case. Hell, one can't even take the IPCC, who actually claim to be a science based club (rather than a political action committee, which they really are), seriously on their reports, so go figure!
Let's all welcome the USA to the rest of the world! We have been using ICD-10 for a long time and nothing has crashed, no end of the world meltdown has occurred and better stats are indeed the order of the day.
>>"If the science was as good as Mann and his bunch of lynch-mob fans have claimed, it would be indisputable"
Translation: if Mann can not convince unreasonable people, then this means he is factually in error.
Nope. There are no scientists that dispute the laws of gravity. They have been established solidly. There are however many learned and accredited scientists who do offer credible counter arguments, data and analysis to Mann's version of reality. There is a difference between the two and for good reason: The former is settled, the latter not even by a wild stretch of the imagination. The problem is, as soon as a scientist says there's something wrong with AGW theories, a plethora of shills, paid minions and other members of the afore-mentioned lynch mob, make such a racket that it is very difficult to hear and see common sense and proper debate with which the man in the street can make up his mind. It's the suppression of scientific dissent, the defunding threats and risk of getting fired, that is the true cause for concern, not the small chance that AGW might actually be happening. It's the killing-off of true science and the scientific method by "consensus science" at the hand of mass media that is alarming in every sense of the word.