the people who drive the shortest distances, who would benefit the most right now from a full-electric vehicle, also tend to have the least access to charging. that kinda puts up a barrier with regards to full-electric vehicles.
i live in NYC, and although i work at home (and would try to take public transit if i needed to commute), if i had to drive to work i'd only have to go a pretty short distance round trip. an electric would be perfect for that.
thing is, like most new yorkers, i live in an apartment and my car is parked on the street. i don't have a garage or a driveway to run a cord out to.
DDT was voluntarily removed from use by a number of signing countries for agricultural use. hardcore ag use was stupid and overkill and started breeding DDT-resistant mosquitos.
anti-disease vector use was never banned. ever. the WHO did, and continues to, promote its use in malarial areas, but also pushes a schedule of rotating insecticides to avoid resistance. india ignored that schedule and has had a big issue in the past with resistant mosquitos.
even carlson, the bugbear of the "the DDT ban killed millions!!1" crew, never advocated for a worldwide ban, or any ban, for malaria control.
we banned its use in the US because of its environmental impact. we don't have a malaria problem in the US.
if that's what you took from my explanation then you're a moron. you do realize that something that can be an effect of a cause can also be a cause itself of a further effect, don't you?
just because warming releases CO2 which can cause further warming doesn't mean that CO2 caused the warming in the first place, nor does it mean that that CO2 can't effect further warming.
hey, if we knew what the hell we were doing it wouldn't be so bad. unfortunately we've been dumping tons of CO2 into the atmosphere willy-nilly and certainly not from the standpoint of trying to exactly counter an eventual ice age.
it's like setting someone's house on fire accidentally then being all 'well hey, winter is coming up so i guess i did you a favor!'
However, it seems that the carbon dioxide levels increase about 40 to 50 years *after* the temperature increase.
you've bought into a classic denier talking point.
just because during the natural ice age cycle CO2 lags temperature does not mean that CO2 doesn't cause warming. it's just that in the natural cycle CO2 doesn't just magically appear en masse, its released by an increase in temperature brought about by other changes.
during natural warming, increases in solar insolation due to changes in the earth's axis/obliquity/etc causes melting of ice which adds CO2 to the atmosphere. this causes warming which creates a positive loop that leads to a warm interglacial period.
on the other side of the cycle, changes in the other direction with regard to solar insolation cause ice to form, locking up CO2, which lowers the warming effect creating another loop. the CO2 level again lags temperature.
right now we're screwing that up by pumping sh1t tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. that is not a natural phenomenon, its measurably anthropogenic. and its causing warming by the same basic mechanism that occurs during the natural cycle.
we're supposed to be past the peak of the current interglacial. CO2 levels should, under the natural cycle of things, be going down. instead they're skyrocketing because we've spent the last coupla thousand years cutting down forests, destroying grasslands and burning carbon.
i saw one of those in front of my house a few days ago with the autobot badge and everything. i thought it was some lamer's attempt to make his car look cool.
but jesus, its an official version of the car?? man, no wonder GM sunk.
What Apple is trying to prevent is people connecting a Palm and getting a tab in iTunes that has multiple occurrences of the word "iPod". This can be seen as a subtle case of trademark dilution
i have to say, that's a really, really interesting way of looking at it. i hadn't thought of that.
that's why I was suggesting the fear is pretty irrational to begin with. That, however, is not going to stop anyone who wants to believe that a doctor would do so
these are the same sort of people who believe that adam and eve rode dinosaurs to church. ignore them.
if somebody else does all the work leading up to it, yes. a lot goes into coming up with a whole new energy transport system and the energy companies aren't too keen in going through all that.
now, if someone else starts the ball rolling and others come in and get a good infrastructure in place, they'll step in and buy them all up.
supply is only cheap and guaranteed after lots of hard work and the big biz doesn't want to do that hard work unless the supply is already cheap and guaranteed.
wha? you produce vitamin D in your skin. you get vitamin A from plant sources, pro vitamines like carotenes. vitamin E is available in avocado and nuts. vitamin K in bananas.
Slashdot Mirror
the people who drive the shortest distances, who would benefit the most right now from a full-electric vehicle, also tend to have the least access to charging. that kinda puts up a barrier with regards to full-electric vehicles.
i live in NYC, and although i work at home (and would try to take public transit if i needed to commute), if i had to drive to work i'd only have to go a pretty short distance round trip. an electric would be perfect for that.
thing is, like most new yorkers, i live in an apartment and my car is parked on the street. i don't have a garage or a driveway to run a cord out to.
actually, this is evidence that climatologists' theoretical models work.
you're an idiot.
DDT was voluntarily removed from use by a number of signing countries for agricultural use. hardcore ag use was stupid and overkill and started breeding DDT-resistant mosquitos.
anti-disease vector use was never banned. ever. the WHO did, and continues to, promote its use in malarial areas, but also pushes a schedule of rotating insecticides to avoid resistance. india ignored that schedule and has had a big issue in the past with resistant mosquitos.
even carlson, the bugbear of the "the DDT ban killed millions!!1" crew, never advocated for a worldwide ban, or any ban, for malaria control.
we banned its use in the US because of its environmental impact. we don't have a malaria problem in the US.
that sound you hear is NoYob's spirit being completely crushed.
bravo, sir.
don't bother. /.ers see 'patent' and flip out. never mind that a design patent is non-functional, it doesn't matter. it's the "P" word.
So you're claiming cause happens *after* effect?
if that's what you took from my explanation then you're a moron. you do realize that something that can be an effect of a cause can also be a cause itself of a further effect, don't you?
just because warming releases CO2 which can cause further warming doesn't mean that CO2 caused the warming in the first place, nor does it mean that that CO2 can't effect further warming.
jesus, you're daft.
hey, if we knew what the hell we were doing it wouldn't be so bad. unfortunately we've been dumping tons of CO2 into the atmosphere willy-nilly and certainly not from the standpoint of trying to exactly counter an eventual ice age.
it's like setting someone's house on fire accidentally then being all 'well hey, winter is coming up so i guess i did you a favor!'
However, it seems that the carbon dioxide levels increase about 40 to 50 years *after* the temperature increase.
you've bought into a classic denier talking point.
just because during the natural ice age cycle CO2 lags temperature does not mean that CO2 doesn't cause warming. it's just that in the natural cycle CO2 doesn't just magically appear en masse, its released by an increase in temperature brought about by other changes.
during natural warming, increases in solar insolation due to changes in the earth's axis/obliquity/etc causes melting of ice which adds CO2 to the atmosphere. this causes warming which creates a positive loop that leads to a warm interglacial period.
on the other side of the cycle, changes in the other direction with regard to solar insolation cause ice to form, locking up CO2, which lowers the warming effect creating another loop. the CO2 level again lags temperature.
right now we're screwing that up by pumping sh1t tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. that is not a natural phenomenon, its measurably anthropogenic. and its causing warming by the same basic mechanism that occurs during the natural cycle.
we're supposed to be past the peak of the current interglacial. CO2 levels should, under the natural cycle of things, be going down. instead they're skyrocketing because we've spent the last coupla thousand years cutting down forests, destroying grasslands and burning carbon.
i thought "do-whatever-you-want-just-don't-kill-anyone free-for-all" was a libertarian fantasy.
passengers will have to say in a computer voice "pad five, please"
also, a warmer more tropical climate benefits the deadliest creature on earth - the mosquito.
i saw one of those in front of my house a few days ago with the autobot badge and everything. i thought it was some lamer's attempt to make his car look cool.
but jesus, its an official version of the car?? man, no wonder GM sunk.
cool, next time i dare to find a comment on the internet 'interesting' i'll run it past you first.
What Apple is trying to prevent is people connecting a Palm and getting a tab in iTunes that has multiple occurrences of the word "iPod". This can be seen as a subtle case of trademark dilution
i have to say, that's a really, really interesting way of looking at it. i hadn't thought of that.
do you believe that evil doctors are going to harvest shit-tons of eggs from unknowing women during IVF treatments in order to create stem cells?
cause that's what the GP was referring to. that fear is irrational and only morons would believe it as some reason to go after stem cell research.
that's why I was suggesting the fear is pretty irrational to begin with. That, however, is not going to stop anyone who wants to believe that a doctor would do so
these are the same sort of people who believe that adam and eve rode dinosaurs to church. ignore them.
well, the limited liability applied by the court is supposed to be a one-time-only thing. so there is a disincentive now.
i disagree that the liability should have been limited at all, but that's the way the majority found.
eh, its easier to complain on the internet.
yes, if its one thing the right wing is all about, its facts, sources and methodology. thats why they're so pro-science.
thanks, you had to tell me after i threw my broken bulb down the well.
if somebody else does all the work leading up to it, yes. a lot goes into coming up with a whole new energy transport system and the energy companies aren't too keen in going through all that.
now, if someone else starts the ball rolling and others come in and get a good infrastructure in place, they'll step in and buy them all up.
supply is only cheap and guaranteed after lots of hard work and the big biz doesn't want to do that hard work unless the supply is already cheap and guaranteed.
asking whether time and space existed 'before the big bang' is like asking what's north of the north pole.
wha? you produce vitamin D in your skin. you get vitamin A from plant sources, pro vitamines like carotenes. vitamin E is available in avocado and nuts. vitamin K in bananas.
in short, you're waaaay wrong.
the characters: they basically nailed everyone
see, explicit sex is exactly what i thought was missing in all the previous start trek movies.
you're an idiot.