So, if I'm hearing you correctly, proper scientific procedure consists of two-sentence soundbites and article headlines about assured conclusions by scientists? I mean, you just said:
Posting a story about a news event doesn't deny the proper scientific procedure.
So I'm forced to conclude that, according to you, when people posted news stories about cold fusion and cures for cancer, they were performing the proper due-diligence with regards to scientific process.
You seem very contradictory in your last post, can you restate? You seem to presume that lots of people deny that it is changing, an then you assert that it is important to *know* it is changing and in what direction and speed. As I have just stated in the previous post, there is no offered proof in existence on this planet that conclusively demonstrates that climate is currently changing outside of historical natural variation. Rather than contradict this with anything resembling proof, you simply assert that it is important to *know* it is changing, with no offered reason to believe it is changing in any way catastrophically. You seem to want to "believe" that climate is changing for the worse and in an uncontrolled or unnatural way, but you have not convinced me. And simply stating it does not make it so.
Forever. There's a reason why CERN has more data storage and processing capabilities than God.
Leave religion out of this.
No, it isn't, not outside high-school classes.
Yes it is. You can't be more wrong. I can only surmise you've got alternate accounts modding yourself up because that is just nonsense. All science depends on repeatable experiments. In fact your first sentence demonstrates that very fact. You are in-essence, contradicting yourself. Why would CERN need more "data storage capabilities than God." if they weren't trying to repeat experiments?
What, exactly, is the control for the hypothesis "the Earth's climate is increasing in temperature"?
That is a problem for those trying to demonstrate humans are altering the climate to come up with. The non-existence of a solution does not demonstrate cause to take short-cuts through the scientific method.
We know that climate has always changed, usually flipping from current conditions to ice-age. Proving that climate changes is a vacuous excercise, we already know it changes. Proving that it is currently changing outside the scope of historical natural changes is impossible, we haven't been alive long enough to document it's variations. Proving further that such changes are cause by man is frankly, unthinkable.
We also know that we will always have the likes of Richard walking our planet.
To answer your questions, the warming we see is consistent with anthropogenic climate change models..
Which "warming" that we see are you talking about? Ground stations or satellites? They tell different stories.
Also, which models are you talking about? They're all different.
Do have anything real to add or are you just repeating what others tell you with regards to climate change? I rarely see believers of man-made cataclysm add much to the conversation, they seem to always have all the answers, and no questions. Unfortunately for you, this is very reminiscent to me of cult followers.
Regardless of who is visiting us, other-humans, spagetti monsters, little-green-men it is important to acknoweldge that it is real.
Why? Because- if it continues we are in for some problems.
Possible interplanetary war, damage to Earth, extinctions, famines, possible new viruses from alien contact.
Stopping alien visitation (if caused by man) is only one side of the coin- the other side is WE NEED TO PREPARE because there is no reason for anyone to believe it is going to stop anytime soon.
So, we need to start thinking about- how to we stop coastal cities from being abducted, depriving us of our families. We need to think about how alien activities in local regions will change our way of life. If Nebraska is no longer capable of growing maize because of alien attacks- how will that affect the economy there?
Lots of cities are already seeing increased fear because they can't handle the increasing encounters they get as the aliens get aggressive.
Chicago is smart- they're upgrading their anti-aircraft with an increase in alien attention so they won't retroactively be dealing with lost population.
I don't care if you think man is not responsible- if you're republican or democrat- spreading denial of alien visitation is dangerous. We need our elected officials to take the threat seriously and prepare for the changes BEFORE they happen.
I don't want to sensationalise or be a scare-monger... we don't need to run into the streets screaming- but we do need to calmly, on a local by local basis sit down and analyse- what will alien war mean for my community and what needs to be done about it. Do we need to build large lasers, prepare the economy for a new agriculture (or loss of it)?
We can adapt to a war with the green men but we need to take it seriously and act now- rather than wait until it is too late.
I'm sorry, calling for a proper scientific procedure, where papers are reviewed by experts before their conclusions are sent to the masses, is an "ugly" bias? I guess I didn't realize humanity had fallen so far. Perhaps I'll someday accept recently written white-papers as conclusive human knowledge someday, but it will be at the point of a gun by an oppressive government, I can tell you that. In the mean time, perhaps you can put your troll-gun away, accept that I have a point here, and acknowledge that research should go through all manner of due-diligence before being touted as "oh we've now confirmed something" in the media.
I agree with BA on this one. This story doesn't add up.
If you presume they were looking at pieces transiting the sun over 2-3 days, then you have to assume that the narrow window of parallax in which to observe the transit existed for 2-3 days in the same location on Earth. THAT IS HIGHLY IMPROBABLE. The comet would have had to have an orbit directly on-plane to earths orbit to begin with for this to happen, and if that were so and the comet fragment were so close to us, we would have had to have directly crossed the comet's orbit during the time of the transit, which would mean impact I should think.
The story just doesn't add up.
"Science News reports on a story which blames a centuries long cooling of Europe on the discovery of the new world. Scientists contend that the native depopulation and deforestation had a chilling effect on world-wide climate. 'Trees that filled in this territory pulled billions of tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, diminishing the heat-trapping capacity of the atmosphere and cooling climate, says Richard Nevle, a geochemist at Stanford University.' The story notes that the pandemics in the Americas were possibly an example of human climate manipulation predating the Industrial Revolution, though isotope measurements used during research have much uncertainty, so 'that evidence isn't conclusive.'"
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
So, Trees that filled an area and used to pull tons of CO2 from the air were cut down, meaning that now there is *more* CO2 in the air. But contrary to what we've all had hammered into our brains for 15+ years now this deforestation doesn't cause warming by removing CO2 eaters, no no, it in fact causes the little ice age. What's worse, is deforestation caused pandemics. No gentlemen, it wasn't the filthy sailors from the depths of the boats finding native girls to get cuddly with and passing on their horrific viruses, no it was deforestation and climate manipulation that caused them.
Abject nonsense, I'm surprised more people on/. are not calling this for what it is, complete bunk.
No, Engineers built them. Doesn't matter what profession these guys have or what investigations into the universe they do while on the clock. This development is outside the realm of question, therefore it's not science, it's engineering.
Online retailers typically get some kind of notice of a fraudulent credit card within a day or so of charging/shipping a product right? So, in theory, if someone handling a drop were notified by the retailer that they have stolen goods and should ship it back, all would be well, right? If the person handling the drop doesn't intend criminal behavior, they can just ship it back, and no need to get stuck doing anything illegal.
In addition, these online retailers have to have records of refused credit cards, if they cross-reference the bad cards with who has been shipped to, they should have some correlating groups of numbers/people on which to place suspicion of being a drop. This should translate into a mandatory 1-3 day delay before shipping to those people.
Seems like there's lots of options to shut down these kinds of operations at the source.
If you are going to build reactors then do it properly and build a Terra-watt scale nuclear reactor facility in the belly of a massive granite mountain with an attached waste facility that chomps up all your remaining plutonium or end all commercial nuclear activity altogether.
That power has to be transmitted, which means line losses. You cannot practically generate power in Nevada and supply people 3 states away due to losses in transmission. It is always most cost-effective to generate power closest to where it is used. So while this suggestion seems rational on nuclear safety, it is horribly impractical in terms of electrical energy generation. This is why countries have hundreds of power plants close to population centers, instead of a single gigantic power plant in the middle of nowhere.
That's true, however a smart phone likely contains countless artifacts of a personal nature. The idea that a street cop can go through your cell phone contents because of a traffic stop is akin to cops being allowed to search through your keepsakes at home if they catch you jaywalking.
..by always saying warm and cuddly things.
I find myself agreeing with Stallman. Job's products were marketed towards those who liked to fantasize about how close to Star Trek TNG their lives were. All the while they were designed to restrict software, media and content choices.
What he did wouldn't be much different than Comcast throttling all sites but their preferred sites to their customers and marketing themselves as the great library of the world, yet everyone hates the idea of corporations so much as tainting net neutrality.
If the consumer technology industry needs the likes of Steve Jobs to advance, then it's just a matter of time before the world looks like one of my favorite childhood sci-fi novels.
The interesting part is it is a "new" method to tease information out of old data. What this implies is that astronomers might be able to get clear pictures of other solar systems because they'll have records of where the planets they see now were relative to each other (and the star) in old data. So previously we were only able to see the recent pictures, telling us there were planets there. Now we'll be able to map out the orbits of what we see.
That's kinda cool
Distort time by 60 nanoseconds over such a (relatively) short distance? That's a huge distortion. Something else is likely involved in the explanation than gravity.
Slashdot Mirror
Then it gets interesting.
for lengthy periods of time?
So, if I'm hearing you correctly, proper scientific procedure consists of two-sentence soundbites and article headlines about assured conclusions by scientists? I mean, you just said:
So I'm forced to conclude that, according to you, when people posted news stories about cold fusion and cures for cancer, they were performing the proper due-diligence with regards to scientific process.
You seem very contradictory in your last post, can you restate? You seem to presume that lots of people deny that it is changing, an then you assert that it is important to *know* it is changing and in what direction and speed. As I have just stated in the previous post, there is no offered proof in existence on this planet that conclusively demonstrates that climate is currently changing outside of historical natural variation. Rather than contradict this with anything resembling proof, you simply assert that it is important to *know* it is changing, with no offered reason to believe it is changing in any way catastrophically. You seem to want to "believe" that climate is changing for the worse and in an uncontrolled or unnatural way, but you have not convinced me. And simply stating it does not make it so.
You measure chaotic systems by linear trendlines with dubiously chosen start and endpoints and call them similar? Where did you learn math?
Leave religion out of this.
Yes it is. You can't be more wrong. I can only surmise you've got alternate accounts modding yourself up because that is just nonsense. All science depends on repeatable experiments. In fact your first sentence demonstrates that very fact. You are in-essence, contradicting yourself. Why would CERN need more "data storage capabilities than God." if they weren't trying to repeat experiments?
That is a problem for those trying to demonstrate humans are altering the climate to come up with. The non-existence of a solution does not demonstrate cause to take short-cuts through the scientific method.
You are implying motives and actions before they occur. I knew there were some psychics in the CAGW believer crowd, had to be.
We know that climate has always changed, usually flipping from current conditions to ice-age. Proving that climate changes is a vacuous excercise, we already know it changes. Proving that it is currently changing outside the scope of historical natural changes is impossible, we haven't been alive long enough to document it's variations. Proving further that such changes are cause by man is frankly, unthinkable.
We also know that we will always have the likes of Richard walking our planet.
Which "warming" that we see are you talking about? Ground stations or satellites? They tell different stories.
Also, which models are you talking about? They're all different.
Do have anything real to add or are you just repeating what others tell you with regards to climate change? I rarely see believers of man-made cataclysm add much to the conversation, they seem to always have all the answers, and no questions. Unfortunately for you, this is very reminiscent to me of cult followers.
Regardless of who is visiting us, other-humans, spagetti monsters, little-green-men it is important to acknoweldge that it is real.
Why? Because- if it continues we are in for some problems.
Possible interplanetary war, damage to Earth, extinctions, famines, possible new viruses from alien contact.
Stopping alien visitation (if caused by man) is only one side of the coin- the other side is WE NEED TO PREPARE because there is no reason for anyone to believe it is going to stop anytime soon.
So, we need to start thinking about- how to we stop coastal cities from being abducted, depriving us of our families. We need to think about how alien activities in local regions will change our way of life. If Nebraska is no longer capable of growing maize because of alien attacks- how will that affect the economy there?
Lots of cities are already seeing increased fear because they can't handle the increasing encounters they get as the aliens get aggressive.
Chicago is smart- they're upgrading their anti-aircraft with an increase in alien attention so they won't retroactively be dealing with lost population.
I don't care if you think man is not responsible- if you're republican or democrat- spreading denial of alien visitation is dangerous. We need our elected officials to take the threat seriously and prepare for the changes BEFORE they happen.
I don't want to sensationalise or be a scare-monger... we don't need to run into the streets screaming- but we do need to calmly, on a local by local basis sit down and analyse- what will alien war mean for my community and what needs to be done about it. Do we need to build large lasers, prepare the economy for a new agriculture (or loss of it)?
We can adapt to a war with the green men but we need to take it seriously and act now- rather than wait until it is too late.
I'm sorry, calling for a proper scientific procedure, where papers are reviewed by experts before their conclusions are sent to the masses, is an "ugly" bias? I guess I didn't realize humanity had fallen so far. Perhaps I'll someday accept recently written white-papers as conclusive human knowledge someday, but it will be at the point of a gun by an oppressive government, I can tell you that. In the mean time, perhaps you can put your troll-gun away, accept that I have a point here, and acknowledge that research should go through all manner of due-diligence before being touted as "oh we've now confirmed something" in the media.
These papers are not out of peer review yet, and /. wants to promote their preliminary results?
remind me again, which side has an agenda, exactly?
I agree with BA on this one. This story doesn't add up. If you presume they were looking at pieces transiting the sun over 2-3 days, then you have to assume that the narrow window of parallax in which to observe the transit existed for 2-3 days in the same location on Earth. THAT IS HIGHLY IMPROBABLE. The comet would have had to have an orbit directly on-plane to earths orbit to begin with for this to happen, and if that were so and the comet fragment were so close to us, we would have had to have directly crossed the comet's orbit during the time of the transit, which would mean impact I should think. The story just doesn't add up.
We're worried about the Chinese (perhaps understandably), but we can't prevent our own companies from interfering with the military?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LightSquared#Interference_issues
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. So, Trees that filled an area and used to pull tons of CO2 from the air were cut down, meaning that now there is *more* CO2 in the air. But contrary to what we've all had hammered into our brains for 15+ years now this deforestation doesn't cause warming by removing CO2 eaters, no no, it in fact causes the little ice age. What's worse, is deforestation caused pandemics. No gentlemen, it wasn't the filthy sailors from the depths of the boats finding native girls to get cuddly with and passing on their horrific viruses, no it was deforestation and climate manipulation that caused them. Abject nonsense, I'm surprised more people on /. are not calling this for what it is, complete bunk.
No, Engineers built them. Doesn't matter what profession these guys have or what investigations into the universe they do while on the clock. This development is outside the realm of question, therefore it's not science, it's engineering.
Online retailers typically get some kind of notice of a fraudulent credit card within a day or so of charging/shipping a product right? So, in theory, if someone handling a drop were notified by the retailer that they have stolen goods and should ship it back, all would be well, right? If the person handling the drop doesn't intend criminal behavior, they can just ship it back, and no need to get stuck doing anything illegal. In addition, these online retailers have to have records of refused credit cards, if they cross-reference the bad cards with who has been shipped to, they should have some correlating groups of numbers/people on which to place suspicion of being a drop. This should translate into a mandatory 1-3 day delay before shipping to those people. Seems like there's lots of options to shut down these kinds of operations at the source.
That power has to be transmitted, which means line losses. You cannot practically generate power in Nevada and supply people 3 states away due to losses in transmission. It is always most cost-effective to generate power closest to where it is used. So while this suggestion seems rational on nuclear safety, it is horribly impractical in terms of electrical energy generation. This is why countries have hundreds of power plants close to population centers, instead of a single gigantic power plant in the middle of nowhere.
That's true, however a smart phone likely contains countless artifacts of a personal nature. The idea that a street cop can go through your cell phone contents because of a traffic stop is akin to cops being allowed to search through your keepsakes at home if they catch you jaywalking.
Who thinks that some forms of non-violent protest need to be directed at the UN?
Statements like these make me wish I get the opportunity someday to meet someone from the UN, just so I can deliberately ignore them.
/I pray it's not a beautiful woman.
..by always saying warm and cuddly things. I find myself agreeing with Stallman. Job's products were marketed towards those who liked to fantasize about how close to Star Trek TNG their lives were. All the while they were designed to restrict software, media and content choices. What he did wouldn't be much different than Comcast throttling all sites but their preferred sites to their customers and marketing themselves as the great library of the world, yet everyone hates the idea of corporations so much as tainting net neutrality. If the consumer technology industry needs the likes of Steve Jobs to advance, then it's just a matter of time before the world looks like one of my favorite childhood sci-fi novels.
The interesting part is it is a "new" method to tease information out of old data. What this implies is that astronomers might be able to get clear pictures of other solar systems because they'll have records of where the planets they see now were relative to each other (and the star) in old data. So previously we were only able to see the recent pictures, telling us there were planets there. Now we'll be able to map out the orbits of what we see. That's kinda cool
Distort time by 60 nanoseconds over such a (relatively) short distance? That's a huge distortion. Something else is likely involved in the explanation than gravity.