Wait, you're dismissing it because it's from Norway? First of all, two of the institutes which are most associated with the theory of anthropogenic global warming are GISS, and UEA CRU. The first is in the US funded by the government, and you cannot tell me that the US administrations are all anti-oil greenies. The other is in the UK, which *gasp* is also an oil producer. Don't tar the Norwegians with your prejudices.
Second, read the damn paper. It doesn't say that there isn't warming. It doesn't claim that there's no anthropogenic effect. It merely attempts to explain something that's bothered the hell out of the CC research community for the last decade - why is it not still warming? Their conclusion is that the forcings in the model overestimated climate sensitivity so we have a bit more time before it's catastrophic (if you believe it will be).
So, this a paper which tries to explain something that is a known problem without actually challenging anything about the underlying theories. And you're attacking it because of your mental problems which see conspiracies everywhere? One of those shadows behind your door or maybe the monster under your bed should whisper the answer to this in your ear - who makes and runs all the green technolgies and generators that will replace the carbon spewing monstrosities we have today? You'd find some familair names and logos in there.
Apple still have huge facilities in Cork. Until Dell left they were the EMEA maufacturing facility. Intel, IBM, Google and Facebook all employ thousands of people around Dublin. If Ireland had any kind of venture capital markets...
You do have a choice. Strike out the sections you don't like and return it for approval. Never sign anything because it's "unenforceable". Any reasonable employer will be ok with this, and if they're unreasonable about this, do you really want to work for them?
Apparently Russia nuked out of control oil and gas wells and suggested the same for the Deepwater Horizon spill (nuking the gulf of mexico couldn't possibly have gone wrong, could it?) and we have all these nuclear weapons that no-one really wants to use lying about...
As a bonus, the lava should mean that the radioactives are less of a problem. Or you'll now have radioactive eruptions of lava which is sure to lead to superheroes, right?
In Galway in Ireland a friend brought his girlfriend home. She was vegetarian, but was served ham. When he pointed out to his mother that the girlfriend didn't eat meat, his mother said "Ah yeah, but sure it's only ham". I think she just could not imagine someone not eating ham.
It always bugs my when people refer to us (Ireland) as a tax haven.
Put simply, it's not. Corporate tax is payable here, at a rate of 12.5%. There's bugger all in the way of reductions. In the US, and France, and many other countries, there are high headline rates (around 35%) but after jumping through the loopholes the companies will pay between 6 and 10 percent. We decided to skip the loopholes step and just charge them. And it worked, companies came here because it was simpler than playing a tax-loophole obstacle course (which is an effective huge boost for the accounting profession) and we're a small country.
We're also part of the single EU market, and denominate in Euro, which is useful for trading in the EU. We also do not levy taxes on (some) receipts from EU member states so a company providing those receipts from the Netherlands doesn't have to pay tax here (and pays much lower tax there).
Instead of throwing around nonsense accusations, attention should be focused on closing a loophole in Irish law that provides that a company is tax resident where its central management and control is located, not where it is incorporated, so that it is possible for the first Irish company not to be tax resident in Ireland. [from wikipedia]. The companies are incorporated in Ireland, but tax resident in a REAL tax haven.
Good lord - this could not be more wrong. Eisenhower refused to get troops involved in SE Asia, despite intense pressure from the French who were being kicked around the place by the Viet Cong.
The frequency of weather "disasters" has not changed in any statisically meaningful way. What has changed is that we built piles of stuff in places that are more likely to be hit by said weather disasters in a very short space of time. Such as all of Florida.
This is false. Any study done on this shows that smokers pay more than they consume, precisely because they die early. Taxes are quite high on smokers, and many pay a premium on their health insurance anyway, but they don't linger until late in old age so they cost less in pensions and healthcare over their lifetime.
I personally think that the great breakthrough that would change everything is energy storage that is significantly more energy dense (orders of magnitude) than the batteries we have today, chargeable, and stable.
Think Heinlein's Shipstones and you've got the idea. Anyone who managed this would need to spend the first half of the money to build somewhere big enough to store the second half of the money.
I think the howls of protest are because India still receives a lot of foreign aid. It is a perfectly rational question to ask - if I country can afford a space program, why do they need aid?
If you, as a merchant, are accepting Chip & PIN transactions, then you're paying significantly lower fees to reflect the significantly lower risk. If you're accepting mag-strip & signature, then you're paying more for the transaction because there's a much higher risk that it's a fraud. If you're doing a card-not-present transaction (i.e. online) then you're paying even more because the risk is even higher.
This technique, which is a result of insecure hardware on the devices, is very hard and requires a lot of infrastructure, for lack of a better word. In 2010, the US had 27% of all card transactions worldwide, but 47% of all fraudulent transactions. The facts and figures say that Chip & PIN is more secure. The problem is that the US is so used to hucksters and fraudsters that they need the safety blanket, whereas in the EU the instance of fraud is so much lower that it's not seen as a problem.
All transactions are also vetted by more than the EMV, previous transaction history and known locations are taken into account, as well as overall usage. The PIN itself is separate from EMV (they go in two separate data elements in a transaction), and EMV has more than just this number, it also has other checks like an Application Transaction Counter.
And lastly, whatever the specifics of where liability lies, the banks treat disputes fairly because it's easy for them to do, and the person getting done is generally the merchant. Bear in mind, to get money off a card you need the following: 1. A machine, registered to a bank which is regulated by that country's local regulator (so no "magic" banks). 2. A merchant account, verified by said bank, 3. for which you need to be a registered business.
It should also be noted that the number they're talking about is not random and was never intended to be random, which is why they use the term "unpredictable" rather than the technical term "random".
The flip side of this is that the processing fees for Chip & PIN cards are significantly lower. The fact is that fraud is vastly reduced by using Chip & PIN, so the fees charged can account for that.
A total of up to 4000 people could eventually die of radiation exposure from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (NPP) accident nearly 20 years ago, an international team of more than 100 scientists has concluded.
As of mid-2005, however, fewer than 50 deaths had been directly attributed to radiation from the disaster, almost all being highly exposed rescue workers, many who died within months of the accident but others who died as late as 2004.
The whole report is worth reading - there's a lot of information in there and a FAQ on the second page.
The estimated 4000 casualties may occur during the lifetime of about 600 000 people under consideration. As about quarter of them will eventually die from spontaneous cancer not caused by Chernobyl radiation, the radiation-induced increase of about 3% will be difficult to observe. However, in the most highly exposed cohorts of emergency and recovery operation workers, some increase in particular cancers (e.g., leukemia) has already been observed.
The report also notes that there is a tendency to attribute all health problems in a wide area to Chernoybl, and that the major problem is trauma from the panic.
I believe it's arguable whether Chernoybl should be included in any discussion - the cause of the incident was not an accident, it was deliberate (even if those doing it clearly had no idea of what they were doing). So, yeah, you turn off all the safeties and backups, then scram the reactor and ignore the subseqent alarms. Uh... not the greatest idea?
but the olympics being funded out of worldwide collected taxes, the olympics haven been given special exemptions and special rights with specially tailored laws sort of would imply it. not to mention the whole thing about olympic spirit..
Really? I've never paid the Olympic tax! Sure, some (maybe most) of the athletes get government funding, but it's not that impressive. In the main the bulk of the costs of running the games are paid by the hosts.. NBC giving them $PILESOFMONEY helps with that, but it cost a $EVENLARGERPILEOFMONEY to set up.
it's a fucking travesty. maybe we'll have some Red Bull Realympics in 4 years as competing event where athletes can mention whatever the fuck they want on social media, wear whatever sporting goods they want and which will be streamed live to everyone who wants to watch.
I'm amused that you think that a corporately sponsored version of the Olympics would be better.
You are paying your ISP to provide internet, regardless of the content. It does not imply any rights to have content available, so tough cookie if it isn't. Net neutrality, wot.
There are jobs in Ireland - but the construction bubble effectively lured a generation into trades when what it turns out is needed is professionals. A number of labs closed down as well as everyone consolidated. There are fields where every position has several people with the skills and experience applying for it leaving graduates in the lurch. On the flip side, anyone with any kind of decent development experience will have a job in no time. All the major software companies have development centers in Ireland, and it's not just for the 12.5% corporation tax rate. Hiring people here is expensive, the Employer PRSI is high, the income tax is pretty high and the VAT is very high indeed.
The tradespeople got badly shafted by the bubble bursting. Construction is non-existent now and many of them had set up as sole traders and weren't paying their employers PRSI so they don't qualify for anything but the most basic social welfare. Many have left for Australia and Canada where there is demand for their skills.
On the corporation tax: the thinking behind this tax rate was sound. The government at the time cut way back on exceptions to the tax rules so everyone paid the same. As was mentioned above, France's effective corporation tax rate is 8.2% against a headline rate of 33%. There isn't a corporation in the world paying headline rates so what should be being compared is effective rates. Ireland's effective rate is pretty close to the 12.5% headline rate, and is unlikely to change.
the amount and severity of natural disaster has increased over the past decade alone. Hurricanes have become more frequent and tornado activity has increased.
All research done on this shows that this is not true. The only thing that has changed is the amount of stuff that gets broken and people that get hurt. That is a function of having more stuff and more people in vulernable places. If cities in places with names like "Tornado Alley" weren't growing, or places like Miami that have historically been swamps regularly hit by hurricanes didn't expand very quickly in the last 30 years, then it wouldn't look so bad. Further, because news is now effectively instant we hear about it now, not yesterday.
It's like saying "Well, Indonesia and Japan were both hit by massive tidal waves in the last 10 years, but we don't have any records of that happening before so it must be our fault". It's nonsensical.
To see massive changes in a biosphere all one has to do is visit a surface mine operation. Although they attempt to restore the biosphere somewhat it never fully returns to its original state.
Well, yes. It doesn't. It's an evolving system, why would it return to it's previous state. What it WILL do is find an equilibrium. See Ascension Island for a living, breathing example of this. A few hundred years ago it was a rock. Then along comes Darwin and convinces the British to dump a pile of vegetation and now it's a lush tropical jungle with a diverse biosphere.
A biosphere is not static - it changes based on inputs. A closed biosphere is delicate, and invasive flora or fauna can totally change it but it will eventually find balance. Another great example is the cane toads in Australia. Local birds have finally figured out that it's full of tasty meat, and it's not poisonous if you don't try and go through the top. So now they flip the toads to get at them. This means that the toads now have predators so their population should stabilize. It's changed the Australian biosphere, but it's finding balance.
None of which is to say we should not be reducing carbon emissions, of course, but wild anecdotal claims don't help anything.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait, you're dismissing it because it's from Norway? First of all, two of the institutes which are most associated with the theory of anthropogenic global warming are GISS, and UEA CRU. The first is in the US funded by the government, and you cannot tell me that the US administrations are all anti-oil greenies. The other is in the UK, which *gasp* is also an oil producer. Don't tar the Norwegians with your prejudices.
Second, read the damn paper. It doesn't say that there isn't warming. It doesn't claim that there's no anthropogenic effect. It merely attempts to explain something that's bothered the hell out of the CC research community for the last decade - why is it not still warming? Their conclusion is that the forcings in the model overestimated climate sensitivity so we have a bit more time before it's catastrophic (if you believe it will be).
So, this a paper which tries to explain something that is a known problem without actually challenging anything about the underlying theories. And you're attacking it because of your mental problems which see conspiracies everywhere? One of those shadows behind your door or maybe the monster under your bed should whisper the answer to this in your ear - who makes and runs all the green technolgies and generators that will replace the carbon spewing monstrosities we have today? You'd find some familair names and logos in there.
Apple still have huge facilities in Cork. Until Dell left they were the EMEA maufacturing facility. Intel, IBM, Google and Facebook all employ thousands of people around Dublin. If Ireland had any kind of venture capital markets...
Desert is the last word you'd use to describe Limerick. It rains here all the damn time!
Google also employ thousands of people in Dublin.
You do have a choice. Strike out the sections you don't like and return it for approval. Never sign anything because it's "unenforceable". Any reasonable employer will be ok with this, and if they're unreasonable about this, do you really want to work for them?
Nuke them!
Apparently Russia nuked out of control oil and gas wells and suggested the same for the Deepwater Horizon spill (nuking the gulf of mexico couldn't possibly have gone wrong, could it?) and we have all these nuclear weapons that no-one really wants to use lying about...
As a bonus, the lava should mean that the radioactives are less of a problem. Or you'll now have radioactive eruptions of lava which is sure to lead to superheroes, right?
In Galway in Ireland a friend brought his girlfriend home. She was vegetarian, but was served ham. When he pointed out to his mother that the girlfriend didn't eat meat, his mother said "Ah yeah, but sure it's only ham". I think she just could not imagine someone not eating ham.
Incorrect, you CAN survive on meat alone - just not rabbit. I might not be pleasant, but it's possible.
It always bugs my when people refer to us (Ireland) as a tax haven.
Put simply, it's not. Corporate tax is payable here, at a rate of 12.5%. There's bugger all in the way of reductions. In the US, and France, and many other countries, there are high headline rates (around 35%) but after jumping through the loopholes the companies will pay between 6 and 10 percent. We decided to skip the loopholes step and just charge them. And it worked, companies came here because it was simpler than playing a tax-loophole obstacle course (which is an effective huge boost for the accounting profession) and we're a small country.
We're also part of the single EU market, and denominate in Euro, which is useful for trading in the EU. We also do not levy taxes on (some) receipts from EU member states so a company providing those receipts from the Netherlands doesn't have to pay tax here (and pays much lower tax there).
Instead of throwing around nonsense accusations, attention should be focused on closing a loophole in Irish law that provides that a company is tax resident where its central management and control is located, not where it is incorporated, so that it is possible for the first Irish company not to be tax resident in Ireland. [from wikipedia]. The companies are incorporated in Ireland, but tax resident in a REAL tax haven.
And Eisenhower started the Vietnam war
Good lord - this could not be more wrong. Eisenhower refused to get troops involved in SE Asia, despite intense pressure from the French who were being kicked around the place by the Viet Cong.
The frequency of weather "disasters" has not changed in any statisically meaningful way.
What has changed is that we built piles of stuff in places that are more likely to be hit by said weather disasters in a very short space of time. Such as all of Florida.
Slashdot would be a better place with that moderation. You made me laugh, thank you.
This is false. Any study done on this shows that smokers pay more than they consume, precisely because they die early. Taxes are quite high on smokers, and many pay a premium on their health insurance anyway, but they don't linger until late in old age so they cost less in pensions and healthcare over their lifetime.
that's a tippling point...
No, their names were "Herr"
I personally think that the great breakthrough that would change everything is energy storage that is significantly more energy dense (orders of magnitude) than the batteries we have today, chargeable, and stable.
Think Heinlein's Shipstones and you've got the idea. Anyone who managed this would need to spend the first half of the money to build somewhere big enough to store the second half of the money.
I think the howls of protest are because India still receives a lot of foreign aid. It is a perfectly rational question to ask - if I country can afford a space program, why do they need aid?
If you, as a merchant, are accepting Chip & PIN transactions, then you're paying significantly lower fees to reflect the significantly lower risk . If you're accepting mag-strip & signature, then you're paying more for the transaction because there's a much higher risk that it's a fraud. If you're doing a card-not-present transaction (i.e. online) then you're paying even more because the risk is even higher.
This technique, which is a result of insecure hardware on the devices, is very hard and requires a lot of infrastructure, for lack of a better word. In 2010, the US had 27% of all card transactions worldwide, but 47% of all fraudulent transactions. The facts and figures say that Chip & PIN is more secure. The problem is that the US is so used to hucksters and fraudsters that they need the safety blanket, whereas in the EU the instance of fraud is so much lower that it's not seen as a problem.
All transactions are also vetted by more than the EMV, previous transaction history and known locations are taken into account, as well as overall usage. The PIN itself is separate from EMV (they go in two separate data elements in a transaction), and EMV has more than just this number, it also has other checks like an Application Transaction Counter.
And lastly, whatever the specifics of where liability lies, the banks treat disputes fairly because it's easy for them to do, and the person getting done is generally the merchant. Bear in mind, to get money off a card you need the following:
1. A machine, registered to a bank which is regulated by that country's local regulator (so no "magic" banks).
2. A merchant account, verified by said bank,
3. for which you need to be a registered business.
It should also be noted that the number they're talking about is not random and was never intended to be random, which is why they use the term "unpredictable" rather than the technical term "random".
The flip side of this is that the processing fees for Chip & PIN cards are significantly lower. The fact is that fraud is vastly reduced by using Chip & PIN, so the fees charged can account for that.
From the WHO
A total of up to 4000 people could eventually die of radiation exposure from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (NPP) accident nearly 20 years ago, an international team of more than 100 scientists has concluded.
As of mid-2005, however, fewer than 50 deaths had been directly attributed to radiation from the disaster, almost all being highly exposed rescue workers, many who died within months of the accident but others who died as late as 2004.
The whole report is worth reading - there's a lot of information in there and a FAQ on the second page.
The estimated 4000 casualties may occur during the lifetime of about 600 000 people under consideration. As about quarter of them will eventually die from spontaneous cancer not caused by Chernobyl radiation, the radiation-induced increase of about 3% will be difficult to observe. However, in the most highly exposed cohorts of emergency and recovery operation workers, some increase in particular cancers (e.g., leukemia) has already been observed.
The report also notes that there is a tendency to attribute all health problems in a wide area to Chernoybl, and that the major problem is trauma from the panic.
I believe it's arguable whether Chernoybl should be included in any discussion - the cause of the incident was not an accident, it was deliberate (even if those doing it clearly had no idea of what they were doing). So, yeah, you turn off all the safeties and backups, then scram the reactor and ignore the subseqent alarms. Uh... not the greatest idea?
but the olympics being funded out of worldwide collected taxes, the olympics haven been given special exemptions and special rights with specially tailored laws sort of would imply it. not to mention the whole thing about olympic spirit..
Really? I've never paid the Olympic tax! Sure, some (maybe most) of the athletes get government funding, but it's not that impressive. In the main the bulk of the costs of running the games are paid by the hosts.. NBC giving them $PILESOFMONEY helps with that, but it cost a $EVENLARGERPILEOFMONEY to set up.
it's a fucking travesty. maybe we'll have some Red Bull Realympics in 4 years as competing event where athletes can mention whatever the fuck they want on social media, wear whatever sporting goods they want and which will be streamed live to everyone who wants to watch.
I'm amused that you think that a corporately sponsored version of the Olympics would be better.
No, stop being so wrong.
You are paying your ISP to provide internet, regardless of the content. It does not imply any rights to have content available, so tough cookie if it isn't. Net neutrality, wot.
issues much more pressing than global warming like pollution, habitat destruction, overfishing/hunting and global extinction.
Really? One of these things is not like the others :)
There are jobs in Ireland - but the construction bubble effectively lured a generation into trades when what it turns out is needed is professionals. A number of labs closed down as well as everyone consolidated. There are fields where every position has several people with the skills and experience applying for it leaving graduates in the lurch.
On the flip side, anyone with any kind of decent development experience will have a job in no time. All the major software companies have development centers in Ireland, and it's not just for the 12.5% corporation tax rate. Hiring people here is expensive, the Employer PRSI is high, the income tax is pretty high and the VAT is very high indeed.
The tradespeople got badly shafted by the bubble bursting. Construction is non-existent now and many of them had set up as sole traders and weren't paying their employers PRSI so they don't qualify for anything but the most basic social welfare. Many have left for Australia and Canada where there is demand for their skills.
On the corporation tax: the thinking behind this tax rate was sound. The government at the time cut way back on exceptions to the tax rules so everyone paid the same. As was mentioned above, France's effective corporation tax rate is 8.2% against a headline rate of 33%. There isn't a corporation in the world paying headline rates so what should be being compared is effective rates. Ireland's effective rate is pretty close to the 12.5% headline rate, and is unlikely to change.
the amount and severity of natural disaster has increased over the past decade alone. Hurricanes have become more frequent and tornado activity has increased.
All research done on this shows that this is not true. The only thing that has changed is the amount of stuff that gets broken and people that get hurt. That is a function of having more stuff and more people in vulernable places. If cities in places with names like "Tornado Alley" weren't growing, or places like Miami that have historically been swamps regularly hit by hurricanes didn't expand very quickly in the last 30 years, then it wouldn't look so bad. Further, because news is now effectively instant we hear about it now, not yesterday.
It's like saying "Well, Indonesia and Japan were both hit by massive tidal waves in the last 10 years, but we don't have any records of that happening before so it must be our fault". It's nonsensical.
To see massive changes in a biosphere all one has to do is visit a surface mine operation. Although they attempt to restore the biosphere somewhat it never fully returns to its original state.
Well, yes. It doesn't. It's an evolving system, why would it return to it's previous state. What it WILL do is find an equilibrium. See Ascension Island for a living, breathing example of this. A few hundred years ago it was a rock. Then along comes Darwin and convinces the British to dump a pile of vegetation and now it's a lush tropical jungle with a diverse biosphere.
A biosphere is not static - it changes based on inputs. A closed biosphere is delicate, and invasive flora or fauna can totally change it but it will eventually find balance. Another great example is the cane toads in Australia. Local birds have finally figured out that it's full of tasty meat, and it's not poisonous if you don't try and go through the top. So now they flip the toads to get at them. This means that the toads now have predators so their population should stabilize. It's changed the Australian biosphere, but it's finding balance.
None of which is to say we should not be reducing carbon emissions, of course, but wild anecdotal claims don't help anything.