He only needs to be charged with a crime. Easy to come up with some bogus charges. He then tries to escape, and, very regrettably, had to be shot in the back.
What are you going to do? They know they have you over a barrel.
Not really. I refuse to pay $50/month for some simple entertainment. Right now, I only get the cheapest Netflix option. Some other stuff I get on Pirate Bay.
I know, but converting the number to a percentage of some other hard-to-imagine quantity (like total sea/ice volume) isn't very useful, even though OP was asking for it. For instance, if the oceans were twice as deep, the relative number would halve, despite the depth of the oceans being totally irrelevant for every day understanding.
Relating it to a sea level rise gets you a quantity that's relevant, and easy to visualize.
Because a few hundred years is going to provide reliable trend information about a hundred thousand year trend
Why not ? When the sun goes down at night, it only takes hours for noticeable cooling to happen. It's a fallacy to think we need to wait hundred thousand years for the Earth to respond to changes in inputs. The reason that ice ages take thousands of years is because they are triggered by equally slow changes in orbital characteristics. CO2 changes happened in the last century, and the atmospheric warming responds right away (although equilibrium will take a bit longer due to longer time constant of ocean heat)
You are like the guy who sells all his shit because the stock market goes down on Monday.
If somebody claims that nothing special happened because "the stock market has been going down since the last ice age", and we can show that it actually has been going up this whole time, but suddenly crashed on Monday, then his claim is invalid, and we know something new must have happened.
Everyone knows the hockey stick is bogus manipulation of data
Nope, the hockey stick graph has been confirmed by several studies. You can find plenty of references in the wikipedia page above. And if you dismiss all of the data, then what are you going to use to show that "we are still coming out of an ice age" as GP tried to claim?
Slashdot Mirror
If someone doesn't want to date people with a penis, then it would save a lot of time and grief if they knew that right away.
It is Apple's app store.
Apple can make its own app store, and the people in The Netherlands/EU can make their own antitrust laws.
Regulators have been studying complaints for 10 months. It is possible that they've seen patterns that you're missing ?
Abuse of monopoly is a real problem, yes.
but beyond that I'm not sure I see what the advantages would be
Showing the Apple apps before the 3rd party ones could be a simple advantage.
He only needs to be charged with a crime. Easy to come up with some bogus charges. He then tries to escape, and, very regrettably, had to be shot in the back.
How about a dating site that decided you had a bias in favour of tall partners, or light skinned partners? There is no simple answer to this.
And how about a dating site that figures out you had a bias for a certain gender ?
Then why did he lock himself up in a prison for 8 years ?
Ecuador demanded a guarantee that Assange would not be tortured
They won't torture him. They'll just thoroughly wash his face.
People from foreign nations are completely above the law here in the USA.
That's nonsense. Try robbing a bank in another country, or hacking into a computer system.
How did humans find their way around before compasses were invented?
Using GPS obviously.
I was taught by slashdot commenters that scientists always like to create alarm and panic in order to raise taxes. What happened here ?
What are you going to do? They know they have you over a barrel.
Not really. I refuse to pay $50/month for some simple entertainment. Right now, I only get the cheapest Netflix option. Some other stuff I get on Pirate Bay.
Except for the little problems of bandwidth and synchronization.
I know, but converting the number to a percentage of some other hard-to-imagine quantity (like total sea/ice volume) isn't very useful, even though OP was asking for it. For instance, if the oceans were twice as deep, the relative number would halve, despite the depth of the oceans being totally irrelevant for every day understanding.
Relating it to a sea level rise gets you a quantity that's relevant, and easy to visualize.
There's also the thermal expansion of the sea itself.
Essentially, humanity evolved at low tide, now we're bitching that the tide's coming in and is giong to knock over our sandcastles.
Just because there used to be a shallow sea where my house was, means that I shouldn't complain if it floods ?
Because a few hundred years is going to provide reliable trend information about a hundred thousand year trend
Why not ? When the sun goes down at night, it only takes hours for noticeable cooling to happen. It's a fallacy to think we need to wait hundred thousand years for the Earth to respond to changes in inputs. The reason that ice ages take thousands of years is because they are triggered by equally slow changes in orbital characteristics. CO2 changes happened in the last century, and the atmospheric warming responds right away (although equilibrium will take a bit longer due to longer time constant of ocean heat)
You are like the guy who sells all his shit because the stock market goes down on Monday.
If somebody claims that nothing special happened because "the stock market has been going down since the last ice age", and we can show that it actually has been going up this whole time, but suddenly crashed on Monday, then his claim is invalid, and we know something new must have happened.
Everyone knows the hockey stick is bogus manipulation of data
Nope, the hockey stick graph has been confirmed by several studies. You can find plenty of references in the wikipedia page above. And if you dismiss all of the data, then what are you going to use to show that "we are still coming out of an ice age" as GP tried to claim?
Your study is about Antarctica, the study in the article is about the entire world.
The ongoing rise in sea level confirms that there's a net loss of ice in the world.
I'm comparing it to the entirety of exactly the same substance that TFA implies is being lost at a catastrophic rate
Right, so the article makes the same error.
Did you link the wrong page? That only goes a thousand years back, not eight thousand..
Correct. I wanted to show the sudden recent change (i.e. the "hockey stick"), and the 1000 year graph shows that more clearly.
There's no way that "coming out of an ice age" can cause a sudden increase in warming, like that graph shows.
A better number to relate to is the annual sea level rise, partially caused by melting land ice, which is now about 3.3 millimeters/year (about 1/8")
I guess nothing sounds impressive if you compare it to something else that's much bigger.
That doesn't seem very hard. They didn't pour that water on the 48 states. There is more to the world than the US.
For starters, there are 50 states in the US alone.