I also like how they casually imply the year being warm has strong ties to all the disasters - which include things like a freeze.
That's not so strange. Higher temps in the Arctic can have an effect on the jet stream, which can then bring patterns of both hot and cold weather to lower latitudes.
People are also easily fooled, but in different ways. Researches will update their networks to be more robust for this kind of trickery, and we'll move on.
It's certainly possible to design a CPU in your spare time. I've designed a couple myself.
Designing a modern Intel CPU replacement is something else though. That's a lot of man years of work, and most of it is in tedious work like testing and validating that very few people find joyful.
Really? Which one? The one from your competitor that allegedly does not have that bug?
Possibly, yes. Another possibility is to replace it with a new intel CPU where the bug is fixed, or at least a model where a software fix can be implemented with minimum performance degradation.
Thankfully, we have a satellite record covering most of that same time period, and it has NOT been constantly massaged, homogenized, extrapolated, and fitted.
Satellite temperature are much more massaged. Satellites don't measure surface air temperature, so the data has to be reconstructed.
"Eat more carbs", sorry never heard about that advice.
1980 US dietary guidelines:
to avoid too much fat, saturated fat and cholesterol:
- choose lean meat, fish, poultry, dry beans and peas as your protein sources - moderate your use of eggs and organ meats - limit your intake of butter, cream, hydrogenated margarines, shortenings and coconut oil. - trim excess fat off meats - broil, bake or boil rather than fry - read labels carefully to determine both amount and types of fat [...]
Also: "if you limit your fat intake, you should increase your calories from carbohydrates [...]"
We have about 50 years of good satellite data which shows warming, vs 150 years of ground based samples that don't.
The ground based samples are better quality. A satellite doesn't measure surface air temperature. Instead it measure the IR radiation coming from the surface, mixed in with the radiation coming from the entire column of air, and then has to perform complicated modelling to figure out what portion of the IR actually comes from the bottom layer.
Even without the adjustments, there's a very clear warming. A team of scientists from Berkeley had doubts about these adjustments, so they started with the raw data, and redid everything themselves. They ended up with almost the same graph.
Appealing to authority is a logical fallacy. It's also not necessary to do that. We should be skeptical of claims by authority and investigate the evidence
It's hard to investigate the evidence when you're not an expert in the field.
Slashdot Mirror
I also like how they casually imply the year being warm has strong ties to all the disasters - which include things like a freeze.
That's not so strange. Higher temps in the Arctic can have an effect on the jet stream, which can then bring patterns of both hot and cold weather to lower latitudes.
I've been using Swedish designed CPUs
Do they come in a flat pack with a hex wrench ?
I think you forgot how slow everything was. I remember kernel builds taking half a day on my 486.
Given that the cheapest internet service you can get for a phone is $50/mo
Really ? I pay $15/month. Granted, it's only 10GB, but most months that's more than enough.
Neural nets can approximate arbitrary functions to arbitrary precision, so where's the fundamental limitation ?
People are also easily fooled, but in different ways. Researches will update their networks to be more robust for this kind of trickery, and we'll move on.
Yep, just like they have a rabid fear of cigarettes after listening to the anti-tobacco nazis.
They'll probably figure out a more generic solution.
Humans have similar problems. Instead of stop sign, they sometimes concentrate on areas with the most detail, like a smartphone.
It's certainly possible to design a CPU in your spare time. I've designed a couple myself.
Designing a modern Intel CPU replacement is something else though. That's a lot of man years of work, and most of it is in tedious work like testing and validating that very few people find joyful.
What are you going to do to accomplish this "fast track legal procedure" ? Delay other court cases ? Or spend less time looking at the evidence ?
Really? Which one? The one from your competitor that allegedly does not have that bug?
Possibly, yes. Another possibility is to replace it with a new intel CPU where the bug is fixed, or at least a model where a software fix can be implemented with minimum performance degradation.
Yes, it really boosts your sales, especially internationally, when the press tells everyone your CPUs are insecure crap
Well, a lot of people have to buy new CPUs now...
You are still going to do manual verification when you read it.
In that case, it doesn't save any time, because you still have to read all of them.
With an average accuracy of around 80 percent
That makes it pretty much useless, then.
Canada ? You mean the Atlantic Ocean.
No, 97% of climate scientists agree.
Thankfully, we have a satellite record covering most of that same time period, and it has NOT been constantly massaged, homogenized, extrapolated, and fitted.
Satellite temperature are much more massaged. Satellites don't measure surface air temperature, so the data has to be reconstructed.
It's not quite compelling if you zoom out his graph for the PDO index.
http://research.jisao.washingt...
As you can see, the index since 2000 has been mostly negative, while we continued record high temperatures.
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gis...
> it's hard to say things are warmer by 0.03 deg C when your tolerance/error bar is 1 deg C).
Things are warmer by more than 1 deg C, and the error bar is about 0.1 deg C.
"Eat more carbs", sorry never heard about that advice.
1980 US dietary guidelines:
to avoid too much fat, saturated fat and cholesterol:
- choose lean meat, fish, poultry, dry beans and peas as your protein sources
- moderate your use of eggs and organ meats
- limit your intake of butter, cream, hydrogenated margarines, shortenings and coconut oil.
- trim excess fat off meats
- broil, bake or boil rather than fry
- read labels carefully to determine both amount and types of fat [...]
Also: "if you limit your fat intake, you should increase your calories from carbohydrates [...]"
We have about 50 years of good satellite data which shows warming, vs 150 years of ground based samples that don't.
The ground based samples are better quality. A satellite doesn't measure surface air temperature. Instead it measure the IR radiation coming from the surface, mixed in with the radiation coming from the entire column of air, and then has to perform complicated modelling to figure out what portion of the IR actually comes from the bottom layer.
And the 150 years of ground data clearly show warming. https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gis...
It doesn't help that East Anglia climatologists were caught cherry picking
They weren't. Here's a nice article explaining the temperature adjustments: https://skepticalscience.com/u...
Even without the adjustments, there's a very clear warming. A team of scientists from Berkeley had doubts about these adjustments, so they started with the raw data, and redid everything themselves. They ended up with almost the same graph.
Here's some more info: http://berkeleyearth.org/summa...
Scott Adams has some interesting things to say [dilbert.com] about the subject.
No, what he's saying is absolutely stupid. Climate models are based on physics models, not just a bunch of made-up offsets.
Here's a well known model forecast, with real temperatures plotted inside it: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DK...
Here you can find all the details about these models:
https://cmip.llnl.gov/index.ht...
We've now seen probably millions of prediction over decades on how global warming will reveal itself to us, and millions of them did not come true
What's the probability that the temperature rise we have seen since the 1960s is a result of random weather ?
https://data.giss.nasa.gov/gis...
If you want to argue that the rise is not due to random weather, what alternative explanation would you suggest ?
Then claim ignorance don't choose which dogma you will follow
Or ask other experts what they think. That's how we deal with everything else.
Appealing to authority is a logical fallacy. It's also not necessary to do that. We should be skeptical of claims by authority and investigate the evidence
It's hard to investigate the evidence when you're not an expert in the field.