Honestly, I think you should have kept that to yourself, because on second thought it doesn't make much sense. Nostradamus' "predictions" are incredibly ambiguous, which is why they can be made fit observations after the fact. Quantities such as degrees Celcius/Fahrenheit are not; the observations either fit within the specified level of precision or not.
Yep. On both sides. This is why both sides have zero credibility with the other. Both sides call the others lying bastards, and for a vocal minority on both sides, they are right.
I'm curious. Who do you think is funding the side that's supported by 90% of climate scientists worldwide?
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I'm sure Apple had a bucket load of old Motorola pagers in the room when they were designed the push software for the iPhone.
Nothing we do can combined cause global scale changes on the planet, which is nice, because then I can keep doing whatever I want.
The worst part is that very little is required to make very large impacts on carbon emissions. If everyone in the US bought a car that had half the horsepower that the car they currently own has, they could make a huge impact on their emissions.
That's because the scientists are done arguing. And it doesn't help when people keep repeating points that have been rejected (or as close as science will ever get to rejecting something):
Slashdot Mirror
typepad.com or nasa.gov. Pick the one you think is most trustworthy on science issues.
(http://climate.nasa.gov/)
Well, you can take for instance the side of the 1300 scientists that made the report that's cited here: http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/. Or the 3146 surveyed here: http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-19/world/eco.globalwarmingsurvey_1_global-warming-climate-science-human-activity.
But these guys are all funded by some organization that wants people to recycle, right?
FFS: http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
Or don't you trust these guys either?
Honestly, I think you should have kept that to yourself, because on second thought it doesn't make much sense. Nostradamus' "predictions" are incredibly ambiguous, which is why they can be made fit observations after the fact. Quantities such as degrees Celcius/Fahrenheit are not; the observations either fit within the specified level of precision or not.
Yep. On both sides. This is why both sides have zero credibility with the other. Both sides call the others lying bastards, and for a vocal minority on both sides, they are right.
I'm curious. Who do you think is funding the side that's supported by 90% of climate scientists worldwide?
...denying ideas widely held by entire scientific and academic communities...
Please elaborate. I'm very interested to hear what the scientific and academic community has to say about climate change.
Nope
On a side note: *uuutiiiniii*
If by best, you mean adequate, the answer would be nobody. But I guess AT&T would be least worst (at least when I was last there).
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I'm sure Apple had a bucket load of old Motorola pagers in the room when they were designed the push software for the iPhone.
Thank you (again) Poland.
The reverse argument is equally ridiculous:
Nothing we do can combined cause global scale changes on the planet, which is nice, because then I can keep doing whatever I want.
The worst part is that very little is required to make very large impacts on carbon emissions. If everyone in the US bought a car that had half the horsepower that the car they currently own has, they could make a huge impact on their emissions.
Let's roll the dice so we don't have to be inconvenienced by sorting our garbage and driving cars with smaller engines.
Nananananananana, Bribeman!
Aaaaaany minute now.
So you're saying Windows ME and Vista was on purpose?
I'm waiting for Firefox 23, so it will be the same version as emacs. I'm guessing it will be released around Christmas.
So long dumbass Firefox developers, I'm switching to Chrome.
Which does not display it's version number so prominently, but otherwise uses the same development schedule and version numbering.
Know what I mean, know what I mean?
Or the 54% I'm spending at the gun shop.
I like the idea, and I'd like to contribute. Here's a plus function:
plus: { value: function(y) {
return this + 2;
}}
You can test it with
function Plus(result) {
result((2).plus(2), 4, '2+2 is 4');
}
Of course it is.
http://emacs-w3m.namazu.org/
Take that vi :P
what unit is it measured in?
I propose the Stallman, with 10 Stallman being as open as can be, and 0 Stallman being NSA-like transparency.
Let's conveniently ignore the following:
The evidence for rapid climate change is compelling (http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/)
Most climate scientists agree the main cause of the current global warming trend is human expansion of the "greenhouse effect" (http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/)
Until it says "most scientists agree that we needn't worry about AGW" I'll keep worrying about AGW.
The answers to all you questions are here:
http://climate.nasa.gov
But I guess they're socialist conspirators at the same time as being American heros, right?
That's because the scientists are done arguing. And it doesn't help when people keep repeating points that have been rejected (or as close as science will ever get to rejecting something):
* It's happening.
* We're at fault.
(Most climate scientists agree that) it's not part of a natural cycle. That's as close to resolved as it's going to be.
And the Abel Prize which is pretty much equivalent to a Nobel Prize in all but name.