Re:Was Not Impressed at All
on
Lost Ends
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
My issue with Lost is that the entire series was sold with the premise of 'theres a mystery, watch to find out what it is'. Its built up and built up, so many things are hyped and then discarded, and when we get to the final episode... nothing.
They did answer a lot of the mysteries, though. It's just that they raised new and sometimes bigger mysteries, and those were left open.
Re:Was Not Impressed at All
on
Lost Ends
·
· Score: 1
I sympathize with the writers as they had no idea how many seasons they would get
They knew from some time in season 3.
Also the lead writer had refuted the theory that everyone was dead, in purgatory, in heaven or in hell. Yet, at the end they're clearly in some sort of afterlife.
No, they said that the island wasn't a purgatory. They never said the FS wasn't.
I liked it until Jack's father turned up alive. Or dead, rather. And they were all dead. And nothing that happened on the island really mattered anyway. So the ending seemed kind of cheap and rushed. A lame way to get away from all the loose ends and stringing along for all these seasons.
No, you are saying that "humans are intelligent, therefore God".
and can't possibly be affecting global climate
Already refuted. Please read the link I gave you.
by adding trace amounts of plant food into the atmosphere measured in parts per million.
Your ignorance shines through again. Please read the link I gave you.
You're the one attributing superhuman powers to people:)
Nope. You are saying that anything which can affect the climate is supernatural, therefore anyone who says that humans affect the climate believe in the supernatural. However, we know for a fact that the climate can be affected by things that are not supernatural.
HA! Sorry, the Church of Global Warming is religion
See above. You are the one claiming that humans are supernatural (because your religion compels you to believe that anything that can affect the climate must be supernatural).
Really? What happened, did you see a screening of "An Inconvenient Truth"?:)
I already told you what happened. I educated myself. I have not watched "An Inconvenient Truth", and that is a political movie anyway.
The problem is that not knowing which original data was licensed from where is a loss of information. Ever hear of traceability? CRU lost it.
Nope. The findings have been independently verified by scientists from across the world.
Verified? ROTFLMAO! Did you hear the part when Phil Jones admitted that not a single person who ever peer-reviewed their stuff EVER asked for the data?
You are aware that different researchers do their own research, right? And that research matches up.
Remember, it's creationist/warmist:)
The denialists are the ones acting like creationists. In fact, creationists make up a significant portion of the denialist industry.
No he didn't. He said that they deleted a small part of a local copy of the data. How can he lose the original data when they licensed it from somewhere else, and the place they licensed it from still has the same data?
The whole point of CRU was that it made all of these predictions and projections based on manipulating data that they now cannot account for.
On the contrary, the findings of the CRU have been independently verified by scientists from all over the world. Indeed, several investigations into manipulation and other wrongdoings found no such thing.
You are indeed a typical dishonest and ignorant creationist/denialist.
You see, now you've got the essence of the Church of Global Warming -> humans are supernatural beings that can affect the global climate in significant ways by altering a trace atmospheric gas measured in parts PER MILLION!
You are the one who is saying that humans are supernatural. Also, your amazing ignorance is really something. The "humans are too insignificant to affect global climate" lie keeps being repeated by dishonest and ignorant denialists. That's because you and other denialists are religious, and willfully reject the science.
Sure you are. You've identified evil humanity and the trace gas and plant food CO2 as the cause of the world's woes in the most arbitrary and capricious manner.
What on earth are you rambling about? Oh yes, yet another dishonest straw man and red herring from a denialist. Who'd have thought!
The thought that it is even possible for you to be wrong is but a fantasy, since you make no predictions that can be falsified by observations. If that isn't arbitrary, then nothing is.
Actually, I used to be an AGW skeptic myself. That was before I actually bothered to educate myself. So I have indeed been wrong in the past, and accepted that I had been wrong. You, on the other hand, are religious. And AGW is indeed falsifiable. The problem is that it hasn't been falsified.
Say a couple of Hail-Gore's at your Church of Global Warming, and you'll get over it though:)
Ah yes, the Al Gore references. I don't give a crap about Al Gore. He is not a scientist. But it is obvious that you don't give a crap about science, since all you do is to push your political agenda.
Upon reviewing the evidence of the car driving down the road, an independent group discover that all of the photographs, videos and audio had been doctored.
Except it turns out they hadn't. Only right-wing religious groups claimed that they were.
This may have been to clarify the images or it may have been for more nefarious purposes, however, when they ask for the original photos, videos and audio they are told that "we don't have them anymore."
But they do. Not all of it locally, but the original people who recorded it still have them.
Of the eye witnesses we discover that many of them weren't even in the area on the day that the alleged car drove down the road.
Yes they were.
Of those that actually were present, most of these were family pets ("bark once if a car came down the street and twice if it didn't, Fido")
Are you drunk?
the remaining witnesses are all on the local committee to get more funding to resurface the road.
Nope. See, this is your problem. Your right-wing and diseased mind cannot accept the facts, so you invent lies.
Since unused roads are unimportant and can go without resurfacing, especially in times of budget deficit, we can see that their testimony is suspect.
Except this isn't about witness testimony, but a huge body of clear evidence. But of course a disgusting denialist will keep denying the facts.
Yes, the data was destroyed and the originals no longer exist. See:
That article is 404, but it is wrong anyway. It doesn't matter if some dishonest journalist keeps repeating this lie. No data was lost. Only local data was deleted.
What makes you think the original data still exists when Phil Jones himself testified that they only had the "value-added" data, since losing the original data in the 80s?
Stop being a fucking moron, and pay attentiont. The original raw data is still around. The CRU licensed that data from elsewhere. When they deleted a tiny part of the raw data, that data was still available from where they licensed it from (and still is).
"We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added data."
Yes, you fucking moron, the CRU does not. But the data was not lost or deleted. The original licensors still have the raw data.
No, I consider human beings to be intelligent, and therefore naturally analogous to God in the intelligent design theory.
That's a fallacy, because we know for a fact that humans exist, and we know that humans are able to create things. Your argument only makes sense if you consider humans to be supernatural, like God.
That being said, you bring up an interesting point -> why are things that humans do not considered part of nature? Why is a BMW considered any less natural than a spruce tree? Taken to the logical conclusion with catastrophic AGW, the religious statement becomes:
The religious statements here are yours alone. You consistently lie, deceive, and misrepresent the scientific position. Quite pathetic.
No, my argument is that "If anyone says that because we are ignorant of certain factors, it must be due to some arbitrary actor, then they are acting like a creationist." Asserting certainty of a theory based upon ignorance is the hallmark of AGW and intelligent design.
No one is saying "it must be due to some arbitrary actor". You are clearly both deeply dishonest and deeply ignorant.
Tell you what, offer me up your falsifiable hypothesis, and then we can talk science.
You wouldn't know science if it punched you in the face.
It's the modifications and justifications made to the raw data that's primarily important that's also lost.
Nope. Nothing was lost. A small part of a local copy of some data was deleted. The original data still exists. It is not gone.
You see, years and years of research is built off of these manipulations or normalizations and other studies are based off the fruits of this manipulation.
Correction: Years and years of research has confirmed those studies.
Because it isn't "crap", and maybe the moderators who modded it up are getting sick and tired of the name calling and insulting attitude of those who push AGW down the rest of our throats.
Yes, how terrible. "Forcing" science and fact on people. Evil!
Nope. No data was thrown out. A small part of a local copy of some data was deleted. The original data still exists. It is not gone. Why do deniers always insist on lying?
Slashdot Mirror
They did answer a lot of the mysteries, though. It's just that they raised new and sometimes bigger mysteries, and those were left open.
They knew from some time in season 3.
No, they said that the island wasn't a purgatory. They never said the FS wasn't.
I liked it until Jack's father turned up alive. Or dead, rather. And they were all dead. And nothing that happened on the island really mattered anyway. So the ending seemed kind of cheap and rushed. A lame way to get away from all the loose ends and stringing along for all these seasons.
The analysis of the main x264 developer says "VP8 is poo". How "unexpected". No bias there or anything.
All future Android phones will support VP8, and Android will take over bigger and bigger parts of the market. I think VP8 is covered just fine.
Do you have a source for that? I thought the point of the patent pool was that the licensors didn't pay because they all contributed.
Apple is siding with Google? When? Didn't Steve Jobs dismiss VP8 and point to the x264 guy's anti-VP8 piece?
No, you are saying that "humans are intelligent, therefore God".
Already refuted. Please read the link I gave you.
Your ignorance shines through again. Please read the link I gave you.
Nope. You are saying that anything which can affect the climate is supernatural, therefore anyone who says that humans affect the climate believe in the supernatural. However, we know for a fact that the climate can be affected by things that are not supernatural.
See above. You are the one claiming that humans are supernatural (because your religion compels you to believe that anything that can affect the climate must be supernatural).
I already told you what happened. I educated myself. I have not watched "An Inconvenient Truth", and that is a political movie anyway.
Nope. The findings have been independently verified by scientists from across the world.
You are aware that different researchers do their own research, right? And that research matches up.
The denialists are the ones acting like creationists. In fact, creationists make up a significant portion of the denialist industry.
IE9 will not support it directly. IE9 will, however, play it if the user installs support for it.
Of course. A guy who has a crapload of money, time and resources invested in H.264 obviously isn't biased in favor of it...
Yeah, because it's completely unlikely that someone like the x264 dev, who is heavily invested in H.264, might be biased...
Wow, so someone heavily invested in H.264 thinks H.264 is the best thing since sliced bread? Amazing!
No he didn't. He said that they deleted a small part of a local copy of the data. How can he lose the original data when they licensed it from somewhere else, and the place they licensed it from still has the same data?
On the contrary, the findings of the CRU have been independently verified by scientists from all over the world. Indeed, several investigations into manipulation and other wrongdoings found no such thing.
You are indeed a typical dishonest and ignorant creationist/denialist.
You are the one who is saying that humans are supernatural. Also, your amazing ignorance is really something. The "humans are too insignificant to affect global climate" lie keeps being repeated by dishonest and ignorant denialists. That's because you and other denialists are religious, and willfully reject the science.
What on earth are you rambling about? Oh yes, yet another dishonest straw man and red herring from a denialist. Who'd have thought!
Actually, I used to be an AGW skeptic myself. That was before I actually bothered to educate myself. So I have indeed been wrong in the past, and accepted that I had been wrong. You, on the other hand, are religious. And AGW is indeed falsifiable. The problem is that it hasn't been falsified.
Ah yes, the Al Gore references. I don't give a crap about Al Gore. He is not a scientist. But it is obvious that you don't give a crap about science, since all you do is to push your political agenda.
Except it turns out they hadn't. Only right-wing religious groups claimed that they were.
But they do. Not all of it locally, but the original people who recorded it still have them.
Yes they were.
Are you drunk?
Nope. See, this is your problem. Your right-wing and diseased mind cannot accept the facts, so you invent lies.
Except this isn't about witness testimony, but a huge body of clear evidence. But of course a disgusting denialist will keep denying the facts.
Wow, I have my own stalker :D
That article is 404, but it is wrong anyway. It doesn't matter if some dishonest journalist keeps repeating this lie. No data was lost. Only local data was deleted.
Stop being a fucking moron, and pay attentiont. The original raw data is still around. The CRU licensed that data from elsewhere. When they deleted a tiny part of the raw data, that data was still available from where they licensed it from (and still is).
Yes, you fucking moron, the CRU does not. But the data was not lost or deleted. The original licensors still have the raw data.
That's a fallacy, because we know for a fact that humans exist, and we know that humans are able to create things. Your argument only makes sense if you consider humans to be supernatural, like God.
The religious statements here are yours alone. You consistently lie, deceive, and misrepresent the scientific position. Quite pathetic.
No one is saying "it must be due to some arbitrary actor". You are clearly both deeply dishonest and deeply ignorant.
You wouldn't know science if it punched you in the face.
So you are indeed fucking retarded.
I guess it's because alien abductions never happen. But it's a known fact that you are obsessing over me like a little crybaby :D
Aww, did facts hurt your feelings, denialist?
Nope. Nothing was lost. A small part of a local copy of some data was deleted. The original data still exists. It is not gone.
Correction: Years and years of research has confirmed those studies.
Yes, how terrible. "Forcing" science and fact on people. Evil!
Nope. No data was thrown out. A small part of a local copy of some data was deleted. The original data still exists. It is not gone. Why do deniers always insist on lying?