There are only about 1000 thousand e-mails released. This cannot possibly be all there is send in over 10 years. I don't think there is a massive conspiracy, only a lot of people with the same interrests and a "the end justifies the means" mentality.
Could it be possible that the more inciminating e-mails were deleted upon being read? Or that there is a silent understanding of what is important so there is no need to talk all the time about the nasty stuff? So the absence of that does not prove anything.
Please read the emails for yourself. The most important piece of information in there is that the top climate scientists are anything but sure about the theories by which we get scared into accepting big impact measures.
"Trick" is frequently used in scientific context to mean "clever method" or "correction".
Please click your link and actually read the search results. Trick is a surname. Try http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=trick+-autor%3Atrick&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0 and see how much "trick" is used as "clever method" or "correction".
If the tree ring data is wrong recently, and there is no verifyable explanation, it is a bad idea to use that data to describe the temperature in the past.
It is a bad sign that data has to be adjusted to be convincing enough. Especially while keeping part of the source data closed. Some people don't like to be manipulated, even if it is for the greater good.
Real skepticism provides criteria by which it can be satisfied. Unchanging skepticism in the face of evidence is not scientific.
Real science makes predictions about the results of experiments or future developments. Ignoring evidence when it does not fit the theory is not science either.
Greenland was never named as such because it was "green." It was named in order to lure colonists who would hear the name and think "Sounds like a nice place. When's the next boat?"
Yes and those colonists came there and stayed for 500 years. Longer than the European colonists in America or Australia so far. They died because the climate got colder.
We don't know why it was called Greenland but they were able to herd cows and sheep.
Maybe I've missed the food and medicine packets from Somalia being dropped on poor areas of our country.
Although i agree with most of your post, this is not strictly fair. My parents visited a small factory in Kenya a few years ago. It was run by HIV infected women, and they were proud to save money for hurricane Katrina victims, to give something back. (i know, citation needed, and i don't know what came of it).
Also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina
By Excel '97 the program was so feature rich that most users never used more than a fraction of its functionality, same goes for Word '97. Where do you go from there?
I, personally, just hope that I will have a gun handy the day it gets too bad.
And you'll make things a lot worse for yourself and everyone else with it. I, personally, just hope to meet helpfull and friendly people the day it gets too bad.
Fear not! That "worthless" helium would be very useful to the mixed gas scuba diving market, which currently has to rely on the meager pickings of helium separated from natural gas.
And it is REALLY valuable if you want to talk with a squiky high-pitched voice!
In other words, they're would-be genocidists who care more about a pile of rocks, water, dirt, and biomass than they care for their own species.
Nah, they generally wouldn't kill people. Nature can defend herself with rising sea levels and skin cancer. But while accurate in pointing out the problems, their suggestion for solutions are rather useless because they see humankind as the source of the problem.
Good grief! The only solution that the shotgun approach gives is for all humans to go live in caves--with the caveat that 5 billion or so of us dissappear (remember that farming and ranching contribute to global warming as well).
Well, many of the more fundamental environmentalists see humankind as a a plague that is scrourging an otherwise perfect earth (mother nature). It is a modern version of the old Gnosis, where the whole creation was evil, and only the Sophia was perfect.
If we manage to figure out a way to move Earth away from the sun before it goes red giant, it will most likely involve leaving any unnecessary baggage (like orbiting balls of rock) behind.
I am sure all scientist who are involved in that project already know this but I'll state it again for if someone wants to do something by himself:
When pushing the moon away to move the earth into a higher orbit when the sun goes red giant, it is of the utmost importance to push her towards the sun. So not in the direction of Mars or 2003UB313! (Unless they are at the other side of the sun). Pushing the moon away from the sun will only make the situation worse! The best time to push is probably during a solar eclipse. Also, don't confuse the sun going red giant with a sunrise or sunset (which is actually just the earth turning!).
I am sorry but I'd prefer to think of it as the earth and her moon. That way it is easier to remember where I am (earth) and what that big thing in the sky is (moon). Also, when you get lost in the woods during the night, it is much easier to find your way by looking at the moon than by looking at the Earth.
You realize of course, the context of the "kill the lawyers" quote is that the act of killing all the lawyers would aid in the establishment of a tyrannical reign. In other words, Shakespeare was saying that in some way, there are lawyers who protect freedom.
Actually, the line follows a line of the rather dumb Jack Cade, who is talking about the reformations when he will be king: I thank you, good people:- there shall be no money; all shall eat and drink on my score; and I will apparel them all in one livery, that they may agree like brothers, and worship me their lord.
to what the vile and ad-rem henchman Dick adds: The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
Jack makes proposals for a perfect, but impossible, society. Dick jokes at the expense of both his boss and the lawyers, and suggests an impossible way to start creating this utopia.
Nonsence. You cannot build an application and expect the user to do an administrative task that can be easily done by the program. The whole point of a computer for most people is to take over stupid tasks, and in my book, regular saving is one of them. The whole saving thing is a ridiculous leftover from the days when disk-access was much slower, floppies needed to be swapped, memory was too low for decent undo, and building an application was just wrapping some sort of interface around system calls. The lady you were calling an idiot because she did not use ctrl-s all the time was probably working with MSWord, a program that has had almost no interface improvements (except macros) since its first version for the macintosh, and that program is a great excemple of bad interface design. Sometimes it uses an autosave function every few minutes, but you cannot rely on that and you never know where these will be saved. I know there are settings for all those things and that you can find them in Options, Extra, Settings, Tools, Advanced and/or Miscellaneous, but the ordinary people who expect an "user-friendly" product might not be able to find them. Please do not call people you do not know idiots, just because they have not developed some habit that is a workaround for a bug in the software they use.
Slashdot Mirror
Make the parent observe while you terminate its children.
Maybe there is no coal, but with all those trees, magma, and limestone this park would make a perfect location to start a steel producing fortress.
There are only about 1000 thousand e-mails released. This cannot possibly be all there is send in over 10 years. I don't think there is a massive conspiracy, only a lot of people with the same interrests and a "the end justifies the means" mentality.
Could it be possible that the more inciminating e-mails were deleted upon being read? Or that there is a silent understanding of what is important so there is no need to talk all the time about the nasty stuff? So the absence of that does not prove anything.
Please read the emails for yourself. The most important piece of information in there is that the top climate scientists are anything but sure about the theories by which we get scared into accepting big impact measures.
"Trick" is frequently used in scientific context to mean "clever method" or "correction".
Please click your link and actually read the search results. Trick is a surname. Try http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=trick+-autor%3Atrick&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0 and see how much "trick" is used as "clever method" or "correction". If the tree ring data is wrong recently, and there is no verifyable explanation, it is a bad idea to use that data to describe the temperature in the past. It is a bad sign that data has to be adjusted to be convincing enough. Especially while keeping part of the source data closed. Some people don't like to be manipulated, even if it is for the greater good.
Real skepticism provides criteria by which it can be satisfied. Unchanging skepticism in the face of evidence is not scientific.
Real science makes predictions about the results of experiments or future developments. Ignoring evidence when it does not fit the theory is not science either.
Greenland was never named as such because it was "green." It was named in order to lure colonists who would hear the name and think "Sounds like a nice place. When's the next boat?"
Yes and those colonists came there and stayed for 500 years. Longer than the European colonists in America or Australia so far. They died because the climate got colder. We don't know why it was called Greenland but they were able to herd cows and sheep.
Maybe I've missed the food and medicine packets from Somalia being dropped on poor areas of our country.
Although i agree with most of your post, this is not strictly fair. My parents visited a small factory in Kenya a few years ago. It was run by HIV infected women, and they were proud to save money for hurricane Katrina victims, to give something back. (i know, citation needed, and i don't know what came of it). Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_response_to_Hurricane_Katrina
It is the only effective way to save their server from being slashdotted, nobody else is going to RTFA.
By Excel '97 the program was so feature rich that most users never used more than a fraction of its functionality, same goes for Word '97. Where do you go from there?
My Office goes to eleven!
An embryo needs to be fertilised before it even has the chance of becoming a child.
Please don't talk about things you don't know anything about.
I, personally, just hope that I will have a gun handy the day it gets too bad.
And you'll make things a lot worse for yourself and everyone else with it. I, personally, just hope to meet helpfull and friendly people the day it gets too bad.
Bacteria don't have a space program. Therefore, they're fucked when the Sun expands. We're not.
Bacteria are developing their own space ships. They are called "humans".
Pinky
Fear not! That "worthless" helium would be very useful to the mixed gas scuba diving market, which currently has to rely on the meager pickings of helium separated from natural gas.
And it is REALLY valuable if you want to talk with a squiky high-pitched voice!
In other words, they're would-be genocidists who care more about a pile of rocks, water, dirt, and biomass than they care for their own species.
Nah, they generally wouldn't kill people. Nature can defend herself with rising sea levels and skin cancer. But while accurate in pointing out the problems, their suggestion for solutions are rather useless because they see humankind as the source of the problem.
Good grief! The only solution that the shotgun approach gives is for all humans to go live in caves--with the caveat that 5 billion or so of us dissappear (remember that farming and ranching contribute to global warming as well).
Well, many of the more fundamental environmentalists see humankind as a a plague that is scrourging an otherwise perfect earth (mother nature). It is a modern version of the old Gnosis, where the whole creation was evil, and only the Sophia was perfect.
If we manage to figure out a way to move Earth away from the sun before it goes red giant, it will most likely involve leaving any unnecessary baggage (like orbiting balls of rock) behind.
I am sure all scientist who are involved in that project already know this but I'll state it again for if someone wants to do something by himself:
When pushing the moon away to move the earth into a higher orbit when the sun goes red giant, it is of the utmost importance to push her towards the sun. So not in the direction of Mars or 2003UB313! (Unless they are at the other side of the sun). Pushing the moon away from the sun will only make the situation worse! The best time to push is probably during a solar eclipse.
Also, don't confuse the sun going red giant with a sunrise or sunset (which is actually just the earth turning!).
Comets, asteroids, planets, stars, they all have grey areas between them.
And black areas! Big black areas!
I am sorry but I'd prefer to think of it as the earth and her moon. That way it is easier to remember where I am (earth) and what that big thing in the sky is (moon). Also, when you get lost in the woods during the night, it is much easier to find your way by looking at the moon than by looking at the Earth.
You realize of course, the context of the "kill the lawyers" quote is that the act of killing all the lawyers would aid in the establishment of a tyrannical reign. In other words, Shakespeare was saying that in some way, there are lawyers who protect freedom.
Actually, the line follows a line of the rather dumb Jack Cade, who is talking about the reformations when he will be king:
I thank you, good people:- there shall be no money; all shall eat and drink on my score; and I will apparel them all in one livery, that they may agree like brothers, and worship me their lord.
to what the vile and ad-rem henchman Dick adds:
The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
Jack makes proposals for a perfect, but impossible, society. Dick jokes at the expense of both his boss and the lawyers, and suggests an impossible way to start creating this utopia.
We cannot see footprints or anything else left there because there is nothing like that over there!!
"Damn, my robot has lost the battle, time to bring out the nukes."
Nonsence. You cannot build an application and expect the user to do an administrative task that can be easily done by the program. The whole point of a computer for most people is to take over stupid tasks, and in my book, regular saving is one of them. The whole saving thing is a ridiculous leftover from the days when disk-access was much slower, floppies needed to be swapped, memory was too low for decent undo, and building an application was just wrapping some sort of interface around system calls. The lady you were calling an idiot because she did not use ctrl-s all the time was probably working with MSWord, a program that has had almost no interface improvements (except macros) since its first version for the macintosh, and that program is a great excemple of bad interface design. Sometimes it uses an autosave function every few minutes, but you cannot rely on that and you never know where these will be saved. I know there are settings for all those things and that you can find them in Options, Extra, Settings, Tools, Advanced and/or Miscellaneous, but the ordinary people who expect an "user-friendly" product might not be able to find them. Please do not call people you do not know idiots, just because they have not developed some habit that is a workaround for a bug in the software they use.
Strange...I always start drinking after using MS-Word.
An anti-gravity device is easy to make, but usually it is called a "floor".