The prediction of an increase in concentration in carbon dioxide predates the 1970s. Arrhenius first predicted it in the 19th century. That's why Keeling started measuring the concentration on carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in the 1950s. In 1979, the Jason Committee predicted a doubling in the concentration of carbon dioxide and a warming of several degrees Celsius by 2035. At this point, we have decades of data confirming these predictions.
No, it hasn't been for naught. Just think about what the emissions would have been if we haven't been trying to reduce emissions. What we need to do is much more to reduce emissions. We really haven't done much so far.
Yes, they can measure the concentration of the isotope carbon-14. But even if we couldn't do so, what else do you think would make the concentration of carbon dioxide increase from about 285 ppm to about 385 ppm in just over 100 years?
If your intranet site doesn't work in Chrome, and users are forbidden to install Chrome because the intranet site doesn't work with it, it's no wonder that Chrome accounts for less than 1% of your intranet traffic. Perhaps if you fixed the problem with the site and users were allowed to install Chrome, the usage of Chrome would be far higher.
I see. So Fusion-IO gets its speed advantage from bypassing the SATA bus speed limitation. I would suppose it would lose much of that advantage when SATA 3.0 SSD drives start shipping.
Maybe for write performance. For read performance, it looks like most SSDs are maxing out the 3Gbps SATA bus, so we'll need the 6Gbps goodness that SATA 3.0 offers for better read performance.
A change in climate can be natural or manmade. Earth's climate is changing now because of a manmade increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. That does not mean that all climate change on all planets is manmade!
More global citations may include here [longrangeweather.com] or here [wikipedia.org], both of which throw some concern on taking your citation as the ultimate word.
That first graph utterly contradicts all other sources I've seen. I highly doubt its accuracy.
As to the second graph, the scale is so compressed that it's very difficult to see that the current warming trend over the past several decades is an order of magnitude faster than past warming. A warming of a few degrees Celsius over 200 years would appear as a vertical line (literally one pixel wide on that bit-mapped graph!), as opposed to the lines with obvious, albeit steep, slopes.
The bottom line is that the warming we've seen in the past several decades is unprecedented in its rate of change. It's also in line with the warming that was predicted by Arrhenius over 100 years ago and by the Jason committee in 1979.
Um, this is the arctic. When you melt that ice, the sea level will remain unchanged.
When sea ice melts, it does not change the sea level. Obviously, Miller was referring to ice that is on land. There's lots of ice in the Arctic that is on land, for example, in Greenland, Canada, Russia, and Alaska. The sea level has been rising due to melting ice sheets and the thermal expansion of the ocean. Within the next century, rising sea level is predicted to inundate a number of urban areas.
It's the ad author, who used a loop for polling or delaying until the next frame instead of a wait or sleep, who's to blame. Anyway, just run Firefox with Adblock Plus and you'll see hardly any of those ads.
There have been energy efficiency standards for decades before Obama took office, in particular for refrigerators. Medicare also has always been run by the government. I don't understand this idiotic Obama backlash, where suddenly every new government program or regulation is socialism or communism, but Medicare, social security, public schools, and other programs we've had for decades are perfectly fine.
Your comment reminds me of Harlan Ellison's work. I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream is a short story that deals with an AI that extracts revenge on its former masters by enslaving and torturing them. The Outer Limits episode The Human Operators has a similar theme.
I don't think Google has a monopoly in any area, nor does this look like an instance of Google leveraging their success in search or advertising to gain an advantage for their browser. Google is simply paying Sony to install Chrome, as has been done with pre-installed software for many years.
Well, yeah, you could have beans faster if you don't stop to laugh so much. I guess you could have anything faster if you don't stop to laugh so much. I doubt that anyone will stop to laugh at this lame joke though.
If you make a good edit, the chance that it will be reverted is very low. I think most of the edits I make are reverting bad edits by anonymous or new contributors who for some reason add incorrect information or mess something up. I'm not sure if they just don't know what they're doing or if they're deliberately trying to mess up Wikipedia. But if you make sure you're adding correct information and use the preview button to make sure you're not messing something up, then the edit will almost always stick.
No, it doesn't prevent us putting different engine on future planes. On the other hand, the other forms of energy do not have as high an energy density as carbon-based fuels, so they are are not practical to power planes. That is why we are looking for carbon-based fuels to replace fossil fuels.
Slashdot Mirror
The consensus among climatologists is that we'll see warming over the next century. You can see the results of Peter Norvig's experiment to determine if there is a consensus on global warming and a survey which shows that 97% of active climatologists agree humans are causing warming.
The prediction of an increase in concentration in carbon dioxide predates the 1970s. Arrhenius first predicted it in the 19th century. That's why Keeling started measuring the concentration on carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in the 1950s. In 1979, the Jason Committee predicted a doubling in the concentration of carbon dioxide and a warming of several degrees Celsius by 2035. At this point, we have decades of data confirming these predictions.
Yes, in the past, the increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere lagged behind temperature increases. But that does not mean that an increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide cannot cause an increase in temperatures now. After all, digging up billions of tons of fossil fuels and burning them is not something that has happened in the past. And we know it's not an increase in solar output causing the warming we've observed.
If we're trying to prevent the disaster, it had better be news and we had better wake up well before is happens so we can prevent it. As for data validating climate models, that has been happening for decades. Remember? It's been in all the papers for many years. We've seen an increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere since that 1950s, and the warming that was predicted to cause since the 1970s. That's why we're trying to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
No, it hasn't been for naught. Just think about what the emissions would have been if we haven't been trying to reduce emissions. What we need to do is much more to reduce emissions. We really haven't done much so far.
Yes, they can measure the concentration of the isotope carbon-14. But even if we couldn't do so, what else do you think would make the concentration of carbon dioxide increase from about 285 ppm to about 385 ppm in just over 100 years?
You're a little late. Back in May, the Obama administration adopted California's fuel efficiency regulations for passenger vehicles. There are also new efficiency standards for applicances, introduced in February, and new lighting efficiency standards, introduced in June.
No, no, no! Hasn't this been explained enough already? It's a series of TUBES, dammit!
If your intranet site doesn't work in Chrome, and users are forbidden to install Chrome because the intranet site doesn't work with it, it's no wonder that Chrome accounts for less than 1% of your intranet traffic. Perhaps if you fixed the problem with the site and users were allowed to install Chrome, the usage of Chrome would be far higher.
I see. So Fusion-IO gets its speed advantage from bypassing the SATA bus speed limitation. I would suppose it would lose much of that advantage when SATA 3.0 SSD drives start shipping.
Maybe for write performance. For read performance, it looks like most SSDs are maxing out the 3Gbps SATA bus, so we'll need the 6Gbps goodness that SATA 3.0 offers for better read performance.
A change in climate can be natural or manmade. Earth's climate is changing now because of a manmade increase in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. That does not mean that all climate change on all planets is manmade!
That first graph utterly contradicts all other sources I've seen. I highly doubt its accuracy.
As to the second graph, the scale is so compressed that it's very difficult to see that the current warming trend over the past several decades is an order of magnitude faster than past warming. A warming of a few degrees Celsius over 200 years would appear as a vertical line (literally one pixel wide on that bit-mapped graph!), as opposed to the lines with obvious, albeit steep, slopes.
The bottom line is that the warming we've seen in the past several decades is unprecedented in its rate of change. It's also in line with the warming that was predicted by Arrhenius over 100 years ago and by the Jason committee in 1979.
When sea ice melts, it does not change the sea level. Obviously, Miller was referring to ice that is on land. There's lots of ice in the Arctic that is on land, for example, in Greenland, Canada, Russia, and Alaska. The sea level has been rising due to melting ice sheets and the thermal expansion of the ocean. Within the next century, rising sea level is predicted to inundate a number of urban areas.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/09/090903-arctic-warming-ice-age.html
On the graph, can you see the slow decline in temperatures until about 1900, when temperatures suddenly switched to rising rapidly?
There are several hypotheses regarding the warming observed on Mars and Pluto.
It's the ad author, who used a loop for polling or delaying until the next frame instead of a wait or sleep, who's to blame. Anyway, just run Firefox with Adblock Plus and you'll see hardly any of those ads.
There have been energy efficiency standards for decades before Obama took office, in particular for refrigerators. Medicare also has always been run by the government. I don't understand this idiotic Obama backlash, where suddenly every new government program or regulation is socialism or communism, but Medicare, social security, public schools, and other programs we've had for decades are perfectly fine.
Your comment reminds me of Harlan Ellison's work. I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream is a short story that deals with an AI that extracts revenge on its former masters by enslaving and torturing them. The Outer Limits episode The Human Operators has a similar theme.
According to this article from two weeks ago, Google has a 65% share of the U.S. search market. That's hardly a monopoly.
I don't think Google has a monopoly in any area, nor does this look like an instance of Google leveraging their success in search or advertising to gain an advantage for their browser. Google is simply paying Sony to install Chrome, as has been done with pre-installed software for many years.
What is it?
Well, yeah, you could have beans faster if you don't stop to laugh so much. I guess you could have anything faster if you don't stop to laugh so much. I doubt that anyone will stop to laugh at this lame joke though.
What is it that they could of had?
If you make a good edit, the chance that it will be reverted is very low. I think most of the edits I make are reverting bad edits by anonymous or new contributors who for some reason add incorrect information or mess something up. I'm not sure if they just don't know what they're doing or if they're deliberately trying to mess up Wikipedia. But if you make sure you're adding correct information and use the preview button to make sure you're not messing something up, then the edit will almost always stick.
No, it doesn't prevent us putting different engine on future planes. On the other hand, the other forms of energy do not have as high an energy density as carbon-based fuels, so they are are not practical to power planes. That is why we are looking for carbon-based fuels to replace fossil fuels.