The only real purpose of a jury, any jury, is to make it impossible for the State to prosecute with laws, means or punishments that are too unpopular. It is a sign of the deep corruption of the legal system that this cannot be mentioned in any open court.
... will be bamboozled. There is nothing new in that. It lies behind all political folly.
The data that was adjusted was paleoclimate data, and what it was being adjusted to was temperature data (i.e., the more reliable modern temperature data). As far as I can tell, they neither could nor did adjust the measured temperature data.
The OP did not quote the really important part of the Nature piece :
Nothing in the e-mails undermines the scientific case that global warming is real — or that human activities are almost certainly the cause. That case is supported by multiple, robust lines of evidence, including several that are completely independent of the climate reconstructions debated in the e-mails.
The evidence for this is literally all around us. Throw all of the CRU data out if you want. It won't change a thing.
The system described is an active device, not passive. An active device emits radiation and listens to echo. A passive device just listens to naturally occurring radiation emanating from a source. Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion. But an active device, that actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision. It should be treated like wiretapping, no need to inform the targets but the police should not be able to use the technology willy-nilly at their own discretion.
So, I give you a couple of black box cameras, each able to take pictures of the same resolution inside an (unprotected) house. The one that is passive, and works at 300 GHz, is OK for unrestricted police use, but the one that is active, and works at 3 GHz, requires a (secret) search warrant.
Well, this is reasoning, of a sort, but not any that I would personally want to be associated with.
I have a simple answer to that : I live out in the exurbs where there is basically no real crime. And, yet, the police helicopters (at a cost of so many hundred dollars per hour) buzz by all of the time. I don't think they are looking for donuts. And you think it is luddism to worry about exactly how they are wasting the taxpayer money, and whether it is a threat to the ordinary citizen ? Exactly what century do you think you are living in ?
This is a 3 GHz or 9 cm radar (3.101 to 3.499 GHz using frequency stepping), and would be very easy to block. It would not, for example, go through most screen doors. That makes it less of a threat than the 100 GHz radars also used to "see through walls."
When will we be able to get drywall and ceiling tiles with imprinted or embedded dipoles to block this foolishness ?
Easily disproved. Take a gravimeter up in an elevator. In the growing theory, the gravitational force either stays constant or increases with altitude, while in real gravity (and this well within the powers of modern gravimeters and has been checked many times) the force decreases with altitude.
Remember, faster than light means time travel (&, thus, causality violations), so I can understand caution. But, I bet in reality his theory had more serious problems.
it fits some observations better than Einstein's or Newton's solutions. It better predicts the movement of the planets (in an idealized case)
Oh. In an idealized case. Imaginary physics. Of course, in the actual case, it does not (it requires patching to allow for non-spherical planets).
At any rate, there are at present no known relativistic measurements that are not consistent with General Relativity, so I am not clear where the "better than" comes from.
And, from the standpoint of a General Relativist, the stubborn desire of the particle physicists to have a flat spacetime at high enough energies, no matter what, seems, well, quaint.
I can't say it's surprising that there is " 'very little concrete evidence' that the DNA database had any actual use in investigating crime." If you look at the UK, the trend lines all seem very alarming - billions of pounds spent on crime fighting theater that doesn't actually fight crime, loss of basic freedoms at a rate even the Tudors or the Puritans would have found alarming, all with no apparent actual oversight of any of it. This just seems part of the same pattern.
Except for sometimes in military affairs, it is an iron law that secrecy in Government is intended to cover up malfeasance. Like the ACTA, if it's secret it's bad.
The UK just had the Queen's speech, which was widely regarded as full of things that will never come to pass, as this government most likely has only a few months to live. Even the Queen seemed dubious.
Can someone who is actually plugged into UK politics tell us the likelihood that this would be passed by the current lame-duck government ?
The spacecraft, designed in the early 1970's, had essentially no onboard memory.
In the Deep Space Network, where I worked at the time, that was regarded as a perverse feature, not a bug. Those spacecraft had to get tracking time, or the data would be lost forever. That was not regarded as playing nice in the intense juggling of tracking resources that goes on all of the time in the DSN.
They are not trying to test Pioneer anomaly, but the flyby anomaly. These are totally separate things, and either could be real or due to systematic errors without affecting the other. This paper by Anderson and Nieto describes both anomalies.
The flyby anomaly is an step-function like change in spacecraft velocity that occurs at the moment of closest approach of a Earth gravity assist. (There is not sufficient tracking data to say whether or not it occurs for gravity assists at other planets. There are enough VHF relays around Mars that it might be possible to test this for Mars, if some future mission to Venus or the asteroids wants to carry along a Mars VHF transponder.)
While the Pioneer anomaly has long seemed dubious to me (the required acceleration is small compared to the potential acceleration of the spacecraft from waste heat, and of course has only been seen in one model of spacecraft), the flyby anomaly is more robust, and is seen in many spacecraft flybys. On the other hand, the anomaly is not obviously related to the physics of the situation. Anderson has developed a phenomenological model for the size of the anomaly, but makes no attempt to derive this from first principles. Another thing arguing against the reality of this effect is that it is large enough to be seen as a perturbation in the orbit of in highly elliptical Earth orbiters, and it has never been reported there.
I know that I read about this in the 1970's in some of the SETI scientific literature - I believe in Intelligent Life in the Universe (Carl Sagan & I.S. Shklovskii, Random House, 1966), but I don't have a copy handy.
Slashdot Mirror
There are lots of things which are perfectly legal yet something one would prefer to keep private
Just try and get into one of the Google data centers.
In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible.
George Orwell
Secrecy is necessary to plan the indefensible; what's rare is the Ambassador's honesty in admitting it.
Good for you.
The only real purpose of a jury, any jury, is to make it impossible for the State to prosecute with laws, means or punishments that are too unpopular. It is a sign of the deep corruption of the legal system that this cannot be mentioned in any open court.
Matt is pleading guilty on the advice of his public defender in hopes of getting a three and a half year sentence.
In other words, he doesn't have the money to actually fight this.
... will be bamboozled. There is nothing new in that. It lies behind all political folly.
The data that was adjusted was paleoclimate data, and what it was being adjusted to was temperature data (i.e., the more reliable modern temperature data). As far as I can tell, they neither could nor did adjust the measured temperature data.
The OP did not quote the really important part of the Nature piece :
Nothing in the e-mails undermines the scientific case that global warming is real — or that human activities are almost certainly the cause. That case is supported by multiple, robust lines of evidence, including several that are completely independent of the climate reconstructions debated in the e-mails.
The evidence for this is literally all around us. Throw all of the CRU data out if you want. It won't change a thing.
Like that VP.
If he worked for my company, I would fire him. A VP should know when to keep his or her mouth shut.
The system described is an active device, not passive. An active device emits radiation and listens to echo. A passive device just listens to naturally occurring radiation emanating from a source. Police and private parties might use a passive device at their own discretion. But an active device, that actually illuminates the target would violate expectations of privacy and should not be deployed without court supervision. It should be treated like wiretapping, no need to inform the targets but the police should not be able to use the technology willy-nilly at their own discretion.
So, I give you a couple of black box cameras, each able to take pictures of the same resolution inside an (unprotected) house. The one that is passive, and works at 300 GHz, is OK for unrestricted police use, but the one that is active, and works at 3 GHz, requires a (secret) search warrant.
Well, this is reasoning, of a sort, but not any that I would personally want to be associated with.
I have a simple answer to that : I live out in the exurbs where there is basically no real crime. And, yet, the police helicopters (at a cost of so many hundred dollars per hour) buzz by all of the time. I don't think they are looking for donuts. And you think it is luddism to worry about exactly how they are wasting the taxpayer money, and whether it is a threat to the ordinary citizen ? Exactly what century do you think you are living in ?
This is a 3 GHz or 9 cm radar (3.101 to 3.499 GHz using frequency stepping), and would be very easy to block. It would not, for example, go through most screen doors.
That makes it less of a threat than the 100 GHz radars also used to "see through walls."
When will we be able to get drywall and ceiling tiles with imprinted or embedded dipoles to block this foolishness ?
How did they quantify the $1 million dollar amount?
They got it from the guys that calculate the "street value" of marijuana busts.
And what continent would you jump to from Mexico ?
Easily disproved. Take a gravimeter up in an elevator. In the growing theory, the gravitational force either stays constant or increases with altitude, while in real gravity (and this well within the powers of modern gravimeters and has been checked many times) the force decreases with altitude.
it is the infinities and negative probabilities that are the trouble
Only from a quantum mechanical viewpoint. These are problems of quantization, not intrinsic problems with G.R.
Remember, faster than light means time travel (&, thus, causality violations), so I can understand caution. But, I bet in reality his theory had more serious problems.
it fits some observations better than Einstein's or Newton's solutions. It better predicts the movement of the planets (in an idealized case)
Oh. In an idealized case. Imaginary physics. Of course, in the actual case, it does not (it requires patching to allow for non-spherical planets).
At any rate, there are at present no known relativistic measurements that are not consistent with General Relativity, so I am not clear where the "better than" comes from.
And, from the standpoint of a General Relativist, the stubborn desire of the particle physicists to have a flat spacetime at high enough energies, no matter what, seems, well, quaint.
I can't say it's surprising that there is " 'very little concrete evidence' that the DNA database had any actual use in investigating crime." If you look at the UK, the trend lines all seem very alarming - billions of pounds spent on crime fighting theater that doesn't actually fight crime, loss of basic freedoms at a rate even the Tudors or the Puritans would have found alarming, all with no apparent actual oversight of any of it. This just seems part of the same pattern.
Except for sometimes in military affairs, it is an iron law that secrecy in Government is intended to cover up malfeasance. Like the ACTA, if it's secret it's bad.
The UK just had the Queen's speech, which was widely regarded as full of things that will never come to pass, as this government most likely has only a few months to live. Even the Queen seemed dubious.
Can someone who is actually plugged into UK politics tell us the likelihood that this would be passed by the current lame-duck government ?
...nor did he use the agreed upon remedies outlined in the terms of service. I guess even the editors don't read those things.
Editors : we are altering our Terms of Service.
Pray we do not alter them any further
MOND is much too small to explain this.
The spacecraft, designed in the early 1970's, had essentially no onboard memory.
In the Deep Space Network, where I worked at the time, that was regarded as a perverse feature, not a bug. Those spacecraft had to get tracking time, or the data would be lost forever. That was not regarded as playing nice in the intense juggling of tracking resources that goes on all of the time in the DSN.
They are not trying to test Pioneer anomaly, but the flyby anomaly. These are totally separate things, and either could be real or due to systematic errors without affecting the other. This paper by Anderson and Nieto describes both anomalies.
The flyby anomaly is an step-function like change in spacecraft velocity that occurs at the moment of closest approach of a Earth gravity assist. (There is not sufficient tracking data to say whether or not it occurs for gravity assists at other planets. There are enough VHF relays around Mars that it might be possible to test this for Mars, if some future mission to Venus or the asteroids wants to carry along a Mars VHF transponder.)
While the Pioneer anomaly has long seemed dubious to me (the required acceleration is small compared to the potential acceleration of the spacecraft from waste heat, and of course has only been seen in one model of spacecraft), the flyby anomaly is more robust, and is seen in many spacecraft flybys. On the other hand, the anomaly is not obviously related to the physics of the situation. Anderson has developed a phenomenological model for the size of the anomaly, but makes no attempt to derive this from first principles. Another thing arguing against the reality of this effect is that it is large enough to be seen as a perturbation in the orbit of in highly elliptical Earth orbiters, and it has never been reported there.
I know that I read about this in the 1970's in some of the SETI scientific literature - I believe in Intelligent Life in the Universe (Carl Sagan & I.S. Shklovskii, Random House, 1966), but I don't have a copy handy.
From Dr. Ozcan's list of refereed papers :
Lensfree on-chip cytometry towards wireless health
Electron-proton collisions will not lead to a 511 KeV line. That's due to electron-positron collisions.