I just don't entirely buy these guy's motives. They are required to be paranoid about having all the facts. They can see through the rape case BS like anyone else. Wikileaks was already starting to make redactions, a compromise. Openleaks must want to fall in line with demands just a little more, why else split?
The first thing that came to my mind is that it's a new site is being set up to catch whistle blowers. Leak occasional trivial documents to snare the big ones. I don't condone any of this but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.
True, Dark Matter, like Dark Energy, is just a placeholder name for something that we know is there. What we're seeing is patches of gravity where none should exist. Even with all those red dwarfs being added it still doesn't come close to making up for all the extra gravity. I heard Neil deGrasse Tyson say at a lecture (which certainly could be outdated) that observable mass accounts for about %5 of of all the stuff out there.
Have you just asked them to correct it? State your case thoroughly and at least give them a chance to not need to go on the defensive. Be nice about it they're people too. Projects might be patented as a matter of routine and not necessarily by the actual programmer. If you attack them they most certainly won't bow out gracefully.
Pluto is mostly made of various ices (like comets) and travels through the Oort Cloud (like comets). It's orbit is highly eccentric and at a tilt (like comets). Pluto is quite clearly a large comet that never made it to the inner Solar System.
Also, because of it's companion, Charon, the center of gravity for the two is actually between the two. If it were a planet, it would also be unique in this respect as well.
Sorry, to disappoint, but the reason I saw those videos was because of Dawkins. I don't like Christians imposing their beliefs any more than Muslims. Atheists don't kill in the name of... well, nothing. There has never been a war to un-convert people. Sure there have been atheist warmongers, though far more religious ones.
I'm talking about people alive right now, not 700 years ago, that think others in the area they just arrived at should die or convert to their ways.
My thoughts exactly. I've watched a few interview from a British Muslim guy named Anjem Choudary (mostly arguing with Richard Dawkins over the inherent danger in religion), and I find it enlightening to know just how crazy some people are out there. We're talking the kind of guy that thinks everyone should be converted to Sharia law, forcefully if necessary. Someone who thinks people should be put to death for leaving Islam. It's strange to watch someone debate a topic, when that debate would not even be allowed if he had his way. Also, by banning these people is makes them harder to find for those needing to detain these freaks.
Wow dude, mellow out. It was a joke. You just pissed in the previous guy's Wheaties so why do you deserve better? I love learning new things more than anyone I personally know. I am comfortable with the knowledge that I know a lot more than the most people around me, but I don't demonstrate it or rub it in every chance I get. By correcting people making a non-offensive joke, especially nitpicking stupid little details, it makes you seem like an arrogant prick.
You might not realize this, but a transgendered "woman" is just a guy who's disfigured themselves with surgery. Sorry, I just don't find this kind of behavior to be stable and don't intend to pretend like it's normal. If I cut a tumor out of my arm with a knife myself, good job, let a doctor do it right next time. If I took a knife and tried to invert my penis myself, Id be committed. Why is it any more sane to let a doctor do it? It's no different than when I tried to get a hole put in my septum because I want a three chambered heart. I'm a bipedal alien reptile dammit! I don't care about no "DNA". Gay is fine, their brains are just built different. It can be argued that there is a evolutionary benefit to a society which has members that work but don't reproduce, especially a society exposed to famine.
There's a certain bit or irony to disagreeing with my post against censorship, only to mod it down to where it isn't normally viewable. There's nothing in my post in any way is meant to be a troll. I'd be interested to know what loose definition of trolling includes that post. Seriously, don't waste mod points on posts you don't agree with and mod up the ones you do. Yes, this is mostly -1 offtopic.
Amnesty's sole purpose is to support the rights of humans everywhere. They should be having a huge outcry over the things found in the leak. A human rights group should be an authority on what is right and wrong. Instead they are calling for censorship. What could a meeting accomplish other than expressing our freedoms less? It's not like he's going to convince the Amnesty rep that what he's asking is entirely counter to their cause. Ever consider he might be right to out them too? You don't call a meeting so you can get someone to change your mind.
They're worried that putting Afghan's names out in the press releases might hurt them, yet seem rather indifferent to soldiers going on shooting sprees? I suppose technically you're aren't hurt if you're dead. Besides, I don't really believe in a country with a %20 literacy rate, that there are a lot of Internet using, English reading militants sifting through 76,000 documents looking for a reasons to kill their neighbor. If they want to kill them they don't need an excuse.
So we go to war, supposedly to "protect our freedoms," having soldiers willing to lay down their lives. We then censor all those said fatally defended freedoms. A journalist then decides to express their lost freedom by ousting the underhanded and barbaric activities of our own government. Another group whose sole premise is to advocate the rights of humans, ignores the whole barbarism bit and advocates censorship.
Yes, bad shit happens in war. Being willing to help cover it up makes them accessory to all those bad things. How many more years before can start taking all the Vietnam comparisons and switch them to Afghanistan comparisons?
I'm quite serious. If you have anything to correct, link or otherwise challenge without acting like children I'd be happy to answer. Think that kind of idiocy would fly if you were giving a talk at TED? So why does it fly anywhere else talking about science? If you're throwing an emotional response in, then you're not thinking rationally. Just like people trust religion out of emotion, and science out of logic, you're acting like a fundie blindly guarding something you don't really understand yourself. If that too much to ask then go bother someone else.
Sorry, your angry irrational responses demonstrate you are unable to have a normal discussion and most likely are even less qualified than me. Post a rational response and I will be happy to respond (go ahead, it's not hard). Until then, go back to the kids room, the other adults are getting annoyed.
And even his math did not show a runaway effect, but instead that CO2 must increase in greater and greater amounts for the same increase of temperature.
"if the quantity of carbonic acid increases in geometric progression, the augmentation of the temperature will increase nearly in arithmetic progression"
The runaway part of the graph would be the CO2 axis, not the temperature. Evan at that, CO2 has doubled since his time, but temperature has not increased to anywhere near the amount predicted. Just because he did the math doesn't mean he got it right.
Then I ask why is Earth's temperature not explained by it's density of atmosphere and distance from the Sun like its neighbors, instead of it's contents? I am insisting that Earth can not be special in this respect. Maybe CO2 has only a tenuous connection to global warming. The combination of atmospheric density and distance from the Sun seems a perfectly rational explanation. From your analysis I'll conclude that CO2 has only a marginal impact on global warming. I do think latent geothermal heat has a lot to do with it. Mars is not tectonically active while the Venusian crust shows evidence of being recently liquid, in cosmic timescales at least. Earth is a happy medium in almost every respect between Mars and Venus besides CO2, and humanity gives itself too much credit for it's over all impact.
One last bit. Human have been putting a great deal of effort into releasing stored energy, being fossil fuels and nuclear energy. Occam's Razor suggests we are heating Earth with the 16,000,000,000,000 watts of non-solar heat being added. True, this is small compared to what the Sun gives us, but we are talking a small increase. It seems to me that climate science implies what we are doing is the equivalent of sticking a heater in the room, and then saying it's hot because we are breathing all the O2 into CO2.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I'm between the Jetsons car noise or a running horse.
Democratic National Committee: 21% Basic, 77% Intermediate, less than 1% Advanced .org site and RNC has .com? Weird)
Republican National Committee: 11, 87, less than 1 (DNC has
Whitehouse: 6, 87, 5
Or Wikileaks: 1, 42, 56
Of course the epicenter of stupid, Sarah Palin's Facebook page, 64, 33, 1
A few Slashdot worthy ones:
Microsoft: 12, 77, 9
Apple: 48, 49, 2 (anyone surprised here?)
Linux: 4, 91, 3
I just don't entirely buy these guy's motives. They are required to be paranoid about having all the facts. They can see through the rape case BS like anyone else. Wikileaks was already starting to make redactions, a compromise. Openleaks must want to fall in line with demands just a little more, why else split?
The first thing that came to my mind is that it's a new site is being set up to catch whistle blowers. Leak occasional trivial documents to snare the big ones. I don't condone any of this but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.
True, Dark Matter, like Dark Energy, is just a placeholder name for something that we know is there. What we're seeing is patches of gravity where none should exist. Even with all those red dwarfs being added it still doesn't come close to making up for all the extra gravity. I heard Neil deGrasse Tyson say at a lecture (which certainly could be outdated) that observable mass accounts for about %5 of of all the stuff out there.
Have you just asked them to correct it? State your case thoroughly and at least give them a chance to not need to go on the defensive. Be nice about it they're people too. Projects might be patented as a matter of routine and not necessarily by the actual programmer. If you attack them they most certainly won't bow out gracefully.
nt
Pluto is mostly made of various ices (like comets) and travels through the Oort Cloud (like comets). It's orbit is highly eccentric and at a tilt (like comets). Pluto is quite clearly a large comet that never made it to the inner Solar System. Also, because of it's companion, Charon, the center of gravity for the two is actually between the two. If it were a planet, it would also be unique in this respect as well.
Wait a minute, are you telling me the Sun doesn't rise out of the Atlantic every morning?
Virgin birth of a serpent. That's gotta count for something.
Sorry, to disappoint, but the reason I saw those videos was because of Dawkins. I don't like Christians imposing their beliefs any more than Muslims. Atheists don't kill in the name of... well, nothing. There has never been a war to un-convert people. Sure there have been atheist warmongers, though far more religious ones. I'm talking about people alive right now, not 700 years ago, that think others in the area they just arrived at should die or convert to their ways.
My thoughts exactly. I've watched a few interview from a British Muslim guy named Anjem Choudary (mostly arguing with Richard Dawkins over the inherent danger in religion), and I find it enlightening to know just how crazy some people are out there. We're talking the kind of guy that thinks everyone should be converted to Sharia law, forcefully if necessary. Someone who thinks people should be put to death for leaving Islam. It's strange to watch someone debate a topic, when that debate would not even be allowed if he had his way. Also, by banning these people is makes them harder to find for those needing to detain these freaks.
Wow dude, mellow out. It was a joke. You just pissed in the previous guy's Wheaties so why do you deserve better? I love learning new things more than anyone I personally know. I am comfortable with the knowledge that I know a lot more than the most people around me, but I don't demonstrate it or rub it in every chance I get. By correcting people making a non-offensive joke, especially nitpicking stupid little details, it makes you seem like an arrogant prick.
I bet you're a lot of fun at parties.
You might not realize this, but a transgendered "woman" is just a guy who's disfigured themselves with surgery. Sorry, I just don't find this kind of behavior to be stable and don't intend to pretend like it's normal. If I cut a tumor out of my arm with a knife myself, good job, let a doctor do it right next time. If I took a knife and tried to invert my penis myself, Id be committed. Why is it any more sane to let a doctor do it? It's no different than when I tried to get a hole put in my septum because I want a three chambered heart. I'm a bipedal alien reptile dammit! I don't care about no "DNA". Gay is fine, their brains are just built different. It can be argued that there is a evolutionary benefit to a society which has members that work but don't reproduce, especially a society exposed to famine.
Hey, it's Slashdot. Somebody had to notice.
There's a certain bit or irony to disagreeing with my post against censorship, only to mod it down to where it isn't normally viewable. There's nothing in my post in any way is meant to be a troll. I'd be interested to know what loose definition of trolling includes that post. Seriously, don't waste mod points on posts you don't agree with and mod up the ones you do. Yes, this is mostly -1 offtopic.
Amnesty's sole purpose is to support the rights of humans everywhere. They should be having a huge outcry over the things found in the leak. A human rights group should be an authority on what is right and wrong. Instead they are calling for censorship. What could a meeting accomplish other than expressing our freedoms less? It's not like he's going to convince the Amnesty rep that what he's asking is entirely counter to their cause. Ever consider he might be right to out them too? You don't call a meeting so you can get someone to change your mind.
They're worried that putting Afghan's names out in the press releases might hurt them, yet seem rather indifferent to soldiers going on shooting sprees? I suppose technically you're aren't hurt if you're dead. Besides, I don't really believe in a country with a %20 literacy rate, that there are a lot of Internet using, English reading militants sifting through 76,000 documents looking for a reasons to kill their neighbor. If they want to kill them they don't need an excuse.
So we go to war, supposedly to "protect our freedoms," having soldiers willing to lay down their lives. We then censor all those said fatally defended freedoms. A journalist then decides to express their lost freedom by ousting the underhanded and barbaric activities of our own government. Another group whose sole premise is to advocate the rights of humans, ignores the whole barbarism bit and advocates censorship.
Yes, bad shit happens in war. Being willing to help cover it up makes them accessory to all those bad things. How many more years before can start taking all the Vietnam comparisons and switch them to Afghanistan comparisons?
You sir, have earned your nerd humor merit badge.
I'm quite serious. If you have anything to correct, link or otherwise challenge without acting like children I'd be happy to answer. Think that kind of idiocy would fly if you were giving a talk at TED? So why does it fly anywhere else talking about science? If you're throwing an emotional response in, then you're not thinking rationally. Just like people trust religion out of emotion, and science out of logic, you're acting like a fundie blindly guarding something you don't really understand yourself. If that too much to ask then go bother someone else.
Sorry, your angry irrational responses demonstrate you are unable to have a normal discussion and most likely are even less qualified than me. Post a rational response and I will be happy to respond (go ahead, it's not hard). Until then, go back to the kids room, the other adults are getting annoyed.
And even his math did not show a runaway effect, but instead that CO2 must increase in greater and greater amounts for the same increase of temperature.
"if the quantity of carbonic acid increases in geometric progression, the augmentation of the temperature will increase nearly in arithmetic progression"
The runaway part of the graph would be the CO2 axis, not the temperature. Evan at that, CO2 has doubled since his time, but temperature has not increased to anywhere near the amount predicted. Just because he did the math doesn't mean he got it right.
Then I ask why is Earth's temperature not explained by it's density of atmosphere and distance from the Sun like its neighbors, instead of it's contents? I am insisting that Earth can not be special in this respect. Maybe CO2 has only a tenuous connection to global warming. The combination of atmospheric density and distance from the Sun seems a perfectly rational explanation. From your analysis I'll conclude that CO2 has only a marginal impact on global warming. I do think latent geothermal heat has a lot to do with it. Mars is not tectonically active while the Venusian crust shows evidence of being recently liquid, in cosmic timescales at least. Earth is a happy medium in almost every respect between Mars and Venus besides CO2, and humanity gives itself too much credit for it's over all impact.
I am an atheist. Zeus has no mercy for me.
One last bit. Human have been putting a great deal of effort into releasing stored energy, being fossil fuels and nuclear energy. Occam's Razor suggests we are heating Earth with the 16,000,000,000,000 watts of non-solar heat being added. True, this is small compared to what the Sun gives us, but we are talking a small increase. It seems to me that climate science implies what we are doing is the equivalent of sticking a heater in the room, and then saying it's hot because we are breathing all the O2 into CO2.