It's stupid to ignore everything we know about physics. Science consists of both theory and observation.
I can't agree more. The danger is in taking a person's model, which may very well accurately predict climate change, and calling it truth without argument. That isn't science anymore.
I've read some of Alan Robock's papers and don't disagree. It's full of actual data and measurements. I might also point out that sulphates are known for their cloud forming abilities and also raise the albedo of the clouds they are present in. It seems likely that sulphates have multiple ways they effect temperatures. I wonder if cutting out the human component in sulphur production might actually warm the planet.
Clouds do form on dust though, water vapor condensing on it. You cant ignore this. More dust in atmosphere and there will be more clouds. Not in the same proportion as the dust increase, but it dramatically increasing the chances that cool water vapor in the atmosphere will find it. You don't think that's some kind of special dust that somehow remains separate, do you? You refer to models like someone using the Bible defense. Make your case will facts, not some preordained truth. You know, actual numbers and records. No models, no data from model, and no models of models are ever fact.
I honestly desire a global catastrophe as humanity needs another reset and where I live I'm likely to survive it. Unfortunately these pesky clouds are only making that more difficult.
But the light must make it down first to be absorbed and emitted as infrared. I have to put the idea out there that the models say that cloud feedback is positive because if the model came back negative the researcher would no longer have any money.
Why is it when we talked about a nuclear war it was a Nuclear Winter? Sorry, at this point that is only conjecture, too. So let's take a fact then. Every time there has been a major volcanic explosion in history, global effects, it was followed by sudden and sometimes extreme cooling. Mt. Tambora in Indonesia exploded in 1815 and 1816 became "the year without a summer."
Real data, not models, shows that this dust in the atmosphere and the resulting clouds (clouds form on dust) cool the planet.
The Venusian atmosphere is NOT water vapor though and comparing Venus's CO2 (96%) atmosphere and and sulfur dioxide clouds at 9 MPa to our nitrogen-oxygen atmosphere and water vapor clouds at 100 kPa and then add in that Venus it 1/3 closer to the Sun than Earth and its a bit like apples and oranges.
If the albedo becomes very high, where most of the atmosphere is white, where is the heat coming from? Anyone who thinks clouds trap heat has forgotten what it's like to stand outside on a cloudy day. The top layer of cloud should reflect most of the heat back up. Anything else will get sent down to through more cloud and some more of that will escape upward and so on.
When the oil fields burned in the Middle East in the first gulf war we notice the temperatures actually locally dropped 10C from all the black clouds.
I've seen the 3rd concern listed over and over again on this forum. Water vapor certainly is a greenhouse gas, reflecting Earth's infrared back down, but I don't buy the idea that more water vapor means more heat. Are we gonna have all this vapor up in the air with no more clouds? With little sunlight making it all the way down, there will be little infrared coming back up. Continued extensive cloud cover would only make the Earth cold, probably giving us our overdue ice age.
Sell it? It's not like we don't use salts in many things, especially ourselves.
His figure of a half inch everywhere comes out to about 171,000 gallons of water. That doesn't seem all that impossible. How much salt is in that relatively small amount of water?
I'm speaking from personal experience here. Do you ever look back at a joke that you told or got and laughed at and thought: "Wow, I really am a nerd."
I'm nearing the end of Red Mars right now, planning to read all three. Wouldn't have thought I'd ever randomly run into a spoiler for a book I was reading. If I didn't know better, I would've thought Kim Stanley Robinson was a woman. He writes a lot more about relationships than most books Ive read.
The only thing about Dune that seemed really science fictiony in any way was the Spice (just can't call it melange, doesn't roll of the tongue). But, really it explains it in the book as basically throttling up you brain's processing power. You can already make guesses as to what will happen in the future. The Spice makes you better at it. As the book points out, predicting a possible future is easy. Seeing the past from the future, and all the points that lead up to that future is hard. Herbert was very good at sticking plots within plots.
And that is less plausible then some uneducated desert slave kid finding out he has magic powers which allow him to topple an intergalactic empire? The problem with George Lucas is that he wrote the same trilogy twice. In one the kid is bad, and the other he is good. Who would've thought he'd do worse for the second trilogy?
Came back a few days later to see a bunch of really bad excuses for an argument. It's time to suck it up and admit you're whack.
5 to 10 years makes no sense at all as a response. It would be paid for immediately by the government who would then take it from the person at fault. How long do you think it takes to build a house, anyway?
I'm arguing that if %74 of that town are in agreement that they want to put fiber optic lines beneath their own streets at their own cost then they damn well have every right to do it no matter what. It hurts no person, it's their town. If this government isn't "We the People", then what the hell is the point in voting?
I'm actually getting really tired of this. You appear to continue to make up nonsensical, hypothetical situations to find loopholes in laws that haven't even been violated. Only the second part has anything to do with anything.
In a perfect world, if the guy could not cover the cost of repair, the government would cover the cost and garnish the man's wages. There would be many times that it would be difficult to get all the money back, but at least it's being paid off instead of all the damages being absorbed the government.
That argument is bunk. The company denied the contract, there should be no issue to settle. The referendum passed with %74 approval, what else gets that kind of approval? You're saying that people's vote should be less important than a telecom's? They should be barred from a contract because the issue was decided by vote, end of story.
I could build you a good computer, charge you $50 a month for a year and easily pay for itself, that argument doesn't stand at all.
The telecom could have had exclusive, very high bandwidth service in that town and chose not to. They likely already have another, slower, moneymaking service in place and didn't want to lose revenue off that system. Now that they see the city is actually going to build it themselves they realize that their monopoly will be gone unless they somehow find some legal loophole to wind back the clock and accept the contract.
If their is some local minority group that is trained and has the equipment to lay fiber optic lines, then I ask why the local minorities all banded together to buy that kind of equipment. It's not there are a bunch of white guys pooling money together to by machinery that can make small tunnels sideways underground anywhere either. They don't do it with shovels you know.
Because the alcohol really holds on to that last little bit of water. The water doesn't settle so you can't sieve it out the bottom.
Lastly, the technology you speak of has already been done. Not only that, it's very common. Reverse osmosis is taking impure water and squeezing it against a membrane so relatively pure water comes through. If the pressure were removed the water would wick back through the membrane to diffuse the the more impure side.
The US Constitution certainly does apply to all levels of government in the US. That why we move up the judicial chain, to the Supreme Court who determines Constitutionality of subordinates' decisions, not down.
I would at least argue for being able to communicate with other citizens without benefiting the interests of a third party as being vital, it is mail on an entirely different level.
That first example is the perfect for what is the wrong reasoning. That guy who threw alcohol down his own throat and drove a vehicle not owned by him should be sued by that city and the person who's house was destroyed. When you sue the government, it's not like the politicians write the check. We do. Being able to hide behind the government or any company's checkbook should never have been allowed.
To say the city "illegally charged" someone presumes that guilt has already been determined and all debts are square. And no, that is a ridiculous reason to exclude someone from a contract, anyone would agree.
Your previous argument is self-serving and naive. A company's only goal is to make money, they care nothing for the people they service. They saw no immediate return and refused to build the lines. The PEOPLE, not the government, which you should think of as the same thing, wanted the connection. Who are you to tell the people of a town they cannot build a fiber optic network, of their own expense, in their own town?
Maybe he's just getting closer to where the money isn't and Microsoft hit his selling price. You don't actually think Seinfeld, the actor and comedian, was just so jazzed about Vista that he had to tell someone about it, do you?
I wont argue the polarity aspect of water, which can be viewed anywhere you try to mix oil and water, but the idea that an EM field in a microwave is causing the heating escapes logic. Why then do people not cook when near a high voltage transformer? It's certainly a rapidly rotating electromagnetic field and on orders of magnitude more powerful than a microwave. Why does aluminum burn up like a firework in the microwave, especially since aluminum isn't affected by magnetics much until it's very cold?
This is partially an argument, but the questions are sincere.
I've read the article on Wikipedia for a microwave oven and others related to it and they're flat out wrong. Microwaves do not heat food by an oscillating electromagnetic field, which would also work but would require enormous power (think of how strong a MRI's magnetic field needs to be to get everything oriented in the same direction). They operate by emitting microwave radiation. Don't confuse an EM field with EM radiation like a few of the articles concerning microwaves have done. If it operated by a rotating magnetic field that grid that you peer through to see your food would do jack squat. If you don't believe me then go more basic than the microwave oven and read the article specifically about the magnetron and you realize that the others disagree with it.
Things in a microwave get hot simply because that's what happens when you dump a kilowatt of radio waves on some lasagna. Pick the right metal to deflect a specific microwave and build a box out of it and you have an oven.
Cell phones aren't going to heat your brain, but it would be a bad thing if you could. Your brain starts slowly dieing at 103 because some of your body's enzymes quit working properly around that temperature. I wish I had a reference but it was something a biology prof had said. I've never met anyone that seemed smarter while enduring prolonged sunlight/sauna/hot tub/fever exposure.
I will bet almost everyone you know has had some level of intimacy where alcohol was involved. Almost every guy that I've got to know enough to know how they starting seeing their girlfriend/wife, did it with a few beers in them. Show me anyone who has had numerous relationships, and I will show you someone who likes to drink.
I'm fairly certain that any system put into place would likely be focused. The inverse square of the distance works great for a source that is radiated in every direction, but when you focus it, it changes the decay rate. If not, than a flashlight or satellite dish would not any better than an open antenna. Like the difference between a candela and a lumen.
With that in mind it would not be difficult to imagine the beam missing or passing through. Think of how nasty it would be if you lock up cars in front of somebody evading police, or even in front of a persuing cop.
I would have a hard time believing it wasn't intended to pay homage to "Another Brick in the Wall", since the songs are pretty much about the schools trying make kids conform to a mold. I would say that constantly tracking them would definitely be another brick in the wall.
Strangely, I'm actually listening to the album right now.
Wikipedia has an article on the Hall-Héroult process, the major method used to refine aluminum oxide into aluminum. Ill save you the time.
"In the Hall-Héroult process alumina, Al2O3 is dissolved in a carbon-lined bath of molten cryolite, Na3AlF6. Aluminium fluoride, AlF3 is also present to reduce the melting point of the cryolite. The mixture is electrolyzed, which reduces the liquid aluminium. This causes the liquid aluminium to be deposited at the cathode as a precipitate. The carbon anode is oxidized and bubbles away as carbon dioxide. The electrical current used by many smelters, has a very low voltage, but massive amperage. This is typically 3-5 volts, but 150,000 amperes."
So now were back to greenhouse gasses and massive amounts of electricity.
Slashdot Mirror
It's stupid to ignore everything we know about physics. Science consists of both theory and observation.
I can't agree more. The danger is in taking a person's model, which may very well accurately predict climate change, and calling it truth without argument. That isn't science anymore.
I've read some of Alan Robock's papers and don't disagree. It's full of actual data and measurements. I might also point out that sulphates are known for their cloud forming abilities and also raise the albedo of the clouds they are present in. It seems likely that sulphates have multiple ways they effect temperatures. I wonder if cutting out the human component in sulphur production might actually warm the planet.
Clouds do form on dust though, water vapor condensing on it. You cant ignore this. More dust in atmosphere and there will be more clouds. Not in the same proportion as the dust increase, but it dramatically increasing the chances that cool water vapor in the atmosphere will find it. You don't think that's some kind of special dust that somehow remains separate, do you? You refer to models like someone using the Bible defense. Make your case will facts, not some preordained truth. You know, actual numbers and records. No models, no data from model, and no models of models are ever fact.
I honestly desire a global catastrophe as humanity needs another reset and where I live I'm likely to survive it. Unfortunately these pesky clouds are only making that more difficult.
There I go making a long case for myself only to forever have it labeled "Anonymous Coward"
But the light must make it down first to be absorbed and emitted as infrared. I have to put the idea out there that the models say that cloud feedback is positive because if the model came back negative the researcher would no longer have any money.
Why is it when we talked about a nuclear war it was a Nuclear Winter? Sorry, at this point that is only conjecture, too. So let's take a fact then. Every time there has been a major volcanic explosion in history, global effects, it was followed by sudden and sometimes extreme cooling. Mt. Tambora in Indonesia exploded in 1815 and 1816 became "the year without a summer."
Real data, not models, shows that this dust in the atmosphere and the resulting clouds (clouds form on dust) cool the planet.
The Venusian atmosphere is NOT water vapor though and comparing Venus's CO2 (96%) atmosphere and and sulfur dioxide clouds at 9 MPa to our nitrogen-oxygen atmosphere and water vapor clouds at 100 kPa and then add in that Venus it 1/3 closer to the Sun than Earth and its a bit like apples and oranges.
If the albedo becomes very high, where most of the atmosphere is white, where is the heat coming from? Anyone who thinks clouds trap heat has forgotten what it's like to stand outside on a cloudy day. The top layer of cloud should reflect most of the heat back up. Anything else will get sent down to through more cloud and some more of that will escape upward and so on.
When the oil fields burned in the Middle East in the first gulf war we notice the temperatures actually locally dropped 10C from all the black clouds.
I've seen the 3rd concern listed over and over again on this forum. Water vapor certainly is a greenhouse gas, reflecting Earth's infrared back down, but I don't buy the idea that more water vapor means more heat. Are we gonna have all this vapor up in the air with no more clouds? With little sunlight making it all the way down, there will be little infrared coming back up. Continued extensive cloud cover would only make the Earth cold, probably giving us our overdue ice age.
Sell it? It's not like we don't use salts in many things, especially ourselves.
His figure of a half inch everywhere comes out to about 171,000 gallons of water. That doesn't seem all that impossible. How much salt is in that relatively small amount of water?
I'm speaking from personal experience here. Do you ever look back at a joke that you told or got and laughed at and thought: "Wow, I really am a nerd."
I'm nearing the end of Red Mars right now, planning to read all three. Wouldn't have thought I'd ever randomly run into a spoiler for a book I was reading. If I didn't know better, I would've thought Kim Stanley Robinson was a woman. He writes a lot more about relationships than most books Ive read.
The only thing about Dune that seemed really science fictiony in any way was the Spice (just can't call it melange, doesn't roll of the tongue). But, really it explains it in the book as basically throttling up you brain's processing power. You can already make guesses as to what will happen in the future. The Spice makes you better at it. As the book points out, predicting a possible future is easy. Seeing the past from the future, and all the points that lead up to that future is hard. Herbert was very good at sticking plots within plots.
And that is less plausible then some uneducated desert slave kid finding out he has magic powers which allow him to topple an intergalactic empire? The problem with George Lucas is that he wrote the same trilogy twice. In one the kid is bad, and the other he is good. Who would've thought he'd do worse for the second trilogy?
Came back a few days later to see a bunch of really bad excuses for an argument. It's time to suck it up and admit you're whack.
5 to 10 years makes no sense at all as a response. It would be paid for immediately by the government who would then take it from the person at fault. How long do you think it takes to build a house, anyway?
I'm arguing that if %74 of that town are in agreement that they want to put fiber optic lines beneath their own streets at their own cost then they damn well have every right to do it no matter what. It hurts no person, it's their town. If this government isn't "We the People", then what the hell is the point in voting?
I'm actually getting really tired of this. You appear to continue to make up nonsensical, hypothetical situations to find loopholes in laws that haven't even been violated. Only the second part has anything to do with anything.
In a perfect world, if the guy could not cover the cost of repair, the government would cover the cost and garnish the man's wages. There would be many times that it would be difficult to get all the money back, but at least it's being paid off instead of all the damages being absorbed the government.
That argument is bunk. The company denied the contract, there should be no issue to settle. The referendum passed with %74 approval, what else gets that kind of approval? You're saying that people's vote should be less important than a telecom's? They should be barred from a contract because the issue was decided by vote, end of story.
I could build you a good computer, charge you $50 a month for a year and easily pay for itself, that argument doesn't stand at all.
The telecom could have had exclusive, very high bandwidth service in that town and chose not to. They likely already have another, slower, moneymaking service in place and didn't want to lose revenue off that system. Now that they see the city is actually going to build it themselves they realize that their monopoly will be gone unless they somehow find some legal loophole to wind back the clock and accept the contract.
If their is some local minority group that is trained and has the equipment to lay fiber optic lines, then I ask why the local minorities all banded together to buy that kind of equipment. It's not there are a bunch of white guys pooling money together to by machinery that can make small tunnels sideways underground anywhere either. They don't do it with shovels you know.
Because the alcohol really holds on to that last little bit of water. The water doesn't settle so you can't sieve it out the bottom.
Lastly, the technology you speak of has already been done. Not only that, it's very common. Reverse osmosis is taking impure water and squeezing it against a membrane so relatively pure water comes through. If the pressure were removed the water would wick back through the membrane to diffuse the the more impure side.
The US Constitution certainly does apply to all levels of government in the US. That why we move up the judicial chain, to the Supreme Court who determines Constitutionality of subordinates' decisions, not down.
I would at least argue for being able to communicate with other citizens without benefiting the interests of a third party as being vital, it is mail on an entirely different level.
That first example is the perfect for what is the wrong reasoning. That guy who threw alcohol down his own throat and drove a vehicle not owned by him should be sued by that city and the person who's house was destroyed. When you sue the government, it's not like the politicians write the check. We do. Being able to hide behind the government or any company's checkbook should never have been allowed.
To say the city "illegally charged" someone presumes that guilt has already been determined and all debts are square. And no, that is a ridiculous reason to exclude someone from a contract, anyone would agree.
Your previous argument is self-serving and naive. A company's only goal is to make money, they care nothing for the people they service. They saw no immediate return and refused to build the lines. The PEOPLE, not the government, which you should think of as the same thing, wanted the connection. Who are you to tell the people of a town they cannot build a fiber optic network, of their own expense, in their own town?
Maybe he's just getting closer to where the money isn't and Microsoft hit his selling price. You don't actually think Seinfeld, the actor and comedian, was just so jazzed about Vista that he had to tell someone about it, do you?
The real question is why isn't it an Opt-in list that starts blank? Seeing as how that would be a shorter list that would be easier to maintain.
I wont argue the polarity aspect of water, which can be viewed anywhere you try to mix oil and water, but the idea that an EM field in a microwave is causing the heating escapes logic. Why then do people not cook when near a high voltage transformer? It's certainly a rapidly rotating electromagnetic field and on orders of magnitude more powerful than a microwave. Why does aluminum burn up like a firework in the microwave, especially since aluminum isn't affected by magnetics much until it's very cold?
This is partially an argument, but the questions are sincere.
I've read the article on Wikipedia for a microwave oven and others related to it and they're flat out wrong. Microwaves do not heat food by an oscillating electromagnetic field, which would also work but would require enormous power (think of how strong a MRI's magnetic field needs to be to get everything oriented in the same direction). They operate by emitting microwave radiation. Don't confuse an EM field with EM radiation like a few of the articles concerning microwaves have done. If it operated by a rotating magnetic field that grid that you peer through to see your food would do jack squat. If you don't believe me then go more basic than the microwave oven and read the article specifically about the magnetron and you realize that the others disagree with it.
Things in a microwave get hot simply because that's what happens when you dump a kilowatt of radio waves on some lasagna. Pick the right metal to deflect a specific microwave and build a box out of it and you have an oven.
Cell phones aren't going to heat your brain, but it would be a bad thing if you could. Your brain starts slowly dieing at 103 because some of your body's enzymes quit working properly around that temperature. I wish I had a reference but it was something a biology prof had said. I've never met anyone that seemed smarter while enduring prolonged sunlight/sauna/hot tub/fever exposure.
Your words, not his. And if you gonna go all irrationally stupid on us, at least post with your name so we can filter you.
I will bet almost everyone you know has had some level of intimacy where alcohol was involved. Almost every guy that I've got to know enough to know how they starting seeing their girlfriend/wife, did it with a few beers in them. Show me anyone who has had numerous relationships, and I will show you someone who likes to drink.
I'm fairly certain that any system put into place would likely be focused. The inverse square of the distance works great for a source that is radiated in every direction, but when you focus it, it changes the decay rate. If not, than a flashlight or satellite dish would not any better than an open antenna. Like the difference between a candela and a lumen.
With that in mind it would not be difficult to imagine the beam missing or passing through. Think of how nasty it would be if you lock up cars in front of somebody evading police, or even in front of a persuing cop.
I would have a hard time believing it wasn't intended to pay homage to "Another Brick in the Wall", since the songs are pretty much about the schools trying make kids conform to a mold. I would say that constantly tracking them would definitely be another brick in the wall. Strangely, I'm actually listening to the album right now.
Wikipedia has an article on the Hall-Héroult process, the major method used to refine aluminum oxide into aluminum. Ill save you the time.
"In the Hall-Héroult process alumina, Al2O3 is dissolved in a carbon-lined bath of molten cryolite, Na3AlF6. Aluminium fluoride, AlF3 is also present to reduce the melting point of the cryolite. The mixture is electrolyzed, which reduces the liquid aluminium. This causes the liquid aluminium to be deposited at the cathode as a precipitate. The carbon anode is oxidized and bubbles away as carbon dioxide. The electrical current used by many smelters, has a very low voltage, but massive amperage. This is typically 3-5 volts, but 150,000 amperes."
So now were back to greenhouse gasses and massive amounts of electricity.