You can listen to crackpots all you want, who start from a conclusion work through rationalizations - I will listen to scientists, who look at data and come to conclusions based on that data.
Funny that the overwhelming majority of actual, you know, scientists support AGW, while you are supported by the majority of conspiracy theorists.
Who do you THINK I'm more likely to listen to? Data does NOT care about politics. The big dollars are not in any 'greenspiracy', but rather in propping up the deniers so that the petro-dollars can be maximized. Face it, the vast majority of deniers are tools being used to their own detriment.
But keep up the non sequiturs. I'm sure your faith in big business looking after your best interests is well justified, and after all, those greedy, rapacious egghead scientists can't be trusted anyway. Damned elitists. Imagine thinking that education, hard work, and study gives you any kind of expertise to be listened to, when you could just listen to "Drill Baby Drill" and relax knowing that everything will be OK forever.
Funny, there's a record of how much I've paid into Social Security.
Tell me how to find out (to the dollar) how much I've paid for highways or defense?
No?
See - just because the funds are fungible does NOT mean that it's just another tax. That's just what the Republicans want you to believe so that when they eliminate Social Security (I'm looking at YOU, Perry!) they can just steal the money for their own projects (tax breaks for the wealthy, military spending, etc) without paying any back to the citizens that need it.
Except that deniers distrust data and science, and the opinions of those that actually, you know, study the climate - in favor of political and economic conservatism - ie, if it means we have to change we're gonna put our fingers in our ears and go "lalala" as loud as we can rather than accept the challenge. They change their dialogue to match their conclusions; not their conclusions to match the data. Scientists do this, and deniers jump on it claiming 'see? The science is not settled!' The difference? It's politics to deniers, and science to the 'warmers - and in the deniers' reality, science is subordinate to politics.
And - nobody knows the form AGW will impose on our climate - but western civilization DEPENDS n the relative stability we have now. To throw that away for the idea that we don't have to embrace any kind of risk, to assume that everything will always be as it was, 'forever and ever, world without end, amen' is foolish in the extreme.
But then, it's not about science. It's about money - and despite denier's claims about the big business of grant money, the real dollars go to the middle east and their proxies - the oil companies. These guys do NOT want to let a little thing like science or suffering get in the way of making 'their' money.
"Please point anyone to actual plans for a viable fusion reactor which details the materials which will be used"
Doesn't exist. Therefore can't be done, and not worth researching. Riiiight..
"Fusion is absolutely NOTHING but a grand science experiment"
No shit you fucking troll. Of course because it hasn't succeeded and we haven't got profitable fusion yet, this is all a waste. So says the master of fusion.
"What they are trying to achieve today is actually below the power levels which are required of a functioning, energy producing, reactor. So even once they have breakeven, they'll then need to do it again at even higher power levels"
So fucking what? Oh I get it - YOU can't see how it can be done, therefore it's not worth doing. Asshole.
"People like you really are what's wrong with this world. Holy shit you are stupid."
Fuck you and your cancer riddled brain.
Fucking shitbags like yourself impede any kind of progress. Had it been the turn of the 19th, you would have said flight was impossible. If it was a century earlier you would have said trains are a pipe dream because going that fast would suck all the air out of the cars. You are a piece of trash that impairs any kind of accomplishment, fuck you.
Maybe. Will it need a containment vessel? If so, is it massive? Can it be foil? What's the half-life of the isotopes produced, if any? What do they degenerate to? Do you know? Are you a researcher? Are you current with the state of laser fusion technology?
Yeah, you'll be much more successful designing stuff then building it without any skills in building stuff in the first place. And craftsmanship has no value, after all, right?
No, idiot. The postal service can't raise rates to match costs. It's another Unfunded Wonder.
And of course its cool by you if the government defaults on signed contracts to workers, because "OMG pension! I don't have that because I was too stupid to require it to work so FUCK them!" right?
And $45/hr? Yeah that's common. Funny, all the carriers I know make about 1/5th that amount. Asshole. You probably think teachers are rich and only work during school hours, too.
"only the government could have a monopoly service to every house in the US and fuck it up" Yeah - by trying NOT to rape the consumer. Lemme guess, your a republican and think the way to prosperity is to fuck the poor out of as much of their discretionary cash as possible because the rich will eventually trickle all over them.
And yes, I'm being deliberately hostile. You morons will wreck the US for the sake of venality. Some baseline government services SHOULD exist, so that we aren't crushed by business - because business is about reducing and eliminating competition and maximizing profit.
Rather than 'free', how about 'fair'? Free doesn't work; it depends on everything being a luxury, all transactions being reversible (ie, everything is fungible), all markets must be infinite, and you must ignore the fact that the 'market' is people, and that people elect the government, and therefore regulations ARE the market 'adjusting'. Free is a fantasy springing from the minds of corporate officers. Regulations came about BECAUSE of the terrible failures of 'free market' principles.
Fair is better - put all businesses on an equal footing, ignore tax breaks for individuals, but grant them to businesses in order encourage them to act as the people want (determining that will give politicians something to do). Make income taxes flat (and remove property taxes), but only on disposable income (yes, I mean for business too!), so that the wealthy still have wealth, but the poor still have a chance to succeed, and small business is encouraged. Provide a baseline of care for the people so that we have a healthy workforce, and encourage business of all sorts by providing infrastructure in good order. Fund research and then make the results available to all. Hell we could do that and STILL have enough left over for a kick-ass military.
"The market will, in the VAST majority of cases, choose options that do both: 'support what is good for society' AND 'what is profitable'."
Ah, faith-based economics... People ARE the market, the people elect the government, government 'interference' as you blithely call it IS the market reacting.
Slashdot Mirror
You can listen to crackpots all you want, who start from a conclusion work through rationalizations - I will listen to scientists, who look at data and come to conclusions based on that data.
Funny that the overwhelming majority of actual, you know, scientists support AGW, while you are supported by the majority of conspiracy theorists.
Who do you THINK I'm more likely to listen to? Data does NOT care about politics. The big dollars are not in any 'greenspiracy', but rather in propping up the deniers so that the petro-dollars can be maximized. Face it, the vast majority of deniers are tools being used to their own detriment.
But keep up the non sequiturs. I'm sure your faith in big business looking after your best interests is well justified, and after all, those greedy, rapacious egghead scientists can't be trusted anyway. Damned elitists. Imagine thinking that education, hard work, and study gives you any kind of expertise to be listened to, when you could just listen to "Drill Baby Drill" and relax knowing that everything will be OK forever.
With reason, it sounds like.
Funny, there's a record of how much I've paid into Social Security.
Tell me how to find out (to the dollar) how much I've paid for highways or defense?
No?
See - just because the funds are fungible does NOT mean that it's just another tax. That's just what the Republicans want you to believe so that when they eliminate Social Security (I'm looking at YOU, Perry!) they can just steal the money for their own projects (tax breaks for the wealthy, military spending, etc) without paying any back to the citizens that need it.
Except that deniers distrust data and science, and the opinions of those that actually, you know, study the climate - in favor of political and economic conservatism - ie, if it means we have to change we're gonna put our fingers in our ears and go "lalala" as loud as we can rather than accept the challenge. They change their dialogue to match their conclusions; not their conclusions to match the data. Scientists do this, and deniers jump on it claiming 'see? The science is not settled!' The difference? It's politics to deniers, and science to the 'warmers - and in the deniers' reality, science is subordinate to politics.
And - nobody knows the form AGW will impose on our climate - but western civilization DEPENDS n the relative stability we have now. To throw that away for the idea that we don't have to embrace any kind of risk, to assume that everything will always be as it was, 'forever and ever, world without end, amen' is foolish in the extreme.
But then, it's not about science. It's about money - and despite denier's claims about the big business of grant money, the real dollars go to the middle east and their proxies - the oil companies. These guys do NOT want to let a little thing like science or suffering get in the way of making 'their' money.
Yup. Only paperbacks and kindles should be allowed in space.
The magic invisible hand will save us by hiring the Russians and the Chinese to look after our interests. What could possibly go wrong?
Yes. And pursuit of grand goals generally requires grand effort.
OK fuckhead.
"Please point anyone to actual plans for a viable fusion reactor which details the materials which will be used"
Doesn't exist. Therefore can't be done, and not worth researching. Riiiight..
"Fusion is absolutely NOTHING but a grand science experiment"
No shit you fucking troll. Of course because it hasn't succeeded and we haven't got profitable fusion yet, this is all a waste. So says the master of fusion.
"What they are trying to achieve today is actually below the power levels which are required of a functioning, energy producing, reactor. So even once they have breakeven, they'll then need to do it again at even higher power levels"
So fucking what? Oh I get it - YOU can't see how it can be done, therefore it's not worth doing. Asshole.
"People like you really are what's wrong with this world. Holy shit you are stupid."
Fuck you and your cancer riddled brain.
Fucking shitbags like yourself impede any kind of progress. Had it been the turn of the 19th, you would have said flight was impossible. If it was a century earlier you would have said trains are a pipe dream because going that fast would suck all the air out of the cars. You are a piece of trash that impairs any kind of accomplishment, fuck you.
*grin* It'd be interesting to see them refuse it.
Unlike yourself, of course. All hail the conquering naysayer!
Maybe. Will it need a containment vessel? If so, is it massive? Can it be foil? What's the half-life of the isotopes produced, if any? What do they degenerate to? Do you know? Are you a researcher? Are you current with the state of laser fusion technology?
Don't try! Never try! You can't win! It will never work!
"Those ideas become "lost art" and the rest of society loses out"
Really. If they are lost, how do you know? You don't?
Thought so.
Yeah, you'll be much more successful designing stuff then building it without any skills in building stuff in the first place. And craftsmanship has no value, after all, right?
No, idiot. The postal service can't raise rates to match costs. It's another Unfunded Wonder.
And of course its cool by you if the government defaults on signed contracts to workers, because "OMG pension! I don't have that because I was too stupid to require it to work so FUCK them!" right?
And $45/hr? Yeah that's common. Funny, all the carriers I know make about 1/5th that amount. Asshole. You probably think teachers are rich and only work during school hours, too.
"only the government could have a monopoly service to every house in the US and fuck it up" Yeah - by trying NOT to rape the consumer. Lemme guess, your a republican and think the way to prosperity is to fuck the poor out of as much of their discretionary cash as possible because the rich will eventually trickle all over them.
And yes, I'm being deliberately hostile. You morons will wreck the US for the sake of venality. Some baseline government services SHOULD exist, so that we aren't crushed by business - because business is about reducing and eliminating competition and maximizing profit.
HAHAHAHA!
Tell that to wikileaks!
This was NEVER about expanding spectrum, it WAS about reducing competition.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-08/deutsche-telekom-is-said-to-discuss-sale-of-t-mobile-usa-to-sprint-nextel.html
ROFL the 'all parties are the same' error?
You COMPLETELY gave that impression.
Cool! And thanks!
ROFL so asking a question is an ad-hominem? Curiousity has to be regulated and 'politically correct'? Sounds like you 'lost' it a long time ago.
Bullshit. The "all things are luxuries" flaw.
Faith-based econ theory.
Rather than 'free', how about 'fair'? Free doesn't work; it depends on everything being a luxury, all transactions being reversible (ie, everything is fungible), all markets must be infinite, and you must ignore the fact that the 'market' is people, and that people elect the government, and therefore regulations ARE the market 'adjusting'. Free is a fantasy springing from the minds of corporate officers. Regulations came about BECAUSE of the terrible failures of 'free market' principles.
Fair is better - put all businesses on an equal footing, ignore tax breaks for individuals, but grant them to businesses in order encourage them to act as the people want (determining that will give politicians something to do). Make income taxes flat (and remove property taxes), but only on disposable income (yes, I mean for business too!), so that the wealthy still have wealth, but the poor still have a chance to succeed, and small business is encouraged. Provide a baseline of care for the people so that we have a healthy workforce, and encourage business of all sorts by providing infrastructure in good order. Fund research and then make the results available to all. Hell we could do that and STILL have enough left over for a kick-ass military.
"The Free Market *always* works when all of the externalities are accounted for"
Ah, "No True Scotsman" economic theory...
"The market will, in the VAST majority of cases, choose options that do both: 'support what is good for society' AND 'what is profitable'."
Ah, faith-based economics... People ARE the market, the people elect the government, government 'interference' as you blithely call it IS the market reacting.
Pay attention yourself.
'the' flaw? There are many.