The second you say "consensus" you prove to everyone that you don't understand the first thing about science.
Actually it proves the author of such an opining is the ignoramus, "consensus" is just another name for what used to be called "The republic of science", it's the difference between "a scientist says" and "science says".
eg: A scientist says he has discovered how to get free energy from perpetual motion, science says he's mistaken.
I've seen other scientists saying that it's too early to judge individual weather events in relation to climate change yet
The problem is you can't pin a particular weather event to a global climate trend with 100% certainty, it's the same problem as pinning a tumour to a particular cigarette, it's a statistical increase/decrease in the chance of weather event X happening, say a one in 500yr flood changing to once a decade. What's more concrete is that your insurance company have been factoring risks from AGW into your premiums for the past decade or so.
So global warming causes there to be more water vapor in the air, which causes more rainfall and snow. But at the same time it causes more droughts?
Look up Hadley cell expansion. Tropics will be wetter and current desert zones caused by the Hadley cells down draft will expand. Lake effect snow will increase because lakes will give off more water vapour.
Basically, the system is fucking broken, regardless of what system it is, because a few greedy piles of shit control it all.
Yes, but some systems are more broken than others, here in Oz government inefficiency brings us better health care than the US and pays for it by a 1.5% tax on income, the US government proportionally spends about the same ~1.5% of income tax revenue on health. So the US govt could provide "free as in beer" world class health care for all it's people with current spending, removing the need for private insurance or the possibility of going bankrupt without it. The fly in the ointment is the same one that Australia had in the 70's, ie the constitution requires that all the states have to agree to a treaty handing certain powers to the feds before it can be implemented.
This is very different to the Westminster tradition where politicians are expected and indeed do vote along party lines. Some social issues (abortion, gay marriage,etc) are declared a conscience vote where the expectation is dropped, the party usually doesn't have a specific policy opinion on the issue anyway. But other than a few execption s, voting against party lines is considered to be "crossing the floor" and "breaking ranks" is seen as a big deal. Having said that the results of party line votes be exactly the same as what you describe and often land in the hands of a single nutter...err...independent. But I think it's also easier for the public to pick which team to barrack for based on their form guides.
There's two sides to the story. The ideal workplace is one that the owners have set up such that people want to work there as opposed to having to work there. Unions are a reaction to employers who take the "you'll do it because you need this job" approach, both the action and reaction are bad for business.
Most deaths occur in the first few weeks after the lucky ones are killed by the blast. Not just radiation poisoning but also the loss of infrastructure.
War is not the only cause of PTSD, a freind of mine wittnesed a horrific industrial accident where his mate was crushed by large steel rollers up to his waist. The top half of the victims body balloned because all his organs and blood were forced into his chest. He was still alive for several minutes while trapped in the rollers. My friend has been a miserable ball of anxiety attacks and nightmares since then, and that was over a decade ago.
I see vast open space on my commute to work and every time I travel.
I've seen almost the same words on several post, how can so called "educated" people be so ignorant about where their food comes from? The empty space you see is called "farmland", there would be no city for you to commute to without it. Globally, we have run out of new farmland, food prices have sky-rocketed over the last decade causing food riots in many places, including Mexico which borders the US. The only thing that will stop this from becoming worse as our population grows is a new green revolution that does not depend on oil to create fertiliser.
The crash will likely leave behind a world suitable for goat herders and not much of anything else. As for growing your own food, that will work out like it did for the peasants under Chairman Mao.
Try actually working on a farm rather than just driving past them every now and then, it takes much more than a box with central heating to support a human. All large carnivores need a large territory to feed themselves, the only thing different about humans is that we've stopped our prey from running away when it comes time to eat them.
talk to someone who watched the first moon landing live
I was 10yo when I watched it live, it was indeed inspiring. However as an adult I have been similary inspired by the work of robotic probes such as; Sagan's pale blue dot, the pillars of creation, hubble deep field, etc. Probes extend human experience they do not replace it, there is ample grass roots interest for mankind to do both types of exploration.
Yes, ancient Chinese maps show themselves as the centre of the universe for good reason. China had trade routes all over the Indian ocean as far away as Africa and the middle east before the Europeans had managed to round Cape Horn. It's a simple twist of fate that one of their Emperor's basically disbanded their navy in the 15th (?) century just as Europe started exploring the worlds oceans in earnest. Had they maintained their navy they would have had the jump on Europe's colonisation of the far east by several centuries.
Slashdot Mirror
The second you say "consensus" you prove to everyone that you don't understand the first thing about science.
Actually it proves the author of such an opining is the ignoramus, "consensus" is just another name for what used to be called "The republic of science", it's the difference between "a scientist says" and "science says".
eg: A scientist says he has discovered how to get free energy from perpetual motion, science says he's mistaken.
I've seen other scientists saying that it's too early to judge individual weather events in relation to climate change yet
The problem is you can't pin a particular weather event to a global climate trend with 100% certainty, it's the same problem as pinning a tumour to a particular cigarette, it's a statistical increase/decrease in the chance of weather event X happening, say a one in 500yr flood changing to once a decade. What's more concrete is that your insurance company have been factoring risks from AGW into your premiums for the past decade or so.
Muller is not a skeptic
Didn't take them long to throw Muller under the bus after he came up with the wrong results using Koch brother's money.
So global warming causes there to be more water vapor in the air, which causes more rainfall and snow. But at the same time it causes more droughts?
Look up Hadley cell expansion. Tropics will be wetter and current desert zones caused by the Hadley cells down draft will expand. Lake effect snow will increase because lakes will give off more water vapour.
I agree but it will never happen, coal and especially oil are of strategic importance to the military.
Yeah it beaks down quickly, but unfortunately it breaks down to CO2 and water.
Agree with what you say, but still, livestock are a land use, farting and burping is not a big issue in the scheme of things.
Quit whining and become the 1% yourself.
They call it the American 'dream' because you have to be asleep to believe it. - George Carlin.
Basically, the system is fucking broken, regardless of what system it is, because a few greedy piles of shit control it all.
Yes, but some systems are more broken than others, here in Oz government inefficiency brings us better health care than the US and pays for it by a 1.5% tax on income, the US government proportionally spends about the same ~1.5% of income tax revenue on health. So the US govt could provide "free as in beer" world class health care for all it's people with current spending, removing the need for private insurance or the possibility of going bankrupt without it. The fly in the ointment is the same one that Australia had in the 70's, ie the constitution requires that all the states have to agree to a treaty handing certain powers to the feds before it can be implemented.
This is very different to the Westminster tradition where politicians are expected and indeed do vote along party lines. Some social issues (abortion, gay marriage,etc) are declared a conscience vote where the expectation is dropped, the party usually doesn't have a specific policy opinion on the issue anyway. But other than a few execption s, voting against party lines is considered to be "crossing the floor" and "breaking ranks" is seen as a big deal. Having said that the results of party line votes be exactly the same as what you describe and often land in the hands of a single nutter...err...independent. But I think it's also easier for the public to pick which team to barrack for based on their form guides.
There's two sides to the story. The ideal workplace is one that the owners have set up such that people want to work there as opposed to having to work there. Unions are a reaction to employers who take the "you'll do it because you need this job" approach, both the action and reaction are bad for business.
Those voluntary extinction nutters
..are in the majority, (assuming the US senate represents the will of the people).
The space shuttle engines are about the size of a car and pump 4 tons of fuel (~4m^3) per second thru a pipe a few inches in diameter.
Look into the term ecological footprint, you may be surprised to find it takes about 23 acres to support one American.
Most deaths occur in the first few weeks after the lucky ones are killed by the blast. Not just radiation poisoning but also the loss of infrastructure.
Back in the 80's when car factories were being automated the promise was that automation would deliver a shorter working week for everyone.
Longer than that, I remember getting plastic walking toys in my corn flakes back in the 60's, and they had two legs and a body.
And "you people" would rather take the sky away from everyone in the vain hope you won't have to pay a few extra cents per kilowatt.
War is not the only cause of PTSD, a freind of mine wittnesed a horrific industrial accident where his mate was crushed by large steel rollers up to his waist. The top half of the victims body balloned because all his organs and blood were forced into his chest. He was still alive for several minutes while trapped in the rollers. My friend has been a miserable ball of anxiety attacks and nightmares since then, and that was over a decade ago.
I see vast open space on my commute to work and every time I travel.
I've seen almost the same words on several post, how can so called "educated" people be so ignorant about where their food comes from? The empty space you see is called "farmland", there would be no city for you to commute to without it. Globally, we have run out of new farmland, food prices have sky-rocketed over the last decade causing food riots in many places, including Mexico which borders the US. The only thing that will stop this from becoming worse as our population grows is a new green revolution that does not depend on oil to create fertiliser.
The population will crash and rebound.
The crash will likely leave behind a world suitable for goat herders and not much of anything else. As for growing your own food, that will work out like it did for the peasants under Chairman Mao.
Try actually working on a farm rather than just driving past them every now and then, it takes much more than a box with central heating to support a human. All large carnivores need a large territory to feed themselves, the only thing different about humans is that we've stopped our prey from running away when it comes time to eat them.
talk to someone who watched the first moon landing live
I was 10yo when I watched it live, it was indeed inspiring. However as an adult I have been similary inspired by the work of robotic probes such as; Sagan's pale blue dot, the pillars of creation, hubble deep field, etc. Probes extend human experience they do not replace it, there is ample grass roots interest for mankind to do both types of exploration.
Great plan if you want your kid to be socially inept.
Yes, ancient Chinese maps show themselves as the centre of the universe for good reason. China had trade routes all over the Indian ocean as far away as Africa and the middle east before the Europeans had managed to round Cape Horn. It's a simple twist of fate that one of their Emperor's basically disbanded their navy in the 15th (?) century just as Europe started exploring the worlds oceans in earnest. Had they maintained their navy they would have had the jump on Europe's colonisation of the far east by several centuries.