Every law has a loophole, the one you're missing is contained in the words in private. ie: They would have to break the very same law to confirm you are breaking the law.
"modern public sanitation" - That was my first thought but then tying a sharp rock to a stick was a pretty awsome achievment for a long forgotten apeman. Of course it's all subjective opinion, I think the rovers are a fantasic achievment but they're not in my top ten.
The sun and the moon together cover less than 1/100,000th of the sky.
Really? so you are saying the universe is flat, and the earth is off in a corner where nothing but the sun and moon are around it?
Is the sky flat where you live?
"and no matter which direction we go, we are going to hit some "celestial" body."
Nope, space is pretty much just space. Galaxies commonly collide with each other but the stars within those collisions very rarely smash into each other. It's not that there is any shortage of celestial bodies it's just that space is really, really, big.
There's also the fact that ALL of the celestial bodies are contained within the microwave background, so why is it that we can see the microwave background if every direction is obscured with a celestial body?
When you examine science thru a political lense you will find a political conclusion. When you examine politics thru a scientific lense you will find the ugly truth of human nature.
C is certainly not the easiest language to learn but it will give you a very solid base that will make every other language easier to pick up. And yeah, most books are focused on boring bussiness applications but you need to remeber that it's programming you're learning, the bussiness apps are just contrived examples that are designed to touch on all of the basic programming elements.
THE classic C book is K&R, it does not have example applications, it has examples of techniques. If you take the (non-trivial) time to understand K&R from cover to cover you will still not know how to write MIDI drivers but your skills will be such that it will be easy for you to pick it up in a couple of days.
Note that K&R uses unix as it's example operating system but it does not teach you how to compile/link on any OS. Linux distro's usually have the compiler/linker already installed. If you want to use windows then you will need to find (and learn) an IDE, a respectable freebie is Eclipse.
Excellent advise. I've got a CS degree and have been in the industry for 20yrs, but writing/securing web sites is not my gig. Sure I could easily write my own web site, but considering the price of hiring a reputable firm to do it for me it's just not worth the effort/risk. My time would be much better spent testing said web site.
Claiming climate predictions are impossible due to chaos theory makes as much sense as claiming QM predictions are impossible due to Newtons laws of motion. Which is kind of ironic considering he is accusing everyone else of making incorrect assumptions.
The correct mathematical term for describing the way the climate behaves is Dynamic equilibrium
"Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics)." - National Academies of Science (on the subject of evolution).
I think it's fair to say that the above quote is what NOAA means by the term "undeniable".
Your only looking at the list of established solar plants, look further down the page at the list of "announced" projects where the 2.0GW "Sudan Solar Program" tops the list.
Solar thermal is a relatively new technology on an industrial scale, it's hardly surprising the first plants are small, after all the first commercial nuke (Calder Hall in Sellafield, England) was rated at 50MW when it commenced operations.
"Most of externalities are factored in the fuel price / construction price already. That's where the "price" comes from"
Poppycock, "acid rain, global warming, air pollution, respiratory health effects, environmental damage from mining and oil drilling, and damage to the global ecosystem", are all partially or totally socialized externalities. If they were built into the price, coal would suddenly become the most expensive way to produce electricity.
The spot price for uranium peaked at just under US$140/lb in 2007 and since then has dropped well below US$100/lb. Fuel is chump change compared to capital costs, insurance, decommissioning, waste disposal, etc.
If you replace "most" with "all" I'm inclined to agree. Self skepticisim is the core skill required for critical thinking but it's not a miricale cure for divided opinion simply because in most cases (such as your video games/art example) there is no "correct" opinion, they are just opinions conveyed with various degrees of passion and/or arrogance that you may or may not agree to with your own degree of passion/arrogance.
What I find amusing is that you come across as if you are immune to human nature because you have discovered introspection, however your uncritical acceptance of "climategate" propoganda is strong evidence that you suffer from the same utterly human foibles as the people you are critisizing.
PS: My drooling grandchild gleefully stuffing chocolate cake into (and onto) her face on her first birthday is the most beautifull thing I have seen in a long time. Unlike the swill they serve at Subway, we are all organic but some people are uncomfortable with that fact.;)
debate in the history of the world has ever actually changed the truth of any matter. Arguments and legislation should be based on published literature and statistics, not on who is the better orator."
Debate == Formal argument. What you are objecting to is rhetoric.
Your whole post is about attacking the faults you think you can percieve in others, I see none of the self-doubt you say you value so highly.
"Could you simply accept it, shrug, decide not to act on it, and continue on?"
Yes, everyone has "uncomfortable" thoughts and the vast majority neither act on them, or end up with rubber wallpaper because of them. What is much more uncomfortable are the real life images seared into your nurons, the face of a child as they dissapear under the front of your car, your best mate as a blackened skeleton in a burnt out car wreck, etc, etc. Compared to the uncomfortable things in real life humans have to face, the unplesant thoughts of which you speak are no more uncomfortable than a bad dream.
If you don't have such real life images in your head then you're either young and naive, or extremely fortunate.
Agreed, I think the cop in the video acted reasonably but the subsequent raid and charges for posting the video on YT are far from reasonable. Those actions have done nothing but distract attention from the fact the guy deserved to be taken off the road in the first place.
"In your case, I'd be willing to suggest that you experience immediate stress at the subject of spirituality and religion, and possibly anything that isn't hard and accepted science: you'd have difficulty exploring the basic meaning behind everything I've said here because it would be extremely uncomfortable for you to take in that kind of knowledge, even for simple analysis or curiosity."
For a lengthy and eloquent rebuttal of your patronizing argument try reading Dawkins "Unweaving the rainbow". Of course it may make you extremly unconfortable to find out you don't have a monopoly of self discovery.
"much more plausible than "nothing" (which is the atheists' option of choice)."
"Don't know" is the most common option for Atheists who know anything about cosmology. It's much more plausible than either of your options and it's by far the most intellectually honest.
Slashdot Mirror
"The problem is that Churchill was a racist, biggoted prick. If he lived in our times..."
But he didn't, so judging him by today's standards is irrelevant.
Every law has a loophole, the one you're missing is contained in the words in private. ie: They would have to break the very same law to confirm you are breaking the law.
Heart attack after having casual sex with a stranger.
"modern public sanitation" - That was my first thought but then tying a sharp rock to a stick was a pretty awsome achievment for a long forgotten apeman. Of course it's all subjective opinion, I think the rovers are a fantasic achievment but they're not in my top ten.
it scares me when scientists get visibly excited over the possibility of a 'smoking gun'
Why? Observational evidence is one of the central pillars of science, no?
Self-serving science is bad karma
Yes, fucking selfish bastards! Who do they think they are, sharing an intriging observation they can't explain.
The sun and the moon together cover less than 1/100,000th of the sky.
Really? so you are saying the universe is flat, and the earth is off in a corner where nothing but the sun and moon are around it?
Is the sky flat where you live?
"and no matter which direction we go, we are going to hit some "celestial" body."
Nope, space is pretty much just space. Galaxies commonly collide with each other but the stars within those collisions very rarely smash into each other. It's not that there is any shortage of celestial bodies it's just that space is really, really, big.
There's also the fact that ALL of the celestial bodies are contained within the microwave background, so why is it that we can see the microwave background if every direction is obscured with a celestial body?
When you examine science thru a political lense you will find a political conclusion. When you examine politics thru a scientific lense you will find the ugly truth of human nature.
C is certainly not the easiest language to learn but it will give you a very solid base that will make every other language easier to pick up. And yeah, most books are focused on boring bussiness applications but you need to remeber that it's programming you're learning, the bussiness apps are just contrived examples that are designed to touch on all of the basic programming elements.
THE classic C book is K&R, it does not have example applications, it has examples of techniques. If you take the (non-trivial) time to understand K&R from cover to cover you will still not know how to write MIDI drivers but your skills will be such that it will be easy for you to pick it up in a couple of days.
Note that K&R uses unix as it's example operating system but it does not teach you how to compile/link on any OS. Linux distro's usually have the compiler/linker already installed. If you want to use windows then you will need to find (and learn) an IDE, a respectable freebie is Eclipse.
Excellent advise. I've got a CS degree and have been in the industry for 20yrs, but writing/securing web sites is not my gig. Sure I could easily write my own web site, but considering the price of hiring a reputable firm to do it for me it's just not worth the effort/risk. My time would be much better spent testing said web site.
"I've chosen to see this as a political issue"
;)
In other words you have chosen not to think about it.
Claiming climate predictions are impossible due to chaos theory makes as much sense as claiming QM predictions are impossible due to Newtons laws of motion. Which is kind of ironic considering he is accusing everyone else of making incorrect assumptions.
The correct mathematical term for describing the way the climate behaves is Dynamic equilibrium
"Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory), or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory), that matter is not composed of atoms, or that the surface of the Earth is not divided into solid plates that have moved over geological timescales (the theory of plate tectonics)."
- National Academies of Science (on the subject of evolution).
I think it's fair to say that the above quote is what NOAA means by the term "undeniable".
"Fucking rubber bands, how do they work?
Feynman to the rescue.
The phenomena in TFA is just begging for a numerical simulation. I wonder if something like Blender or PhysX would predict this behaviour correctly?
Your only looking at the list of established solar plants, look further down the page at the list of "announced" projects where the 2.0GW "Sudan Solar Program" tops the list.
Solar thermal is a relatively new technology on an industrial scale, it's hardly surprising the first plants are small, after all the first commercial nuke (Calder Hall in Sellafield, England) was rated at 50MW when it commenced operations.
"Most of externalities are factored in the fuel price / construction price already. That's where the "price" comes from"
Poppycock, "acid rain, global warming, air pollution, respiratory health effects, environmental damage from mining and oil drilling, and damage to the global ecosystem", are all partially or totally socialized externalities. If they were built into the price, coal would suddenly become the most expensive way to produce electricity.
The spot price for uranium peaked at just under US$140/lb in 2007 and since then has dropped well below US$100/lb. Fuel is chump change compared to capital costs, insurance, decommissioning, waste disposal, etc.
If you replace "most" with "all" I'm inclined to agree. Self skepticisim is the core skill required for critical thinking but it's not a miricale cure for divided opinion simply because in most cases (such as your video games/art example) there is no "correct" opinion, they are just opinions conveyed with various degrees of passion and/or arrogance that you may or may not agree to with your own degree of passion/arrogance.
;)
What I find amusing is that you come across as if you are immune to human nature because you have discovered introspection, however your uncritical acceptance of "climategate" propoganda is strong evidence that you suffer from the same utterly human foibles as the people you are critisizing.
PS: My drooling grandchild gleefully stuffing chocolate cake into (and onto) her face on her first birthday is the most beautifull thing I have seen in a long time. Unlike the swill they serve at Subway, we are all organic but some people are uncomfortable with that fact.
"They're still asshats"
/pedant
ASsCAPs
debate in the history of the world has ever actually changed the truth of any matter. Arguments and legislation should be based on published literature and statistics, not on who is the better orator."
Debate == Formal argument. What you are objecting to is rhetoric.
Your whole post is about attacking the faults you think you can percieve in others, I see none of the self-doubt you say you value so highly.
"Could you simply accept it, shrug, decide not to act on it, and continue on?"
Yes, everyone has "uncomfortable" thoughts and the vast majority neither act on them, or end up with rubber wallpaper because of them. What is much more uncomfortable are the real life images seared into your nurons, the face of a child as they dissapear under the front of your car, your best mate as a blackened skeleton in a burnt out car wreck, etc, etc. Compared to the uncomfortable things in real life humans have to face, the unplesant thoughts of which you speak are no more uncomfortable than a bad dream.
If you don't have such real life images in your head then you're either young and naive, or extremely fortunate.
Agreed, I think the cop in the video acted reasonably but the subsequent raid and charges for posting the video on YT are far from reasonable. Those actions have done nothing but distract attention from the fact the guy deserved to be taken off the road in the first place.
Smart people want an education.
The first year of a degree is usually spent getting everyone on the same page.
"In your case, I'd be willing to suggest that you experience immediate stress at the subject of spirituality and religion, and possibly anything that isn't hard and accepted science: you'd have difficulty exploring the basic meaning behind everything I've said here because it would be extremely uncomfortable for you to take in that kind of knowledge, even for simple analysis or curiosity."
For a lengthy and eloquent rebuttal of your patronizing argument try reading Dawkins "Unweaving the rainbow". Of course it may make you extremly unconfortable to find out you don't have a monopoly of self discovery.
"much more plausible than "nothing" (which is the atheists' option of choice)."
"Don't know" is the most common option for Atheists who know anything about cosmology. It's much more plausible than either of your options and it's by far the most intellectually honest.