The problem with this idea is that the richter scale is logrithmic, ie: a 6.0 quake is 1000 times as energetic as a 3.0 quake. You would need thousand(s) of small artificial quakes (in the right place) to have any hope of avoiding the build up of a single big one.
If my degree taught me anything it's how little experts know about things outside their field. Such as the anthropologists/archeologists who ridiculed Luz Antequera Congregado for suggesting the famous Hall of Bulls was a prehistoric planetarium
I have nothing against dams, I think they are an essential part of the "fix". I cannot comment on your dams, however here in Australia we had a dam project in Tasmania that really would have destroyed something special in the Franklin river. That particular dam was canned after international protests but Tasmania compensated by building other dams in less contraversial locations. These dams were built with the expectation of exporting clean electricity to the mainland through a project called BassLink (basically a giant undersea cable).
Unfortunately the climate has already changed here in SE Australia, not just the well publisized "permanent drought" but also the once predictable storm tracks have changed significantly away from pre-existing catchments. Since your in the bussiness I'm sure you know that a 20% decrease in rainfall translates to a 60% decrease in run off to the dam. The result of all this is that Tasmania's well thought out hydro scheme cannot get enough water in their dams to run the turbines. The irony here is that when Basslink was eventually completed it was not used to export Hydro power but rather to import electricity from the coal fired plants on the mainland.
"True environmentalism isn't some simple quick fix."
I couldn't agree more, it must be based on solid science. The brainwashed remark in my OP was refering to a (seemingly organised) minority of extreme right-wingers here on slashdot who go out of their way to promote the latest psuedo-skeptical talking points from anti-science think-tanks associated with the Heartland Institute who seem to spawn a new disinformation web site every second week (thier most recent success is having the top site on google for the search terms "icecap" and "ice cap"). If you haven't noticed these brainwashed dolts I can only conclude you are browsing at +5.
Dude you are posting your tripe to the wrong site, many people here have formal qualifications in science and like me will view your post in the same light they view a Discovery Institute press release.
"I strongly prefer that we tax vices, not necessities."
Agreed, the US alone spends $100 Billion/yr just to enforce pot prohibition, the DEA recieves $10 billion/yr of that directly, again this is just for pot. Pot is the largest cash crop in the US in dollar terms (yes bigger than corn, cotton, wheat, etc). Take that $100 billion/yr plus the tax bonanza on legal pot and fix the health system or something useful. Once the US legalises pot the rest of the western world will follow.
One american is arrested for pot every 18 seconds. And yes, he is getting sick and tired of it!
Guess what? - The waste heat from our energy use produces temprature imbalances in the atmosphere which in turn produces more wind but this effect is dwarfed by the temprature imbalances from our GHG emmisions. As I said elsewhere you could cover the entire planet with wall to wall windmills and it would have as much effect on the earth's atmosphere as installing shag pile carpet has on the atmosphere in your lounge room.
"Personally, I think that these "wind|sun|wave energy solves all our problems" stories do more harm than good because they offer an extreme and unbalanced view that is so easily dismissed."
On the contrary it's YOU that finds them easy to dismiss because of YOUR extremely unbalanced view. I don't see anyone here buying your la la land bullshit.
He gave me one, just goes to show you are not amoung the chosen people an therfore must be worshiping a false god. Repent and convert and I will let you to bath in the glory of my gilded propeller hat.;)
"Circumcision remains medically slightly beneficial, but only slightly."
Actually when you count the number of babies who die from infection I doubt it has an overall benifit, parents don't have their new born's tonsils or appendix taken out to reduce the future chance of disease, what is so special about the foreskin?
Circumcision at birth has been a bizzare and cruel religious ritual for millenia, and it still is. When I was a kid it was still a popular belief that circumcision prevented masterbation. When the health excuse was first dreamed up (long before I was born) it was pure propoganda with zero supporting evidence. The fact that it has recently been shown to reduce the risk of AIDS is nothing more than a coincidence. If people were not already circumcised in large numbers in the name of religious propoganda, nobody would have been able to perform those studies and this stupid debate would be non-existant.
Yes it's an absurd example that perfectly illustrates the absurdity of your arguments. I suggest you stop reading Michael Chrichton's anti-science novels, they are rotting your brain.
Give me a break, it was a rhetorical question. I agree with you and have been arguing with these brainwashed dolts for almost a decade on slashdot. I thank the FSM that unlike when I first started they are now in the minority.
Your comment on hurricanes indicates you don't know the difference between weather and climate, you asked for a "reasonable model" climate model I pointed to is more than reasonable and it's forcasts have been spot on.
Your argument about maples trees is rediculous, it's like saying installing shag pile carpet will prevent the air circulating in your lounge room.
"Simulations are fun, but don't ever think you thought of everything."
Imprefect does not mean useless, just ask the boffins at Lockheed, Airbus, or anyone else in the bussiness of civil, mechanical, hydrostatic or electrical engineering.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with this idea is that the richter scale is logrithmic, ie: a 6.0 quake is 1000 times as energetic as a 3.0 quake. You would need thousand(s) of small artificial quakes (in the right place) to have any hope of avoiding the build up of a single big one.
If my degree taught me anything it's how little experts know about things outside their field. Such as the anthropologists/archeologists who ridiculed Luz Antequera Congregado for suggesting the famous Hall of Bulls was a prehistoric planetarium
The internet really is like a super-highway in that you can scream abuse at strangers for trivial transgressions without ever having to face them.
A first class comedian can take the piss out of anyone.
The comma after "knowledge" makes the meaning ambiguious. It can be read either way.
You've gotta love a president who proclaimed "Make the most of the hemp seed and sow it everywhere"
I have nothing against dams, I think they are an essential part of the "fix". I cannot comment on your dams, however here in Australia we had a dam project in Tasmania that really would have destroyed something special in the Franklin river. That particular dam was canned after international protests but Tasmania compensated by building other dams in less contraversial locations. These dams were built with the expectation of exporting clean electricity to the mainland through a project called BassLink (basically a giant undersea cable).
Unfortunately the climate has already changed here in SE Australia, not just the well publisized "permanent drought" but also the once predictable storm tracks have changed significantly away from pre-existing catchments. Since your in the bussiness I'm sure you know that a 20% decrease in rainfall translates to a 60% decrease in run off to the dam. The result of all this is that Tasmania's well thought out hydro scheme cannot get enough water in their dams to run the turbines. The irony here is that when Basslink was eventually completed it was not used to export Hydro power but rather to import electricity from the coal fired plants on the mainland.
"True environmentalism isn't some simple quick fix."
I couldn't agree more, it must be based on solid science. The brainwashed remark in my OP was refering to a (seemingly organised) minority of extreme right-wingers here on slashdot who go out of their way to promote the latest psuedo-skeptical talking points from anti-science think-tanks associated with the Heartland Institute who seem to spawn a new disinformation web site every second week (thier most recent success is having the top site on google for the search terms "icecap" and "ice cap"). If you haven't noticed these brainwashed dolts I can only conclude you are browsing at +5.
Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch.
I never claimed you said "that windmills would cause the winds to fall", so I guess your barking up an imaginary tree.
Dude you are posting your tripe to the wrong site, many people here have formal qualifications in science and like me will view your post in the same light they view a Discovery Institute press release.
Nooooo, forests are evil, they dampen the wind more than windmills do!
"You don't even know me buddy" - No I don't, the opinions you have posted here are all I have to go on, they are absurd.
"I strongly prefer that we tax vices, not necessities."
Agreed, the US alone spends $100 Billion/yr just to enforce pot prohibition, the DEA recieves $10 billion/yr of that directly, again this is just for pot. Pot is the largest cash crop in the US in dollar terms (yes bigger than corn, cotton, wheat, etc). Take that $100 billion/yr plus the tax bonanza on legal pot and fix the health system or something useful. Once the US legalises pot the rest of the western world will follow.
One american is arrested for pot every 18 seconds. And yes, he is getting sick and tired of it!
Citation
"Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." - Diderot.
Thanks, that was the best laugh I've had all week.
Guess what? - The waste heat from our energy use produces temprature imbalances in the atmosphere which in turn produces more wind but this effect is dwarfed by the temprature imbalances from our GHG emmisions. As I said elsewhere you could cover the entire planet with wall to wall windmills and it would have as much effect on the earth's atmosphere as installing shag pile carpet has on the atmosphere in your lounge room.
I spotted that too and was working on a windbag joke. You beat me to it.
"Personally, I think that these "wind|sun|wave energy solves all our problems" stories do more harm than good because they offer an extreme and unbalanced view that is so easily dismissed."
On the contrary it's YOU that finds them easy to dismiss because of YOUR extremely unbalanced view. I don't see anyone here buying your la la land bullshit.
He gave me one, just goes to show you are not amoung the chosen people an therfore must be worshiping a false god. Repent and convert and I will let you to bath in the glory of my gilded propeller hat. ;)
"Circumcision remains medically slightly beneficial, but only slightly."
Actually when you count the number of babies who die from infection I doubt it has an overall benifit, parents don't have their new born's tonsils or appendix taken out to reduce the future chance of disease, what is so special about the foreskin?
Circumcision at birth has been a bizzare and cruel religious ritual for millenia, and it still is. When I was a kid it was still a popular belief that circumcision prevented masterbation. When the health excuse was first dreamed up (long before I was born) it was pure propoganda with zero supporting evidence. The fact that it has recently been shown to reduce the risk of AIDS is nothing more than a coincidence. If people were not already circumcised in large numbers in the name of religious propoganda, nobody would have been able to perform those studies and this stupid debate would be non-existant.
Yes it's an absurd example that perfectly illustrates the absurdity of your arguments. I suggest you stop reading Michael Chrichton's anti-science novels, they are rotting your brain.
"Because you are too naive."
Give me a break, it was a rhetorical question. I agree with you and have been arguing with these brainwashed dolts for almost a decade on slashdot. I thank the FSM that unlike when I first started they are now in the minority.
"Part of me thinks some of them are disinfo agents on the fossil fuel payrolls."
That part would be your brain, apparently some of these morons can live without one.
I left out the word "about". Is that the best critsism you have, a typo?
Your comment on hurricanes indicates you don't know the difference between weather and climate, you asked for a "reasonable model" climate model I pointed to is more than reasonable and it's forcasts have been spot on.
Your argument about maples trees is rediculous, it's like saying installing shag pile carpet will prevent the air circulating in your lounge room.
"Simulations are fun, but don't ever think you thought of everything."
Imprefect does not mean useless, just ask the boffins at Lockheed, Airbus, or anyone else in the bussiness of civil, mechanical, hydrostatic or electrical engineering.
LMFAO - and people like you call James Hansen an alarmist?