There is no hiatus, but a slowing down of warming. The warming is still happening, but at a slightly slower rate than predicted. So yeah, it's deniers who point out the hiatus, as it doesn't exist.
"Big Oil" is only working out pretty well for everyone if you ignore the mountains of evidence that it's having a horrific effect on the climate. It's only working out well for those who are ignorant (either on purpose or by accident) of AGW. You seem to be espousing a position of "don't fix any problems (as other problems will undoubtedly arise), and some awesome solution will probably be discovered to fix everything, which we should definitely bet the future of humanity as we know it on", which is clearly pathetic.
The ignorance is staggering. You clearly haven't even tried to study AGW or even read a summary by someone versed in the science and how to convey it to laymen. How you can post that with a straight face, knowing full-well you are being either willfully ignorant or intellectually lazy, is beyond me.
The silence is staggering! It's almost as if he doesn't want to see the data and was looking for some reason to condemn the science because it suits him to do so.
A "slowdown in the rate of global warming" is not a hiatus. A hiatus is a pause or break - we are currently witnessing a slight slowdown. "Hiatus" implies there is no warming, when all evidence suggests there is still warming.
Are you really comparing the emissions from a power station (outside of the city) to thousands of cars/vans/buses in the middle of the city? You do realise that it's far easier to clean pollution at a power station than it is at every single exhaust pipe, right? Do you want anyone to take you seriously?
Electric vehicles push pollution to a single place, away from population centres, which can be more easily upgraded when new technology comes available.
Judging by the Anonymous reply to your post, it appears it's you who has no idea. It seems you are the one who has no concept of the numbers involved... You seem so convinced of things which are patently nonsense, to the point that you will lambast others who are correct. So weird.
It's not about driving up a steep hill, but about starting on one. Electric motors deliver massive torque all the time, whereas Diesels don't. That's the issue. So yeah, it makes sense.
It's far easier to clean pollution from exhaust at a power station than on each and every bus. Plus, when new scrubbers/cleaning technology is made available, it's easier to replace it on a single power station than all of the vehicles it would power. It also helps to not have the pollution where everyone lives. These are not difficult concepts to understand.
The helium is constantly leaking into space and being replenished by subterranean sources. When those sources are gone, so will the helium in the atmosphere. Your 0.0005% figure will decrease over time.
Companies scale, so that's clearly not a problem. The number of companies has absolutely nothing to do with coverage.
If your excuse for poor internet ("too few companies") were accurate, then there would be booming competition in all US cities, and everyone would have great internet at low, low prices...
It would be so trivial to do that, it would be insane for them not to. The computer knows precisely how much force is being put on the steering wheel, for example, and knows precisely how far the car is turning. It also precisely knows the speed. It would have to go out of its way to not realise that something's amiss if it has to routinely use more force to steer than it did before. Humans don't even get close to that level of understanding of what's going on in their car.
You'd have a point if all of Europe wasn't larger than the US, with a similar population density...
Why are you so keen to excuse the ridiculous nature of the US's ISP business practices & regulations? It makes you look ridiculously foolish, and only serves to ensure this problem continues for generations.
Europe is larger than the US, and has a similar population density. Your argument simply does not work. You do realise that for every person who believes that nonsense, the problem gets worse, right? It will never be fixed if people accept that the US's incredibly-shitty level of ISP service is simply an inherent problem of a large land mass.
There are tiny, tiny towns in the Arctic Circle which have 100/100 connections. You have no excuse.
I say the following as a caring human being who agrees with how useful HOSTS files are: Your zeal is to be respected, but you seriously should get some help. You do realise it's not normal for people to get so worked up when talking about a project, right? And do you also realise that you are spamming Slashdot in a style akin to that which you prescribe your HOSTS files solution to counter?
You do realise the world of riches that awaits a scientist who could show AGW to be nonsense, right? They'd end up with a Nobel prize, their own science department, and a large research budget. This is such an easily-disproven nonsensical claim made by denialists it's not even funny. It only seems to work on other denialists who applaud it and say "See! See! That's what happens!". Others just laugh and assume the denialist in question is a grade-A muppet.
Climate change is indeed "the norm", however scientists can measure how quickly it's changing, and what's causing it. They can also figure out what will happen to our civilisation should it change. They've done this, and published several reports on the matter. Clearly you've not read them, which is why you posted that nonsense:)
Hint: If you want to dismiss scientific findings by stating that "common sense" says it's nonsense, you are most likely woefully incorrect, to the point people will laugh at you. And they'd be right.
The beauty of automated driving systems is that they will notice when they have to make the car steer 1% more to attain the same heading, or brake 1% more in order to stop in the same distance, etc. The sheer amount of feedback they get from the car's performance means they can alert the driver to a potential mechanical problem before it causes an accident. Humans are generally terrible at doing that - computers are made for it.
The Palestinian Territories are much smaller, so if you adjust the size accordingly, it would be the same as if Canada took ~155,000 acres. Also this land already had people living in it and relying on it for water and access, both things which can soon be forgotten. And - sorry - where does good will come into stealing land from someone? A token of good-will is accepted beforehand between both parties, even if begrudgingly - this is clearly not the case here.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no hiatus, but a slowing down of warming. The warming is still happening, but at a slightly slower rate than predicted. So yeah, it's deniers who point out the hiatus, as it doesn't exist.
"Big Oil" is only working out pretty well for everyone if you ignore the mountains of evidence that it's having a horrific effect on the climate. It's only working out well for those who are ignorant (either on purpose or by accident) of AGW. You seem to be espousing a position of "don't fix any problems (as other problems will undoubtedly arise), and some awesome solution will probably be discovered to fix everything, which we should definitely bet the future of humanity as we know it on", which is clearly pathetic.
The ignorance is staggering. You clearly haven't even tried to study AGW or even read a summary by someone versed in the science and how to convey it to laymen. How you can post that with a straight face, knowing full-well you are being either willfully ignorant or intellectually lazy, is beyond me.
The silence is staggering! It's almost as if he doesn't want to see the data and was looking for some reason to condemn the science because it suits him to do so.
A "slowdown in the rate of global warming" is not a hiatus. A hiatus is a pause or break - we are currently witnessing a slight slowdown. "Hiatus" implies there is no warming, when all evidence suggests there is still warming.
Are you really comparing the emissions from a power station (outside of the city) to thousands of cars/vans/buses in the middle of the city? You do realise that it's far easier to clean pollution at a power station than it is at every single exhaust pipe, right? Do you want anyone to take you seriously?
Electric vehicles push pollution to a single place, away from population centres, which can be more easily upgraded when new technology comes available.
You actually solve those problems by:
1. Decreasing the wealth gap
2. Providing adequate healthcare (including preventative care) and protected sick leave
If you ignore the cause of crime and sick people on public transport you'll never fix those problems. Treating the symptoms fixes nothing.
Judging by the Anonymous reply to your post, it appears it's you who has no idea. It seems you are the one who has no concept of the numbers involved... You seem so convinced of things which are patently nonsense, to the point that you will lambast others who are correct. So weird.
It's not about driving up a steep hill, but about starting on one. Electric motors deliver massive torque all the time, whereas Diesels don't. That's the issue. So yeah, it makes sense.
It's far easier to clean pollution from exhaust at a power station than on each and every bus. Plus, when new scrubbers/cleaning technology is made available, it's easier to replace it on a single power station than all of the vehicles it would power. It also helps to not have the pollution where everyone lives. These are not difficult concepts to understand.
The helium is constantly leaking into space and being replenished by subterranean sources. When those sources are gone, so will the helium in the atmosphere. Your 0.0005% figure will decrease over time.
Companies scale, so that's clearly not a problem. The number of companies has absolutely nothing to do with coverage.
If your excuse for poor internet ("too few companies") were accurate, then there would be booming competition in all US cities, and everyone would have great internet at low, low prices...
It would be so trivial to do that, it would be insane for them not to. The computer knows precisely how much force is being put on the steering wheel, for example, and knows precisely how far the car is turning. It also precisely knows the speed. It would have to go out of its way to not realise that something's amiss if it has to routinely use more force to steer than it did before. Humans don't even get close to that level of understanding of what's going on in their car.
You'd have a point if all of Europe wasn't larger than the US, with a similar population density...
Why are you so keen to excuse the ridiculous nature of the US's ISP business practices & regulations? It makes you look ridiculously foolish, and only serves to ensure this problem continues for generations.
Europe is larger than the US, and has a similar population density. Your argument simply does not work. You do realise that for every person who believes that nonsense, the problem gets worse, right? It will never be fixed if people accept that the US's incredibly-shitty level of ISP service is simply an inherent problem of a large land mass.
There are tiny, tiny towns in the Arctic Circle which have 100/100 connections. You have no excuse.
Must... resist... "American Geography" joke...
Europe is larger than the US, so by your logic it must be easier for the US to have better internet than Europe, which it doesn't.
(Hint: EU != Europe)
Clearly it isn't, otherwise US cities would have great internet, which they mostly do not.
Plus you are confusing the EU with Europe. The EU is indeed smaller than the US, but Europe is larger:
Europe: 3,930,000 sq mi
US: 3,717,813 sq mi
So you don't really have a point.
Translation: "I've made my mind up after watching some TV, and evidence can go screw itself".
I say the following as a caring human being who agrees with how useful HOSTS files are: Your zeal is to be respected, but you seriously should get some help. You do realise it's not normal for people to get so worked up when talking about a project, right? And do you also realise that you are spamming Slashdot in a style akin to that which you prescribe your HOSTS files solution to counter?
You do realise the world of riches that awaits a scientist who could show AGW to be nonsense, right? They'd end up with a Nobel prize, their own science department, and a large research budget. This is such an easily-disproven nonsensical claim made by denialists it's not even funny. It only seems to work on other denialists who applaud it and say "See! See! That's what happens!". Others just laugh and assume the denialist in question is a grade-A muppet.
Climate change is indeed "the norm", however scientists can measure how quickly it's changing, and what's causing it. They can also figure out what will happen to our civilisation should it change. They've done this, and published several reports on the matter. Clearly you've not read them, which is why you posted that nonsense :)
Hint: If you want to dismiss scientific findings by stating that "common sense" says it's nonsense, you are most likely woefully incorrect, to the point people will laugh at you. And they'd be right.
They'll probably deal with it better than people currently do... Their sensor packages and reaction times are orders of magnitude better.
The beauty of automated driving systems is that they will notice when they have to make the car steer 1% more to attain the same heading, or brake 1% more in order to stop in the same distance, etc. The sheer amount of feedback they get from the car's performance means they can alert the driver to a potential mechanical problem before it causes an accident. Humans are generally terrible at doing that - computers are made for it.
The Palestinian Territories are much smaller, so if you adjust the size accordingly, it would be the same as if Canada took ~155,000 acres. Also this land already had people living in it and relying on it for water and access, both things which can soon be forgotten. And - sorry - where does good will come into stealing land from someone? A token of good-will is accepted beforehand between both parties, even if begrudgingly - this is clearly not the case here.