...a scanned card- kinda hard to argue it was someone else...
That assumes they got the correct information when the card was obtained the first time. There is no law that says the info you give them when getting a card has to be yours. Give them the phone number of a payphone at a local pub or the phone number of the police chief.
...You think it's OK for a company to coerce customers...
Who says that the "personal" information has to pertain to you? Just invent some and give it to them. There is no law that says the info you give them has to be yours and they really have no way to check up on the whether the data pertains to you, someone else or to some non-existent person. They can still use the bogus info for their marketing statistics, just that they have no correct data on who bought what to give to the cops on demand. As the cops find out that most of the "personal" data the grocery store has is not associated truthfully with anyone, they'll stop bothering to even ask the grocery stores for it.
...Coercing people into surrendering their personal information to buy groceries...
There is no reason why the "personal information" you give them has to have the slightest relation to you. Just invent some "information" and give it to them. I do this all the time when I get one of these "phishing" e-mails. If everybody gave out bogus information to phishers and these grocery sales gimmicks, pretty soon the practice of both would stop.
...We know the causes of the rise in Global Temperatures...
That is a really confident assertion that has no facts associated with it. CO2 may be component of warming, but it MUST be a small one, since there were much warmer (and colder) periods in history than what we observe today, long before fossil fuel burning could be a significant contribution to warming.
Prescribing a medicine to a sick patient if you don't really know what is causing the illness is foolish and subject to medical malpractice. Most medicines have side effects, some of them quite serious. Why prescribe a medicine if there is not the slightest assurance that the patient will be helped rather than harmed.
In the long run, the kinds of time periods involved in climate changes, the fossil fuel problem will be taken care of by the simple fact that we will run out of easily obtained fuels and will have to find another source of energy, such as fusion and/or solar. Until that happens, artificially mandated hobbling of the economies of the industrialized societies is foolish medicine. When there is an economic incentive to develop alternative energy supplies, that will be done, but not as long as cheap fossil fuels are available.
--particulates into the air through our industrial activities,--
The particulates mankind is able to put into the UPPER atmosphere (short of a global thermonuclear war) is minute compared to a major volcanic eruption, such as Krakatoa in1883. Few particulates now emitted by human activities make it to the upper reaches of the atmosphere where it can linger for a long time, but are washed out quickly by normal precipitation that takes place in the troposphere.
...Global Warming is in very largely related to the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere..
That may be true, but there are other factors beyond the control of man that may be far larger. How about solar output? We know there is a 11 year solar cycle, but is there also a much longer cycle, measured in centuries or even millenia? We do know that there were much warmer as well as much colder periods in RECORDED HUMAN HISTORY!
I am not saying that there is no warming, nor disputing the rate at which it may be accelerating, but the cause thereof. Unless the cause of an event is known it is not a good idea to try to influence the event.
Large volcanic eruptions, for example, throw large amounts of fine ash into the upper atmosphere. This dust reflects some and absorbs some of the sun's energy and causes cooling. The amount of clouds than can condense around all the dust also reflects more sunlight and causes cooling. There have not been very many monstrous eruptions since the one on Krakatoa in the late 1800s and so there is less dust in the air to reduce the average temperature. This settling out of dust happens to coincide with the rise of fuel burning.
In short, there are many variables that affect the temperature of the earth, most of them beyond the control of man. CO2 content is one of them, but there is no evidence that it is the main cause.
Using an energy source other than fossil fuels will happen as readily accessible fossil fuels are depleted, not because of the unknown cause of warmer temperatures.
Yes, and you'll propose that the tektonic plates all over the earth rose or fell EXACTLY the same amount uniformly all over! If the upper air is also warm, then there will be no storms.
It is the temperature DIFFERENCES, that operate the weather engine, just as the temperature differences operate any other engine. Simple thermodynamics tell us that! If the whole earth gets warmer, the difference of temperature in the levels of the atmosphere gets less and the weather engine runs more gently.
200 feet of water can easily be accomodated if the average temperature of the planet approached a uniform 80-90 deg F. There is evidence that the whole earth was once UNIFORMLY warm. We find the remains of tropical life forms everywhere on this planet.
There is no substance that can soak up and transport more heat than water, whether liquid or gaseous. That is why the climate near large bodies of water is less extreme in both hot and cold. If you get into a room whith 100% humidity you still can breathe just fine. The moisture content of the air does not change its pressure. Where do you think all these FOSSIL fuels we are burning came from in the first place?
Really, how long compared to cycles of nature have scientists been looking at this? There is plenty of evidence that there were times of much warmer and also much colder climate, long before anyone burned fossil fuels. There is NO evidence that the rapid rise of temperature is not part of the natural ups and downs that have occurred for ages.
...a temperature rise of 11K will put most of Florida under water..
One fact that is forgotten is all this is that as the air gets warmer, it can hold a LOT more water. There is evidence that in ages past, the earth was MUCH warmer, such that we find fossilized tropical life forms in Siberia. At the same time, oceans were about 200 feet LOWER than they are today! The now under water areas called continental shelves were dry land then. As the atmosphere gets warmer, especially the upper parts of it, it can hold enourmous amounts of water. A hurricane is a localized demo of that fact. Violent whether is largely due to temperature gradients, which lessen as the earth gets warmer because the increased moisture in the air is an equalizing influence.
...But who *really* knows? It's all theory and conjecture - people need to stop treating it as fact....
Exactly true! The main piece of evidence missing is whether or not human activity is the cause. Nobody seems to question this. Everybody assumes that global warming is caused by man burning fossil fuels and thereby increasing the average global temperature. There is plenty of evidence that the climate naturally cycles to warmer, then again colder and it has been doing this long before anyone used fossil fuels.
,,,The evidence in support of global warming is overwhelming,,,
That may be, but there is NO evidence that human activity is the cause. So why should "Washington" do something about that which nobody knows what the cause is in the first place. Climate cycles are natural phenomena that took place long before anyone burned fossil fuels. Mandating sweeping societal changes based on unproven assumptions is NOT sound policy. I certainly am glad that Bush is not responding to the stupid doomsayers who contend that mankind is the cause of perfectly natural events. There is plenty of evidence that the earth was much warmer in times past and there were also periods when things were much colder.
...Global Warming supporting scientific community have mountains of evidence...
But they have NO evidence that this warming is caused by human activity. Climate, like much in nature goes in cycles, some of very long periodicity compared to the short human life time. There were times in recorded history when it was much warmer and also times when it was much colder, all long before mankind started using fossil fuels. So right now we may be in a warming cycle, the duration and extent of which NONE of the smart-@ss scientists can predict any more than the lottery numbers.
...Of course billions and billions of tons of additional CO2...
Yes, of course that's a lot compared to the trillions and trillions of tons of the atmosphere as a whole. Where do you think all that carbon came from which mankind is now releasing into the air? Why are these fuels we are burning called FOSSIL fuels? These fuels represent stored solar energy, converted to oil, gas and coal by life forms that grew profusely on the entire earth, from pole to pole ages ago. So far humanity has released only a small percentage of this KNOWN buried carbon. Who knows how much more there is in the depths of the earth of which we don't even have the slightest hint of?
Man's worst effect upon man has always been and always will be himself. Man's wars and murders have killed and injured orders of magnitude more fellow humans than all the "natural" disasters put together.
Stop worrying about a tiny increase in the CO2 level in the atmosphere. There is evidence that there is some warming, (if you discount last week's record snow storms in the east) but there is NO evidence that this is caused by man rather than just a normal part of the cycling of climate. There have been much warmer and colder periods, even in recorded history, long before man started using fossil fuels.
That's when you and most others won't need to go anywhere, except may around the corner to the nearest bread line because there won't be any jobs to go to and you won't need to go shopping because there will be nothing in the stores (it all gets there by truck) and you'll not have any money. Maybe you'll be out on the street since you can't pay your rent either.
...maybe public transit will become popular enough to help the environment...
Oh what wishful thinking and dreaming that is and how much good money is wasted on that in many places. Public transit works well only in EXTREMELY densely populated, compact places. Spread out cities, such as most of them in the western parts of the USA have not and never will get a significant percentage of the population out of their cars. The one big thing that transit planners never seem to take into consideration is the convenience factor of the automobile.
In the SF Bay Area, where they built a very nice, incredibly expensive transit system called BART, the freeways are still clogged almost all the time with automobiles having only one person in them. The commuter lanes thereon are largely empty, even in the busiest rush hour.
Germany is a densely populated country and the German trains run on time, are fast, comfortable and although not exactly cheap, not outrageously expensive either. Even so, there are traffic jams of many kilometers in many places on their speed unlimited Autobahn throughout that country. Rapid transit is no panacea for our transporation woes.
...As is the pathetic insistence that it is real...
It is real alright, but irrelevant. There are may factors that affect climate, especially on a global scale. Climate goes in cycles, like may things in nature. Government actions must be based on facts and truth, not some maybe educated speculations by certain people who have some kind of other agenda. I agree that the idea that puny man is causing global *anything* is indeed laughable.
...intervening for the benefit of the vast majority of people in the country...
Yes, intervening based on junk scientific speculation. Even if it can be shown that there is such a thing as global warming, there is not one shred of evidence that human activity has anything to do with it. Climate, especially global climate, like most things in nature goes in cycles, some of them with very long time periods. There were periods of time where the climate was MUCH warmer than today, even it recorded human history, let alone during the vast geologic ages of the past.
There MAY be evidence that there is more CO2 in the air, but even if there is, SO WHAT? There are many other factors that affect the temperature of this planet, CO2 is only one of them. Climate goes through long term CYCLES, so how do these smart a** scientists know so for sure that there is a long term warming trend that is caused by anything humans are doing? There is plenty of evidence that there were periods of time, even in recorded history, that the Earth was MUCH warmer than today. How often have proud scientists made confident, high sounding assertions which not much later were proven to be imaginary speculations?
...One of the key culprits in global warming is the increased use of large, fuel inefficient vehicles...
That is a bunch of BS. What evidence is there that *ANY* human activity is causing *ANY* global long term change of *ANY* sort?! Human beings, especially certain so called scientists should get a large dose of humility for imagining that puny, insignificant human beings can affect large scale changes of this planet. Recent natural disasters prove that man is totally impotent, either through intent or accident to materially influence the immense forces of nature.
Many things in nature happen in cycles, some over great time periods, espcially compared to the microseconds of human existence. So how can these so proud and arrogant scientists assert so confidently that human activity is the cause for their observations over the few moments of time they have been breathing air?
Was there anyone alive on this Earth 500 years ago who did foretell or could have remotely fortold what life on this planet would be like today? Nobody alive today can even accurately fortell what will happen tomorrow! If you can, tell me what stocks to buy or what lottery numbers to pick!
How can the &**&!^% arrogant, stupid so called scientists think they can tell what will take place 500 years in the future. These guys are MORE than totally out to lunch! I can't understand why even fools listen to them, let alone responsible leaders of nations.
There are mountains of evidence that this whole planet was once very warm, such as that there was NO ice anywhere on the whole planet and at the same time the water level of the oceans was almost 200 feet lower than today.
There is NO evidence whatsoever that any warming that may be happening is caused by mankind's activity on this earth. Threefourths of the Earth's surface is water and man's presence on the land areas is also quite limited. There are also vast land areas where nobody lives or even ever goes there. Compared to the energy the Earth receives from the sun each day, all of man's energy production and use is miniscule. The earth receives far more energy from the sun in a single day, than mankind has ever, in all of its history, has produced or utilized.
I think it is a form of unmitigated pride and arrogance for humans to think that they can have a significant effect on anything happening on a global scale, especially in the long term. The recent tsunami, last years hurricanes or todays' east coast snow storms amply demonstrate man's impotence and insignificance when the forces of nature are unleashed.
...A computer that is THOUSANDS of times more powerful costs 1/20th..
The reason computer hardware is so much cheaper than software has much to do with the amount of labor needed to produce both. The design labor for the chips that are in computers is amortized over all the software that runs on these chips. The amount of labor that goes into an OS or other major programs is applicable only to that particular program, not to all possible programs that run on a given hardware. Therefore, even if the amount of labor to design the chipsets is equal to a major software design, the labor for software is spread out to a much smaller number of units.
This principle applies not only to computer, but also to music and video players. The cost of many music or video collections far exceeds the cost of the playback hardware.
Whether you want to believe Genesis or any other part of the Bible is up to you, but you too will one day surely, definitely DIE and after that you will find out whether there is a God and whether the Bible is His word. By then, however it will be too late for you to do anything about it, for then you will face God as your judge only. Right now however you still have the opportunity to know Him as the merciful Savior through Jesus the Messiah. You have the rest of your days, however many that may be, here in this time-space dimension to decide whether you will meet God as Judge or Savior. I suggest you read the book written by the Apostle John and then make a very considered decision about what it says to you personally. Do it for what can you really lose?
I've got news for you! The rules DO apply to you, whether you like it or not, for even atheists will definitely, surely DIE and after that you will find out there is a God and HE will be your judge, not me.
That is an IF that will not happen, at least as long as we live in these bodies subject to entropy. The human life span is set by the Creator God who tells us:
Genesis 6:3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."
Re:Reveals Google's Access to Large Data Sets
on
Google Tidbits
·
· Score: 1
...It's like the webmaster that pours over his Urchin stats...
I guess the webmaster liquified at some point. The spelling checker would not catch this, but the correct word is not POUR as in a liquid, but "PORES over..."
What application do you run that an ordinary, garden variety disk drive cannot keep up with? Are you running a transaction processing or data base server that has to respond to thousands of random requests as quickly as possible? Other than that, I cannot think of any application which the average drive cannot handle. If the OS has a decent data caching system, even a moderate number of random data read/writes should not slow the average throughput down all that much.
The key to good computer performance with any given system is plenty of RAM. You can never have too much of that. If you are into media, especially video, then the capacity of the drive becomes important. Most ordinary drives are fast enough for normal video data. For HD though a faster drive may be needed.
Slashdot Mirror
...a scanned card- kinda hard to argue it was someone else...
That assumes they got the correct information when the card was obtained the first time. There is no law that says the info you give them when getting a card has to be yours. Give them the phone number of a payphone at a local pub or the phone number of the police chief.
...You think it's OK for a company to coerce customers...
Who says that the "personal" information has to pertain to you? Just invent some and give it to them. There is no law that says the info you give them has to be yours and they really have no way to check up on the whether the data pertains to you, someone else or to some non-existent person. They can still use the bogus info for their marketing statistics, just that they have no correct data on who bought what to give to the cops on demand. As the cops find out that most of the "personal" data the grocery store has is not associated truthfully with anyone, they'll stop bothering to even ask the grocery stores for it.
...Coercing people into surrendering their personal information to buy groceries...
There is no reason why the "personal information" you give them has to have the slightest relation to you. Just invent some "information" and give it to them. I do this all the time when I get one of these "phishing" e-mails. If everybody gave out bogus information to phishers and these grocery sales gimmicks, pretty soon the practice of both would stop.
...We know the causes of the rise in Global Temperatures...
That is a really confident assertion that has no facts associated with it. CO2 may be component of warming, but it MUST be a small one, since there were much warmer (and colder) periods in history than what we observe today, long before fossil fuel burning could be a significant contribution to warming.
Prescribing a medicine to a sick patient if you don't really know what is causing the illness is foolish and subject to medical malpractice. Most medicines have side effects, some of them quite serious. Why prescribe a medicine if there is not the slightest assurance that the patient will be helped rather than harmed.
In the long run, the kinds of time periods involved in climate changes, the fossil fuel problem will be taken care of by the simple fact that we will run out of easily obtained fuels and will have to find another source of energy, such as fusion and/or solar. Until that happens, artificially mandated hobbling of the economies of the industrialized societies is foolish medicine. When there is an economic incentive to develop alternative energy supplies, that will be done, but not as long as cheap fossil fuels are available.
--particulates into the air through our industrial activities,--
The particulates mankind is able to put into the UPPER atmosphere (short of a global thermonuclear war) is minute compared to a major volcanic eruption, such as Krakatoa in1883. Few particulates now emitted by human activities make it to the upper reaches of the atmosphere where it can linger for a long time, but are washed out quickly by normal precipitation that takes place in the troposphere.
...Global Warming is in very largely related to the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere..
That may be true, but there are other factors beyond the control of man that may be far larger. How about solar output? We know there is a 11 year solar cycle, but is there also a much longer cycle, measured in centuries or even millenia? We do know that there were much warmer as well as much colder periods in RECORDED HUMAN HISTORY!
I am not saying that there is no warming, nor disputing the rate at which it may be accelerating, but the cause thereof. Unless the cause of an event is known it is not a good idea to try to influence the event.
Large volcanic eruptions, for example, throw large amounts of fine ash into the upper atmosphere. This dust reflects some and absorbs some of the sun's energy and causes cooling. The amount of clouds than can condense around all the dust also reflects more sunlight and causes cooling. There have not been very many monstrous eruptions since the one on Krakatoa in the late 1800s and so there is less dust in the air to reduce the average temperature. This settling out of dust happens to coincide with the rise of fuel burning.
In short, there are many variables that affect the temperature of the earth, most of them beyond the control of man. CO2 content is one of them, but there is no evidence that it is the main cause.
Using an energy source other than fossil fuels will happen as readily accessible fossil fuels are depleted, not because of the unknown cause of warmer temperatures.
...with rising and lowering tectonic plates,..
Yes, and you'll propose that the tektonic plates all over the earth rose or fell EXACTLY the same amount uniformly all over! If the upper air is also warm, then there will be no storms.
It is the temperature DIFFERENCES, that operate the weather engine, just as the temperature differences operate any other engine. Simple thermodynamics tell us that! If the whole earth gets warmer, the difference of temperature in the levels of the atmosphere gets less and the weather engine runs more gently.
200 feet of water can easily be accomodated if the average temperature of the planet approached a uniform 80-90 deg F. There is evidence that the whole earth was once UNIFORMLY warm. We find the remains of tropical life forms everywhere on this planet.
There is no substance that can soak up and transport more heat than water, whether liquid or gaseous. That is why the climate near large bodies of water is less extreme in both hot and cold. If you get into a room whith 100% humidity you still can breathe just fine. The moisture content of the air does not change its pressure. Where do you think all these FOSSIL fuels we are burning came from in the first place?
...ever seen.?!
Really, how long compared to cycles of nature have scientists been looking at this? There is plenty of evidence that there were times of much warmer and also much colder climate, long before anyone burned fossil fuels. There is NO evidence that the rapid rise of temperature is not part of the natural ups and downs that have occurred for ages.
...a temperature rise of 11K will put most of Florida under water..
One fact that is forgotten is all this is that as the air gets warmer, it can hold a LOT more water. There is evidence that in ages past, the earth was MUCH warmer, such that we find fossilized tropical life forms in Siberia. At the same time, oceans were about 200 feet LOWER than they are today! The now under water areas called continental shelves were dry land then. As the atmosphere gets warmer, especially the upper parts of it, it can hold enourmous amounts of water. A hurricane is a localized demo of that fact. Violent whether is largely due to temperature gradients, which lessen as the earth gets warmer because the increased moisture in the air is an equalizing influence.
...But who *really* knows? It's all theory and conjecture - people need to stop treating it as fact. ...
Exactly true! The main piece of evidence missing is whether or not human activity is the cause. Nobody seems to question this. Everybody assumes that global warming is caused by man burning fossil fuels and thereby increasing the average global temperature. There is plenty of evidence that the climate naturally cycles to warmer, then again colder and it has been doing this long before anyone used fossil fuels.
,,,The evidence in support of global warming is overwhelming,,,
That may be, but there is NO evidence that human activity is the cause. So why should "Washington" do something about that which nobody knows what the cause is in the first place. Climate cycles are natural phenomena that took place long before anyone burned fossil fuels. Mandating sweeping societal changes based on unproven assumptions is NOT sound policy. I certainly am glad that Bush is not responding to the stupid doomsayers who contend that mankind is the cause of perfectly natural events. There is plenty of evidence that the earth was much warmer in times past and there were also periods when things were much colder.
...Global Warming supporting scientific community have mountains of evidence...
But they have NO evidence that this warming is caused by human activity. Climate, like much in nature goes in cycles, some of very long periodicity compared to the short human life time. There were times in recorded history when it was much warmer and also times when it was much colder, all long before mankind started using fossil fuels. So right now we may be in a warming cycle, the duration and extent of which NONE of the smart-@ss scientists can predict any more than the lottery numbers.
...Of course billions and billions of tons of additional CO2...
Yes, of course that's a lot compared to the trillions and trillions of tons of the atmosphere as a whole. Where do you think all that carbon came from which mankind is now releasing into the air? Why are these fuels we are burning called FOSSIL fuels? These fuels represent stored solar energy, converted to oil, gas and coal by life forms that grew profusely on the entire earth, from pole to pole ages ago. So far humanity has released only a small percentage of this KNOWN buried carbon. Who knows how much more there is in the depths of the earth of which we don't even have the slightest hint of?
Man's worst effect upon man has always been and always will be himself. Man's wars and murders have killed and injured orders of magnitude more fellow humans than all the "natural" disasters put together.
Stop worrying about a tiny increase in the CO2 level in the atmosphere. There is evidence that there is some warming, (if you discount last week's record snow storms in the east) but there is NO evidence that this is caused by man rather than just a normal part of the cycling of climate. There have been much warmer and colder periods, even in recorded history, long before man started using fossil fuels.
...when gas hits $8/gallon ...
That's when you and most others won't need to go anywhere, except may around the corner to the nearest bread line because there won't be any jobs to go to and you won't need to go shopping because there will be nothing in the stores (it all gets there by truck) and you'll not have any money. Maybe you'll be out on the street since you can't pay your rent either.
...maybe public transit will become popular enough to help the environment...
Oh what wishful thinking and dreaming that is and how much good money is wasted on that in many places. Public transit works well only in EXTREMELY densely populated, compact places. Spread out cities, such as most of them in the western parts of the USA have not and never will get a significant percentage of the population out of their cars. The one big thing that transit planners never seem to take into consideration is the convenience factor of the automobile.
In the SF Bay Area, where they built a very nice, incredibly expensive transit system called BART, the freeways are still clogged almost all the time with automobiles having only one person in them. The commuter lanes thereon are largely empty, even in the busiest rush hour.
Germany is a densely populated country and the German trains run on time, are fast, comfortable and although not exactly cheap, not outrageously expensive either. Even so, there are traffic jams of many kilometers in many places on their speed unlimited Autobahn throughout that country. Rapid transit is no panacea for our transporation woes.
...As is the pathetic insistence that it is real ...
It is real alright, but irrelevant. There are may factors that affect climate, especially on a global scale. Climate goes in cycles, like may things in nature. Government actions must be based on facts and truth, not some maybe educated speculations by certain people who have some kind of other agenda. I agree that the idea that puny man is causing global *anything* is indeed laughable.
...intervening for the benefit of the vast majority of people in the country...
Yes, intervening based on junk scientific speculation. Even if it can be shown that there is such a thing as global warming, there is not one shred of evidence that human activity has anything to do with it. Climate, especially global climate, like most things in nature goes in cycles, some of them with very long time periods. There were periods of time where the climate was MUCH warmer than today, even it recorded human history, let alone during the vast geologic ages of the past.
...CO2 is a global problem...
There MAY be evidence that there is more CO2 in the air, but even if there is, SO WHAT? There are many other factors that affect the temperature of this planet, CO2 is only one of them. Climate goes through long term CYCLES, so how do these smart a** scientists know so for sure that there is a long term warming trend that is caused by anything humans are doing? There is plenty of evidence that there were periods of time, even in recorded history, that the Earth was MUCH warmer than today. How often have proud scientists made confident, high sounding assertions which not much later were proven to be imaginary speculations?
...One of the key culprits in global warming is the increased use of large, fuel inefficient vehicles...
That is a bunch of BS. What evidence is there that *ANY* human activity is causing *ANY* global long term change of *ANY* sort?! Human beings, especially certain so called scientists should get a large dose of humility for imagining that puny, insignificant human beings can affect large scale changes of this planet. Recent natural disasters prove that man is totally impotent, either through intent or accident to materially influence the immense forces of nature.
Many things in nature happen in cycles, some over great time periods, espcially compared to the microseconds of human existence. So how can these so proud and arrogant scientists assert so confidently that human activity is the cause for their observations over the few moments of time they have been breathing air?
...tell me where the US will be in 500 years...
Was there anyone alive on this Earth 500 years ago who did foretell or could have remotely fortold what life on this planet would be like today? Nobody alive today can even accurately fortell what will happen tomorrow! If you can, tell me what stocks to buy or what lottery numbers to pick!
How can the &**&!^% arrogant, stupid so called scientists think they can tell what will take place 500 years in the future. These guys are MORE than totally out to lunch! I can't understand why even fools listen to them, let alone responsible leaders of nations.
There are mountains of evidence that this whole planet was once very warm, such as that there was NO ice anywhere on the whole planet and at the same time the water level of the oceans was almost 200 feet lower than today.
There is NO evidence whatsoever that any warming that may be happening is caused by mankind's activity on this earth. Threefourths of the Earth's surface is water and man's presence on the land areas is also quite limited. There are also vast land areas where nobody lives or even ever goes there. Compared to the energy the Earth receives from the sun each day, all of man's energy production and use is miniscule. The earth receives far more energy from the sun in a single day, than mankind has ever, in all of its history, has produced or utilized.
I think it is a form of unmitigated pride and arrogance for humans to think that they can have a significant effect on anything happening on a global scale, especially in the long term. The recent tsunami, last years hurricanes or todays' east coast snow storms amply demonstrate man's impotence and insignificance when the forces of nature are unleashed.
...A computer that is THOUSANDS of times more powerful costs 1/20th..
The reason computer hardware is so much cheaper than software has much to do with the amount of labor needed to produce both. The design labor for the chips that are in computers is amortized over all the software that runs on these chips. The amount of labor that goes into an OS or other major programs is applicable only to that particular program, not to all possible programs that run on a given hardware. Therefore, even if the amount of labor to design the chipsets is equal to a major software design, the labor for software is spread out to a much smaller number of units.
This principle applies not only to computer, but also to music and video players. The cost of many music or video collections far exceeds the cost of the playback hardware.
...that Genesis is meant to be taken literally...
Whether you want to believe Genesis or any other part of the Bible is up to you, but you too will one day surely, definitely DIE and after that you will find out whether there is a God and whether the Bible is His word. By then, however it will be too late for you to do anything about it, for then you will face God as your judge only. Right now however you still have the opportunity to know Him as the merciful Savior through Jesus the Messiah. You have the rest of your days, however many that may be, here in this time-space dimension to decide whether you will meet God as Judge or Savior. I suggest you read the book written by the Apostle John and then make a very considered decision about what it says to you personally. Do it for what can you really lose?
...you're freaky rules do not apply to me...
I've got news for you! The rules DO apply to you, whether you like it or not, for even atheists will definitely, surely DIE and after that you will find out there is a God and HE will be your judge, not me.
...But if we get immortality...
That is an IF that will not happen, at least as long as we live in these bodies subject to entropy. The human life span is set by the Creator God who tells us:
Genesis 6:3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal ; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."
...It's like the webmaster that pours over his Urchin stats...
I guess the webmaster liquified at some point. The spelling checker would not catch this, but the correct word is not POUR as in a liquid, but "PORES over..."
...IDE/SATA-drives need a boost in their speed...
What application do you run that an ordinary, garden variety disk drive cannot keep up with? Are you running a transaction processing or data base server that has to respond to thousands of random requests as quickly as possible? Other than that, I cannot think of any application which the average drive cannot handle. If the OS has a decent data caching system, even a moderate number of random data read/writes should not slow the average throughput down all that much.
The key to good computer performance with any given system is plenty of RAM. You can never have too much of that. If you are into media, especially video, then the capacity of the drive becomes important. Most ordinary drives are fast enough for normal video data. For HD though a faster drive may be needed.