When it comes to security, the problem is the person operating the computer. Malware and viruses don't just magically appear on a system unless there is a remote exploit, and even then it often takes user interaction to make it work.
It doesn't matter how secure you think your favorite operating system is. If someone has admin rights on that machine, then it will be vulnerable to the first NataliePortmanNekkedWithGrits.* that person downloads and runs.
I can pay for an incinerator, but that doesn't mean I can use it on my property. Why? Pollution regulations, possible damage to other people's property, and being a general nuisance to my neighborhood. I can 50 gallons of gasoline, but that doesn't mean I can just dump it down a drain pipe. I can buy a car but that doesn't mean I can run people over with it.
If you want to do something stupid and it affects only you, great. I don't really care. However, energy is not one of those things, because it will affect other people. Capitalism eventually provides the cheapest solution, but that doesn't mean it will provide the best solution as has been demonstrated repeatedly.
A lot of people are concerned for the future and our resources. Apparently you are not. You may not be an American, but you sure act sound like one.
How about you realize that there is more than just you on the planet, that your actions affect other people, and stop being a self-centered, greedy, sociopathic twit?
If you're an American, I realize that might be asking too much.
How else did you think it reaches orbital speeds? It's not just a matter of making it up there, it's making it up there with enough speed that you don't fall back down.
Shuttle launches just show you how people take amazing things for granted. You want to talk about balls? Seven astronauts willing strap themselves to a giant fuel bomb built by the lowest bidder in order to achieve speed between 14,000 to 25,000 mph. Then, if that weren't ballsy enough, they re-enter the Earth's atmosphere at that speed, with the ships hull reaching anywhere from 5,000 to 10,000 F. Still not ballsy enough? After they make it through re-entry they have to perform to descend and land thing without any sort of engine power whatsoever. And that's not including strapping themselves into space suits to go perform work in the harshest environment known to man.
Amazing doesn't begin to describe it.
Of course, the glory days were back when we were landing on the moon. Those days are long gone though. Science in the US has been going downhill for quite some time. And now with the anti-science group gaining momentum, it won't be long before what we have left goes down the drain. It's probably going to be left to other nations to further space explorations.
Since when has the "I'm going to do whatever the fuck I want and fuck everyone else!" mentality been deserving of an insightful mod?
The free ride on cheap and easy resources is going to be coming to an end soon. We need to focus on sustainability. Wastefully burning 100 watts on light bulbs when you can get the same illumination for 10 watts is not going to help reach that goal.
If people want to do stupid shit that ONLY affects them, then I agree the government shouldn't interfere. However passing legislation mandating more energy efficiency is hardly an impediment to that.
If a climate scientists really wants to make money, there is no sane reason why they would pal around for the pennies that grants give. They'd pack up shop and go work for the fossil fuels industry which pays MUCH better than any grant.
Watts is a charlatan who posts "articles" that come from such notable trash journals like E&E (the equivalent of a super market tabloid for science) and other even less credible sources. The "science" he claims to show is not backed up by peer reviewed articles, usually has holes large enough to drive an iceberg through, and when shown to be incontrovertibly incorrect resorts to ad hominem attacks. He encourages the mythos of the "Global Climate Conspiracy" which is, at best, scientifically dishonest.
Anthony Watts attempted to discredit the NOAA, and failed miserably when peer-reviewed articles on the matter appeared showing that even AFTER removing all urban based stations that there was almost no impact on the overall temperature trends.
On top of this, surface station data is also backed by satellite measurements of the lower troposphere. So even IF surface stations were biasing the data, the satellite data would show the disparity (which it doesn't).
Watt's and others of his ilk present objective truth the same way Fox News pundits present objective truth. If your looking for scientifically validated research, I suggest Nature or one of the other well established science journals.
While nobody's proven that the current extraordinary warming trend is man-made...
You may want to check the research again. There is a very high confidence that we are, indeed, the main cause for the current warming trend, not the least of which is the carbon isotope analysis of the CO2 in our atmosphere showing that almost all of the additional CO2 is from fossil fuel sources.
If people are looking for absolute proofs, they need to look into math. All science can do is provide a high level of confidence.
I do agree with your other statements. Solar variation has almost no impact on global average temperatures, and volcanoes have a net cooling effect in general due to sulfur emissions.
People, including scientists can state their opinions. They can write essays, blogs, whatever they want. However, unless they have peer reviewed science to back up those claims, then their statements are worthless.
Being a skeptic is fine. However, when it comes to climate science there is a whole lot of noise and very little science coming from the skeptic side. There are no models developed showing that this warming is not induced by CO2. There are no research papers in respectable science journals refuting the sum total of current climate science. Until there is, then skeptics, even if they are climate scientists, are just like any other Joe or Jane Sixpack on the street.
You also make some ludicrous statements about throttling technological development. In order to create a sustainable policy for living on this planet there has to be ENORMOUS technological development, as we are no where near being able to live sustainably.
Then of course, are the standard idiotic claims of the mad-dog deniers near the end of your post, but those have been debunked many times over so no need to dive into that drivel again.
Carbon dioxide is an important part of our atmosphere. However, too much of it has climatological impacts. The planet could really care less, however we humans depend on our current climate to thrive. Any sudden changes to that climate will most likely bring consequences.
There is plenty of peer-reviewed science on the subject. And most of it is available for you to grab, including model source code and the scenarios used. The IPCC report is a good place to start, and they have an EXTENSIVE list of references to data, research, and models that back up the claims in the report.
Well I thought the plot big blue penis was a little shallow big blue penis in places, but the big blue penis movie big blue penis was overall big blue penis pretty good big blue penis.
The special effects big blue penis were pretty big blue penis decent, though big blue penis it could have big blue penis big blue penis. And then their big blue penis big blue penis, plus big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis. Big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis, big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis. Big blue penis big blue penis, big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis. And then it was like, "OMG WTF? Flaming air ship oragasm? BIG BLUE PENIS?"
Just shows you never know about big blue penis until you actually see big blue penis.
This sums up a lot of the reaction to the movie. I swear, it was like big blue penis became the new smurf language.
Plus, how often can you say big blue penis and actually be on topic.
Not really. Solar irradiance varies only by a fraction of a percent percentage between maxes and mins.
The primary driver for the cold weather was the abnormal weather patterns and abnormally strong negative NAO. A negative NAO weakens the polar vortex and allows cold arctic air to spill southward. Warmer air ends up hanging out over the arctic.
So while some areas had some cold blasts, areas like Greenland and Eastern Canada had some balmy temps approach 40 F above normal.
There is another option. It's called raising enough enough revenues to pay for expenditures, i.e. taxes. But that's political suicide. Even putting the tax rates back to where they were under Clinton would be a big help. But no one is going to do that.
The DoD is the sacred cow to end all sacred cows, the only way it's ever going to get budget cut is if there is nothing else left to cut.
Defense won't even be cut when there is nothing left to cut. We can't afford our defense budget NOW, and it still isn't being cut. Instead, congress will go through and cut critical amounts from lots of small programs to show they are "doing something" even though the cuts won't amount to jack in the end.
If we had politicians who did what needed to be done instead of doing what needs to be done for re-election, we might eventually solve the problem. I don't see that happening.
However, the rest of us professionals have to deal with frustrating shit in our jobs every day as well.
No. No you don't.
One of the definitions of hell is teaching a US high school class at a medium to large school. You get paid shit. The parents treat you like shit. The kids treat you like shit. The public treats you like shit. And the best part is? There is nothing you can do about it.
Teaching is one of the most stressful professions in the US.
Rather than bitch about that, how's about you do your damned job and help them along that path?
If parents would do their damn job, teachers would be able to theirs. Having a room of 30+ TV medicated, over-hormoned, semi-sociopathic, hellions locked up for 8 hours a day is not conducive to a teaching environment. Especially when teachers have a paltry and laughable array of disciplinary tools.
Why is the US falling behind in education? It's more than just the teachers. It's cultural.
Slashdot Mirror
The TSA just have your children in mind. Just ask their new chief Pedobear Gropenfeel.
When it comes to security, the problem is the person operating the computer. Malware and viruses don't just magically appear on a system unless there is a remote exploit, and even then it often takes user interaction to make it work.
It doesn't matter how secure you think your favorite operating system is. If someone has admin rights on that machine, then it will be vulnerable to the first NataliePortmanNekkedWithGrits.* that person downloads and runs.
So eloquent. I must have struck a nerve.
I can pay for an incinerator, but that doesn't mean I can use it on my property. Why? Pollution regulations, possible damage to other people's property, and being a general nuisance to my neighborhood. I can 50 gallons of gasoline, but that doesn't mean I can just dump it down a drain pipe. I can buy a car but that doesn't mean I can run people over with it.
If you want to do something stupid and it affects only you, great. I don't really care. However, energy is not one of those things, because it will affect other people. Capitalism eventually provides the cheapest solution, but that doesn't mean it will provide the best solution as has been demonstrated repeatedly.
A lot of people are concerned for the future and our resources. Apparently you are not. You may not be an American, but you sure act sound like one.
I've got a better idea.
How about you realize that there is more than just you on the planet, that your actions affect other people, and stop being a self-centered, greedy, sociopathic twit?
If you're an American, I realize that might be asking too much.
How else did you think it reaches orbital speeds? It's not just a matter of making it up there, it's making it up there with enough speed that you don't fall back down.
Shuttle launches just show you how people take amazing things for granted. You want to talk about balls? Seven astronauts willing strap themselves to a giant fuel bomb built by the lowest bidder in order to achieve speed between 14,000 to 25,000 mph. Then, if that weren't ballsy enough, they re-enter the Earth's atmosphere at that speed, with the ships hull reaching anywhere from 5,000 to 10,000 F. Still not ballsy enough? After they make it through re-entry they have to perform to descend and land thing without any sort of engine power whatsoever. And that's not including strapping themselves into space suits to go perform work in the harshest environment known to man.
Amazing doesn't begin to describe it.
Of course, the glory days were back when we were landing on the moon. Those days are long gone though. Science in the US has been going downhill for quite some time. And now with the anti-science group gaining momentum, it won't be long before what we have left goes down the drain. It's probably going to be left to other nations to further space explorations.
Use LED bulbs. The larger wattage ones produce a nice amount of heat. :)
If you include the cost to power them, you can quite easily beat that.
Since when has the "I'm going to do whatever the fuck I want and fuck everyone else!" mentality been deserving of an insightful mod?
The free ride on cheap and easy resources is going to be coming to an end soon. We need to focus on sustainability. Wastefully burning 100 watts on light bulbs when you can get the same illumination for 10 watts is not going to help reach that goal.
If people want to do stupid shit that ONLY affects them, then I agree the government shouldn't interfere. However passing legislation mandating more energy efficiency is hardly an impediment to that.
Well, you've certainly mastered the Glenn Beck style of presentation.
Post some peer-reviewed articles on the subject, from a reputable science journal. The rest is your opinion on the matter.
If a climate scientists really wants to make money, there is no sane reason why they would pal around for the pennies that grants give. They'd pack up shop and go work for the fossil fuels industry which pays MUCH better than any grant.
Watts is a charlatan who posts "articles" that come from such notable trash journals like E&E (the equivalent of a super market tabloid for science) and other even less credible sources. The "science" he claims to show is not backed up by peer reviewed articles, usually has holes large enough to drive an iceberg through, and when shown to be incontrovertibly incorrect resorts to ad hominem attacks. He encourages the mythos of the "Global Climate Conspiracy" which is, at best, scientifically dishonest.
Anthony Watts attempted to discredit the NOAA, and failed miserably when peer-reviewed articles on the matter appeared showing that even AFTER removing all urban based stations that there was almost no impact on the overall temperature trends.
On top of this, surface station data is also backed by satellite measurements of the lower troposphere. So even IF surface stations were biasing the data, the satellite data would show the disparity (which it doesn't).
Watt's and others of his ilk present objective truth the same way Fox News pundits present objective truth. If your looking for scientifically validated research, I suggest Nature or one of the other well established science journals.
While nobody's proven that the current extraordinary warming trend is man-made...
You may want to check the research again. There is a very high confidence that we are, indeed, the main cause for the current warming trend, not the least of which is the carbon isotope analysis of the CO2 in our atmosphere showing that almost all of the additional CO2 is from fossil fuel sources.
If people are looking for absolute proofs, they need to look into math. All science can do is provide a high level of confidence.
I do agree with your other statements. Solar variation has almost no impact on global average temperatures, and volcanoes have a net cooling effect in general due to sulfur emissions.
[citation needed]
People, including scientists can state their opinions. They can write essays, blogs, whatever they want. However, unless they have peer reviewed science to back up those claims, then their statements are worthless.
Being a skeptic is fine. However, when it comes to climate science there is a whole lot of noise and very little science coming from the skeptic side. There are no models developed showing that this warming is not induced by CO2. There are no research papers in respectable science journals refuting the sum total of current climate science. Until there is, then skeptics, even if they are climate scientists, are just like any other Joe or Jane Sixpack on the street.
You also make some ludicrous statements about throttling technological development. In order to create a sustainable policy for living on this planet there has to be ENORMOUS technological development, as we are no where near being able to live sustainably.
Then of course, are the standard idiotic claims of the mad-dog deniers near the end of your post, but those have been debunked many times over so no need to dive into that drivel again.
What?
Carbon dioxide is an important part of our atmosphere. However, too much of it has climatological impacts. The planet could really care less, however we humans depend on our current climate to thrive. Any sudden changes to that climate will most likely bring consequences.
Bullshit.
There is plenty of peer-reviewed science on the subject. And most of it is available for you to grab, including model source code and the scenarios used. The IPCC report is a good place to start, and they have an EXTENSIVE list of references to data, research, and models that back up the claims in the report.
Common sense does not meet scientific standards.
But in the real world they would have promoted him to CEO.
...PayPal shows itself to be morally bankrupt.
They're just realizing this now?
They refuse to open their eggs from the little end!
Pray to Chuck Norris. He may answer your prayers. Or he may kick your ass.
Either way, your problems will be solved
Well I thought the plot big blue penis was a little shallow big blue penis in places, but the big blue penis movie big blue penis was overall big blue penis pretty good big blue penis.
The special effects big blue penis were pretty big blue penis decent, though big blue penis it could have big blue penis big blue penis. And then their big blue penis big blue penis, plus big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis. Big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis, big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis. Big blue penis big blue penis, big blue penis big blue penis big blue penis. And then it was like, "OMG WTF? Flaming air ship oragasm? BIG BLUE PENIS?"
Just shows you never know about big blue penis until you actually see big blue penis.
This sums up a lot of the reaction to the movie. I swear, it was like big blue penis became the new smurf language.
Plus, how often can you say big blue penis and actually be on topic.
If my "robit" looks like Bender, I've either been drinking way too much cheap bourbon or I need to see a doctor. Stat.
Not really. Solar irradiance varies only by a fraction of a percent percentage between maxes and mins.
The primary driver for the cold weather was the abnormal weather patterns and abnormally strong negative NAO. A negative NAO weakens the polar vortex and allows cold arctic air to spill southward. Warmer air ends up hanging out over the arctic.
So while some areas had some cold blasts, areas like Greenland and Eastern Canada had some balmy temps approach 40 F above normal.
There is another option. It's called raising enough enough revenues to pay for expenditures, i.e. taxes. But that's political suicide. Even putting the tax rates back to where they were under Clinton would be a big help. But no one is going to do that.
The DoD is the sacred cow to end all sacred cows, the only way it's ever going to get budget cut is if there is nothing else left to cut.
Defense won't even be cut when there is nothing left to cut. We can't afford our defense budget NOW, and it still isn't being cut. Instead, congress will go through and cut critical amounts from lots of small programs to show they are "doing something" even though the cuts won't amount to jack in the end.
If we had politicians who did what needed to be done instead of doing what needs to be done for re-election, we might eventually solve the problem. I don't see that happening.
However, the rest of us professionals have to deal with frustrating shit in our jobs every day as well.
No. No you don't.
One of the definitions of hell is teaching a US high school class at a medium to large school. You get paid shit. The parents treat you like shit. The kids treat you like shit. The public treats you like shit. And the best part is? There is nothing you can do about it.
Teaching is one of the most stressful professions in the US.
Rather than bitch about that, how's about you do your damned job and help them along that path?
If parents would do their damn job, teachers would be able to theirs. Having a room of 30+ TV medicated, over-hormoned, semi-sociopathic, hellions locked up for 8 hours a day is not conducive to a teaching environment. Especially when teachers have a paltry and laughable array of disciplinary tools.
Why is the US falling behind in education? It's more than just the teachers. It's cultural.