*Every* race, religion, ethnicity, etc etc has, at some point in history, moved to some area and forced out and/or killed the people there at the time or committed other atrocities and/or crimes against humanity. African leaders in the 16th/17th centuries sold their own people into slavery.
There are no 'good guys' and everyone is 'privileged'.
The contractor is being paid 50% of the revenue because there is no money to paid them a fix amount upfront.
Because the people won't vote to authorize the government to finance such systems through a bond measure or property assessment or any of the other myriad ways revenue is raised for infrastructure projects. So, government does it anyway by doing an end-run around the will of the constituents. Because those "government by the people, for the people" and "by the consent of the governed" tropes have been mostly lip-service concerning anything that really matters for decades.
Civil disobedience doesn't mean much if you can't distinguish it from whining about the man keeping you down while you are breaking the law and fleeing justice.
It also doesn't mean much if can't be distinguished from all the other protests about injustice from the masses of incarcerated.
It's rather hard to hold news conferences/interviews, make internet videos, etc explaining and defending your decisions and actions along with why this law/act/regulation/etc is unjust/unconstitutional and possible remedies, from a super-max security prison cell.
How is one to commit multiple acts of civil disobedience if one must turn themselves over to authority after the first act? Why would you hog-tie your own ability to combat injustice? How does martyring oneself advance justice?
...and a key part is that you are willing to face the penalties...
No.
No, it is not any part of civil disobedience whatsoever to needlessly suffer unjust punishment for an unjust/unconstitutional law that you are breaking because it is unjust.
This false trope that "you must *suffer* or it's not "True(TM)" civil disobedience" is pushed by authoritarians who wish to discourage possible acts of civil disobedience among the populace against unjust/unconstitutional laws, Acts, and executive orders.
The trouble is that when we're talking about issues like climate change or over-reliance on limited natural resources, the rest of us are going to suffer along with them if we can't change their minds (or otherwise work around their objections).
No, the trouble is both sides honestly believe with just as much conviction that they are correct and the other side is wrong, however, one side has largely decided to abandon logical argumentation, debate, and consideration of conflicting research and data in favor of attempting to silence questioning & debate through suppression, censorship, and intimidation of those holding opposing viewpoints and/or attempting to have their viewpoints/research/data published where it might matter.
Politics dressed up as science where winning becomes more important than science and where science becomes merely a means to an end, is the trouble.
I don't doubt you worked in a building where those activities were being done, but this isn't even a hard problem. You're trying to wave around some sort of authority chode, but argument from authority is crap. And you're not even claiming experience; "I did work I thought was important, a long time ago, therefore I know all about modern materials engineering." It is really weak sauce.
Wow, dude, take the stick out of your ass and that huge chip off your shoulder! Have you got 'little-man syndrome' or something? I'm not trying to wave around any authority, just trying to have an interesting technical 'what-if', the background was just attempting to establish rapport with possibly another person with an engineering background. I was simply tossing out some random off-the-cuff thoughts, I wasn't submitting an engineering thesis, FFS!
Most ICs are also available in ceramic packages. Typically that means it is rated to 210C ambient.
Those ceramic packages also come at a premium price, again making the idea of putting them into the base of a 6L6 not practical. That 210C ambient is also likely a maximum spec and/or exposure time-limited and reliant on heatsinking and forced-air cooling. Good luck fitting that in there.
The base of the tube's plug doesn't get that hot, and the reason is because it has a high temperature plastic washing in between.
That is false for most common octal power power tubes used in guitar amplifiers. There is no "high temperature plastic 'washing'" between the glass envelope and the base. There is only a bit of high-temperature cement to aid in keeping the base attached along with the leads inside the base. Heat also gets transferred to the base's interior by the tube's pin-leads exiting the glass envelope and connecting to the pins in the base. The bases are typically made of the modern version of Bakelite which helps prevent burned fingers, plus the fact that when tubes operate in an upright position the heat rises away from the base due to convection. Many amplifiers operate power tubes inverted, Fender being prominent. I guarantee you that after an hour of operation the bases of 6L6s in a '68 Fender Twin Reverb are quite near 200C, sometimes over, and if you're foolish enough to grab one of those bases you'll leave burned flesh behind, Bakelite or not.
So you if put a flexible printed circuit (made of kapton, good to 260C) with a ceramic IC somewhere inside of some plastic whose purpose is already thermal shielding, then it is safe to assume that that circuit will be somewhere in between the temperature of the tube, and the ambient temperature. And it isn't going to melt or burn.
That might work, but there's bloody-little room in one of those bases, I know as I've had them apart many times.
It might be technically achievable, but it would not be easy or cheap, the added costs would likely negate any added value, and the value itself is still a question. What value could it add to a set of tubes in some guy's guitar amplifier?
... but his claiming we have 100 years left is alarmist and unscientific.
Maybe 'unscientific', but 'alarmist'?
Have you read the recent news? The US just shot down a Russian jet in Syria, the Russians threaten to shoot down any US plane in the Russian-declared zone, Kim Jong Un just sent back a US college student murdered by being beaten to death as a Corlione-style response/threat to the US which brings China into the mix and the US has put *Three* aircraft carrier battle groups into the waters off N. Korea, and the only times the US has sent in three carrier battle groups in the past is when the US has gone to war.
Hell, I don't know if Hawking's warning was alarmist *enough*!
Having iodine pills on hand probably would not be the most unwise thing at this point.
Even with the worst case global warming, the earth will still be more hospitable than any body in the universe outside of earth.
And you can back that up with a list of all the planets in the universe and their environmental data?
...but let's not go nutso and alarmist about this and make claims that no one can accurately back up.
>> Facial Recognition Is Coming To US Airports I'm Not Coming To US Airports.
Not to worry, the TSA has started having teams of TSA agents set up security screening checkpoints at post offices, train and bus stations (metro & greyhound), even stopping metro buses and boarding them to do security checks on riders. I'm sure the facial-recognition systems will be rolled out for these alternate and local transportation systems in the very near future.
We will soon be very safe with TSA checkpoints at malls, major intersections, residential neighborhood entrances/exits, and more!
Strangely, however, somehow I'm not feeling the love.
It could be thermally insulated so that it didn't reach anything like that temperature, yes.
Hmm, I can't think of methods/materials one could use in such a tiny space as the interior of the base of a 6L6 to successfully passively-insulate the unit from up to 4 to 6 hours continuous exposure to temps easily exceeding 200C, and this sort of thing is kind of in my wheelhouse, as I've worked on avionics and rocket guidance systems before retiring. Tube amps are just a passion springing from the intersection of two of my loves...guitar and electronics/engineering.
I suppose if cost-per-unit and added complexity weren't an issue you could do something like add Peltier-junction cooling systems, but that's likely not practical nor cost effective. And, although you might get the thing to meet the base performance specs of a 6L6, I seriously doubt you would be able to stick a pair of those things into a '59 tweed Fender Bassman combo amplifier in place of the normal 6L6s and go play a gig. They would not be plug-n-play replacements.
That's not even touching on the fact that guitarists/musicians have very eclectic and particular preferences when it comes to their personal instrument amplifiers. Nigel Tufnel is never going to part with his rows of 100-watt Marshall Super-Leads nor be OK with sticking weird bits of silly-con into them. "It's not got nothing to do with going up to eleven, and that's one louder than ten, innit?!":P
Anyways, it's been a pleasant thought experiment and interesting exchange, thanks for the replies!
APK buddy, I gotta give you props as a longtime Slashdotter. Straight up, sometimes you get off the rails a bit when you're in 'the zone', and sometimes tend a bit too heavily towards "wall-o-text" for a forum post on/., but your posts on this and the hosts file posts, and more, have never been in error and/or bad advice.
I'm sure you get a lot of shit, so I just wanted to let you know we aren't all "nattering nabobs of negativity" here.:)
Then they will make it very, very, VERY inconvenient not to connect them to the internet, at the very least.
The market for such devices is rather small, so given the "danger" of people buying them who could else be forced into giving up their data buying them and thus not providing data that can be sold for lots of money, it's unlikely that any maker of appliances would endanger his data harvesting for such comparably insignificant gains.
That's where there's a niche-market for tiny cottage-industries. For example, I occasionally build custom vacuum-tube guitar amplifiers either for myself or acquaintances. Unless they can figure a way to incorporate IoT into the glass envelope of a 6L6GC, 12AX7A, or EL34.:P
But no one wants to actually DO something about this.
Actually, ISIS, Al Quaida, the Russians and a bunch of people in the Middle East and North Africa are actively working on a solution as we sit here typing!
And don't forget Kim Jong Un, that champion advocate of combating human-caused global warming by eliminating humans!
Maybe the DNC could hire Kim as a climate change consultant. He'd fit right in with the #huntrepublicans crowd at the DNC!
For anyone wanting something more than the parent's word on this, the IPCC backs him up on it in their 5th assessment report you can read about here [www.ipcc.ch]: For instance, maintaining the global mean top of the atmosphere (TOA) energy balance in a simulation of pre-industrial climate is essential to prevent the climate system from drifting to an unrealistic state. The models used in this report almost universally contain adjustments to parameters in their treatment of clouds to fulfil this important constraint of the climate system (Watanabe et al., 2010; Donner et al., 2011; Gent et al., 2011; Golaz et al., 2011; Martin et al., 2011; Hazeleger et al., 2012; Mauritsen et al., 2012; Hourdin et al., 2013).
One of the referenced papers [wiley.com] comments on the reason tuning is desirable: The choices we make naturally depend on our preconceptions, preferences and objectives. We choose to tune our model because the alternatives - to either drift away from the known climate state, or to introduce flux-corrections - are less attractive. Within the foreseeable future climate model tuning will continue to be necessary as the prospects of constraining the relevant unresolved processes with sufficient precision are not good.
So, our inherent understanding of some processes is still not accurate enough for the job and tuning is a necessary evil. Regrettably, the corrections we tune for are bad enough that they are "essential to prevent the climate system from drifting to an unrealistic state".
The challenges still faced from tuning are outlined in another of the referenced papers: CM3w predicts the most realistic 20th century warming. However, this is achieved with a small and less desirable threshold radius of 6.0 m for the onset of precipitation. Conversely, CM3c uses a more desirable value of 10.6 m but produces a very unrealistic 20th century temperature evolution. So the tuning process means using less realistic values for parameters just to make sure the TOA energy balances.
That same paper ends with the following note: Furthermore, in order to predict a realistic evolution of the 20th century, models must balance radiative forcing and climate sensitivity, resulting in a well-documented inverse correlation between forcing and sensitivity [Schwartz etal. 2007; Kiehl, 2007; Andrews etal. 2012]. This inverse correlation is consistent with an intercomparison-driven model selection process in which âoeclimate modelsâ(TM) ability to simulate the 20th century temperature increase with fidelity has become something of a show-stopper as a model unable to reproduce the 20th century would probably not see publication
So, as even the IPCC and many jumping on after me here will be liable to observe, the published climate models out there all more or less are able to recreate the historical temperature record. Of course, as noted this isn't necessarily a comment on inherent merit to the models as the authors note their own model tuning meant the choice between picking a parameter value that better fit the known data, or the parameter that would yield a better hindcast and unless you choose the hindcast you don't get published. If the only models that can get published are tuned for hindcasts, it's less surprising that a sampling of published models manages to do that. The question of HOW they manage to hindcast is key, and the inability to properly control TOA energy without hand balling things is huge.
Wow, thanks for that! I would have just posted a link to that IPCC document, if I even bothered, seeing as the alarmists don't tend to accept anything that casts any doubts on their religion, particularly here on Slashleft, heh!
The corporations want it to be a federal issue. Wile they may disagree about what the federal rules should be, they can all agree that duping you suckers into demanding it to be a federal issue is a great idea.
Precisely!
That takes away the ability of people at the local and State level from having a direct say, and puts things in the hands of the cable co.'s bought-and-paid for Congressional shills and K-Street lobbying firms. The very *last* thing the cable co.s want is for the people they screw over having any say in the laws & regulations they do business under.
This tactic is not confined to the cable co.s and is a major contributing factor to the growth in the federal government's power & scope.
Also, look at the Civil Rights riots, the Ferguson riots, the Baltimore riots.
The fucking rioters used Stone Age techniques, throwing bottles, bricks, and stones and making fire.
The only reason those "disturbances" (they were hardly "riots" by comparison with the '60s civil rights riots I lived through) went on longer than a half an hour was that the politicians had the police holding back and standing down for political reasons. During the LA Rodney King riots the only stores in that area that weren't looted/burned were the ones guarded by armed shopkeepers. Guns in civilian hands save more lives in defense than they take in anger/greed.
The prime example of your fallacy would be the United States of America.
The Confederacy had rights and resources and yet the insurgent traitors lost. How does that fit your narrative?
What, you expect guarantees in life? Perfect outcomes every time with never a failure? How old are you?
The Confederacy lacked industrial infrastructure resources and suffered with poor logistical capabilities & resources, so my post stands and your example proves my post *for* me, thank you very much!:)
Having resources and arms (rights are what you're fighting for, and/or to preserve) does not 100% guarantee victory, but *not* having them does 100% guarantee defeat.
Oh please, in the real world it's been shown throughout history time after time, that the only "rights" anyone has are the ones they have the arms and resources to defend along with the plausible/believable *willingness* to use them against those who would infringe those rights, including, and especially, against their own government/leaders.
If you don't have the arms, resources, or plausible/believable (to those who would infringe rights) willingness to *kill* in defense of your individual rights, history teaches that you shall have none and deserve your relegation to serfdom.
I can't stand the Gender studies crowd either, but people who have an issue with women's monthly cycle and the products they use to deal with it are pretty darn 1930's.
It's like so awful, I'll tell you what.. I've been to events where the person using the porta Potty before or after me have been women. We say hi as we pass each other, and don't even have a second thought. It doesn't make you a SJW to not see rest rooms as a place to hook up.
Porta-pottys are, by their nature and design, universal single-occupancy units. If some company wants to equip their units with tampon and rubber dispensers, I don't care. Being single-occupancy, sex of the user is irrelevant.
I have no problem with whatever sex someone believes they are, whether their lovers have different or the same bits, where they stick the bits, or anything else unless it causes harm. Different strokes for different folks, as we said back in the '60s/'70s. That's because I have respect for other people's choices.
It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty sexes, or no sexes. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg, to mangle an old Thomas Jefferson quote. I will stand with him to defend his right to believe and say so. But, if he attempts to force me by law, Act, or plain violent thuggery, to make positive affirmations or expend time, money, or labor to his cause, I shall stand in opposition, even if I agree with his beliefs.
Why, in 2017, I have to point out something as simple as this that my 7 year old understands to adults I don't know.
Why? You are compelled to because you're a homophobic, racist, white-privileged, bigoted, Christian-moral-extremist hatemonger, intent on achieving your goal of a radical US Christian Theocracy, as your post proves by questioning what the authorities on genders decree from their public taxpayer-funded, tenure-protected, university gender-studies department positions./s
That's correct. However, in order for broken ideas to die, they must be challenged.
True. Then when they're dead, we bury them, as they deserve.
Great! We can't have anyone learning from past history!
How will we keep convincing the 'useful idiots' to repeat the same ideological/political/societal mistakes that have always allowed tyranny to take hold down through history, if we leave records of past examples laying around to warn people!? [signed] Current & Future Tyrants, Dictators, and Oligarchs of the World
Slashdot Mirror
White privilege detected
Hypocrite privilege detected.
*Every* race, religion, ethnicity, etc etc has, at some point in history, moved to some area and forced out and/or killed the people there at the time or committed other atrocities and/or crimes against humanity. African leaders in the 16th/17th centuries sold their own people into slavery.
There are no 'good guys' and everyone is 'privileged'.
Strat
The contractor is being paid 50% of the revenue because there is no money to paid them a fix amount upfront.
Because the people won't vote to authorize the government to finance such systems through a bond measure or property assessment or any of the other myriad ways revenue is raised for infrastructure projects. So, government does it anyway by doing an end-run around the will of the constituents. Because those "government by the people, for the people" and "by the consent of the governed" tropes have been mostly lip-service concerning anything that really matters for decades.
Strat
Civil disobedience doesn't mean much if you can't distinguish it from whining about the man keeping you down while you are breaking the law and fleeing justice.
It also doesn't mean much if can't be distinguished from all the other protests about injustice from the masses of incarcerated.
It's rather hard to hold news conferences/interviews, make internet videos, etc explaining and defending your decisions and actions along with why this law/act/regulation/etc is unjust/unconstitutional and possible remedies, from a super-max security prison cell.
How is one to commit multiple acts of civil disobedience if one must turn themselves over to authority after the first act? Why would you hog-tie your own ability to combat injustice? How does martyring oneself advance justice?
Strat
...and a key part is that you are willing to face the penalties...
No.
No, it is not any part of civil disobedience whatsoever to needlessly suffer unjust punishment for an unjust/unconstitutional law that you are breaking because it is unjust.
This false trope that "you must *suffer* or it's not "True(TM)" civil disobedience" is pushed by authoritarians who wish to discourage possible acts of civil disobedience among the populace against unjust/unconstitutional laws, Acts, and executive orders.
Strat
The trouble is that when we're talking about issues like climate change or over-reliance on limited natural resources, the rest of us are going to suffer along with them if we can't change their minds (or otherwise work around their objections).
No, the trouble is both sides honestly believe with just as much conviction that they are correct and the other side is wrong, however, one side has largely decided to abandon logical argumentation, debate, and consideration of conflicting research and data in favor of attempting to silence questioning & debate through suppression, censorship, and intimidation of those holding opposing viewpoints and/or attempting to have their viewpoints/research/data published where it might matter.
Politics dressed up as science where winning becomes more important than science and where science becomes merely a means to an end, is the trouble.
Strat
I don't doubt you worked in a building where those activities were being done, but this isn't even a hard problem. You're trying to wave around some sort of authority chode, but argument from authority is crap. And you're not even claiming experience; "I did work I thought was important, a long time ago, therefore I know all about modern materials engineering." It is really weak sauce.
Wow, dude, take the stick out of your ass and that huge chip off your shoulder! Have you got 'little-man syndrome' or something? I'm not trying to wave around any authority, just trying to have an interesting technical 'what-if', the background was just attempting to establish rapport with possibly another person with an engineering background. I was simply tossing out some random off-the-cuff thoughts, I wasn't submitting an engineering thesis, FFS!
Most ICs are also available in ceramic packages. Typically that means it is rated to 210C ambient.
Those ceramic packages also come at a premium price, again making the idea of putting them into the base of a 6L6 not practical. That 210C ambient is also likely a maximum spec and/or exposure time-limited and reliant on heatsinking and forced-air cooling. Good luck fitting that in there.
The base of the tube's plug doesn't get that hot, and the reason is because it has a high temperature plastic washing in between.
That is false for most common octal power power tubes used in guitar amplifiers. There is no "high temperature plastic 'washing'" between the glass envelope and the base. There is only a bit of high-temperature cement to aid in keeping the base attached along with the leads inside the base. Heat also gets transferred to the base's interior by the tube's pin-leads exiting the glass envelope and connecting to the pins in the base. The bases are typically made of the modern version of Bakelite which helps prevent burned fingers, plus the fact that when tubes operate in an upright position the heat rises away from the base due to convection. Many amplifiers operate power tubes inverted, Fender being prominent. I guarantee you that after an hour of operation the bases of 6L6s in a '68 Fender Twin Reverb are quite near 200C, sometimes over, and if you're foolish enough to grab one of those bases you'll leave burned flesh behind, Bakelite or not.
So you if put a flexible printed circuit (made of kapton, good to 260C) with a ceramic IC somewhere inside of some plastic whose purpose is already thermal shielding, then it is safe to assume that that circuit will be somewhere in between the temperature of the tube, and the ambient temperature. And it isn't going to melt or burn.
That might work, but there's bloody-little room in one of those bases, I know as I've had them apart many times.
It might be technically achievable, but it would not be easy or cheap, the added costs would likely negate any added value, and the value itself is still a question. What value could it add to a set of tubes in some guy's guitar amplifier?
Strat
... but his claiming we have 100 years left is alarmist and unscientific.
Maybe 'unscientific', but 'alarmist'?
Have you read the recent news? The US just shot down a Russian jet in Syria, the Russians threaten to shoot down any US plane in the Russian-declared zone, Kim Jong Un just sent back a US college student murdered by being beaten to death as a Corlione-style response/threat to the US which brings China into the mix and the US has put *Three* aircraft carrier battle groups into the waters off N. Korea, and the only times the US has sent in three carrier battle groups in the past is when the US has gone to war.
Hell, I don't know if Hawking's warning was alarmist *enough*!
Having iodine pills on hand probably would not be the most unwise thing at this point.
Even with the worst case global warming, the earth will still be more hospitable than any body in the universe outside of earth.
And you can back that up with a list of all the planets in the universe and their environmental data?
...but let's not go nutso and alarmist about this and make claims that no one can accurately back up.
Umm...yeah...sure...whatever you say, buddy. 0_o
Strat
>> Facial Recognition Is Coming To US Airports
I'm Not Coming To US Airports.
Not to worry, the TSA has started having teams of TSA agents set up security screening checkpoints at post offices, train and bus stations (metro & greyhound), even stopping metro buses and boarding them to do security checks on riders. I'm sure the facial-recognition systems will be rolled out for these alternate and local transportation systems in the very near future.
We will soon be very safe with TSA checkpoints at malls, major intersections, residential neighborhood entrances/exits, and more!
Strangely, however, somehow I'm not feeling the love.
Strat
It could be thermally insulated so that it didn't reach anything like that temperature, yes.
Hmm, I can't think of methods/materials one could use in such a tiny space as the interior of the base of a 6L6 to successfully passively-insulate the unit from up to 4 to 6 hours continuous exposure to temps easily exceeding 200C, and this sort of thing is kind of in my wheelhouse, as I've worked on avionics and rocket guidance systems before retiring. Tube amps are just a passion springing from the intersection of two of my loves...guitar and electronics/engineering.
I suppose if cost-per-unit and added complexity weren't an issue you could do something like add Peltier-junction cooling systems, but that's likely not practical nor cost effective. And, although you might get the thing to meet the base performance specs of a 6L6, I seriously doubt you would be able to stick a pair of those things into a '59 tweed Fender Bassman combo amplifier in place of the normal 6L6s and go play a gig. They would not be plug-n-play replacements.
That's not even touching on the fact that guitarists/musicians have very eclectic and particular preferences when it comes to their personal instrument amplifiers. Nigel Tufnel is never going to part with his rows of 100-watt Marshall Super-Leads nor be OK with sticking weird bits of silly-con into them. "It's not got nothing to do with going up to eleven, and that's one louder than ten, innit?!" :P
Anyways, it's been a pleasant thought experiment and interesting exchange, thanks for the replies!
Strat
APK buddy, I gotta give you props as a longtime Slashdotter. Straight up, sometimes you get off the rails a bit when you're in 'the zone', and sometimes tend a bit too heavily towards "wall-o-text" for a forum post on /., but your posts on this and the hosts file posts, and more, have never been in error and/or bad advice.
I'm sure you get a lot of shit, so I just wanted to let you know we aren't all "nattering nabobs of negativity" here. :)
Strat
Now we know why your name is Strat. ;)
Also, any guitar I pick up is 'blue' regardless of the finish. ;)
Strat
You could fit an ESP8266 inside just the base of a 6L6GC.
Maybe, but would it survive, never mind function at full capacity, at prolonged environmental temperatures of up to 250C?
Strat
Then they will make it very, very, VERY inconvenient not to connect them to the internet, at the very least.
The market for such devices is rather small, so given the "danger" of people buying them who could else be forced into giving up their data buying them and thus not providing data that can be sold for lots of money, it's unlikely that any maker of appliances would endanger his data harvesting for such comparably insignificant gains.
That's where there's a niche-market for tiny cottage-industries. For example, I occasionally build custom vacuum-tube guitar amplifiers either for myself or acquaintances. Unless they can figure a way to incorporate IoT into the glass envelope of a 6L6GC, 12AX7A, or EL34. :P
Strat
if the autopilot were to just crash once in a while, people would learn to take the warnings seriously.
So what you're saying is, this isn't a bug it's a feature?
Strat
And don't forget Kim Jong Un, that champion advocate of combating human-caused global warming by eliminating humans!
Maybe the DNC could hire Kim as a climate change consultant. He'd fit right in with the #huntrepublicans crowd at the DNC!
Strat
For anyone wanting something more than the parent's word on this, the IPCC backs him up on it in their 5th assessment report you can read about here [www.ipcc.ch]:
For instance, maintaining the global mean top of the atmosphere (TOA) energy balance in a simulation of pre-industrial climate is essential to prevent the climate system from drifting to an unrealistic state. The models used in this report almost universally contain adjustments to parameters in their treatment of clouds to fulfil this important constraint of the climate system (Watanabe et al., 2010; Donner et al., 2011; Gent et al., 2011; Golaz et al., 2011; Martin et al., 2011; Hazeleger et al., 2012; Mauritsen et al., 2012; Hourdin et al., 2013).
One of the referenced papers [wiley.com] comments on the reason tuning is desirable:
The choices we make naturally depend on our preconceptions, preferences and objectives. We choose to tune our model because the alternatives - to either drift away from the known climate state, or to introduce flux-corrections - are less attractive. Within the foreseeable future climate model tuning will continue to be necessary as the prospects of constraining the relevant unresolved processes with sufficient precision are not good.
So, our inherent understanding of some processes is still not accurate enough for the job and tuning is a necessary evil. Regrettably, the corrections we tune for are bad enough that they are "essential to prevent the climate system from drifting to an unrealistic state".
The challenges still faced from tuning are outlined in another of the referenced papers:
CM3w predicts the most realistic 20th century warming. However, this is achieved with a small and less desirable threshold radius of 6.0 m for the onset of precipitation. Conversely, CM3c uses a more desirable value of 10.6 m but produces a very unrealistic 20th century temperature evolution.
So the tuning process means using less realistic values for parameters just to make sure the TOA energy balances.
That same paper ends with the following note:
Furthermore, in order to predict a realistic evolution of the 20th century, models must balance radiative forcing and climate sensitivity, resulting in a well-documented inverse correlation between forcing and sensitivity [Schwartz etal. 2007; Kiehl, 2007; Andrews etal. 2012]. This inverse correlation is consistent with an intercomparison-driven model selection process in which âoeclimate modelsâ(TM) ability to simulate the 20th century temperature increase with fidelity has become something of a show-stopper as a model unable to reproduce the 20th century would probably not see publication
So, as even the IPCC and many jumping on after me here will be liable to observe, the published climate models out there all more or less are able to recreate the historical temperature record. Of course, as noted this isn't necessarily a comment on inherent merit to the models as the authors note their own model tuning meant the choice between picking a parameter value that better fit the known data, or the parameter that would yield a better hindcast and unless you choose the hindcast you don't get published. If the only models that can get published are tuned for hindcasts, it's less surprising that a sampling of published models manages to do that. The question of HOW they manage to hindcast is key, and the inability to properly control TOA energy without hand balling things is huge.
Wow, thanks for that! I would have just posted a link to that IPCC document, if I even bothered, seeing as the alarmists don't tend to accept anything that casts any doubts on their religion, particularly here on Slashleft, heh!
Strat
The corporations want it to be a federal issue. Wile they may disagree about what the federal rules should be, they can all agree that duping you suckers into demanding it to be a federal issue is a great idea.
Precisely!
That takes away the ability of people at the local and State level from having a direct say, and puts things in the hands of the cable co.'s bought-and-paid for Congressional shills and K-Street lobbying firms. The very *last* thing the cable co.s want is for the people they screw over having any say in the laws & regulations they do business under.
This tactic is not confined to the cable co.s and is a major contributing factor to the growth in the federal government's power & scope.
Strat
More processing power, models refined over the decades for more accurate forecasting.
...And they *STILL* can't get the computer climate models to even somewhat-accurately track *PAST* climate changes!
WTF makes anyone think that their predictions about *future* climate changes are any more reliable?
Strat
Also, look at the Civil Rights riots, the Ferguson riots, the Baltimore riots.
The fucking rioters used Stone Age techniques, throwing bottles, bricks, and stones and making fire.
The only reason those "disturbances" (they were hardly "riots" by comparison with the '60s civil rights riots I lived through) went on longer than a half an hour was that the politicians had the police holding back and standing down for political reasons. During the LA Rodney King riots the only stores in that area that weren't looted/burned were the ones guarded by armed shopkeepers. Guns in civilian hands save more lives in defense than they take in anger/greed.
Strat
The prime example of your fallacy would be the United States of America.
The Confederacy had rights and resources and yet the insurgent traitors lost. How does that fit your narrative?
What, you expect guarantees in life? Perfect outcomes every time with never a failure? How old are you?
The Confederacy lacked industrial infrastructure resources and suffered with poor logistical capabilities & resources, so my post stands and your example proves my post *for* me, thank you very much! :)
Having resources and arms (rights are what you're fighting for, and/or to preserve) does not 100% guarantee victory, but *not* having them does 100% guarantee defeat.
Strat
Oh please, in the real world it's been shown throughout history time after time, that the only "rights" anyone has are the ones they have the arms and resources to defend along with the plausible/believable *willingness* to use them against those who would infringe those rights, including, and especially, against their own government/leaders.
If you don't have the arms, resources, or plausible/believable (to those who would infringe rights) willingness to *kill* in defense of your individual rights, history teaches that you shall have none and deserve your relegation to serfdom.
Strat
I can't stand the Gender studies crowd either, but people who have an issue with women's monthly cycle and the products they use to deal with it are pretty darn 1930's.
It's like so awful, I'll tell you what.. I've been to events where the person using the porta Potty before or after me have been women. We say hi as we pass each other, and don't even have a second thought. It doesn't make you a SJW to not see rest rooms as a place to hook up.
Porta-pottys are, by their nature and design, universal single-occupancy units. If some company wants to equip their units with tampon and rubber dispensers, I don't care. Being single-occupancy, sex of the user is irrelevant.
I have no problem with whatever sex someone believes they are, whether their lovers have different or the same bits, where they stick the bits, or anything else unless it causes harm. Different strokes for different folks, as we said back in the '60s/'70s. That's because I have respect for other people's choices.
It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty sexes, or no sexes. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg, to mangle an old Thomas Jefferson quote. I will stand with him to defend his right to believe and say so. But, if he attempts to force me by law, Act, or plain violent thuggery, to make positive affirmations or expend time, money, or labor to his cause, I shall stand in opposition, even if I agree with his beliefs.
Strat
Why, in 2017, I have to point out something as simple as this that my 7 year old understands to adults I don't know.
Why? You are compelled to because you're a homophobic, racist, white-privileged, bigoted, Christian-moral-extremist hatemonger, intent on achieving your goal of a radical US Christian Theocracy, as your post proves by questioning what the authorities on genders decree from their public taxpayer-funded, tenure-protected, university gender-studies department positions. /s
Strat
Great! We can't have anyone learning from past history!
How will we keep convincing the 'useful idiots' to repeat the same ideological/political/societal mistakes that have always allowed tyranny to take hold down through history, if we leave records of past examples laying around to warn people!? [signed] Current & Future Tyrants, Dictators, and Oligarchs of the World
Strat
If you don't think you should have to give money to others, you shouldn't be allowed to live in society. Taking what you have is a requirement.
"We are the Progressives. Your wealth and liberties will be sacrificed to service our agendas. Resistance is futile."
---
"Number One, shields at maximum, divert warp power to all phaser banks, photon torpedoes, all tubes, full yield, full spread! On my mark!
Strat