Boy, do I ever wish "No no, I'm a computer expert, just do what I say, I don't have time to explain it" worked on my boss.
Sorry, but you can't get a degree in "computer expert". Expand that to "computer engineering" and it should make more sense.
Should you have to explain to your boss every detail of things like TCP/IP to justify a new server to handle and increased load or better response time?
Though, since PHB is paying, if they DID want a complete explanation of TCP/IP, it might be worth getting a contracting agreement and getting paid by the hour.
OK, and how do we know the climate models are reliable? The answer is we don't, and if you keep digging, you will find that they aren't.
This is the actual problem. Credibility and education is no longer honored, but tested by people like yourselves. Quite simply, the answer to your questions, is to get a degree in atmospheric sciences. Don't dig. Learn.
At some point, it unfortunately became more desirable in our society to just repeatedly ask questions until you "stump" some authority. Somehow, this got labeled by those as being "educated" and "intelligent". The reality seems instead to be that you have no desire to understand the issue or concept, just challenge it until you can deem yourself superior.
Do you have any honest credibility for making statements like "OK, and how do we know the climate models are reliable? The answer is we don't"?
Are you well studied in how the microphysics of ice, rain, sleet, graupel, etc are handled in the climate models? How the terrain resolution and the corresponding land-use fields are interpolated and any potential effects of such? How about the sources of the snowpack fields and how often they're updated?
I'm sorry, but credible scientists can not spend their time to give you a free education when you demand it.
Oh, and by the way: you triggered this with a completely invalid example. Gravity pulls. Low pressure pulls. Horses pull. Tractors pull.
I beg to differ abot the invalid example. Communicate why it is the low pressure pulling and not the high pressure pushing, or possibly a mix of the two, or even a mix of many forces. Why, when we view observe these parcels of air well above the surface, do we see them nearly circling a region of low pressure (geostrophic balance). You follow with some other examples, a horse pulls, which pulls its object directly towards it, just as does a tractor does. I would expect this to cause more confusion to the interested student than anything.
Student: "So you're saying that a low pressure pulls on a parcel of air causing the parcel to circle the low, in the same way a horse pulls a buggy behind it? Why doesn't the buggy circle the horse?"
Gravity is a poor example as it is something humans have yet to fully grasp an understanding of, we use the "anthropomorphism, simile, and metaphor", whatever you'd like to call it because the ultimate cause of the gravitational force remains an open question. We simply cannot at this time formulate a better description.
Not quite. The atmosphere can be approximated by a hydrostatic balance only on large scales, this is a convenience of physics and math, not reality. IAAM and I assure you there's always vertical movement on some scale. When discussing it in the context of mesoscale severe weather, i.e. thunderstorms, tornados, the vertical scales of motion (updraft/downdraft) are similar in magnitude to the horizontal scales of motion (wind) and thus becomes significant. On the scale of hurricanes (as a whole) and synoptic cyclones, the vertical scale is insignificant compared to the horizontal scale and can be ignored in a mathematical sense.
The increased lightning observation indicates that there is some transfer of energy happening on the scales we have not been able to research yet. I look forward to some interesting research opportunities coming out of these observations.
PS:Please refrain from the pathetic falacies as well. Low pressure can not "pull".
At the moment of instantaneous flash, a source of ambient light travels towards the camera, same as the sun, in parallel rays. Since the camera, observer, is at a distance, these rays seem to diverge as they approach, think of railroad tracks that appear closer together further down the track, but are nonetheless parallel.
Unlike the suns crepuscular rays though, which we see as brighter owing to the fact that most are blocked by clouds when we observe crepuscular rays, only a very tiny fraction of the rays are blocked in this photo, possibly by a section of the pole the flash occurs from. Thus, the ambient lighting is slightly increased, except along the parallel ray that is blocked.
I have not come up with a valid source of the flash, I must admit the smoke confuses me there, but my best guess it a transformer or bulb.
This is a good point to bring up. Weather modeling (fluid dynamics) is often all about many iterations over many loops, number of iterations depending on grid size and time step.
Fortran compilers have been perfected at optimizing techniques such as loop unrolling for a parallel environment.
Most often you will see C routines or scripting languages handling the execution of the FORTRAN and/or the data to pass into the FORTRAN.
If this post held any truth whatsoever, then the developers of this (and almost every) wind farm made a very big mistake considering the turbines in the middle would never spin.
How does not mentioning the US soccer (AKA real football) training in the EU make this argument "stupid"? Nice straw man though.
No one was denying this happens both ways. The original post was debating the validity of the model trying to tie socio-economic factors to Olympic medals.
Consider this. According to what I could find, prior to Athens, Zimbabwe had won a single gold medal (1980). Does Kristy Coventrys, who trains and competes in a country other than Zimbabwe, I won't mention any specific country, winning a silver in the womens 100m back indicate that Zimbabwe's economic growth has since basically doubled?
If you ask me, unless this model accounts for that, its results are bogus.
Does this account for the numerous athletes that live and train in countries other than the ones they compete for?
Example from yesterday. Markus Rogan, silver medalist in the mens 100m backstroke trains and competes with Stanford in the USA, however, in this model it appears that medal is credited towards Austria.
1) People on TV usually do not have a BS in meteorology. They are usually journalists...
It's a tough sell to convince people (especially slashdotters) that meteorology is a difficult 'science'. A big reason for this is, as you mention, the inability to distinguish an atmospheric scientist from an 'on-air' meteorologist.
Some 'on-air' do have sufficient education, however, the level of science able to be presented to the general viewing public is virtually nil. This is one reason I pursue research and numerical modeling, making colorful maps and blurting out some temperatures is not my idea of satisfying my ambition. I do however have many colleagues in the science who do take their 'on-air' jobs passionately. Which brings me to another hidden aspect of TV meteorology.
It has been suggested that most people choose their news channel heavily biased on the weather segment and/or meteorologists. Quite an effort is made to often make the meteorologist the most charming likeable news anchor with all sorts of gimmicks: pets, vacations, trivia, etc. This is no secret to producers and station directors and it can often be seen that an over dramatization of certain weather events is created to ensure YOU, the viewer, are tuning into station X instead of station Y. Producers don't care if the forecast is right or wrong, the station wants viewers, which brings advertisers, who pay money...end of story.
I prefer to tell people to take most weather segments on the news according to how much time they are presented in.
Usually a 1 minute intro (teaser) and a 3-5 minute forecast later, sometimes a small 1 minute wrapup at the end...all in all, there's about as much weather on the news as there is commercials and advertising. Quite often both are used to sell you something too. If you're REALLY looking for a detailed forecast, as another poster suggested, go to the NWS page and read the discussions (WARNING: pretty animated icons not included)
1 Observation
2 Definition
3 Hypothesis
4 Deduction from the hypothesis
5 Experiment
6 Conclusion
7 Evaluation
8 Repeat/Reproduce
As far as I can tell, you pose a question regarding paprika or cinnamon (aka: step 3) and stop.
Re:On a related note....
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
Whomever distributes these 'boycott' emails, rather than appeal to consumers emotional 'tough guy ego', should possibly fill inboxes with more logical approaches (with explanations).
Here's a start, and something everyone might benefit from reading if they hadn't already known:
It's a shame I have to feel unsafe driving the speed limit on the way to work in the morning, I don't drive the most aerodynamic vehicle and glady sacrifice the few extra minutes.
Deserts aren't the most ideal place for renewable energy sources...yet. The vast landscape combined with the temperature extremes from radiative cooling/heating can whip up quite a wind.
Solar arrays are likely to be covered by some dust/sand and dust/sand storms can reduce the solar rays reaching the cells as much if not more than clouds.
Wind farms as well, can be very expensive to maintain and keep working properly in these conditions.
Only a matter of time hopefully until we develop and/or use technologies to help minimize these effects.
As the parent mentions, bad content is not to blame, but rather the inability for a previous method such as books, to be properly reproduced in an interactive environment using a computer.
When the motion picture was invented around 1890, early filmmakers saw it primarily as a means of distributing existing material, such as stage performances. It took some time -- about 20 years -- before movies were recognized as a new medium with expressive possibilities that, while they overlapped with those of existing media, went far beyond anything previously attainable.
As a measure of the distance we have traveled with motion pictures, try moving backward. Consider any one of the last 10 movies you watched, and imagine transforming it into a play for presentation on a live stage: What aspects of effective communication would have to be sacrificed?
Content presented in one form, is not always (and may be rarely) suitable for presentation in another form without changing the content so as to utilize the advantages of the newer medium.
Slashdot Mirror
Boy, do I ever wish "No no, I'm a computer expert, just do what I say, I don't have time to explain it" worked on my boss.
Sorry, but you can't get a degree in "computer expert". Expand that to "computer engineering" and it should make more sense.
Should you have to explain to your boss every detail of things like TCP/IP to justify a new server to handle and increased load or better response time?
Though, since PHB is paying, if they DID want a complete explanation of TCP/IP, it might be worth getting a contracting agreement and getting paid by the hour.
OK, and how do we know the climate models are reliable? The answer is we don't, and if you keep digging, you will find that they aren't.
This is the actual problem. Credibility and education is no longer honored, but tested by people like yourselves. Quite simply, the answer to your questions, is to get a degree in atmospheric sciences. Don't dig. Learn.
At some point, it unfortunately became more desirable in our society to just repeatedly ask questions until you "stump" some authority. Somehow, this got labeled by those as being "educated" and "intelligent". The reality seems instead to be that you have no desire to understand the issue or concept, just challenge it until you can deem yourself superior.
Do you have any honest credibility for making statements like "OK, and how do we know the climate models are reliable? The answer is we don't"?
Are you well studied in how the microphysics of ice, rain, sleet, graupel, etc are handled in the climate models? How the terrain resolution and the corresponding land-use fields are interpolated and any potential effects of such? How about the sources of the snowpack fields and how often they're updated?
I'm sorry, but credible scientists can not spend their time to give you a free education when you demand it.
Oh, and by the way: you triggered this with a completely invalid example. Gravity pulls. Low pressure pulls. Horses pull. Tractors pull.
I beg to differ abot the invalid example. Communicate why it is the low pressure pulling and not the high pressure pushing, or possibly a mix of the two, or even a mix of many forces. Why, when we view observe these parcels of air well above the surface, do we see them nearly circling a region of low pressure (geostrophic balance). You follow with some other examples, a horse pulls, which pulls its object directly towards it, just as does a tractor does. I would expect this to cause more confusion to the interested student than anything.
Student: "So you're saying that a low pressure pulls on a parcel of air causing the parcel to circle the low, in the same way a horse pulls a buggy behind it? Why doesn't the buggy circle the horse?"
Gravity is a poor example as it is something humans have yet to fully grasp an understanding of, we use the "anthropomorphism, simile, and metaphor", whatever you'd like to call it because the ultimate cause of the gravitational force remains an open question. We simply cannot at this time formulate a better description.
Not quite. The atmosphere can be approximated by a hydrostatic balance only on large scales, this is a convenience of physics and math, not reality. IAAM and I assure you there's always vertical movement on some scale. When discussing it in the context of mesoscale severe weather, i.e. thunderstorms, tornados, the vertical scales of motion (updraft/downdraft) are similar in magnitude to the horizontal scales of motion (wind) and thus becomes significant. On the scale of hurricanes (as a whole) and synoptic cyclones, the vertical scale is insignificant compared to the horizontal scale and can be ignored in a mathematical sense.
The increased lightning observation indicates that there is some transfer of energy happening on the scales we have not been able to research yet. I look forward to some interesting research opportunities coming out of these observations.
PS:Please refrain from the pathetic falacies as well. Low pressure can not "pull".
Better keep a FORTRAN book handy.
GCM ModelE http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/modelE/
WRF (mesoscale model/regional) http://www.wrf-model.org/
Do you have any idea how big a billion is?
billion = 1,000,000,000. Or approximately 1/6th of the current world population.
Why would the sun angle rule out anti-crepuscular theory?
I haven't had time to look it up, but I wouldn't be too surprised if the luminence of an exploding transformer was similar to the sun.
At the distance from light to lenss in this case, even a very small source could produce the same crepuscular effect as the sun.
This is the same phenomena you see from the sun
http://www.sundog.clara.co.uk/atoptics/ray1.htm
At the moment of instantaneous flash, a source of ambient light travels towards the camera, same as the sun, in parallel rays. Since the camera, observer, is at a distance, these rays seem to diverge as they approach, think of railroad tracks that appear closer together further down the track, but are nonetheless parallel.
Unlike the suns crepuscular rays though, which we see as brighter owing to the fact that most are blocked by clouds when we observe crepuscular rays, only a very tiny fraction of the rays are blocked in this photo, possibly by a section of the pole the flash occurs from. Thus, the ambient lighting is slightly increased, except along the parallel ray that is blocked.
I have not come up with a valid source of the flash, I must admit the smoke confuses me there, but my best guess it a transformer or bulb.
Raw data is available.
http://www.emc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/
http://weather.gov/noaaport/html/noaaport.shtml
Competing predictions are available, generally for a price however.
Example: http://www.saic.com/omega/
Every formally pristine hilltop now has a 6 meter wide access road, and a row of eyesores.
The formally pristine strip of land you live on now has a 6 meter wide access road and a row of eyesores...one of which you sleep inside every night.
Are you vehemently opposed to houses and neighborhoods?
This is a good point to bring up. Weather modeling (fluid dynamics) is often all about many iterations over many loops, number of iterations depending on grid size and time step.
Fortran compilers have been perfected at optimizing techniques such as loop unrolling for a parallel environment.
Most often you will see C routines or scripting languages handling the execution of the FORTRAN and/or the data to pass into the FORTRAN.
I thought of them more like "A group of SMFs that wanted to make some neat shit".
I think boatloads of money is some pretty neat shit.
If this post held any truth whatsoever, then the developers of this (and almost every) wind farm made a very big mistake considering the turbines in the middle would never spin.
How does not mentioning the US soccer (AKA real football) training in the EU make this argument "stupid"? Nice straw man though.
No one was denying this happens both ways. The original post was debating the validity of the model trying to tie socio-economic factors to Olympic medals.
Consider this. According to what I could find, prior to Athens, Zimbabwe had won a single gold medal (1980). Does Kristy Coventrys, who trains and competes in a country other than Zimbabwe, I won't mention any specific country, winning a silver in the womens 100m back indicate that Zimbabwe's economic growth has since basically doubled?
If you ask me, unless this model accounts for that, its results are bogus.
Does this account for the numerous athletes that live and train in countries other than the ones they compete for?
Example from yesterday. Markus Rogan, silver medalist in the mens 100m backstroke trains and competes with Stanford in the USA, however, in this model it appears that medal is credited towards Austria.
Work sadly has to be done
oops, you forgot the rest of that sentence!
Work sadly has to be done, unless its head high plus and offshore. ;-)
1) People on TV usually do not have a BS in meteorology. They are usually journalists ...
It's a tough sell to convince people (especially slashdotters) that meteorology is a difficult 'science'. A big reason for this is, as you mention, the inability to distinguish an atmospheric scientist from an 'on-air' meteorologist.
Some 'on-air' do have sufficient education, however, the level of science able to be presented to the general viewing public is virtually nil. This is one reason I pursue research and numerical modeling, making colorful maps and blurting out some temperatures is not my idea of satisfying my ambition. I do however have many colleagues in the science who do take their 'on-air' jobs passionately. Which brings me to another hidden aspect of TV meteorology.
It has been suggested that most people choose their news channel heavily biased on the weather segment and/or meteorologists. Quite an effort is made to often make the meteorologist the most charming likeable news anchor with all sorts of gimmicks: pets, vacations, trivia, etc.
This is no secret to producers and station directors and it can often be seen that an over dramatization of certain weather events is created to ensure YOU, the viewer, are tuning into station X instead of station Y. Producers don't care if the forecast is right or wrong, the station wants viewers, which brings advertisers, who pay money...end of story.
I prefer to tell people to take most weather segments on the news according to how much time they are presented in. Usually a 1 minute intro (teaser) and a 3-5 minute forecast later, sometimes a small 1 minute wrapup at the end...all in all, there's about as much weather on the news as there is commercials and advertising. Quite often both are used to sell you something too. If you're REALLY looking for a detailed forecast, as another poster suggested, go to the NWS page and read the discussions (WARNING: pretty animated icons not included)
The answer is often not what would be expected by rational analysis.
Isn't this post about the 'science' of cooking, I'm sure its mentioned elsewhere that there's already a book on the 'Joy (Art)' of cooking.
Scientific Method
1 Observation
2 Definition
3 Hypothesis
4 Deduction from the hypothesis
5 Experiment
6 Conclusion
7 Evaluation
8 Repeat/Reproduce
As far as I can tell, you pose a question regarding paprika or cinnamon (aka: step 3) and stop.
Whomever distributes these 'boycott' emails, rather than appeal to consumers emotional 'tough guy ego', should possibly fill inboxes with more logical approaches (with explanations).
Here's a start, and something everyone might benefit from reading if they hadn't already known:
What speed should I drive to get maximum fuel efficiency?
It's a shame I have to feel unsafe driving the speed limit on the way to work in the morning, I don't drive the most aerodynamic vehicle and glady sacrifice the few extra minutes.
You do realize that solar cells, and wind farms aren't the only way to convert solar power to energy?
No, actually I hadn't realized this, but thanks for bringing my attention to it.
For others interested, a site that explains what I'm assuming parent was referring to on the Israeli Ministry of FA page.
Some interesting concepts, as I said before, I look forward to them being developed and implemented.
Deserts aren't the most ideal place for renewable energy sources...yet. The vast landscape combined with the temperature extremes from radiative cooling/heating can whip up quite a wind.
Solar arrays are likely to be covered by some dust/sand and dust/sand storms can reduce the solar rays reaching the cells as much if not more than clouds.
Wind farms as well, can be very expensive to maintain and keep working properly in these conditions.
Only a matter of time hopefully until we develop and/or use technologies to help minimize these effects.
As the parent mentions, bad content is not to blame, but rather the inability for a previous method such as books, to be properly reproduced in an interactive environment using a computer.
A good example of a new medium for communication taking time to be properly utilized, from Colleges Should Tap the Pedagogical Potential of the World-Wide Web
When the motion picture was invented around 1890, early filmmakers saw it primarily as a means of distributing existing material, such as stage performances. It took some time -- about 20 years -- before movies were recognized as a new medium with expressive possibilities that, while they overlapped with those of existing media, went far beyond anything previously attainable.
As a measure of the distance we have traveled with motion pictures, try moving backward. Consider any one of the last 10 movies you watched, and imagine transforming it into a play for presentation on a live stage: What aspects of effective communication would have to be sacrificed?
Content presented in one form, is not always (and may be rarely) suitable for presentation in another form without changing the content so as to utilize the advantages of the newer medium.