Let's start DST on a Sunday in March determined by (year % 4) + 1. Of course starting on a Sunday is also predictable, so we might go with day in March determined by (year % 31) + 1. Or maybe just go with a Julian day of the year - (year % 365) + 1. Or we could go with the Sunday closest to a full moon in March, but what if there's a "blue moon" that month? Anyway, this doesn't have to be boring, we could make it nearly impossible for the average person to predict!
I often see postings by climate deniers, skeptics, critics, whatever you want to call them claiming that the 97% of scientists who supposedly believe in AGW do so because their pay is based on them supporting it. Somebody should put together the stats on who is funding the scientists in the field, whether they are pro or con on the issue and what are the terms of their "contract". Do they have a grant to specifically study the issue of AGW, are they just studying climate in general, or are they just on salary and don't have a grant to do anything in particular? Also, where are the people located? Are they mostly in the US, or spread out among many countries?
I want more info than just a single "97%" statistic.
Of a science fiction short story from decades ago. Mankind builds the ultimate computer and, when they turn it on, the first question they ask it is "is there a god?". The computer answers "There is now!".
Explain this to the dumb folks (like me). I thought frequency was a property of a wave, which involves multiple photons. How does a single photon have a "frequency" which I thought denotes at what inteverals multiple photons pass by.
and hire these professors directly, thus cutting out the middlemen (Universities)? If the cost of higher education keeps going up, yet the money is obviously not going to teaching, there must be some enormous overhead somewhere else in the process.
Second, they're wrong but we believe them and start doing what we can do to lower global warming. Then we lose money and comfort.
I would disagree with the conclusion of losing money and comfort. I'd restate it as "we move to renewable, non-greenhouse gas emitting sources of energy sooner than we would by waiting for carbon based fuels to be exhausted."
I think I saw that episode:
"You will be responsible for an escalation that will destroy everything. Millions of people horribly killed. Complete destruction of our culture here and yes, the culture on Vendikar. Disaster, disease, starvation, horrible, lingering death, pain and anguish!"
It always amused me that some people thought more domestic drilling would return us to the days of cheap fuel. They seemed to think that the oil companies would ignore that they could get a higher price overseas and sell to us cheap out of the goodness of their hearts.
Slashdot Mirror
There you go trying to inject common sense into the law!
when they get around to fully supporting Nvidia Optimus systems.
Let's start DST on a Sunday in March determined by (year % 4) + 1. Of course starting on a Sunday is also predictable, so we might go with day in March determined by (year % 31) + 1. Or maybe just go with a Julian day of the year - (year % 365) + 1. Or we could go with the Sunday closest to a full moon in March, but what if there's a "blue moon" that month? Anyway, this doesn't have to be boring, we could make it nearly impossible for the average person to predict!
sitting on top of barad-dur
I often see postings by climate deniers, skeptics, critics, whatever you want to call them claiming that the 97% of scientists who supposedly believe in AGW do so because their pay is based on them supporting it. Somebody should put together the stats on who is funding the scientists in the field, whether they are pro or con on the issue and what are the terms of their "contract". Do they have a grant to specifically study the issue of AGW, are they just studying climate in general, or are they just on salary and don't have a grant to do anything in particular? Also, where are the people located? Are they mostly in the US, or spread out among many countries?
I want more info than just a single "97%" statistic.
Of a science fiction short story from decades ago. Mankind builds the ultimate computer and, when they turn it on, the first question they ask it is "is there a god?". The computer answers "There is now!".
Yep. Time to put in for some H1B positions!
They haven't even figured out Loki is masquerading as Odin!
I thought it was because they came here and drank the water.
Dangit. No mod points to reward a sneaky Dr. Who reference!
Explain this to the dumb folks (like me). I thought frequency was a property of a wave, which involves multiple photons. How does a single photon have a "frequency" which I thought denotes at what inteverals multiple photons pass by.
Of Samurai stem-cell research!
and hire these professors directly, thus cutting out the middlemen (Universities)? If the cost of higher education keeps going up, yet the money is obviously not going to teaching, there must be some enormous overhead somewhere else in the process.
That's the new iWatch we've been hearing about!
Yeah, darnit. Except for Obama being elected in 2008, we would have had a base on the moon in 1999!
The point is to backup the human race on another planet, not to relieve us here of excess population.
Second, they're wrong but we believe them and start doing what we can do to lower global warming. Then we lose money and comfort.
I would disagree with the conclusion of losing money and comfort. I'd restate it as "we move to renewable, non-greenhouse gas emitting sources of energy sooner than we would by waiting for carbon based fuels to be exhausted."
I was an actor once, dammit, now look at me!
What's the homeopathic cure for dehydration?
Are you sure that wasn't your parents and the sex talk?
I recently moved from Assembler on punched cards to the new-fangled Cobol language on a green screen!
I think I saw that episode: "You will be responsible for an escalation that will destroy everything. Millions of people horribly killed. Complete destruction of our culture here and yes, the culture on Vendikar. Disaster, disease, starvation, horrible, lingering death, pain and anguish!"
If the US didn't fire a single nuke in return, Russians (and everybody else in the world!) would die slow painful deaths from the radioactive fallout.
It always amused me that some people thought more domestic drilling would return us to the days of cheap fuel. They seemed to think that the oil companies would ignore that they could get a higher price overseas and sell to us cheap out of the goodness of their hearts.
...at the end of the Cretaceous period only took about 32,000 years.
Wow, that was one slow-moving asteroid!