Piss off. I spent seven years in combat arms units, am a combat veteran, and you have the balls to tell ME about a free lunch? Get your fat ass out of your chair and pull a tour in Iraq, then you can tell me about free lunches.
Ask the perpetually underemployed, debt-ridden, overworked, and underpaid American worker (including thousands of programmers...) about the consequences of unfettered Capitalism. See if they would be willing to sacrifice the "economy" for a safety net.
As for me, I have a job that I love, am working on a doctorate, own a house, and a have fat 401k. I've been saving a quarter of my income for a decade, much in line with my German relatives. So tell me again about "free lunches".
So let me get this straight...the UNIONS are to blame for France and Germany's economic woes. The integration of East and West Germany, the merging of the European Union (with many *poor* countries dragging on the growth of the larger countries), and the overall higher standard of living (low-crime, high-culture, fair wage, available health-care, environmental awareness) have NOTHING to do with it. Its all the UNIONS.
Give me a break.
For what its worth, I am German (born and raised) and am NOT in a labor union. But I'm bright enough to realize how important their influence is on mitigating the excesses of bottom-line corporatism.
Re: Australian poster - you are mixing science with politics. I was discussing the science since I have no more control over the politics of the situation than you do. I'm not one of the ruling elite in this so-called "democracy". I'm sorry that it is getting warmer in Australia, but I can tell you that it is getting pretty damned hot here in the southeastern United States (not to mention the hurricanes) too.
That said, if you took the time to read the thread (or at least my portions of it), you'd see that I generally AGREE WITH THE IPCC. It is my OPINION that warming is related to human actions...but there isn't enough evidence to lay the blame 100% at greenhouse gas emissions - there ARE other factors. You have to convince the governments of the world (esp. the US) that warming is an issue important enough to change their economic policies, thus more data is needed. Don't even mention Kyoto, that won't accomplish squat (in my opinion). Much more radical moves are necessary (ie shift completely away from greenhouse gas emitting fuel sources). Don't get me wrong, if it were up to me with be changing things right now - but it ISN'T up to me any more than it is up to you. MY self-appointed role (by choice of my academic discipline) is to gather information about the effects of climate change on ancient sea-levels in order to extrapolate forward what, in my OPINION, is inevitable: global warming and sea-level rise. With this sort of data (of which mine is a tiny drop in a big tub) we (speaking for humans collectively) might be able to plan for the consequences of global warming more reliably.
Why do I believe it to be inevitable? Because these necessary radical moves, in my OPINION, will never happen. Man loves cheap power more than he loves cold air. When we run out of oil sometime during this century we will shift to coal (which the US has a 600 year reserve of), thus making the problem even worse.
The hockey stick graph doesn't show anything beyond a relationship between time and temperature. You are imposing your interpretation of a cause on the graph. "Hockey-stick" graphs are a dime a dozen in the geologic past (see http://igloo.gsfc.nasa.gov/wais/documentation/imag es/waisfig1.gif for a graph of sea-level (which *could* be a proxy for temperature via ice cap volume, although basin size is the most crucial factor[but not on that timescale]) versus time). There are many other factors to consider (orbital mechanics, solar radiation, plate motion, as well as changes in atmosphere, ice volume, vegetation, ocean, and land surface). It isn't as simple as saying "look, temperature went up when the Industrial Age started, we did it". The temperature has gone up and down many times in the last 4.5 Ga. Change is constant. Real science requires the examination and, if possible, testing of these other factors in addition to the study of greenhouse emissions.
I'll repeat it again, I personally think that greenhouse gases play a role in accelarating warming. But they aren't the only factor. And you need more than me "thinking" it is so to convince the corporate economy to switch gears and cut emissions. That's why this research is so important.
Since I don't actually have all day to reply, here is a quick selection of 'reputable' links and a few recent (05) peer-reviewed journal article abstracts concerning global warming.
I wasn't implying that you should take MY word for it...just that I have experience in this topic and that my (informed) opinion is that GW is underway. Denying global warming is about as futile as denying evolution (I'm also a paleontologist). As I mentioned in the previous post, however, the causes of global warming are still up in the air (although I personally suspect that greenhouse gas emissions play a role in accelerating warming). Of course Fairbanks (Nature 342/89) demonstrated that there was a two meter per century rise in sea level around 14000 years ago, so rapid change can occur even without human influence.
Here are a few references:
Fairbanks, R.G., 1989, A 17,000-year glacio-eustatic sea level record; influence of glacial melting rates on the Younger Dryas event and deep-ocean circulation: Nature, v. 342, no. 6250, p. 637-642.
The 105-year (1897-2001) surface air temperature record of the National Observatory of Athens (NOA) has been analyzed to determine indications of significant deviations from long-term average features in the city of Athens. The analysis of the whole record reveals a tendency towards warmer years, with significantly warmer summer and spring periods and slightly warmer winters (an increase of 1.23 and 0.34 degrees C has been observed in the mean summer and mean winter temperature, respectively). The tendency is more pronounced for the summer and spring maximum temperature, but marginal for the minimum temperature of the cold season. On a monthly basis, a statistically significant (at the 95th confidence level) warming trend has been observed in the average maximum temperature of May and June. The trend analysis for the last decade of the record (1992-2001) revealed a significant increase for both warm and cold seasons, yet maximum and minimum temperature. Extreme temperatures (high/low temperatures above/below a certain threshold value) and extreme events (prolonged extreme temperatures) have also been studied. The number of hot days as well as the frequency of occurrence and duration of warm events have significantly increased during the last decade, while a negative trend is observed in the frequency of low temperatures and the duration of cold events especially after 1960. _____ From: Recent trends from Canadian permafrost thermal monitoring network sites, Permafrost and Periglacial Processes, vol.16, no.1, pp.19-30, Mar 2005
The Geological Survey of Canada (GSC), in collaboration with other government partners, has been developing and maintaining a network of active-layer and permafrost thermal monitoring sites which contribute to the Canadian Permafrost Monitoring Network and the Global Terrestrial Network for Permafrost. Recent results from the thermal monitoring sites maintained by the GSC and other federal government agencies are presented. These results indicate that the response of permafrost temperature to rec
I research global warming (interrelationship of Paleogene temperature and sea-level and how that translates to the present day).
Global warming is real.
The CAUSE is uncertain.
Re:MythTV would save the builder $70
on
Build Your Own DVR
·
· Score: 0, Troll
*useful*?
I had DVR for about a year. I didn't use it much. Now I don't even have cable (TV). I learn and accomplish much more than I did with cable/DVR. *That* is useful.
That isn't a bad point. I'm a geologist. It is impossible to outsource certain types of field and interpretive work. Programming, on the other hand...
CS isn't the unusual and esoteric field that it was 15 years ago. It has become (more-or-less) commoditized, so salaries have adjusted to the broader market. CS isn't any more (or less) difficult than most other science and engineering related professions (I programmed for a year, so feel comfortable saying that.)
If it isn't peer-reviewed, it isn't *real*. Just because a Harvard guru puts a paper online doesn't make it sound - the peer review process takes care of that aspect. But then again, I'm a geologist, not a CS/Engineer type. The 'rules' are probably somewhat different.
I don't deny that those sorts of journals are available online (e.g. Geology Bulletin, Science, Journal of Coastal Research) - but most, if not all, require paid subscriptions.
"Additionally there are links to more than half a dozen in-depth resources for anyone who is doing serious research on Hamilton."
The internet is pretty much out if you are "doing serious research". Great place to start looking but, peer-reviewed journals and collections, some textbooks, and independent research are pretty much the accepted means to an end once you start building your reference list.
Naturally, a few of these are found ON the internet. But very few are free, unless through a university library journal subscription.
Are we sure this article wasn't some sort of belated April Fool's joke? Come on, this is BUSINESS WEEK. It looks more like a paid advert from Honda to sell a few hundred thousand shares of stock to bandwagoners. I'll consider the idea once I see it in a vetted professional journal.
Slashdot Mirror
Piss off. I spent seven years in combat arms units, am a combat veteran, and you have the balls to tell ME about a free lunch? Get your fat ass out of your chair and pull a tour in Iraq, then you can tell me about free lunches.
Ask the perpetually underemployed, debt-ridden, overworked, and underpaid American worker (including thousands of programmers...) about the consequences of unfettered Capitalism. See if they would be willing to sacrifice the "economy" for a safety net.
As for me, I have a job that I love, am working on a doctorate, own a house, and a have fat 401k. I've been saving a quarter of my income for a decade, much in line with my German relatives. So tell me again about "free lunches".
So let me get this straight...the UNIONS are to blame for France and Germany's economic woes. The integration of East and West Germany, the merging of the European Union (with many *poor* countries dragging on the growth of the larger countries), and the overall higher standard of living (low-crime, high-culture, fair wage, available health-care, environmental awareness) have NOTHING to do with it. Its all the UNIONS.
Give me a break.
For what its worth, I am German (born and raised) and am NOT in a labor union. But I'm bright enough to realize how important their influence is on mitigating the excesses of bottom-line corporatism.
Which is precisely why labor unions need a stronger presence in the United States.
Re: Australian poster - you are mixing science with politics. I was discussing the science since I have no more control over the politics of the situation than you do. I'm not one of the ruling elite in this so-called "democracy". I'm sorry that it is getting warmer in Australia, but I can tell you that it is getting pretty damned hot here in the southeastern United States (not to mention the hurricanes) too.
That said, if you took the time to read the thread (or at least my portions of it), you'd see that I generally AGREE WITH THE IPCC. It is my OPINION that warming is related to human actions...but there isn't enough evidence to lay the blame 100% at greenhouse gas emissions - there ARE other factors. You have to convince the governments of the world (esp. the US) that warming is an issue important enough to change their economic policies, thus more data is needed. Don't even mention Kyoto, that won't accomplish squat (in my opinion). Much more radical moves are necessary (ie shift completely away from greenhouse gas emitting fuel sources). Don't get me wrong, if it were up to me with be changing things right now - but it ISN'T up to me any more than it is up to you. MY self-appointed role (by choice of my academic discipline) is to gather information about the effects of climate change on ancient sea-levels in order to extrapolate forward what, in my OPINION, is inevitable: global warming and sea-level rise. With this sort of data (of which mine is a tiny drop in a big tub) we (speaking for humans collectively) might be able to plan for the consequences of global warming more reliably.
Why do I believe it to be inevitable? Because these necessary radical moves, in my OPINION, will never happen. Man loves cheap power more than he loves cold air. When we run out of oil sometime during this century we will shift to coal (which the US has a 600 year reserve of), thus making the problem even worse.
The hockey stick graph doesn't show anything beyond a relationship between time and temperature. You are imposing your interpretation of a cause on the graph. "Hockey-stick" graphs are a dime a dozen in the geologic past (see http://igloo.gsfc.nasa.gov/wais/documentation/imag es/waisfig1.gif for a graph of sea-level (which *could* be a proxy for temperature via ice cap volume, although basin size is the most crucial factor[but not on that timescale]) versus time). There are many other factors to consider (orbital mechanics, solar radiation, plate motion, as well as changes in atmosphere, ice volume, vegetation, ocean, and land surface). It isn't as simple as saying "look, temperature went up when the Industrial Age started, we did it". The temperature has gone up and down many times in the last 4.5 Ga. Change is constant. Real science requires the examination and, if possible, testing of these other factors in addition to the study of greenhouse emissions.
I'll repeat it again, I personally think that greenhouse gases play a role in accelarating warming. But they aren't the only factor. And you need more than me "thinking" it is so to convince the corporate economy to switch gears and cut emissions. That's why this research is so important.
Actually, I'm still working on my dissertation. How many articles have YOU published, mr. non-Expert?
Since I don't actually have all day to reply, here is a quick selection of 'reputable' links and a few recent (05) peer-reviewed journal article abstracts concerning global warming.
I wasn't implying that you should take MY word for it...just that I have experience in this topic and that my (informed) opinion is that GW is underway. Denying global warming is about as futile as denying evolution (I'm also a paleontologist). As I mentioned in the previous post, however, the causes of global warming are still up in the air (although I personally suspect that greenhouse gas emissions play a role in accelerating warming). Of course Fairbanks (Nature 342/89) demonstrated that there was a two meter per century rise in sea level around 14000 years ago, so rapid change can occur even without human influence.
Here are a few references:
Fairbanks, R.G., 1989, A 17,000-year glacio-eustatic sea level record; influence of glacial melting rates on the Younger Dryas event and deep-ocean circulation: Nature, v. 342, no. 6250, p. 637-642.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library/Aerosols/
http://www.aims.gov.au/pages/research/coral-bleach ing/scr2000/scr-00gcrmn-report.html
http://www4.nas.edu/onpi/webextra.nsf/44bf87db3095 63a0852566f2006d63bb/e4dcc6e935831fc885256a8400588 146?OpenDocument
http://climatechange.gc.ca/english/default.asp
____
From: Analysis of mean, maximum, and minimum temperature in Athens from 1897 to 2001 with emphasis on the last decade, trends, warm events, and cold events, Extreme climatic events
The 105-year (1897-2001) surface air temperature record of the National Observatory of Athens (NOA) has been analyzed to determine indications of significant deviations from long-term average features in the city of Athens. The analysis of the whole record reveals a tendency towards warmer years, with significantly warmer summer and spring periods and slightly warmer winters (an increase of 1.23 and 0.34 degrees C has been observed in the mean summer and mean winter temperature, respectively). The tendency is more pronounced for the summer and spring maximum temperature, but marginal for the minimum temperature of the cold season. On a monthly basis, a statistically significant (at the 95th confidence level) warming trend has been observed in the average maximum temperature of May and June. The trend analysis for the last decade of the record (1992-2001) revealed a significant increase for both warm and cold seasons, yet maximum and minimum temperature. Extreme temperatures (high/low temperatures above/below a certain threshold value) and extreme events (prolonged extreme temperatures) have also been studied. The number of hot days as well as the frequency of occurrence and duration of warm events have significantly increased during the last decade, while a negative trend is observed in the frequency of low temperatures and the duration of cold events especially after 1960.
_____
From: Recent trends from Canadian permafrost thermal monitoring network sites, Permafrost and Periglacial Processes, vol.16, no.1, pp.19-30, Mar 2005
The Geological Survey of Canada (GSC), in collaboration with other government partners, has been developing and maintaining a network of active-layer and permafrost thermal monitoring sites which contribute to the Canadian Permafrost Monitoring Network and the Global Terrestrial Network for Permafrost. Recent results from the thermal monitoring sites maintained by the GSC and other federal government agencies are presented. These results indicate that the response of permafrost temperature to rec
Yes, but Cambridge is in "New England"...and therefore European...
He was referring to the clowns I live with here in Florida that commute alone 40 miles one-way in an H2 and complain about expensive gasoline.
I am a scientist (geologist, specifically).
I research global warming (interrelationship of Paleogene temperature and sea-level and how that translates to the present day).
Global warming is real.
The CAUSE is uncertain.
*useful*?
I had DVR for about a year. I didn't use it much. Now I don't even have cable (TV). I learn and accomplish much more than I did with cable/DVR. *That* is useful.
That isn't a bad point. I'm a geologist. It is impossible to outsource certain types of field and interpretive work. Programming, on the other hand...
CS isn't the unusual and esoteric field that it was 15 years ago. It has become (more-or-less) commoditized, so salaries have adjusted to the broader market. CS isn't any more (or less) difficult than most other science and engineering related professions (I programmed for a year, so feel comfortable saying that.)
Alternately, Google could focus on providing a functional search engine and leave the philanthropy to Bill G.
It isn't about personal survival - it's about the survival of the species. A species isn't extinct until the last member dies.
If it isn't peer-reviewed, it isn't *real*. Just because a Harvard guru puts a paper online doesn't make it sound - the peer review process takes care of that aspect. But then again, I'm a geologist, not a CS/Engineer type. The 'rules' are probably somewhat different.
I don't deny that those sorts of journals are available online (e.g. Geology Bulletin, Science, Journal of Coastal Research) - but most, if not all, require paid subscriptions.
Try telling that to your drill sergeant when you get drafted next year. You will quickly learn that muscle-failure push-ups are "real" "normal".
Cut him some slack, he is part of the new online generation...
I assume you are in my cousin's generation. He is nine years old...
In my eyes, HSR is OK, but nothing special.
I always put mine on the sun-visor, next to my car keys. Makes it easier for the action heros to find when they steal my car...
"Additionally there are links to more than half a dozen in-depth resources for anyone who is doing serious research on Hamilton."
The internet is pretty much out if you are "doing serious research". Great place to start looking but, peer-reviewed journals and collections, some textbooks, and independent research are pretty much the accepted means to an end once you start building your reference list.
Naturally, a few of these are found ON the internet. But very few are free, unless through a university library journal subscription.
...or do people who play video games and use computers have bad vision to begin with?
But does that mean we shouldn't strive to improve? Things can always be better...
Actually, Programmers create. All the "Hackers" I know/knew dick around with computers and have a bucketload of unfinished projects.
It really is pure semantics.
Are we sure this article wasn't some sort of belated April Fool's joke? Come on, this is BUSINESS WEEK. It looks more like a paid advert from Honda to sell a few hundred thousand shares of stock to bandwagoners. I'll consider the idea once I see it in a vetted professional journal.
What do you do if the printer jams?
Shut the machine down and stop using it.
Fix the paper.
Have a backup printer ready.
Isn't that difficult, really.
Sure. I voted absentee. Paper trail and everything.