You clearly have very little foundational knowledge about the history ofclimate science, Fixed that for you.... or science in general. Yeah sure, my school reports however show different.
You adhere to AGW on religious grounds, not on the basis of empirical evidence. You are an idiot and insulting and don't read much on/. or you knew I'm an atheist;D
I simply happen to know a hell of a lot more about it than you do, apparently including some bits of history that you're trying to pretend didn't happen. About the history of climate science publications, yes. About the history of climate science: doubtfully. About climate science itself: very very unlikely.
You are mixing up end consumer prices with production costs. E.g. in Germany the end consumer prices are basically the same, regardless how the power is produced. That is simple to understand as most energy companies run a mix of various power plants. Nevertheless if you want to build a new 1GW plant: it is cheaper to that with a wind or solar plant, than as a coal or nuclear plant. This is true since roughly 5 years and was covered on/. often enough. Believe what you want.
As fr as I can tell it is very reliable, as you have a forecast how much power you will produce tomorrow, or the next hour. And the forecasts are extremely reliable, especially the 1h - 4h forecasts.
You mean something different. wind and solar are not dispatch able. That has nothing to do with reliable.
You still did not explain ehat you mean with your pointless points:) Over daytime solar dors not produce zero... just for your interest. Even when it is cloudy it has a nice power output. It is completely normal for germany to have high wind yields and relatively low solar yields in autumn/winter. However on sunny winterdays peak solar output is similar to summer. Only total yield is lower due to the shorter day length.
The Greenies and NIMBYs are going to oppose fusion just like they oppose fission. That is extremely unlikely. Unlike you most figure heads of the green movements have a clue and/or a PhD about/in science and know what they are talking about. There is a huge difference between some iodine or cesium remains after a fission reaction and agitated iron/steal after neutron bombardment (fusion reaction).
New installations in Germany are cheaper than nuclear since years. And Germany is not a particular good country for either wind (except the coast) or solar.
Bringing retarded grid concepts etc as arguments makes no sense.
Around here it's drive the "peak energy" costs from 0.07kWh to 0.18kWh in less then a decade. Wind and solar are used for base load, not for peak energy or balancing power. You probably mean something else. If the energy prices during peak times changed, you most certainly don't know why. The most likely reason: your peak demand exploded and there were now new load following plants built. The new "renewables" now cover for some base load and the old peak plants struggle to fulfill the new peak demand. Go figure... can't be so hard.
And on top of that: peak prices explode so that people who care about the price can throttle their demand. Only idiots still consume absurd amounts of power around peak time when they could avoid it (and that is damn easy, even in backyard countries like the USA)
In other countries? Perhaps the state? Not every nation is paranoid about the state running something, I have heard some states even run navies and airforces etc.
Why do people always say "we don't have the technology" when we clearly have it? Mars missions are not a technology problem, particular radiation and life support are solved problems.
What we lack is know how, and cost efficient approaches: know how why so many landing operations failed, e.g. Very likely simply due to weather phenomena and atmosphere pressure changes (anomalies).
I agree that manned Mars missions, especially by mini companies, are unrealistic... but it is a mere monetary and time frame problem, not a technology one.
I don't know what you want to achieve with this long post.
You bring stuff like: Researchers in the early 20th Century had made measurements which suggested that additional CO2 would not have an effect on the Earth's climate. The theory was widely discredited on that basis, even though Arrhenius' equations and calculations seemed to be sound. You give an argument and a counterargument in two sentences, is that your idea of "controversial"? For me the counter argument is mainstream. When ever one comes with a claim that CO2 is not a problem or there is no AGW or everything is a natural pendulum, one comes and rectifies: CO2 is a problem, AGW is a problem. The "idiots" coming up with their "weird ideas" don't make the whole topic "controversial".
This thing you're doing where you're denying objective facts which you could trivially confirm, and only reading enough of what is presented to confirm your biases, is rather rude. Hm. And what are you doing? Pushing your idea that it is controversial, by brining up idiot scientists that got debunked instantly? If something gets debunked instantly, then it is not controversial. At least not how I understand the word.
Out of the three or four languages Europeans are supposed to learn English isn't one of them? Yes, we learn minimum 2 languages. Or more precisely: get fed up with them, as teaching languages seems to be something no one knows how to do it properly. However, that makes them not a requirement to enter university, nor to gain a diploma in an university. Otherwise foreign students e.g. had no chance at all. And who cares if you e.g. study biology or electric engineering what your grades where in school in english or french? They don't matter for writing your thesis, and they don't matter for getting into the studies.
write at the 11th grade level. The average American reads at the seventh grade level. That does not tell me anything;D I read what ever I want to read. Only high level math is beyond me (my current level). No idea on what level I write, neither german nor english. And I doubt "Xth grade" makes much sense... but well, in which country do education systems make sense..
System programming has nothing to do with DevOps, or the time you did System Programming had a weird definition of it. System Programming != System Administration/Maintenance.
Learning an Assembly language, especially 6502, is not that useless. First of all it makes learning other assembly/machine languages easier. Secondly, that is why I said "especially 6502", you learn that your language is so limited that you most likely want to use it to implement your own mini virtual machine like Sweet16. The particular interesting thing about the 6502 is: it was designed to have a minimalistic 8 bit opcode set, with 127 free to use 16 bit registers in the so called "zero page". Yes: 16 bit "registers". Ofc. they where not registers in the sense of a true processor register. However programmers used them to implement all kinds of "pseudo code" VMs.
Aren't these the attack vectors used by malware and viruses today? Yes and no.
And what exactly does that have to do with algorithms?
Security, Attack Vectors, Bounds Checking, Input Sanitation: that all has nothing to do with algorithms. Hence for anyone it is easier to buy 5 books: One for algorithms One for security One for Attack Vectors One for Bounds Checking (while that might touch algorithms, see "sentinel based algorithms") Input Sanitation
And if you are up for it, you probably might buy several books for each topic. Keeping books on topic is one of the most important things you might learn in "programming" anyway: separation of concerns.
No, AGW was genuinely scientifically controversial in the late 19th and early 20th Century. No it was not. As I said before. It is a "pop news" myth spread from the USA.
Out of curiosity, where are you from? Germany. 30 years ago winters had like -30 degrees centigrade. Perhaps people remember the exceptional cold winters after WW2.
Now we barely hit 0 degrees, or in every 3 or 5 odd years -3 degrees. (That does not count for the higher mountains ofc.)
We even have heat records in winter now. 23rd of december in 2013(I think) with 23 degree centigrade (plus). It is supposed to snow around that time. When I was 10, I had my appendix removed. Went to hospital at 23rd and got out at 30th of december. At night of 30th - 31st of december we had -35 degrees.
Right now the melting of the glaciers is more a loss for tourism. But in future it will affect water supply in summer in north Europe.
The magical number 16 is for a 16 year old having sex with an ADULT!!! Because the Adult might be so exploiting if the other part is only 15 years 364 days 23 hours and 59 seconds old.
The age limit in most countries in Europe is 14, not 16. 14 year olds can have as much sex as they want as long as the partner is below 18 or 16 (depending on country) but not with an adult (who actually might know some nice tricks;D )
Slashdot Mirror
You clearly have very little foundational knowledge about the history ofclimate science, ... or science in general. Yeah sure, my school reports however show different.
Fixed that for you.
You adhere to AGW on religious grounds, not on the basis of empirical evidence. You are an idiot and insulting and don't read much on /. or you knew I'm an atheist ;D
I simply happen to know a hell of a lot more about it than you do, apparently including some bits of history that you're trying to pretend didn't happen.
About the history of climate science publications, yes. About the history of climate science: doubtfully.
About climate science itself: very very unlikely.
You are mixing up end consumer prices with production costs. /. often enough. Believe what you want.
E.g. in Germany the end consumer prices are basically the same, regardless how the power is produced. That is simple to understand as most energy companies run a mix of various power plants.
Nevertheless if you want to build a new 1GW plant: it is cheaper to that with a wind or solar plant, than as a coal or nuclear plant. This is true since roughly 5 years and was covered on
Then they are doing it all wrong?
https://www.iter.org/sci/Fusio...
As fr as I can tell it is very reliable, as you have a forecast how much power you will produce tomorrow, or the next hour. And the forecasts are extremely reliable, especially the 1h - 4h forecasts.
You mean something different. wind and solar are not dispatch able. That has nothing to do with reliable.
You still did not explain ehat you mean with your pointless points :) ... just for your interest. Even when it is cloudy it has a nice power output.
Over daytime solar dors not produce zero
It is completely normal for germany to have high wind yields and relatively low solar yields in autumn/winter. However on sunny winterdays peak solar output is similar to summer. Only total yield is lower due to the shorter day length.
There is, you use the neutron bombardment of the reaction on a lithium shell in the fusion chamber. /.
It was covered often enough on
Fusion plants are supposed to breed their own Tritium and not all fusion plants even need Tritium.
The Greenies and NIMBYs are going to oppose fusion just like they oppose fission.
That is extremely unlikely.
Unlike you most figure heads of the green movements have a clue and/or a PhD about/in science and know what they are talking about.
There is a huge difference between some iodine or cesium remains after a fission reaction and agitated iron/steal after neutron bombardment (fusion reaction).
You are listing ages old US installations.
No idea why they are such expensive.
New installations in Germany are cheaper than nuclear since years. And Germany is not a particular good country for either wind (except the coast) or solar.
Bringing retarded grid concepts etc as arguments makes no sense.
Around here it's drive the "peak energy" costs from 0.07kWh to 0.18kWh in less then a decade. ... can't be so hard.
Wind and solar are used for base load, not for peak energy or balancing power. You probably mean something else. If the energy prices during peak times changed, you most certainly don't know why. The most likely reason: your peak demand exploded and there were now new load following plants built. The new "renewables" now cover for some base load and the old peak plants struggle to fulfill the new peak demand. Go figure
And on top of that: peak prices explode so that people who care about the price can throttle their demand. Only idiots still consume absurd amounts of power around peak time when they could avoid it (and that is damn easy, even in backyard countries like the USA)
Intermittent and unreliable sources of power usually are.
This is a sentence that makes no sense.
Unreliable? In what regard?
Intermittent? In what regard?
10 years ago, neither wind nor solar was cheaper than nuclear 10 years ago.
"How do we know this radiation isn't actually good for you? I mean, the Sun's heat is radiation, right?"
In the same way as we know that being extremely dumb does not harm you at all but it harms us, because idiots like you still may vote.
Renewables are cheaper than nuclear since years.
Installation wise as in $ per GW as well as in production of energy as in Cents per kWh.
In Germany? The power companies.
In other countries? Perhaps the state? Not every nation is paranoid about the state running something, I have heard some states even run navies and airforces etc.
Why do people always say "we don't have the technology" when we clearly have it?
Mars missions are not a technology problem, particular radiation and life support are solved problems.
What we lack is know how, and cost efficient approaches: know how why so many landing operations failed, e.g.
Very likely simply due to weather phenomena and atmosphere pressure changes (anomalies).
I agree that manned Mars missions, especially by mini companies, are unrealistic ... but it is a mere monetary and time frame problem, not a technology one.
I don't know what you want to achieve with this long post.
You bring stuff like: Researchers in the early 20th Century had made measurements which suggested that additional CO2 would not have an effect on the Earth's climate. The theory was widely discredited on that basis, even though Arrhenius' equations and calculations seemed to be sound.
You give an argument and a counterargument in two sentences, is that your idea of "controversial"?
For me the counter argument is mainstream. When ever one comes with a claim that CO2 is not a problem or there is no AGW or everything is a natural pendulum, one comes and rectifies: CO2 is a problem, AGW is a problem. The "idiots" coming up with their "weird ideas" don't make the whole topic "controversial".
This thing you're doing where you're denying objective facts which you could trivially confirm, and only reading enough of what is presented to confirm your biases, is rather rude.
Hm.
And what are you doing? Pushing your idea that it is controversial, by brining up idiot scientists that got debunked instantly?
If something gets debunked instantly, then it is not controversial. At least not how I understand the word.
Out of the three or four languages Europeans are supposed to learn English isn't one of them?
Yes, we learn minimum 2 languages. Or more precisely: get fed up with them, as teaching languages seems to be something no one knows how to do it properly.
However, that makes them not a requirement to enter university, nor to gain a diploma in an university.
Otherwise foreign students e.g. had no chance at all.
And who cares if you e.g. study biology or electric engineering what your grades where in school in english or french? They don't matter for writing your thesis, and they don't matter for getting into the studies.
write at the 11th grade level. The average American reads at the seventh grade level. That does not tell me anything ;D ... but well, in which country do education systems make sense ..
I read what ever I want to read. Only high level math is beyond me (my current level). No idea on what level I write, neither german nor english. And I doubt "Xth grade" makes much sense
Then you should not make "claims" about those religions.
OTOH, I have to catch up, did not read the Silmarillion yet ;D
System programming has nothing to do with DevOps, or the time you did System Programming had a weird definition of it. System Programming != System Administration/Maintenance.
My preferred book is: https://www8.cs.umu.se/kurser/...
I basically bought it because it is a superb hand craft (I mean cover, paper and print).
The contents is an easy read. When I bought it, it was the most expensive book I ever bought ...
To sad that the announced second volume never was published.
Learning an Assembly language, especially 6502, is not that useless.
First of all it makes learning other assembly/machine languages easier.
Secondly, that is why I said "especially 6502", you learn that your language is so limited that you most likely want to use it to implement your own mini virtual machine like Sweet16.
The particular interesting thing about the 6502 is: it was designed to have a minimalistic 8 bit opcode set, with 127 free to use 16 bit registers in the so called "zero page".
Yes: 16 bit "registers". Ofc. they where not registers in the sense of a true processor register. However programmers used them to implement all kinds of "pseudo code" VMs.
Aren't these the attack vectors used by malware and viruses today?
Yes and no.
And what exactly does that have to do with algorithms?
Security, Attack Vectors, Bounds Checking, Input Sanitation: that all has nothing to do with algorithms. Hence for anyone it is easier to buy 5 books:
One for algorithms
One for security
One for Attack Vectors
One for Bounds Checking (while that might touch algorithms, see "sentinel based algorithms")
Input Sanitation
And if you are up for it, you probably might buy several books for each topic. Keeping books on topic is one of the most important things you might learn in "programming" anyway: separation of concerns.
Don't know about the history abstracts you gave, as they are all america centric.
And that is not the point.
The point is you concluded and proclaim that AGW "always was controversial" while the opposite is true.
Wow ... nice link ...
U.S. Temperature Trends
Fixing that for you. I don't live in the US. Nor do 90% of the world population.
No, AGW was genuinely scientifically controversial in the late 19th and early 20th Century.
No it was not. As I said before. It is a "pop news" myth spread from the USA.
Out of curiosity, where are you from?
Germany. 30 years ago winters had like -30 degrees centigrade. Perhaps people remember the exceptional cold winters after WW2.
Now we barely hit 0 degrees, or in every 3 or 5 odd years -3 degrees. (That does not count for the higher mountains ofc.)
We even have heat records in winter now. 23rd of december in 2013(I think) with 23 degree centigrade (plus). It is supposed to snow around that time. When I was 10, I had my appendix removed. Went to hospital at 23rd and got out at 30th of december. At night of 30th - 31st of december we had -35 degrees.
Right now the melting of the glaciers is more a loss for tourism. But in future it will affect water supply in summer in north Europe.
The magical number 16 is for a 16 year old having sex with an ADULT!!! Because the Adult might be so exploiting if the other part is only 15 years 364 days 23 hours and 59 seconds old.
The age limit in most countries in Europe is 14, not 16. 14 year olds can have as much sex as they want as long as the partner is below 18 or 16 (depending on country) but not with an adult (who actually might know some nice tricks ;D )