Space craft should also use oil and coal, like Jesus would want. Jesus despises renewables, and anyone advocating them will go to Hell, after they've been thoroughly beaten by God-fearing fossil fuel advocates. Remember, God loves fossil fuels, and will make advocates of other energy sources pay for eternity.
Does it matter? It threatens oil companies' revenues, and therefore it should be made a death penalty offense to even think about solar panels. Anyone advocating for alternative energy sources is a repugnant monster who should be executed after months of horrifying torture. Costing the Koch Brothers money should lead to unbelievably harsh sentences.
At this point I'm dubious SK wants to reunite with NK. The financial burden that NK would represent would dwarf even what East Germany represented to West Germany. The economy of NK is beyond basket case territory, and the only reason the country even exists is because China props it up and NK every once in a while blusters itself into financial aid from other parts of the world (oh, and arms sales).
Frankly I find the notion of forced public donation vile. Remember that ridiculous Ice Bucket Challenge. When a partnering company tried to guilt our staff into doing it, we just told them to ignore the email.
I'm still a big fan of TOS, and the best Trek movies are still the TOS movies. The middle seasons of TNG were tolerable, but the beginning and the end seasons were dismal affairs. DS9 started out shaky, but found its own in the later seasons. The less said about Voyager and Enterprise, the shows that killed Star Trek, the better.
In the end, TOS just simply had the more challenging storylines. Even Shatner did a great job; daring handsome smart space captain, what else could you want. I didn't even mind the paper machet boulders and "devices" that were sometimes made out of unusual salt and pepper shakers. Even an episode with special effects as bad as The Doomsday Device had such a great storyline and such good acting that the special effects fade away. If all you're thinking about is how dubious the special effects are, then a fair portion of the Twilight Zone episodes, and a considerable number of older movies would be unwatchable. Christ, in the Wizard of Oz, you can see where the set ends and the scenery paintings begin, and yet it remains probably the most watched film in history.
The problem with TNG in large part was that they never really got the cast to gel. I like Patrick Stewart, and he did his job pretty well. Indeed, I thought they all did their jobs well, but there was never the sense of camaraderie that one got from TOS. The reality was that what made TOS great wasn't so much Roddenberry as it was Gene L. Coons, who created a lot of the backstory like the Prime Directive, did a lot of work on the scripts to bring out the relationships between the three main characters, and in many ways turned Roddenberry's skeleton into a living breathing thing. A lot of what we think of as Star Trek came directly from Coon's imagination, and Shatner was right that he was the unsung hero of Star Trek. But there was no one like that in the later ST series, and TNG was a lot blander for it.
We're talking about a show where the technobabble frequently was little more than Geordy announcing "a concentrated tachyon beam tuned to the right frequency will yada yada yada...", with Data piping in "There's a 72.3% probability that that will blah blah blah and blow us all up", with Riker just rolling his eyes and thinking "I know this gig pays well, but...", and Picard finally saying "Make it so. I'll be in my quarters, but inform me immediately when yada yada yada makes blah blah blah happen." Troi, of course, will simple stand there looking like she just pinched a loaf in her form fitting stretch one piece body suit, while Dr. Crusher goes down to sickbay to deal with the inevitable injuries and psychoses brought on by the inevitable yada yada yadaing.
At least you've admitted your a denialist, though for some reason you don't like to use that word. I think it's a good sort of word, because it adequately describes simpering evil morons like yourself.
And nobody said organisms wouldn't adapt. But when you talk about disrupting agriculture and aquaculture than billions rely on, yeah that's a big deal.
YOu're just desperate to find a way to deny that CO2 traps energy in the lower atmosphere. It's rather pathetic, like how a Creationist will try to find any way to deny that species evolve into other species. Same mindset, pathetic cowardice driven by a pathetic childlike inability to deal with reality.
First off, labeling anyone that disagrees with you as a "science denier" is neither insightful nor thought provoking so you might remove the plank from your eye before criticizing the specks in others.
It is when you're talking to a science denier.
How would you treat an anti-vaxxer or someone who denies evolution?
We do not *KNOW* there's too much CO2 in the atmosphere. We are, at this moment in planetary history, at all time lows for atmospheric CO2. Historically we should be around the average of about 1600-1800ppm. Around 280ppm we would see plant life began to die off. We are damn lucky to be rebounding now. Yes, CO2 traps heat. We rarely hear about the way it does that is a logarithmic effect. The impact of going from 500 to 600 ppm is far lass than the effect of going from 300 to 400.
So what if it is logarithmic. That doesn't mean trapped heat magically doesn't do anything at all. We are observing substantial changes in the ocean, not just sea level rise, but in the actual chemical composition as absorbed CO2 messes up pH levels. And we are also observing higher ocean temperatures, and lower atmospheric temperatures.
As to planetary history, what the fuck difference does that make? Humans didn't exist in the Jurassic, and human civilization only developed in the last 10,000 years, not in the last 100 million years. Significant changes in climate will have, and are already having significant changes on rain belts.
Trying to dismiss AGW by appealing to the fallacious view that it only counts when it is big increases is to betray intense ignorance of an entire discipline. What you're arguing is the equivalent of a Creationist saying "yeah well, we can only observe microevolution!"
You do realise the universe doesn't give a flying fuck about what you think about Climate scientists.
The effects of CO2 in the atmosphere have been know for over a century, and the physics makes it clear the higher the concentrations, the more energy will be trapped in the lower atmosphere. If you have an explanation as to where that energy is going that doesn't involve heating then be my guest and provide it. Otherwise, quit being a fucking retard.
That is until someone besides Apple or the government figures out how to get into that backdoor.
How about a compromise. If an unauthorized third party gains access to your data via this sanctioned back door, you automatically get five hundred billion dollars tax free.
If the IOC wasn't corrupt, there should be one location for the Summer Olympics (it should be in Greece, where the ancient Olympics are held), and the Winter Olympics should be held in another location, one that is guaranteed to have snow. Throw a few hundred billion at each location; major airports, venues, hospitals, living facilities, and then it's just the cost of maintenance. No more shopping around for kickbacks for the winning society, and no more need for the IOC in its current form.
I think you're going to start seeing more major Western cities giving a big fat no to bidding on the Olympics, which is going to mean more Sochis and Rios are going to be expected. The IOC is joining FIFA in the unbelievable host city contests. Equally, they should be joining FIFA in prison cells.
Slashdot Mirror
Space craft should also use oil and coal, like Jesus would want. Jesus despises renewables, and anyone advocating them will go to Hell, after they've been thoroughly beaten by God-fearing fossil fuel advocates. Remember, God loves fossil fuels, and will make advocates of other energy sources pay for eternity.
Does it matter? It threatens oil companies' revenues, and therefore it should be made a death penalty offense to even think about solar panels. Anyone advocating for alternative energy sources is a repugnant monster who should be executed after months of horrifying torture. Costing the Koch Brothers money should lead to unbelievably harsh sentences.
I'm not sure I'd want to hang out near the exhaust pipe of such an engine. O2 is rather explosive.
At this point I'm dubious SK wants to reunite with NK. The financial burden that NK would represent would dwarf even what East Germany represented to West Germany. The economy of NK is beyond basket case territory, and the only reason the country even exists is because China props it up and NK every once in a while blusters itself into financial aid from other parts of the world (oh, and arms sales).
This is a message being sent to NK... "We can target a missile at Kim Jong un's extra-wide ass..."
Frankly I find the notion of forced public donation vile. Remember that ridiculous Ice Bucket Challenge. When a partnering company tried to guilt our staff into doing it, we just told them to ignore the email.
Praise Allah, or else, I guess.
I'm still a big fan of TOS, and the best Trek movies are still the TOS movies. The middle seasons of TNG were tolerable, but the beginning and the end seasons were dismal affairs. DS9 started out shaky, but found its own in the later seasons. The less said about Voyager and Enterprise, the shows that killed Star Trek, the better.
In the end, TOS just simply had the more challenging storylines. Even Shatner did a great job; daring handsome smart space captain, what else could you want. I didn't even mind the paper machet boulders and "devices" that were sometimes made out of unusual salt and pepper shakers. Even an episode with special effects as bad as The Doomsday Device had such a great storyline and such good acting that the special effects fade away. If all you're thinking about is how dubious the special effects are, then a fair portion of the Twilight Zone episodes, and a considerable number of older movies would be unwatchable. Christ, in the Wizard of Oz, you can see where the set ends and the scenery paintings begin, and yet it remains probably the most watched film in history.
The problem with TNG in large part was that they never really got the cast to gel. I like Patrick Stewart, and he did his job pretty well. Indeed, I thought they all did their jobs well, but there was never the sense of camaraderie that one got from TOS. The reality was that what made TOS great wasn't so much Roddenberry as it was Gene L. Coons, who created a lot of the backstory like the Prime Directive, did a lot of work on the scripts to bring out the relationships between the three main characters, and in many ways turned Roddenberry's skeleton into a living breathing thing. A lot of what we think of as Star Trek came directly from Coon's imagination, and Shatner was right that he was the unsung hero of Star Trek. But there was no one like that in the later ST series, and TNG was a lot blander for it.
We're talking about a show where the technobabble frequently was little more than Geordy announcing "a concentrated tachyon beam tuned to the right frequency will yada yada yada...", with Data piping in "There's a 72.3% probability that that will blah blah blah and blow us all up", with Riker just rolling his eyes and thinking "I know this gig pays well, but...", and Picard finally saying "Make it so. I'll be in my quarters, but inform me immediately when yada yada yada makes blah blah blah happen." Troi, of course, will simple stand there looking like she just pinched a loaf in her form fitting stretch one piece body suit, while Dr. Crusher goes down to sickbay to deal with the inevitable injuries and psychoses brought on by the inevitable yada yada yadaing.
At least you've admitted your a denialist, though for some reason you don't like to use that word. I think it's a good sort of word, because it adequately describes simpering evil morons like yourself.
This message brought to you by Mark Shuttleworth
So how did the alligators do at farming?
And nobody said organisms wouldn't adapt. But when you talk about disrupting agriculture and aquaculture than billions rely on, yeah that's a big deal.
YOu're just desperate to find a way to deny that CO2 traps energy in the lower atmosphere. It's rather pathetic, like how a Creationist will try to find any way to deny that species evolve into other species. Same mindset, pathetic cowardice driven by a pathetic childlike inability to deal with reality.
I mean "higher atmospheric" temperatures
It is when you're talking to a science denier.
How would you treat an anti-vaxxer or someone who denies evolution?
So what if it is logarithmic. That doesn't mean trapped heat magically doesn't do anything at all. We are observing substantial changes in the ocean, not just sea level rise, but in the actual chemical composition as absorbed CO2 messes up pH levels. And we are also observing higher ocean temperatures, and lower atmospheric temperatures.
As to planetary history, what the fuck difference does that make? Humans didn't exist in the Jurassic, and human civilization only developed in the last 10,000 years, not in the last 100 million years. Significant changes in climate will have, and are already having significant changes on rain belts.
Trying to dismiss AGW by appealing to the fallacious view that it only counts when it is big increases is to betray intense ignorance of an entire discipline. What you're arguing is the equivalent of a Creationist saying "yeah well, we can only observe microevolution!"
Except it isn't a small amount of energy at all.
You do realise the universe doesn't give a flying fuck about what you think about Climate scientists.
The effects of CO2 in the atmosphere have been know for over a century, and the physics makes it clear the higher the concentrations, the more energy will be trapped in the lower atmosphere. If you have an explanation as to where that energy is going that doesn't involve heating then be my guest and provide it. Otherwise, quit being a fucking retard.
The actuary tables don't lie. Insurance companies have accepted AGW for years now, no matter how much Big Oil and the Koch's try to deny it.
That is until someone besides Apple or the government figures out how to get into that backdoor.
How about a compromise. If an unauthorized third party gains access to your data via this sanctioned back door, you automatically get five hundred billion dollars tax free.
Not if you're a sociopath masking your pathology in a thin veneer of Libertarianism it isn't.
Which is how we got Joomla, which is the IE 7 of CMSs.
I always go to Forbes for my science news. It's good I know AGW is false!
Let's be clear here. The modern Olympic Movement has about as much to do with the Ancient Olympics as Wicca has to do with the pagan Celtic religion.
If the bribes were high enough, they'd be hosting it at Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station.
If the IOC wasn't corrupt, there should be one location for the Summer Olympics (it should be in Greece, where the ancient Olympics are held), and the Winter Olympics should be held in another location, one that is guaranteed to have snow. Throw a few hundred billion at each location; major airports, venues, hospitals, living facilities, and then it's just the cost of maintenance. No more shopping around for kickbacks for the winning society, and no more need for the IOC in its current form.
I think you're going to start seeing more major Western cities giving a big fat no to bidding on the Olympics, which is going to mean more Sochis and Rios are going to be expected. The IOC is joining FIFA in the unbelievable host city contests. Equally, they should be joining FIFA in prison cells.