He at least acknowledges his ignorance. I will concede that I am becoming less knowledgeable about the subject as I hear increasingly passionate arguments from every possible viewpoint.
It seems that as the argument becomes more and more heated, facts seem to matter less and less; people continue to scream out their hearts, louder and louder, until everything is lost in a deafening crescendo.
What if there was a definite answer?
If you cited a paper,
Kettleborough JA, Booth BBB, Stott PA, Allen MR (2007) Estimates of Uncertainty in Predictions of Global Mean Surface Temperature. Journal of Climate: Vol. 20, No. 5 pp. 843-855
that drew strong conclusions supported by reviewable observations, would it speak loud enough to rise above the collective voices of humanity, united in dissonance. Or would it simply add to the noise?
that aggregated over 100 years of such papers that collectively supported that same strong conclusion, would they carry enough weight to hold their own against the onslaught of popular opinion?
If you blocked nothing out -- took in all the supposition driven by fear, all the blind obedience longing for respect, the hate against hate, the vague conclusions supported by observation but with basis in assumption, and, above all, the need to offer an answer, any answer, so long as it is final - could you accept it? Could you claim that you did so objectively?
I cannot. Therefore I am ignorant, aware of it, and too lazy to do anything about it, so I will remain ignorant.
its probably more of a pr thing since they don't actually mention how the technology is supposed to prevent copyright violations. Much like the cpuid crap...
Slashdot Mirror
He at least acknowledges his ignorance. I will concede that I am becoming less knowledgeable about the subject as I hear increasingly passionate arguments from every possible viewpoint.
It seems that as the argument becomes more and more heated, facts seem to matter less and less; people continue to scream out their hearts, louder and louder, until everything is lost in a deafening crescendo.
What if there was a definite answer?
If you cited a paper,
Kettleborough JA, Booth BBB, Stott PA, Allen MR (2007) Estimates of Uncertainty in Predictions of Global Mean Surface Temperature. Journal of Climate: Vol. 20, No. 5 pp. 843-855
that drew strong conclusions supported by reviewable observations, would it speak loud enough to rise above the collective voices of humanity, united in dissonance. Or would it simply add to the noise?
If you referenced a group of journals,
American Meteorological Society
that aggregated over 100 years of such papers that collectively supported that same strong conclusion, would they carry enough weight to hold their own against the onslaught of popular opinion?
If you blocked nothing out -- took in all the supposition driven by fear, all the blind obedience longing for respect, the hate against hate, the vague conclusions supported by observation but with basis in assumption, and, above all, the need to offer an answer, any answer, so long as it is final - could you accept it? Could you claim that you did so objectively?
I cannot. Therefore I am ignorant, aware of it, and too lazy to do anything about it, so I will remain ignorant.
sadly this won't help raise the speed of your CPU, you still can't build a transistor with purely optical materials.
All your computer are belong to us...
PCs may be upgradable, but since when has there been an upgadable Mac?
its probably more of a pr thing since they don't actually mention how the technology is supposed to prevent copyright violations. Much like the cpuid crap...