How many times does someone have to point out that this is not fact, but a guess of what might happen? Seriously, you are a broken record playing the same lame song.
I have read this thread, among others like it, which is beside the point. There is simply no evidence for "millions of deaths" because it is an event that has not yet occurred. Game over. Thanks for playing.
That doubt is going to lead to trillions of dollars in damages and millions of deaths, or more.
This is exactly part of the problem that I see among the more vocal proponents of AGW. Millions of deaths? Do you have any evidence for this purported scenario/outcome? To me it smacks of the "sky is falling we are all doomed please won't you think of the children?" BS that gets us nowhere.
I'm trying to understand why the article mentions that 3,126 earth scientists were surveyed when they only focus on the most frequently(and recently) published climate scientists(79 total). If the other earth scientists don't matter then why survey them at all? And the PDF itself says that the survey was sent to 10,257 earth scientists so the response to the survey was only about 30% of the total. I'm not sure how that can be considered a consensus when far less than half even bothered to take the survey. YMMV.
The problem with the modelling is that it cannot actually tell us what will happen in the future. It's just a guess based on certain parameters at a given time. And basing government policies(that will affect how and where tax money gets spent) on said models is ridiculous. And it doesn't help to have some scientists running around telling everyone the sky is falling and we're all doomed unless we do X, Y and Z RIGHT NOW. I know that gets the most attention, but that does not help anyone. It certainly does lend credibility to their position.
I stand corrected. But is interesting to note, in that image you linked to, at least, that some shipping lanes are in Iranian waters, though maybe not in the strait itself.
It's one thing to misspell a word when it does not change the meaning of what you are saying, but "intents and purposes" and "intensive purposes" do not have the same meaning.
Prices for the Commodore 64 came down pretty quickly, IIRC. There's no way I would have gotten my C64 for $595 and I got it Christmas of '82. Might have been a price drop and a sale to put it around $300 or so.
If you googled her then you should know that she is not that G4 chick- which is Olivia Munn. Olivia Wilde is an actress and was just in Cowboys & Aliens and Tron: Legacy. And if you had seen the movie- and the posters of her- you would know that your baby is not anything like her.
I know it's only anecdotal, but in two different cities where I lived I saw the local indy record store thrive well into the 90s, long after the chain stores should have killed them off, as you say. It wasn't until the late 90s, early 2000s that they both kicked the bucket. Probably a combo of both teh interwebz and the Wal-mart. But I still loved to go there right until the end 'cause you never knew what you would find... well, except for bootlegs of Dead concerts. You always found those.
Slashdot Mirror
6 degrees is actually what we're headed for:
How many times does someone have to point out that this is not fact, but a guess of what might happen? Seriously, you are a broken record playing the same lame song.
I have read this thread, among others like it, which is beside the point. There is simply no evidence for "millions of deaths" because it is an event that has not yet occurred. Game over. Thanks for playing.
Fail.
Your claims are baseless nonsense. Thankfully, you are not in any position of power.
That doubt is going to lead to trillions of dollars in damages and millions of deaths, or more.
This is exactly part of the problem that I see among the more vocal proponents of AGW. Millions of deaths? Do you have any evidence for this purported scenario/outcome? To me it smacks of the "sky is falling we are all doomed please won't you think of the children?" BS that gets us nowhere.
I'm trying to understand why the article mentions that 3,126 earth scientists were surveyed when they only focus on the most frequently(and recently) published climate scientists(79 total). If the other earth scientists don't matter then why survey them at all? And the PDF itself says that the survey was sent to 10,257 earth scientists so the response to the survey was only about 30% of the total. I'm not sure how that can be considered a consensus when far less than half even bothered to take the survey. YMMV.
*does not lend
The problem with the modelling is that it cannot actually tell us what will happen in the future. It's just a guess based on certain parameters at a given time. And basing government policies(that will affect how and where tax money gets spent) on said models is ridiculous. And it doesn't help to have some scientists running around telling everyone the sky is falling and we're all doomed unless we do X, Y and Z RIGHT NOW. I know that gets the most attention, but that does not help anyone. It certainly does lend credibility to their position.
There needs to be a new Gallup poll. That one is more than 12 years old.
I stand corrected. But is interesting to note, in that image you linked to, at least, that some shipping lanes are in Iranian waters, though maybe not in the strait itself.
It's one thing to misspell a word when it does not change the meaning of what you are saying, but "intents and purposes" and "intensive purposes" do not have the same meaning.
Incorrect. The shipping lanes are in Iranian and Omanian territories. And I wish everyone would spell strait correctly in this context.
Prices for the Commodore 64 came down pretty quickly, IIRC. There's no way I would have gotten my C64 for $595 and I got it Christmas of '82. Might have been a price drop and a sale to put it around $300 or so.
Yes, the dems actually had majority in both the House and Senate the last two years of Bush's admin. Lots of people seem to have forgotten that fact.
Not a very creative troll. This is copy/pasted verbatim from a You Tube comment for the trailer.
Odd, so was the book.
Actually, the book was subtitled, "There and Back Again." Chapter 1 was titled, "An Unexpected Journey".
Surely, you jest. The film and the book are miles apart in many key areas, mainly in that Heinlein was serious and Verhoeven was not.
You weren't even speaking of discworlds. ;)
You completely missed his point. He was talking about the article here on /., not the actual Mythbusters accident itself.
If you googled her then you should know that she is not that G4 chick- which is Olivia Munn. Olivia Wilde is an actress and was just in Cowboys & Aliens and Tron: Legacy. And if you had seen the movie- and the posters of her- you would know that your baby is not anything like her.
I know it's only anecdotal, but in two different cities where I lived I saw the local indy record store thrive well into the 90s, long after the chain stores should have killed them off, as you say. It wasn't until the late 90s, early 2000s that they both kicked the bucket. Probably a combo of both teh interwebz and the Wal-mart. But I still loved to go there right until the end 'cause you never knew what you would find... well, except for bootlegs of Dead concerts. You always found those.
New Jersey is not close to New England geographically or politically.
Things certainly are not made of atoms. Nothing is.
My wife and I watched the entire series this past summer and it was all via netflix streaming.
Most likely it is the material in the concrete used for the surface, which includes water.