Many people have offered reasons why their conclusions don't make any sense and how they have gotten it wrong (the recent period of global cooling comes to mind). Since climate science has become something more akin to a religion (see the repeated use of the derogatory denailist label) it has been setting off the common sense alarm the more I listen to them. The leaked emails show the same disdain for anyone who questions their work.
I don't have an ideology, nor do I fear an adjustment to my lifestyle. It's just when someting sounds like a duck, looks like a duck and acts like a duck then it's generally a duck. In this case climate science sounds, looks and acts like a quasi-cult and so I'm skeptical. My observation of scientific certainty during 40+ years has shown me they often claim their intellectual superiority and absolute certainty of their conclusions and only end up having to revise their theories. If you're going to talk about playing the odds then I'd say the odds are in my favor since their science seems pretty thin.
Hahahahaaha! I'd say that there's an excellent chance that this example could be caused by climate change. The problem with that statement is that it really means nothing. Climate change undoubtably caused the entire Sahara to expand to it's current size, so how is that relevant to the discussion? Climate change has always been going on, so saying something is a result of climate change is really telling me nothing.
The fact is the earth has been changing since it was formed. It's not a static system. Since we can't even reliably predict the weather, even in the short term, how am I supposed to take the word of "experts" who say they've got it all figured out. (Yes, I know weather and climate are different, but step back a little and see the bigger meaning here). In every other scientific discipline we see countless examples of scientists telling us they are the experts and they understand how it all works, then later rescinding that statement when something clearly proves them wrong. Why is climate science somehow different? Does anyone really believe they understand it enough to isolate man's influence from all other inputs? I think our understanding has barely scraped the surface in all areas of science and we might want to eat a big more humble pie before making such foolish and arrogant statements about our level of knowledge.
The whole phrasse Kindle killer evokes some epic struggle to knock off the top dog in the market. Right now the iPhone/iPod touch appears to be the number 1 ebook reader. Meanwhile Amazon is afraid to release sales numbers for the Kindle because it would show it has been a disappointing seller.
I think the Kindle is a good idea, but for a single use device with a very high price it is not going to make any inroads into the market.
We definitely need to stop the pollution, protect resources (rainforests, coral reefs, etc.) and find alternative energy sources. We definitely do NOT want to start f'ing with nature by seeding algae in oceans, etc. Humans have a HORRIBLE record when we mess with nature because we have historically upset natural checks/balances in a effort to "do something good". We simply don't understand our world well enough yet to start down that road.
You apologists appear to conveniently gloss over the other point of context in the "trick" sentence. He mentions using a "trick" to "HIDE the decline" (emphasis mine). I could maybe buy the trick explanation, but the context of the sentence shows he's hiding something that disagrees with his goal. Sorry, but the argument of yours doesn't hold water.
I really hope this was intended to be sarcastic humor. I don't look at it as an either-or proposition. The "expert" scientists seem to have questionable methods/ethics AND the CEO of Exxon is a lying scumbag. They both suck.
Any attempt to hold Exxon up as a pillar of good behavior is about the dumbest thing I've ever seen.
Nice typical bullshit rebuttal. If YOU had any familiarity with logic you'd know he has some valid points that you conveniently avoided responding to.
The more I hear about "the scientific community" the more I realize they are pompous windbags who don't like being questioned or told that someone doesn't believe them. In other words, they are human, and as such their statements are fair game to be questioned just like anyone else.
And who is accountable to their state board and oversight in this area? What kind of certification are you referring to that you would find acceptable?
Really? You know plenty of couples in this situation? You'd almost have to be a Scientologist in order to know multiple couples in this situation, wouldn't you? Maybe you're spreading a little disinformation for LRH?
Actually it DID answer your question. The CoS itself harrassed her husband who then divorced her. I'd call that harassment of her as well because the CoS screwed up her life after it screwed up her husband's life.
That was the brilliant query you came up with to disprove his theory? Virtual Machines? Wow, myth debunked!! Good job Nancy Drew!
I think there was a previous article on Slashdot about how Bing was taking a query about Windows having so many viruses and turning it into results that discuss why a Mac is expensive, or something like that. It's pretty obvious they are f'ing with the results.
"Now I can't way to see the juvenile posters making this a case of libertarian freedom of speech"
- And who can blame them after your juvenile post blathering about "being on the clock". Jeez, wake up and realize that nitpicking about being on the clock was never the point of this discussion. The point was why the hell was that asshole tracking commenters down? What kind of a dickhead reports someone for posting on the very message board that he left open for comments?
Don't want comments, shut down that functionality. If you do want comments either moderate them or just deal with a few vulgar posts. And whatever you do, don't post the question "what is the grossest thing you've ever eaten" and not be smart enough to see the comments that are coming your way.
While the posts were a bit juvenile and the guy shouldn't have done it during school hours, they aren't noteworthy enough to cost a person his job. The most juvenile act in this story was the vindictive way the guy was hunted down. Sorry, but put it in perspective and realize it's just one little word.
The only problem with your analogy is the Mac is the Accord and the Winblows box is the Yugo. Macs are not some uber luxury line, that has been disproven so many times its ridiculous.
I had the same issues years ago. I bought a Mac for a video company I was starting and found OS X was a better world. So I instructed all the family I supported that any new computer they buy must be a Mac or I will no longer support them. 4 years later and I do maybe 3-4 couple of hours a year of "support", which consists only of installing a new program for them or explaining how to use something. No malware, no reformatting, no scanning for this and that, no trying to figure out why the machine has slowed down to the point it is unusable, nothing.
You can either continue to support Windows crappy systems or you can learn from your mistakes. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. The choice is yours.
Slashdot Mirror
Has there been recent global cooling? . .. Yes. No lie there.
Did their climate models fail to predict this (the climate models they tell us to believe in without question them)? . . . Yes. No lie there.
Seems like you are the only one propagating misinformation. (that's fancy talk for telling a lie).
Fox News?
Why don't we refer to the articles here about global cooling: http://www.google.com/search?q=global+cooling+trend&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Touche
Many people have offered reasons why their conclusions don't make any sense and how they have gotten it wrong (the recent period of global cooling comes to mind). Since climate science has become something more akin to a religion (see the repeated use of the derogatory denailist label) it has been setting off the common sense alarm the more I listen to them. The leaked emails show the same disdain for anyone who questions their work.
I don't have an ideology, nor do I fear an adjustment to my lifestyle. It's just when someting sounds like a duck, looks like a duck and acts like a duck then it's generally a duck. In this case climate science sounds, looks and acts like a quasi-cult and so I'm skeptical. My observation of scientific certainty during 40+ years has shown me they often claim their intellectual superiority and absolute certainty of their conclusions and only end up having to revise their theories. If you're going to talk about playing the odds then I'd say the odds are in my favor since their science seems pretty thin.
Hahahahaaha! I'd say that there's an excellent chance that this example could be caused by climate change. The problem with that statement is that it really means nothing. Climate change undoubtably caused the entire Sahara to expand to it's current size, so how is that relevant to the discussion? Climate change has always been going on, so saying something is a result of climate change is really telling me nothing.
The fact is the earth has been changing since it was formed. It's not a static system. Since we can't even reliably predict the weather, even in the short term, how am I supposed to take the word of "experts" who say they've got it all figured out. (Yes, I know weather and climate are different, but step back a little and see the bigger meaning here). In every other scientific discipline we see countless examples of scientists telling us they are the experts and they understand how it all works, then later rescinding that statement when something clearly proves them wrong. Why is climate science somehow different? Does anyone really believe they understand it enough to isolate man's influence from all other inputs? I think our understanding has barely scraped the surface in all areas of science and we might want to eat a big more humble pie before making such foolish and arrogant statements about our level of knowledge.
Are you serious? I propose you piss off with your proposal!
The whole phrasse Kindle killer evokes some epic struggle to knock off the top dog in the market. Right now the iPhone/iPod touch appears to be the number 1 ebook reader. Meanwhile Amazon is afraid to release sales numbers for the Kindle because it would show it has been a disappointing seller.
I think the Kindle is a good idea, but for a single use device with a very high price it is not going to make any inroads into the market.
If they have a Freecycle distro for your area (Google it) you can get rid of it painlessly and to someone who probably needs it.
Forest vs Trees? Maybe you could focus on the forest a little more and quit worry about anal grammar corrections?
We definitely need to stop the pollution, protect resources (rainforests, coral reefs, etc.) and find alternative energy sources. We definitely do NOT want to start f'ing with nature by seeding algae in oceans, etc. Humans have a HORRIBLE record when we mess with nature because we have historically upset natural checks/balances in a effort to "do something good". We simply don't understand our world well enough yet to start down that road.
You apologists appear to conveniently gloss over the other point of context in the "trick" sentence. He mentions using a "trick" to "HIDE the decline" (emphasis mine). I could maybe buy the trick explanation, but the context of the sentence shows he's hiding something that disagrees with his goal. Sorry, but the argument of yours doesn't hold water.
Not to descend into Godwins Law, but I'm sure I could find something useful that the Nazis did, but they were still scum.
I really hope this was intended to be sarcastic humor. I don't look at it as an either-or proposition. The "expert" scientists seem to have questionable methods/ethics AND the CEO of Exxon is a lying scumbag. They both suck.
Any attempt to hold Exxon up as a pillar of good behavior is about the dumbest thing I've ever seen.
Nice typical bullshit rebuttal. If YOU had any familiarity with logic you'd know he has some valid points that you conveniently avoided responding to.
The more I hear about "the scientific community" the more I realize they are pompous windbags who don't like being questioned or told that someone doesn't believe them. In other words, they are human, and as such their statements are fair game to be questioned just like anyone else.
Feel free to pull your head out of your butt with that ridiculous logic. "Experts" told us the world was flat at one time too.
And who is accountable to their state board and oversight in this area? What kind of certification are you referring to that you would find acceptable?
Really? You know plenty of couples in this situation? You'd almost have to be a Scientologist in order to know multiple couples in this situation, wouldn't you? Maybe you're spreading a little disinformation for LRH?
Actually it DID answer your question. The CoS itself harrassed her husband who then divorced her. I'd call that harassment of her as well because the CoS screwed up her life after it screwed up her husband's life.
I want to believe that you actually understand and admit the huge shit sandwich that was handed to our current President by our former President.
I want to believe that you're really not this ignorant, and that you're just misrepresenting these issues to dump blame on a President you don't like.
I want to believe that you'll stick to the topic instead of wasting our time with your drivel.
Sorry, my recollection was a bit off, but the end results was the same.
http://search.slashdot.org/story/09/08/06/1334225/Bing-Search-Tainted-By-Pro-Microsoft-Results
That was the brilliant query you came up with to disprove his theory? Virtual Machines? Wow, myth debunked!! Good job Nancy Drew!
I think there was a previous article on Slashdot about how Bing was taking a query about Windows having so many viruses and turning it into results that discuss why a Mac is expensive, or something like that. It's pretty obvious they are f'ing with the results.
"Now I can't way to see the juvenile posters making this a case of libertarian freedom of speech"
- And who can blame them after your juvenile post blathering about "being on the clock". Jeez, wake up and realize that nitpicking about being on the clock was never the point of this discussion. The point was why the hell was that asshole tracking commenters down? What kind of a dickhead reports someone for posting on the very message board that he left open for comments?
Don't want comments, shut down that functionality. If you do want comments either moderate them or just deal with a few vulgar posts. And whatever you do, don't post the question "what is the grossest thing you've ever eaten" and not be smart enough to see the comments that are coming your way.
While the posts were a bit juvenile and the guy shouldn't have done it during school hours, they aren't noteworthy enough to cost a person his job. The most juvenile act in this story was the vindictive way the guy was hunted down. Sorry, but put it in perspective and realize it's just one little word.
HA!! That is the best summary of this issue that I have ever seen! It does seem the guy was whining in a one sided way, wasn't he?
"Plus the excessive cost of buying a mac "
- Stop! That is utter bullsh!t. The Mac are only a little bit more money, and in some cases cheaper, than a similarly spec'd PC.
And two PCs doesn't exactly fix his problem, does it? Now he's got twice as many bad machines to support according to your solution.
The only problem with your analogy is the Mac is the Accord and the Winblows box is the Yugo. Macs are not some uber luxury line, that has been disproven so many times its ridiculous.
I had the same issues years ago. I bought a Mac for a video company I was starting and found OS X was a better world. So I instructed all the family I supported that any new computer they buy must be a Mac or I will no longer support them. 4 years later and I do maybe 3-4 couple of hours a year of "support", which consists only of installing a new program for them or explaining how to use something. No malware, no reformatting, no scanning for this and that, no trying to figure out why the machine has slowed down to the point it is unusable, nothing.
You can either continue to support Windows crappy systems or you can learn from your mistakes. Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. The choice is yours.