"Probably no single issue damages the reputation of the climate science community more than the refusal to show the data that supports their work, even under an FOI request. The public believes that scientists who purport to be concerned about the future of the planet should not place their own financial interests, including future grants, ahead of this concern, particularly when their research has been done with public funds.
Recently I sent an FOI request to the University of East Anglia for a regional chronology combining Yamal, Polar Urals and shorter (presumably Schweingruber) chronologies referred to in Climategate email 1146252894.txt, as well as a request for even a simple list of sites used to make the chronology. This request is for data that is central to Climategate. Yamal was in controversy in the days prior to Climategate. I drew particular attention to this issue and this series in my own submission. Unfortunately, the "inquiries" avoided the issue.
Not only did East Anglia refuse my request for the regional chronology, they even refused to identify the sites. The University claimed that even identifying the sites would result in "financial harm" to the university though an adverse impact on their "ability to attract research funding"."
The likelihood of the Earth being hit by an impactor that's large enough to wipe out humanity is 1 in 1.
Probability is not your strongsuit. Life on Earth has survived for billions of years. Humans are extremely resilient. There is no guarantee that an impactor large enough to wipe out humanity will hit Earth.
The fact that IE wasn't changed in a service pack is indicative of the kinds of stuff they do or don't do in service packs. Completely revamping the UI for touch is a major change, and your original claim of calling Windows 8 a service pack for 7 still stands as ridiculous.
Apple as a corporate brand looks like a cynical, egotistical, dominance protecting bullshit artist. I know, I know, it's all about the shareholders but it seems really at odds with their hipster marketing.
The hipsters and fanboys think that others are copying Apple and deserve to be sued.
Google were sued by Oracle for breaching copyright (in a clearly ridiculous case). This does not apply to OpenJDK because it was created under the Gnu General Public License (GPL).
They also sued over patents, but those are also covered by the license for the JDK. Even better, Oracle lost on both the copyright and patent fronts in its lawsuit against Google.
Afford is not so simple, people on $65,000 p/a take out $100,000 loans for BMW X5. That alone makes them idiots.
It's not something I would do, but if they value the car that much then who am I or you to call them idiots?
they'll complain to hell and back about how they're getting ripped off. They want the cars to cost less, but will still buy them even though they know the manufacturer is taking the piss.
It's one thing to know you're getting screwed. It's another to forgo what you want.
In case you haven't been paying attention, I imported a Nissan Skyline 350 GT, I paid A$15K less for the JDM model than I would have for the ADM (Skyline 350z) model and got a newer car, with fewer KM's on the clock and a better tuned engine.
I was there the other week and a $1000(US) Apple cinema display costs $1600 there (the A$ and US$ are about parity right now). That's not shipping. That's ripping off.
So why don't more Aussies just buy from eBay and have it shipped? Sounds like a case where simple arbitrage should reduce prices.
Since 1850 or so they have actual temperature measurements to compare the proxy data to. Up until 1960 the proxy data closely matched the actual temperature data that was available to compare to.
What is "closely matched"? If you compare the individual graphs with each other for the Jones WMO graph in question, there's plenty of variation where the data hasn't been artificially spliced into agreement. Tree ring data is too messy and easy to fool yourself with to chop decades off arbitrarily, especially when the window for comparison with instrumental data is so small.
So, the graph is just a pretty picture and it's the underlying data that matters.
No, this is complete bullshit. Such graphs are meant to convey information and are used by scientists all the time. That you would say such a thing gives me very little confidence that you have any scientific integrity.
BTW, it wasn't Phil Jones but Michael Mann who decided not to use the proxy after 1960. That you got such a straightforward point wrong doesn't give me confidence in the rest of what you say.
It was Phil Jones who prepared the graph that dropped the 1960 data and spliced in instrumental data: "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."
That Mann may have dropped data too doesn't excuse Jones, nor does it change the fact that Jones upped the ante by splicing on instrumental data, something that Mann has a juicy quote about:
"No researchers in this field have ever, to our knowledge, "grafted the thermometer record onto" any reconstruction. It is somewhat disappointing to find this specious claim (which we usually find originating from industry-funded climate disinformation websites) appearing in this forum."
This quote is from 2004, years before Climategate.
This is shit science. You don't just chop out data post 1960 without knowing what is wrong with it. Yes, it was discussed in the literature. No, they had no definitive answer, only speculation.
Even worse, what Phil Jones did was chop out the data and replace it with thermometer data so that three separate data sets rose up in striking agreement in a hockey stick fashion.
The whole CRU email thingy itself shows why this is the case: it's easy to pick a few lines out of complex scientific dialog and distort them with a quick media blitz designed to portray someone as dishonest, or crooked, or biased, or incompetent, or silly. (As the saying goes, a lie gets half way around the world before the truth can get its shoes on.)
Yup, we don't want email where Phil Jones lays out his intention to deceive, or his intention and requests to erase data, to get around and be misinterpreted, now do we?
Slashdot Mirror
The CRU data has been available for a while now. What have the "deniers" done with it, exactly ?
Let's just replace "deniers" with "critics", and use as our exemplar Steve McIntyre:
http://climateaudit.org/2011/04/25/cru-refuses-foi-request-for-yamal-climategate-chronology/ :
"Probably no single issue damages the reputation of the climate science community more than the refusal to show the data that supports their work, even under an FOI request. The public believes that scientists who purport to be concerned about the future of the planet should not place their own financial interests, including future grants, ahead of this concern, particularly when their research has been done with public funds.
Recently I sent an FOI request to the University of East Anglia for a regional chronology combining Yamal, Polar Urals and shorter (presumably Schweingruber) chronologies referred to in Climategate email 1146252894.txt, as well as a request for even a simple list of sites used to make the chronology. This request is for data that is central to Climategate. Yamal was in controversy in the days prior to Climategate. I drew particular attention to this issue and this series in my own submission. Unfortunately, the "inquiries" avoided the issue.
Not only did East Anglia refuse my request for the regional chronology, they even refused to identify the sites. The University claimed that even identifying the sites would result in "financial harm" to the university though an adverse impact on their "ability to attract research funding"."
The likelihood of the Earth being hit by an impactor that's large enough to wipe out humanity is 1 in 1.
Probability is not your strongsuit. Life on Earth has survived for billions of years. Humans are extremely resilient. There is no guarantee that an impactor large enough to wipe out humanity will hit Earth.
Idiot, if you delete the photos you are exhonorated of your own crime, if they say yes that you have committed a crime by taking photos.
Idiot Anon, no you aren't. You will be out the photos that you wanted and can still be testified against that you took them in the first place.
Being a smartass just deserves to have authority use maximum force to subdue the suspect, the suspect being the smartass.
Fuck you. Be a bootlicking slave if you want, but I'll stand up for my rights.
Sigh..
This is a signal for me to skip your post.
when copyright runs out
Thanks for the laugh.
Fix: So far you haven't presented a case to the contrary.
lets see..
win2k8r2 (was that a new os?)
Vista sp2 (no major changes?)
xp sp3
Please specify what major changes were done in the above service packs that justifies calling Windows 8 a service pack to Windows 7.
but who can say what is MAJOR change and what is a SP except MS and what they wanna call/charge for it.
Service packs are meant to fix bugs, and that is what their history of service packs show.
your denial seems way to shillish
I was just responding to a bit of idiocy on the Internet. So far you have presented a case to the contrary.
The fact that IE wasn't changed in a service pack is indicative of the kinds of stuff they do or don't do in service packs. Completely revamping the UI for touch is a major change, and your original claim of calling Windows 8 a service pack for 7 still stands as ridiculous.
IE wasn't changed in a service pack. Try again.
Wait, isn't Wikipedia a giant sandbox full of sandcastles built by nerd kids?
Apple as a corporate brand looks like a cynical, egotistical, dominance protecting bullshit artist. I know, I know, it's all about the shareholders but it seems really at odds with their hipster marketing.
The hipsters and fanboys think that others are copying Apple and deserve to be sued.
Google were sued by Oracle for breaching copyright (in a clearly ridiculous case). This does not apply to OpenJDK because it was created under the Gnu General Public License (GPL).
They also sued over patents, but those are also covered by the license for the JDK. Even better, Oracle lost on both the copyright and patent fronts in its lawsuit against Google.
0xF00B4R12
Sorry for the nitpick, but 'R' isn't a valid hex character.
Afford is not so simple, people on $65,000 p/a take out $100,000 loans for BMW X5. That alone makes them idiots.
It's not something I would do, but if they value the car that much then who am I or you to call them idiots?
they'll complain to hell and back about how they're getting ripped off. They want the cars to cost less, but will still buy them even though they know the manufacturer is taking the piss.
It's one thing to know you're getting screwed. It's another to forgo what you want.
In case you haven't been paying attention, I imported a Nissan Skyline 350 GT, I paid A$15K less for the JDM model than I would have for the ADM (Skyline 350z) model and got a newer car, with fewer KM's on the clock and a better tuned engine.
Good for you.
Free market != Capitalism
But they go hand-in-hand. Owning the means of production generally implies that you should be free to sell it.
"THOR is here."
I was there the other week and a $1000(US) Apple cinema display costs $1600 there (the A$ and US$ are about parity right now). That's not shipping. That's ripping off.
So why don't more Aussies just buy from eBay and have it shipped? Sounds like a case where simple arbitrage should reduce prices.
however high end cars like a BMW are hideously overpriced (yet idiots keep buying them, so BMW has no impetus to change)
If people can afford them and there is no alternative, then they aren't idiots. It's simple supply and demand.
Since 1850 or so they have actual temperature measurements to compare the proxy data to. Up until 1960 the proxy data closely matched the actual temperature data that was available to compare to.
What is "closely matched"? If you compare the individual graphs with each other for the Jones WMO graph in question, there's plenty of variation where the data hasn't been artificially spliced into agreement. Tree ring data is too messy and easy to fool yourself with to chop decades off arbitrarily, especially when the window for comparison with instrumental data is so small.
So, the graph is just a pretty picture and it's the underlying data that matters.
No, this is complete bullshit. Such graphs are meant to convey information and are used by scientists all the time. That you would say such a thing gives me very little confidence that you have any scientific integrity.
BTW, it wasn't Phil Jones but Michael Mann who decided not to use the proxy after 1960. That you got such a straightforward point wrong doesn't give me confidence in the rest of what you say.
It was Phil Jones who prepared the graph that dropped the 1960 data and spliced in instrumental data: "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."
That Mann may have dropped data too doesn't excuse Jones, nor does it change the fact that Jones upped the ante by splicing on instrumental data, something that Mann has a juicy quote about:
"No researchers in this field have ever, to our knowledge, "grafted the thermometer record onto" any reconstruction. It is somewhat disappointing to find this specious claim (which we usually find originating from industry-funded climate disinformation websites) appearing in this forum."
This quote is from 2004, years before Climategate.
This is shit science. You don't just chop out data post 1960 without knowing what is wrong with it. Yes, it was discussed in the literature. No, they had no definitive answer, only speculation.
Even worse, what Phil Jones did was chop out the data and replace it with thermometer data so that three separate data sets rose up in striking agreement in a hockey stick fashion.
The whole CRU email thingy itself shows why this is the case: it's easy to pick a few lines out of complex scientific dialog and distort them with a quick media blitz designed to portray someone as dishonest, or crooked, or biased, or incompetent, or silly. (As the saying goes, a lie gets half way around the world before the truth can get its shoes on.)
Yup, we don't want email where Phil Jones lays out his intention to deceive, or his intention and requests to erase data, to get around and be misinterpreted, now do we?
The shell is part of the operating system. Microsoft doesn't make radical changes to its Windows UI in service packs.
Calling Windows 8 a service pack to Windows 7 is idiotic. It's a complete change in direction to accomadate touch-mania.
+1
Stamina was the original Xbox. Sony killed them and they lost tons. Xbox 360? Awesome success.
The fact that they stuck it out and chose to make the 360 is where the stamina comes in.