Your weak link here is the assumption that science is in any way clear about what caused relatively recent drastic climate adjustments. Which leads us inevitably to the conclusion that we can't really go making any definitive statements about the comparitively placid warming we're currently experiencing.
Poppycock. Sure, it's no slam dunk, but forensic experts often determine the trajectory of a bullet without ever seeing it, either. I suppose you're going to argue that CFCs weren't causing ozone depletion, as well. After all, the actual full causal link there is pretty hypothetical.
And placid? Sure, compared to the leading hypothesis for the Younger Dryas ending and such, I guess it's placid. For human civilization, we may look back on it and find it to be not very placid at all.
It's much ado about not a whole lot anyway, fossil fuels are being scaled back to nothing and will be out of mass usage in a couple of generations, and no economies need be wrecked in the process either.
Yes, they are. Only by our efforts. You point to our success as evidence that we should stop? Like it won't flip? There's still a *lot* of coal left.
I know the guy you were responding to was wrong.
Your citations are even good.
But certainly you don't think these were non-causally linked random events caused by God sneezing or some shit, right?
All kinds of horrible shit has happened to this planet over time to wipe out massive portions of its population, toss its climate way out of its regular cycle, and generally really make the place a shitty place to be for anyone expecting stability.
The problem is that the only current traumatic event the planet seems to be going through at the moment to cause this particular geologically rapid climate shift is an acute infection of industrialized ostrich-human hybrid civilization. If we can't find something else to explain it, it seems safer to assume that the gigatons of carbon we're pulling from outside of the carbon cycle and injecting into the goddamn gaseous portion of it might possibly be related, rather than assuming it's just a random fucking coincidence.
No one who has ever read the Bible believes that God is going to personally intervene to prevent you from screwing up in your current life
That's too much bullshit to cope with. I had to sacrifice my mod-points to tell you that you are terribly, terribly wrong. I have family in the midwest and the east coast.
My Uncle literally believes that humans can't possibly alter the climate, as God says that the Earth is unchanging. He's not a... stupid man. He retired recently from a life-long career as a network engineer at the Census Bureau; he just really believes his cultural interpretation of the vague writings in that damned book.
He absolutely believes that God does intervene to help him with his fuckups.
I think where you went awry, is that people who do believe in Jehovah the bipolar micromanager are actually the majority, not whatever minority you belong to.
That provision was going to expire regardless of whether the Freedom Act was passed that night or the next day. It's not like a vote to reauthorize it was going to happen that night, then get kicked back to the House for reconciliation.
Again- all he did was prevent McConnell from putting in a vote for extending the Patriot Act, which wasn't going to happen. Nobody thought that was going to happen.
To begrudgingly quote Ted Cruz, "It is abundantly clear that a clean reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act ain’t passing this body, and it certainly ain’t passing the House of Representatives."
So again, kudos to Paul for at least being noisy about all this nonsense, but he ultimately did nothing but that.
I'd repeat myself... but it's pointless.
If you didn't understand it the first time, repeating it just isn't going to help.
It suffices to say, he was correct in his wording...
You're I think the only person who found bias in it.. perhaps you have preconceived notions that are biasing your own viewpoint.
He single-handedly blocked continuation of authorization of mass metadata collection.
That is not true.
The Freedom Act, nor any amendments that passed committee (none of them, to McConnell's dismay) allowed for that. The bill was designed to reform the metadata collection, and it did so.
Now don't get me wrong- it's awesome that he stood up and blocked this horse shit for 11 hours, but he didn't stop the tide, nor did he have the power to.
56% against vs. 44% for is "slightly more against the bill"
2% against vs. 98% for is "overwhelmingly in favor of it"
50% against vs. 50% for is "mostly split"
Yes, there's lots of money to be made in fixing our fuckups, even by the people who supplies the tools to create said fuckups. Why is this relevant?
The "recovery" started happening even before change of CFCs implemented
Utterly not true... Unless of course you limit the data set to between about 86 and 88, and exclude before and after. Smells like denialist arguing;)
clearly the size of the "hole" just solar cycle driven
Now this is just stupid. The high part of the solar cycle creates *more* Ozone, and we've undergone 4 full cycles since the CFC problem was hypothesized and identified, and the stratospheric ozone measurements aren't even nudged by the cycle... Maybe due to how utterly small the variation in the cycle is (.07% of mean peak to trough)
What a bunch of sheeple....
What do you even say to a fucking idiot who talks out of his ass like that?
How would you tell your child they're wrong if they told you today that it's safe to be shot by a gun, and that most people die of a heart attack out of fright from the sound of the gun firing?
You're remind those guys who said, "PC gamers don't need DVD's" when PS2 games shipped on them. I said, "You'll want them because eventually even PC games are going to use the storage space."
That would be a weird thing for a computer gamer to say since DVD computer games predated the PS2 by 2 years...
The Nature Conservancy does some really cool work, however, make no mistake, the bats that currently face potential extinction can't be saved by an organization such as them. It will require Government, and that usually requires an association with the devil (lobbyists)
Very few people nowadays the word "decimation" with it's original meaning, and I'm guessing the author didn't here either. Or rather, we should probably say that the word has evolved to mean "an arbitrarily large percentage" and not just 10%. I see that definition listed as #3 in Merriam-Webster, where the original meaning is #1. Those should probably be reversed now. #2, in case you're wondering, is related to taxation. Go figure.
Eradicating would have perhaps been a better word to use.
Fatality rate for the total bat population in affected caves is 90-100%. In many caves in Missouri, the bats are *gone*.
I went to the article to find out that this fungus was apparently introduced ten years ago, which obviously seems to indicates human involvement, and explains why the bat have no natural defense. I think this also justifies human involvement in finding a solution.
Very likely human involvement. The fungus is natural in European caves, and European bats can have the fungus on them without becoming colonized by it.
The fungus is thought to spread between American caves by people.
There are a few. They're not the majority, and they tend to be pretty liberal on average and have very little actually in common with the national party they identify with. They're good folks... on average. This contrasts starkly with the average person of same affiliation I met while I lived in the midwest. I'd vote for the average Republican I know up here. No so much out of dixiecrat-turned-Republican land.
But if someone built a tower 384,000 km high, it would travel faster than the moon. And if you jumped off that tower, you'd also never reach the ground.
No, but you'd get a great view of the outer solar system... at a good clip of 27km/s or so if my math isn't too wrong.
Geosync- At a certain altitude, rotational velocity of the earth == orbital velocity for that altitude. I don't know the altitude off of the top of my head, but I'm sure the guy you're responding to does;)
I think the Navy's primary long-term interest in this is a defensive measure against ASM tech, and it's frankly, a good application.
We're not going to be seeing gently-rolling guided cruise missiles any time soon (and certainly not for $10k) and we're not going to see long-range guided rolling rockets.
Anti-ship missiles are getting faster and faster, and CIWS is getting less and less likely to work. Aegis cruisers can already take out most ballistics that would threaten a carrier group. CIWS needs replacement- mounting lasers on support cruisers to train on a fast cruise missile is perfectly legitimate, and it increases the usefulness of having carrier groups to begin with.
I think the power-delivery capability is going to greatly outpace the defensive capabilities of ordnance. The kind of cooling necessary to stop that kind of energy is massive, and unlikely to work well on a cruise missile, and the only real defense- thicker armor is going to make it harder to keep the missiles as fast as they need to be to have any chance of success.
This isn't a waste of money, it's literally the only hope for keeping carrier groups relevant.
Mirrors will never be credible way to counter a high-power laser threat. Not even internally cooled. Mirrors are simply too easy to damage, and they're not a mirror after that happens.
They've been destroying 60mm mortar rounds from 500m out with 20kW lasers since 2006, what exactly is the basis for your disbelief in the usefulness of laser point-defense?
Small portions of thin layer of beryllium is destroyed in some small fraction of a second, copper is hit, copper heats up, it and beryllium turn into slag en masse. There's no realistic battlefield mirror scenario that defends against 50kW of light. That's not to say 50kW of light is guaranteed to kill whatever is flying at it, but a mirror just doesn't buy enough time to matter.
Slashdot Mirror
Your weak link here is the assumption that science is in any way clear about what caused relatively recent drastic climate adjustments. Which leads us inevitably to the conclusion that we can't really go making any definitive statements about the comparitively placid warming we're currently experiencing.
Poppycock. Sure, it's no slam dunk, but forensic experts often determine the trajectory of a bullet without ever seeing it, either. I suppose you're going to argue that CFCs weren't causing ozone depletion, as well. After all, the actual full causal link there is pretty hypothetical.
And placid? Sure, compared to the leading hypothesis for the Younger Dryas ending and such, I guess it's placid. For human civilization, we may look back on it and find it to be not very placid at all.
It's much ado about not a whole lot anyway, fossil fuels are being scaled back to nothing and will be out of mass usage in a couple of generations, and no economies need be wrecked in the process either.
Yes, they are. Only by our efforts. You point to our success as evidence that we should stop? Like it won't flip? There's still a *lot* of coal left.
I know the guy you were responding to was wrong.
Your citations are even good.
But certainly you don't think these were non-causally linked random events caused by God sneezing or some shit, right?
All kinds of horrible shit has happened to this planet over time to wipe out massive portions of its population, toss its climate way out of its regular cycle, and generally really make the place a shitty place to be for anyone expecting stability.
The problem is that the only current traumatic event the planet seems to be going through at the moment to cause this particular geologically rapid climate shift is an acute infection of industrialized ostrich-human hybrid civilization. If we can't find something else to explain it, it seems safer to assume that the gigatons of carbon we're pulling from outside of the carbon cycle and injecting into the goddamn gaseous portion of it might possibly be related, rather than assuming it's just a random fucking coincidence.
No one who has ever read the Bible believes that God is going to personally intervene to prevent you from screwing up in your current life
That's too much bullshit to cope with. I had to sacrifice my mod-points to tell you that you are terribly, terribly wrong. I have family in the midwest and the east coast.
My Uncle literally believes that humans can't possibly alter the climate, as God says that the Earth is unchanging. He's not a... stupid man. He retired recently from a life-long career as a network engineer at the Census Bureau; he just really believes his cultural interpretation of the vague writings in that damned book.
He absolutely believes that God does intervene to help him with his fuckups.
I know anecdotes are general pretty poor data, but he's not alone. http://www.motherjones.com/env...
I think where you went awry, is that people who do believe in Jehovah the bipolar micromanager are actually the majority, not whatever minority you belong to.
That provision was going to expire regardless of whether the Freedom Act was passed that night or the next day. It's not like a vote to reauthorize it was going to happen that night, then get kicked back to the House for reconciliation.
Again- all he did was prevent McConnell from putting in a vote for extending the Patriot Act, which wasn't going to happen. Nobody thought that was going to happen.
To begrudgingly quote Ted Cruz, "It is abundantly clear that a clean reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act ain’t passing this body, and it certainly ain’t passing the House of Representatives."
So again, kudos to Paul for at least being noisy about all this nonsense, but he ultimately did nothing but that.
I'd repeat myself... but it's pointless.
If you didn't understand it the first time, repeating it just isn't going to help.
It suffices to say, he was correct in his wording...
You're I think the only person who found bias in it.. perhaps you have preconceived notions that are biasing your own viewpoint.
He single-handedly blocked continuation of authorization of mass metadata collection.
That is not true.
The Freedom Act, nor any amendments that passed committee (none of them, to McConnell's dismay) allowed for that. The bill was designed to reform the metadata collection, and it did so.
Now don't get me wrong- it's awesome that he stood up and blocked this horse shit for 11 hours, but he didn't stop the tide, nor did he have the power to.
56% against vs. 44% for is "slightly more against the bill"
2% against vs. 98% for is "overwhelmingly in favor of it"
50% against vs. 50% for is "mostly split"
where's the bullshit?
It's sad. At this point, I'd welcome either one of them with open arms given the alternatives.
Sound's like Italian dressing... I'm game.
Holy fuck, I knew it was bad after 2008... but >5x... That's... kind of sick.
DuPont made a pile off the new alternatives.
Yes, there's lots of money to be made in fixing our fuckups, even by the people who supplies the tools to create said fuckups. Why is this relevant?
The "recovery" started happening even before change of CFCs implemented
Utterly not true... Unless of course you limit the data set to between about 86 and 88, and exclude before and after. Smells like denialist arguing ;)
clearly the size of the "hole" just solar cycle driven
Now this is just stupid. The high part of the solar cycle creates *more* Ozone, and we've undergone 4 full cycles since the CFC problem was hypothesized and identified, and the stratospheric ozone measurements aren't even nudged by the cycle... Maybe due to how utterly small the variation in the cycle is (.07% of mean peak to trough)
What a bunch of sheeple....
What do you even say to a fucking idiot who talks out of his ass like that?
How would you tell your child they're wrong if they told you today that it's safe to be shot by a gun, and that most people die of a heart attack out of fright from the sound of the gun firing?
look up the molecular weight of freon. It doesn't rise in the atmosphere, it sinks like a lead balloon.
N2 is less dense than air. Does it all rise to the top of the atmosphere?
CO2 is denser than air. Does it all sink to the bottom?
Stupid rubes.
Indeed.
You should apply some kinetic energy to a mixture of oil and water sometime, and see how it looks.
How the fuck is your post Off Topic?
Wish I had mod points...
You're remind those guys who said, "PC gamers don't need DVD's" when PS2 games shipped on them. I said, "You'll want them because eventually even PC games are going to use the storage space."
That would be a weird thing for a computer gamer to say since DVD computer games predated the PS2 by 2 years...
The Nature Conservancy does some really cool work, however, make no mistake, the bats that currently face potential extinction can't be saved by an organization such as them. It will require Government, and that usually requires an association with the devil (lobbyists)
Very few people nowadays the word "decimation" with it's original meaning, and I'm guessing the author didn't here either. Or rather, we should probably say that the word has evolved to mean "an arbitrarily large percentage" and not just 10%. I see that definition listed as #3 in Merriam-Webster, where the original meaning is #1. Those should probably be reversed now. #2, in case you're wondering, is related to taxation. Go figure.
Eradicating would have perhaps been a better word to use.
Fatality rate for the total bat population in affected caves is 90-100%. In many caves in Missouri, the bats are *gone*.
I went to the article to find out that this fungus was apparently introduced ten years ago, which obviously seems to indicates human involvement, and explains why the bat have no natural defense. I think this also justifies human involvement in finding a solution.
Very likely human involvement. The fungus is natural in European caves, and European bats can have the fungus on them without becoming colonized by it.
The fungus is thought to spread between American caves by people.
:(
That's pretty disappointing to hear about New England.
There are a few. They're not the majority, and they tend to be pretty liberal on average and have very little actually in common with the national party they identify with. They're good folks... on average. This contrasts starkly with the average person of same affiliation I met while I lived in the midwest. I'd vote for the average Republican I know up here. No so much out of dixiecrat-turned-Republican land.
But if someone built a tower 384,000 km high, it would travel faster than the moon. And if you jumped off that tower, you'd also never reach the ground.
No, but you'd get a great view of the outer solar system... at a good clip of 27km/s or so if my math isn't too wrong.
Geosync- At a certain altitude, rotational velocity of the earth == orbital velocity for that altitude. I don't know the altitude off of the top of my head, but I'm sure the guy you're responding to does ;)
They are both heavier-than-air flying machines. Well done, Captain.
I think the Navy's primary long-term interest in this is a defensive measure against ASM tech, and it's frankly, a good application.
We're not going to be seeing gently-rolling guided cruise missiles any time soon (and certainly not for $10k) and we're not going to see long-range guided rolling rockets.
Anti-ship missiles are getting faster and faster, and CIWS is getting less and less likely to work. Aegis cruisers can already take out most ballistics that would threaten a carrier group. CIWS needs replacement- mounting lasers on support cruisers to train on a fast cruise missile is perfectly legitimate, and it increases the usefulness of having carrier groups to begin with.
I think the power-delivery capability is going to greatly outpace the defensive capabilities of ordnance. The kind of cooling necessary to stop that kind of energy is massive, and unlikely to work well on a cruise missile, and the only real defense- thicker armor is going to make it harder to keep the missiles as fast as they need to be to have any chance of success.
This isn't a waste of money, it's literally the only hope for keeping carrier groups relevant.
Mirrors will never be credible way to counter a high-power laser threat. Not even internally cooled. Mirrors are simply too easy to damage, and they're not a mirror after that happens.
They've been destroying 60mm mortar rounds from 500m out with 20kW lasers since 2006, what exactly is the basis for your disbelief in the usefulness of laser point-defense?
This is the only realistic protection. Rotation and ablative shielding. Reflection is folly.
Small portions of thin layer of beryllium is destroyed in some small fraction of a second, copper is hit, copper heats up, it and beryllium turn into slag en masse. There's no realistic battlefield mirror scenario that defends against 50kW of light. That's not to say 50kW of light is guaranteed to kill whatever is flying at it, but a mirror just doesn't buy enough time to matter.
Bad idea. The idea is to prevent the mirror from heating up. Covering it in the ablative equivalent of tinder is not a solution to that problem.