You're using casualties as a measure of participation. That's not very accurate. China didn't, for example, do much damage to Japan.
In the European theater, the USSR took massive casualties. Many of those were civilian deaths and by means of things like starvation. However, it's fairly well accepted that their military was on of the main reasons for the win.
They aare largely hypothetical and I've taken a look at the methods - they appear sound, assuming the hypotheses' are correct. (Which is, I admit, a large assumption.) The idea of a tipping point is that it will mean that the effects are going to happen and that there's no longer anything we can do to stop them. That doesn't, of course, mean that they'll continue forever - not at all. The planet is pretty good at finding an equilibrium, given enough time.
I hold no (or ofter no) opinion on the validity of their output - but their modeling methods appear sound. The science appears very sound. Curiously enough, I also learned that the vast majority of papers aren't projecting anything close to what the doomsayers are claiming. Not long ago, I had someone trying to tel me that the scientific consensus was that the oceans were going to rise 53' by 2050...
No, no they aren't. It's just not gonna happen. I was bemused when they decided that I was a Trump supporter, AGW denier, and were happy that I was retired.To deserve those invectives, I told them they were wrong (politely) and showed them a bunch of citations. I even offered to run models for them, though they're pretty slow here. I don't have access to big iron anymore.
Except I'm quite happy with my throughput and costs. I am perched on the side of a mountain. I'm pretty content with this level of service. I don't even need any more speed.
I suspect you're an American. Contrary to many American opinions, one can dislike both major parties and their platforms. I can dislike both Trump and Obama. In fact, it's not even difficult to do.
Though that still doesn't make this a constitutional issue - or a matter of civil rights, or anything else. Trump's an idiot, but that doesn't mean this is illegal.
I've actually made a semi-formal study of this subject. I did so mostly because I wanted to understand the models. I modeled traffic. I'm a mathematician and not a climate scientist.
However...
Some of the models put us into a feedback loop and we may already be beyond the tipping point. That point could even be within the next few decades, if not already behind us. I am unqualified to say much more than the science is more rigorous than many claim. It appears sound, given my understanding. I hold no opinions, or offer none, on the quality of the specific model outputs.
I am on the side of a mountain. I am many miles from a small village. I stream multiple videos, even at once, here. I have a list of dozens. I have DSL. I can use any providers I damned well please, so long as they are willing to service me. Most of them are. They don't even have to have a presence in the State.
Huh... I kinda like my DSL. It is 1.5 up and 12.5 down. I pay like $35/mo for it. I'm pretty happy with the speeds, price, and competition. The PUC ensures I can get service from anyone willing to provide it. I can, and have, switched providers. I get ~15 down, by the way. I pay for 12.5.
Which hasn't been taken away. I don't like Trump, either. However, I retain my ability to be mostly rational. The right to petition for redress hasn't been removed.
Slashdot Mirror
No, no they were not. Why parrot such a lie?
We probably should. People have decided the writing on it is as valid as the Constitution.
You're using casualties as a measure of participation. That's not very accurate. China didn't, for example, do much damage to Japan.
In the European theater, the USSR took massive casualties. Many of those were civilian deaths and by means of things like starvation. However, it's fairly well accepted that their military was on of the main reasons for the win.
I kinda want to see you have a conversation with joe_dragon.
It's not an extreme vacuum. It's not even a complete vacuum.
They aare largely hypothetical and I've taken a look at the methods - they appear sound, assuming the hypotheses' are correct. (Which is, I admit, a large assumption.) The idea of a tipping point is that it will mean that the effects are going to happen and that there's no longer anything we can do to stop them. That doesn't, of course, mean that they'll continue forever - not at all. The planet is pretty good at finding an equilibrium, given enough time.
I hold no (or ofter no) opinion on the validity of their output - but their modeling methods appear sound. The science appears very sound. Curiously enough, I also learned that the vast majority of papers aren't projecting anything close to what the doomsayers are claiming. Not long ago, I had someone trying to tel me that the scientific consensus was that the oceans were going to rise 53' by 2050...
No, no they aren't. It's just not gonna happen. I was bemused when they decided that I was a Trump supporter, AGW denier, and were happy that I was retired.To deserve those invectives, I told them they were wrong (politely) and showed them a bunch of citations. I even offered to run models for them, though they're pretty slow here. I don't have access to big iron anymore.
Except I'm quite happy with my throughput and costs. I am perched on the side of a mountain. I'm pretty content with this level of service. I don't even need any more speed.
No, not whining, but pointing out that they had.
If you're curious, I voted for Stein.
I suspect you're an American. Contrary to many American opinions, one can dislike both major parties and their platforms. I can dislike both Trump and Obama. In fact, it's not even difficult to do.
Though that still doesn't make this a constitutional issue - or a matter of civil rights, or anything else. Trump's an idiot, but that doesn't mean this is illegal.
I've actually made a semi-formal study of this subject. I did so mostly because I wanted to understand the models. I modeled traffic. I'm a mathematician and not a climate scientist.
However...
Some of the models put us into a feedback loop and we may already be beyond the tipping point. That point could even be within the next few decades, if not already behind us. I am unqualified to say much more than the science is more rigorous than many claim. It appears sound, given my understanding. I hold no opinions, or offer none, on the quality of the specific model outputs.
Which one is that? I can't think of any that exclusively use their feet.
You invented the average teen!
No. Then it is an AI with a motor attached. Sheesh...
No, but 'we' also review and submit code, as well as work to secure it. SELinux is a good example.
I am on the side of a mountain. I am many miles from a small village. I stream multiple videos, even at once, here. I have a list of dozens. I have DSL. I can use any providers I damned well please, so long as they are willing to service me. Most of them are. They don't even have to have a presence in the State.
Huh... I kinda like my DSL. It is 1.5 up and 12.5 down. I pay like $35/mo for it. I'm pretty happy with the speeds, price, and competition. The PUC ensures I can get service from anyone willing to provide it. I can, and have, switched providers. I get ~15 down, by the way. I pay for 12.5.
Thanks. I've only used the official support and the StackExchange site.
Java is not JavaScript.
Right or wrong, evidence would suggest that it is, indeed, a part of life.
LOL Nobody listens to that 15%, I don't imagine. Yeah, we kinda suck.
That's not equal outcome, that's the opportunity to improve. Then, if they make more money, they can pay you more. It's rather simple, really.
LOL I am in a rather remote area.
In matters of law, only the official position matters.
Even if what you say is true, it doesn't matter. This is, in no way, a 1st Amendment issue. No rights are being removed, no laws are being passed.
I don't even like Trump. Sheesh.
If you don't believe me, go to a Trump speech and start yelling. They can, and will, legally remove you.
The adage about wrestling with pigs applies. Your not going to reason him out of a position he didn't reason himself into. Thus, the invectives.
Which hasn't been taken away. I don't like Trump, either. However, I retain my ability to be mostly rational. The right to petition for redress hasn't been removed.