100% bullshit. He asserts without evidence, and tries to link it into some evil conspiracy by Teh Commies. Climate science makes clear, evidence-backed statements, and allows for solutions to exist. This is why he is a science fiction writer not a scientist.
There is plenty of evidence - its all in scientific journals and at conferences though. If you are so mistrusting of scientists then check on what they do. Don't expect to have the evidence required to convince you delivered to your door simply because you've decided to obstinantly ignore their work.
You can't sit there and yell 'prove it' at everything you wish weren't true, and call yourself a skeptic. There is a certain level of work you've got to put in to find proof yourself, rather than bothering professional scientists with it.
Either become an amateur scientist yourself and look into the papers yourself, or stfu and concede that the scientists know better than you.
Go right ahead then, because CO2 is completely harmless.
Legal Disclaimer: I am not responsible for the deaths of anybody who thinks that CO2 isn't toxic and is willing to test that assertion with their lives.
AGW "fanatics"? Anyone who disagrees with you can't possibly have rational reasons for doing so? I can't imagine why the scientific community doesn't take your opinion seriously.
You think the smartest graduates go into the private sector straight off and the dumbest go into PhDs? I bet you buy into this 'university of life' bullshit don't you?
You are part of the problem. You don't really respect academic qualification (despite what you claim) and you think that the pursuit of money will somehow lead to scientific advancement. Put down Atlas Shrugged and get a fucking clue.
Yes, you are very lucky to have scientists to think for you. Thats our job. It takes time, dedication, and specific talent to become an expert in a field of science. Most people lack the talent and/or won't put in the time/dedication.
Society has outsourced its heavy-duty thinking to scientific specialists, and so shouldn't be complaining when those specialists consider each others (peer reviewed) conclusions to be inherently more valuable than the rants of some-twat-on-tinternet.
You are missing the point; if everyone's idiotic claims have to be subject to point by point analysis, then intelligence can be overwhelmed by stupidity when it has superior numbers. At a certain point you've got to say "My time as a scientist is costly, and not worth spending on such an obvious cretin"
Wheres the beloved monolithic wall of paranoid state security? The day after the event and they're all "sorry guys, we screwed up one of our missile tests. Here are the details."
Seems unlikely that natural magnetic fields would be strong enough to create such a trajectory. More likely, the rocket aerodynamically disintegrated and that was some part that was venting, or perhaps an engine puffing out a last bit of thrust. That or a booster; recall how the two SRBs flew out of the fireball during the Challenger disaster.
If its an SLBM (likely) or any other kind of military rocket, it will burn nitrogen tetroxide with hydrazine (+1 or 2 methyl groups in some cases). In daylight the flame from that is pretty transparent, don't know what colour it would show at night.
Good job you reserved that right, because you are wrong. There is no indication of a nuclear explosion. The only thing required for it to be seen over much of Norway (it wasn't seen over the entire country) is altitude, which rockets have. And rockets/missiles tend to be very big and have a lot of highly energetic fuels on board.
Good find. If it is a Russian rocket, then it will have to be a military one; the Russian civilian space program is quite open and cooperative with the west now, and civilian rockets launched in that region, by any nations, are warned about well in advance so people watching for ICBM's don't get jittery.
Aside from the direction fail, I was going to point this out. Whoever suggested that needs to buy a globe, find Norway, and then find Kazakhstan. The 'Russian rocket' theory is very much plausible, but at least do some fucking background research. For gods sake, thinking a Proton might be launched from northern Russia is not even a wikipedia level of knowledge.
It won't be long; the religious despots pretty much all have colostomy bags by now, the youth have almost completely rejected their vision of how political Islam should look, and the middle aged religious moderates can see which way the wind is blowing and are making more and more reformist noises.
A society maintains continuity by the old passing on enough of their values to the young before they die. This process has clearly failed in Iran. The post-election protests showed conclusively to everyone in and outside Iran that the government only governs by force, not by even tacit consent. Theres more dark times ahead, but ultimately all the Iranian reformers need for victory now is patience.
Well said. UK citizens (sorry, subjects) are equally blase about their rights. Its paradoxical; in terms of government structure, the UK and US are more democratic than Iran - but in terms of the actions of the populace and their involvement in politics, it seems Iran is more democratic. It can't be just higher per capita wealth, because Iran is not so far behind as to account for the vast difference in behaviour.
It would be nice if you could have the kind of citizen organisations that are willing to stand up to a government quite willing to kill them for their dissent, without having to suffer that kind of government.
If it were a super secret new standard, then the Chinese could use human intelligence and plain old bribery to get the spec, and then you are in the same situation except you are convinced the enemy [i]doesn't[/i] know the specification and thus you've less incentive to keep on top of its security features.
Why is that the idea of security through obscurity, which has been so discredited elsewhere, is still firmly entrenched in the military?
AC scores a hit whilst everyone else is flailing around with tropes about how government contracts are always absurd. The USAF have been given 500k to "begin" the project - probably to determine its feasibility - stipulating that if it looks promising they will be awarded the rest over the next few years
People used to get their news by looking for a news brand like BBC or The Times, and reading stuff that was presented under that brand. Now a lot of people look for news under topics that interest them, and skip between news brands doing so. What google is offering to do will have little effect on such news browsers, who will have a choice of several competing free links under their topic of interest. People linking to interesting stories will simply copy and paste the content they wish to discuss.
The print industry is dead and just doesn't know it yet.
Of course they follow rules; once they get on land they are part of a community and they rely on that community to offer them protection from those who would hunt them down. In return, they bring an awful lot of money into that community.
The west has modern fighter jets and destroyers, so no we are not an 'easier' target. Plus of course there is the fact that there was fighting between armed Somalis, but of course as a veteran armchair warrior you should know that. And yes, westerners are the scourge of the planet. Its an empirical fact.
I don't think the 'warlords' dump toxic waste or overfish. So no, they can't be blamed for destroying the environment and the economy of Somalia. The fact is, piracy is now a significant portion of Somalia's GDP. They are simply acting as a legitimate government would and taxing those who enter their waters.
The Somalis would probably say that the western shipping companies initiated force by entering their waters, and that other western companies initiated force by fishing their waters to depletion and dumping toxic waste on their coast. The problem with 'initiation of force' is that you the interpretation of it is relative. Of course, you are going to believe that your relative interpretation of it is the objective truth, so there is little point arguing with you.
Slashdot Mirror
100% bullshit. He asserts without evidence, and tries to link it into some evil conspiracy by Teh Commies. Climate science makes clear, evidence-backed statements, and allows for solutions to exist. This is why he is a science fiction writer not a scientist.
There is plenty of evidence - its all in scientific journals and at conferences though. If you are so mistrusting of scientists then check on what they do. Don't expect to have the evidence required to convince you delivered to your door simply because you've decided to obstinantly ignore their work.
You can't sit there and yell 'prove it' at everything you wish weren't true, and call yourself a skeptic. There is a certain level of work you've got to put in to find proof yourself, rather than bothering professional scientists with it.
Either become an amateur scientist yourself and look into the papers yourself, or stfu and concede that the scientists know better than you.
Go right ahead then, because CO2 is completely harmless.
Legal Disclaimer: I am not responsible for the deaths of anybody who thinks that CO2 isn't toxic and is willing to test that assertion with their lives.
AGW "fanatics"? Anyone who disagrees with you can't possibly have rational reasons for doing so? I can't imagine why the scientific community doesn't take your opinion seriously.
You think the smartest graduates go into the private sector straight off and the dumbest go into PhDs? I bet you buy into this 'university of life' bullshit don't you?
You are part of the problem. You don't really respect academic qualification (despite what you claim) and you think that the pursuit of money will somehow lead to scientific advancement. Put down Atlas Shrugged and get a fucking clue.
Which is why no scientific data about the dangers of smoking was ever published. Oh, wait...
Yes, you are very lucky to have scientists to think for you. Thats our job. It takes time, dedication, and specific talent to become an expert in a field of science. Most people lack the talent and/or won't put in the time/dedication.
Society has outsourced its heavy-duty thinking to scientific specialists, and so shouldn't be complaining when those specialists consider each others (peer reviewed) conclusions to be inherently more valuable than the rants of some-twat-on-tinternet.
You are missing the point; if everyone's idiotic claims have to be subject to point by point analysis, then intelligence can be overwhelmed by stupidity when it has superior numbers. At a certain point you've got to say "My time as a scientist is costly, and not worth spending on such an obvious cretin"
Yup, only evil countries do that. But hey, I knew my country (UK) was evil already :)
Wheres the beloved monolithic wall of paranoid state security? The day after the event and they're all "sorry guys, we screwed up one of our missile tests. Here are the details."
Unless its all a cunning Russkie ruse...
Seems unlikely that natural magnetic fields would be strong enough to create such a trajectory. More likely, the rocket aerodynamically disintegrated and that was some part that was venting, or perhaps an engine puffing out a last bit of thrust. That or a booster; recall how the two SRBs flew out of the fireball during the Challenger disaster.
If its an SLBM (likely) or any other kind of military rocket, it will burn nitrogen tetroxide with hydrazine (+1 or 2 methyl groups in some cases). In daylight the flame from that is pretty transparent, don't know what colour it would show at night.
Good job you reserved that right, because you are wrong. There is no indication of a nuclear explosion. The only thing required for it to be seen over much of Norway (it wasn't seen over the entire country) is altitude, which rockets have. And rockets/missiles tend to be very big and have a lot of highly energetic fuels on board.
Good find. If it is a Russian rocket, then it will have to be a military one; the Russian civilian space program is quite open and cooperative with the west now, and civilian rockets launched in that region, by any nations, are warned about well in advance so people watching for ICBM's don't get jittery.
Aside from the direction fail, I was going to point this out. Whoever suggested that needs to buy a globe, find Norway, and then find Kazakhstan. The 'Russian rocket' theory is very much plausible, but at least do some fucking background research. For gods sake, thinking a Proton might be launched from northern Russia is not even a wikipedia level of knowledge.
It won't be long; the religious despots pretty much all have colostomy bags by now, the youth have almost completely rejected their vision of how political Islam should look, and the middle aged religious moderates can see which way the wind is blowing and are making more and more reformist noises.
A society maintains continuity by the old passing on enough of their values to the young before they die. This process has clearly failed in Iran. The post-election protests showed conclusively to everyone in and outside Iran that the government only governs by force, not by even tacit consent. Theres more dark times ahead, but ultimately all the Iranian reformers need for victory now is patience.
Well said. UK citizens (sorry, subjects) are equally blase about their rights. Its paradoxical; in terms of government structure, the UK and US are more democratic than Iran - but in terms of the actions of the populace and their involvement in politics, it seems Iran is more democratic. It can't be just higher per capita wealth, because Iran is not so far behind as to account for the vast difference in behaviour.
It would be nice if you could have the kind of citizen organisations that are willing to stand up to a government quite willing to kill them for their dissent, without having to suffer that kind of government.
And once again, I forget which forum I am on in the middle of a sentence. Perhaps this is why I am not programming computers for the USAF :)
If it were a super secret new standard, then the Chinese could use human intelligence and plain old bribery to get the spec, and then you are in the same situation except you are convinced the enemy [i]doesn't[/i] know the specification and thus you've less incentive to keep on top of its security features.
Why is that the idea of security through obscurity, which has been so discredited elsewhere, is still firmly entrenched in the military?
AC scores a hit whilst everyone else is flailing around with tropes about how government contracts are always absurd. The USAF have been given 500k to "begin" the project - probably to determine its feasibility - stipulating that if it looks promising they will be awarded the rest over the next few years
People used to get their news by looking for a news brand like BBC or The Times, and reading stuff that was presented under that brand. Now a lot of people look for news under topics that interest them, and skip between news brands doing so. What google is offering to do will have little effect on such news browsers, who will have a choice of several competing free links under their topic of interest. People linking to interesting stories will simply copy and paste the content they wish to discuss.
The print industry is dead and just doesn't know it yet.
Of course they follow rules; once they get on land they are part of a community and they rely on that community to offer them protection from those who would hunt them down. In return, they bring an awful lot of money into that community.
The west has modern fighter jets and destroyers, so no we are not an 'easier' target. Plus of course there is the fact that there was fighting between armed Somalis, but of course as a veteran armchair warrior you should know that. And yes, westerners are the scourge of the planet. Its an empirical fact.
I don't think the 'warlords' dump toxic waste or overfish. So no, they can't be blamed for destroying the environment and the economy of Somalia. The fact is, piracy is now a significant portion of Somalia's GDP. They are simply acting as a legitimate government would and taxing those who enter their waters.
The Somalis would probably say that the western shipping companies initiated force by entering their waters, and that other western companies initiated force by fishing their waters to depletion and dumping toxic waste on their coast. The problem with 'initiation of force' is that you the interpretation of it is relative. Of course, you are going to believe that your relative interpretation of it is the objective truth, so there is little point arguing with you.