When it's illegal to shoot police with cameras, the only recourse of the oppressed will be to shoot them with guns.
This is besides my other point that all police should be considered to be in the middle of executing a theft, due to civil asset forfeiture laws. Of course, one can legally kill someone who is in the act of stealing from them as well.
Uhhh, no, it didn't. I don't understand how anyone can call this a burst bubble. If this is what a bubble burst looks like, then we should all be so lucky. My Dad could sell his house for 3x what he bought it for seven years ago, and at a less than 1% haircut from its peak price. But he can't. His house is worth HALF of what it was when he bought it.
I mean, this is just blatant stupidity, like claiming that water is rock, and phone calls are dinosaur bones. It just doesn't make any sense.
Hasn't killed anybody, eh? I guess you missed the part where he has authorize God knows how many targeted killings of his "enemies", disregarding all semblance of law. That's not to mention all the Iraqis he's killed by not pulling out of Iraq like he promised (he said we would be out by last week, we've still got ~90K soldiers there).
Obama's hands are just as stained with blood as any of our recent dictators-in-chief. If you can't see that, then you are just a partisan hack. BTW, I hated Bush too.
Yeah, those stupid rich people, expecting to be able to keep what they earn! Don't they know that we NEED what they have!?
I also love how you cite the foolishness of Democrats and then complain that it is the neocons that are destroying the country. SURPRISE! It's both! And you're helping, by being a partisan! You think your ignorant sociopaths are better than the other guys ignorant sociopaths. THEY ARE THE SAME PEOPLE!
What if they break in every day, and eventually run the store out of business? What if the store owner and his family starve to death as a result?
Going to extremes in these scenarios doesn't always useful. Private property is private property, and failure to recognize that destroys entire civilizations. Once thievery becomes acceptable, it becomes commonplace. Once it becomes commonplace, then there is no longer an incentive for people to work for a living, as they will simply have everything taken from them. It's easier to just join the looters. Eventually, there is nothing left to loot, and everyone dies. Congratulations, you just destroyed civilization, because you failed to recognize natural rights.
There are plenty of midwives still practicing, and for much less than the cost of a hospital.
Consider that medical care in this country has been marching down the road to fascism for a hundred years, and we are nearing the end point where the entire system falls apart.
There are also thousands of others who did contribute, but didn't get famous from it. Margaret Thatcher was an inventor before she became Prime Minister, and had at least one patent to her name (I forget what it was for, but it was quite neat, as I recall, but nothing Earth-shattering).
There is life (bacterial) that floats around in the sky (some think that high-flying bacteria play a role in cloud formation), and life lives in the deepest reaches of the ocean, and EVERYWHERE in between. Hell, drill down under a mile of ice in Antarctica, and you find life. It's insane how diverse and resilient it is.
Basically, if there is liquid water, there will be life so long as at some point in the past conditions were right on that planet for life to form. With the revelations about life in ice and in the sky, you don't even need for it to be liquid!
The government killed them in 1913. And we're running out of fairy dust, at an altitude of 26,000 feet. The ride down will be exhilarating so long as you don't think about the sudden stop at the end.
How could anyone confuse climatology with meteorology? That's like confusing oceanography with marine biology.
The science of climatology was founded on global climate change fears. It did not exist prior to that. Crops were planted just fine. Climatologists can't make any predictions beyond vague "there will be more hurricanes this year" drivel that is wrong half of the time.
But yeah, thanks for calling me sleazy and thus proving the thesis of AGW people using insults rather than facts to "prove" their point.
We worked on a shoestring budget for three years prior to finally getting some industry and grant funding. I would have moved the data to my garage if I had to. YOU DO NOT THROW AWAY DATA. PERIOD. This is not a luxury, it is the ultimate necessity. A scientist throwing away data is like a plumber throwing away tools, or a car dealer burning his cars, or like a farmer salting their fields. It is self destruction. No scientist who isn't trying to hide something would ever do this. The only time it is ever in danger of happening is when a PI dies and there is no one ot take over his project, but even then, the department will usually keep all their records for this very reason. To have long established research refuted or questioned because you can't produce the original data is the height of embarrassment, and is liable to get a department's funding cut.
It's silly to trust the science that built the ships that take you across the Atlantic, but not to listen to the doctors who tell you that your headache is being caused by bad humors that must be drained by way of bloodletting.
You're using a logical fallacy that assumes a uniform scientific progression in all fields at the same time, which is certainly not the case. For example, we put a man on the moon, but we can't cure the common cold. We can build a computer that makes an absurdly high number of calculations per second, but we can't make tires that last longer than 6 years. Etc.
BP and Exxon don't put 100% of their profits into climate research. I doubt if they even put.001% into it.
The fact is that if Global warming were disproven, 99+% of climate scientists would lose ALL of their funding. This is a hell of an incentive for them to do the wrong thing.I'm not saying that they do or have done the wrong thing, but to claim that there isn't a conflict of interest is asinine.
I'm also a scientist, and let me tell you, I keep EVERYTHING (as does everyone that I have ever dealt with). I have lab notebooks in my lab going back to the 70's, full of every bit and byte of data that we have generated, across countless comings and goings of post-docs, technicians, and research associates.
If we get find the government involved in buying video game consoles, the prices WILL go up. This will make a nice experiment. Let's make it so that insurance covers them. We'll have $1000 Wiis before you know it. It will then be called a failure of the "free market".
Slashdot Mirror
When it's illegal to shoot police with cameras, the only recourse of the oppressed will be to shoot them with guns.
This is besides my other point that all police should be considered to be in the middle of executing a theft, due to civil asset forfeiture laws. Of course, one can legally kill someone who is in the act of stealing from them as well.
In this case, one man's burst bubble is another man's rally.
Up is down, left is right, big is small, and short is long! My computer said so, so it must be true!
Uhhh, no, it didn't. I don't understand how anyone can call this a burst bubble. If this is what a bubble burst looks like, then we should all be so lucky. My Dad could sell his house for 3x what he bought it for seven years ago, and at a less than 1% haircut from its peak price. But he can't. His house is worth HALF of what it was when he bought it.
I mean, this is just blatant stupidity, like claiming that water is rock, and phone calls are dinosaur bones. It just doesn't make any sense.
Hasn't killed anybody, eh? I guess you missed the part where he has authorize God knows how many targeted killings of his "enemies", disregarding all semblance of law. That's not to mention all the Iraqis he's killed by not pulling out of Iraq like he promised (he said we would be out by last week, we've still got ~90K soldiers there).
Obama's hands are just as stained with blood as any of our recent dictators-in-chief. If you can't see that, then you are just a partisan hack. BTW, I hated Bush too.
Yeah, those stupid rich people, expecting to be able to keep what they earn! Don't they know that we NEED what they have!?
I also love how you cite the foolishness of Democrats and then complain that it is the neocons that are destroying the country. SURPRISE! It's both! And you're helping, by being a partisan! You think your ignorant sociopaths are better than the other guys ignorant sociopaths. THEY ARE THE SAME PEOPLE!
What if they break in every day, and eventually run the store out of business? What if the store owner and his family starve to death as a result?
Going to extremes in these scenarios doesn't always useful. Private property is private property, and failure to recognize that destroys entire civilizations. Once thievery becomes acceptable, it becomes commonplace. Once it becomes commonplace, then there is no longer an incentive for people to work for a living, as they will simply have everything taken from them. It's easier to just join the looters. Eventually, there is nothing left to loot, and everyone dies. Congratulations, you just destroyed civilization, because you failed to recognize natural rights.
There are plenty of midwives still practicing, and for much less than the cost of a hospital.
Consider that medical care in this country has been marching down the road to fascism for a hundred years, and we are nearing the end point where the entire system falls apart.
They claim gold as a success, and yet here we are, less than 1% from the record high, which was set less than a month ago.
This guy fails at predicting bubbles.
There are also thousands of others who did contribute, but didn't get famous from it. Margaret Thatcher was an inventor before she became Prime Minister, and had at least one patent to her name (I forget what it was for, but it was quite neat, as I recall, but nothing Earth-shattering).
Accuse them of child rape, then.
There is life (bacterial) that floats around in the sky (some think that high-flying bacteria play a role in cloud formation), and life lives in the deepest reaches of the ocean, and EVERYWHERE in between. Hell, drill down under a mile of ice in Antarctica, and you find life. It's insane how diverse and resilient it is.
Basically, if there is liquid water, there will be life so long as at some point in the past conditions were right on that planet for life to form. With the revelations about life in ice and in the sky, you don't even need for it to be liquid!
Hit a little too close to home, eh?
Yeah, some of us want to feel wet and puddlely outside!
Unfortunately, they'll all be guys.
The government killed them in 1913. And we're running out of fairy dust, at an altitude of 26,000 feet. The ride down will be exhilarating so long as you don't think about the sudden stop at the end.
I am a scientist, and I found the abuse of the peer review system to be an unforgivable sin. These people should be stripped of their PhDs.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
How could anyone confuse climatology with meteorology? That's like confusing oceanography with marine biology.
The science of climatology was founded on global climate change fears. It did not exist prior to that. Crops were planted just fine. Climatologists can't make any predictions beyond vague "there will be more hurricanes this year" drivel that is wrong half of the time.
But yeah, thanks for calling me sleazy and thus proving the thesis of AGW people using insults rather than facts to "prove" their point.
lol, filing cabinets are so expensive.
We worked on a shoestring budget for three years prior to finally getting some industry and grant funding. I would have moved the data to my garage if I had to. YOU DO NOT THROW AWAY DATA. PERIOD. This is not a luxury, it is the ultimate necessity. A scientist throwing away data is like a plumber throwing away tools, or a car dealer burning his cars, or like a farmer salting their fields. It is self destruction. No scientist who isn't trying to hide something would ever do this. The only time it is ever in danger of happening is when a PI dies and there is no one ot take over his project, but even then, the department will usually keep all their records for this very reason. To have long established research refuted or questioned because you can't produce the original data is the height of embarrassment, and is liable to get a department's funding cut.
Prior to the scandal. I'd like to see if they could muster the same numbers today. I'd bet a shiny penny that they couldn't.
It's silly to trust the science that built the ships that take you across the Atlantic, but not to listen to the doctors who tell you that your headache is being caused by bad humors that must be drained by way of bloodletting.
You're using a logical fallacy that assumes a uniform scientific progression in all fields at the same time, which is certainly not the case. For example, we put a man on the moon, but we can't cure the common cold. We can build a computer that makes an absurdly high number of calculations per second, but we can't make tires that last longer than 6 years. Etc.
BP and Exxon don't put 100% of their profits into climate research. I doubt if they even put .001% into it.
The fact is that if Global warming were disproven, 99+% of climate scientists would lose ALL of their funding. This is a hell of an incentive for them to do the wrong thing.I'm not saying that they do or have done the wrong thing, but to claim that there isn't a conflict of interest is asinine.
No, actually, they didn't. The data that was released in those publications was "corrected". The original data was thrown out. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece
I'm also a scientist, and let me tell you, I keep EVERYTHING (as does everyone that I have ever dealt with). I have lab notebooks in my lab going back to the 70's, full of every bit and byte of data that we have generated, across countless comings and goings of post-docs, technicians, and research associates.
Sensible discussion...on MY Slashdot!?
This is the first time I've seen sensible moderation on this subject on Slashdot. I've been labelled a troll so many times, I gave up trying.
If we get find the government involved in buying video game consoles, the prices WILL go up. This will make a nice experiment. Let's make it so that insurance covers them. We'll have $1000 Wiis before you know it. It will then be called a failure of the "free market".
It's more like a laser with a frikkin' shark attached to it's head.