[quote]This calls into question your ability to evaluate risk. Mercury contamination is a known, proven hazard with a pretty long half-life in the environment. Mercury doesn't just go away once it's in the environment - CO2 will.[/quote] Depends how seriously you take the global warming risk. While I am not convinced of the most extreme consequences, global warming has the potential to halve the human population and extinct many species. That's not so say mercury is friendly stuff, bu
dmantione
[quote]This is not exactly true. Whether anthropogenic CO2 increases are the proximate cause of the current warming trend remains an open question.[/quote] It remains an open question wether tobacco is harmfull.... We've discussing this to death in this thread already. No one in thread hasn't found someone who can be consired knowledgable about the topic and has no clear conflict of interrest that considers it an open question. [quote]Just as association is not causation, 'co
[quote]Just one volcanic erruption puts so much greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere that we havn't cought up with the first few[/quote] I would ask you friendly you read the thread, read the posts that have been about and you will see that amount of CO2 being put into the atmosphere by volcanous is small compared to human emissions. You may also want to Google a bit about it.
[quote]Meanwhile, mercury containing flourescent lighting is replacing incandescent.[/quote] You are fully correct. At this time, I would say the global warming issue is at this time more threathening for humanity than mercury in the environment, but that doesn't mean this can be ignored. CFL's have the potential to create an environmental disaster if they are not recycled correctly. I would be in favour of allowing mercury in CFLs for a few years during the transition phase, and then
[quote]Whats more pathetic than my "theory" is people actually trying to disprove it. [/quote] As I view the situation, what you did is a common discussion strategy. It is a good test if your discussion partners know what they are talking about and I believe a proper answer to it is necessary for the benefit of the discussion. People claiming something should be willing to back it up, it's as simple as that. One cannot simply claim global warming is true without proper argumen
[quote]I've never said we should do nothing, only that we should have sober expectations and goals, motivated by objectives with intrinsic short-term value and reasonable,[/quote] As this is a community with a love for 4X games, do you remember the original Sid Meier's Civilization? The first game in the series already had global warming in it; when you approached the modern age one of the things that did annoy you were the occasional warming events that did turn your culture land int
How does this compare to the plasmoids in the K Desktop Environment?
[quote who="psychoak" reply="24" id="2046678"]Edit: Dmantione, the GISS information is the ground stations... They aren't all in the US either, they're what passes for a worldwide network.[/quote] Okay, but the case for climate change would be rather weak if the GISS information was the only basis for it, don't you think? The GISS information is just one data set, after all. I just read the scientific paper by Hansen et al. that's linked from the page. You should read it
[quote who="CaptainYar" reply="12" id="2047438"]OK its time I chimed in, I've had this theory for years (since high school). Now seeing that scientists in general don't all agree on this, I feel that my theory is just as valid as any others. Global warming is caused by people, more specifically their mere presence on this planet. Over population is causeing temperature to rise globally. I will argue this point indisputable. The body temerature of a person is 98.6 degrees, with over
[quote]Or, as pointed out by psychoak, the weather stations being monitered are no longer in compliance with the environmental factor standards they are suppoded to meet. Due to people building shit around them, not due to some mass conspiracy. Apparently you can't follow links.[/quote] We don't even know wether U.S. surface station data has been used in the most recent climate models at all! As I see it, the surface stations project will allow constructio
[quote]The fact that observed climate change has been so profoundly different than the AGW proponents' models have predicted over the past 10 years is testimony to the near infinite complexity of our global climate, as well as external factors which may affect it, and should give us pause in contemplating sweeping political & economic changes which are as likely to be based on a chimera as on reasonable probability
[quote]I'm done, arguing with retards is amusing, but none of you pay attention to anything besides the national news.[/quote] Nah, that is not how I view it. You can say whatever you want, the community here has been checking your links and reading them, often doing the work that you failed to do: checking the reliability of the source. I'm perfectly open to reading articles, so have other people here been. Alas, everthing you came up with was garbage or even argumentation in favour
[quote]First thing first, anomalies aren't trends. This is how you check 2000-2008 against 1951-1980 for global warming trend. I pity your argument.[/quote] Oh no. Listen, if you want to be taken seriously you'd better read what data means. Take a look the source & parameters: HR2SST_1200km_Trnd12_2000_2008 Where do you see 1951-1980? This should have been a first hint that you did something wrong. The reason it is absent is explained in the description of the fi
If the software has not been sold there can be no first-sale doctrine. Luckily, the majority software with an EULA is still sold, it's the nature of the transaction and not the fact that there is a license in the box that decides this.
Hmmmm... What I've been told, is if you've got a car built after 1990, you should not worry about corrosion and occassionally using a low ethanol blend (E5, E10) is good to keep your fuel system clean, the ethanol dissolves hard fuel chunks that can slowly form in your tank after years. AFAIK the problem with E85 in a car that is not designed for it is that it has different combustion properties than normal 95 octane petrol. In order to run on E85 properly the the engine ma
The point with people like Al Gore is that they pretend that what scientists often consider a worst case scenario as something that will happen if people don't quickly change their habbits. That's of course not correct and can be considered misinformation. However, Al Gore's mission has never been to present the public the actual scientific situation with all its unknowns and uncertainties. Sci
Producing fuels from algae will be the ultimate bio-fuel because algae are amongst the organisms that turn CO2 into biosmass fastest, they are considered 3th generation bio-fuels. Algae can be used to produce petrol style fuels, kerosine like fuels and diesel like fuels, so there is a lot to like about them. However, 3th generation biofuels aren't ready to become available yet. What will become available very soon (1-2 years) is ethanol from cellulose. This second gener
Storing electricity in batteries is far more efficient than generating hydrogen from it and burning it again. The only area where Hydrogen IMO makes sense is situations where you need to put a lot of energy in a small space. This could be a way to make aircraft more climate friendly. For cars, less weight is an advantage too, but I don't think it will be large enough to outweigh the higher energy efficiency of batteries.
What edition did you buy, which number are you registering and where are you registering it?
You could buy the game and play apirated version. This is not legal, but ethically correct towards paying programmers for their work. However: Digital restrictions management is not more unethical than piracy, and buying such a game is a reward for the developer for its digital restrictions management. Therefore, buying such a game is a bad idea. Voting with your wallet is very important. I would not blame people playing a pirated version without buying a legal versio
[quote who="psychoak" reply="15" id="2042584"] Edit: Terribly sorry about that dmantione, I copied the result instead of how you get there. Here. [/quote] Thanks, I played a bit with it now I understand it. It's easiest to work with the plot you did generate, my graphs were similar to yours. If we take the plot and take a look at the zonal mean graph, we see that at high latitude (near Antarctica) we have have a 2.5 degrees Celcius higher temperature
[quote] Unreported alternative cause for some of that rapid melting you were talking about. Which, by the way, was replaced at a similar rate.[/quote] I read the article, but I do not see how you come to your conclusion. In fact the scientists conclude the opposite: [quote]" However, it cannot explain the more widespread thinning of West Antarctic glaciers that together are contributing nearly 0.2mm per year to sea-level rise. This wider change most probabl
That doesn't sound plausible, since anti-cheat systems should prevent people logging in on-line, not prevent startup of a game. That said, both anti-cheat & DRM require trusted executables, so some of the technology is shared.
[quote]Or we could look at reality. The oceans have cooled off in recent years so much that the sharks are fishing on the shores, and our record high temperatures that likely never existed are a product of our limited, eroneous view being warped by faulty sensor equipment that hasn't been maintained. Antarctica is expanding. The Earth is cooling,[/quote] Source?
[quote]As a side note: the actual case of self-terminating licences here is more likely a sin of incompetence and uncaring laxity than actual malitious intent though. [/quote] Of course, regardless wether the intent was good or bad, the customer pays the programmer's food, car & house is hurt by the programmer that is scared, not of his customer, but of people that will never be his customer. Quod erat demonstrandum?