Re: under investigation as to it's legality should be suspended
No. Until proven illegal the presumption is for innocence. At least that's what I hear every time they put a guy on trial for 20 counts of rape.
7611 posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
Well that's a new number coming from you.
If Warmist Cult were advertising a 60% good model I might have been interested. You didn't. You claimed it was "settled science" and that skeptics were "denialists". And that we need to divert Quadrillions of dollars RFN to avert the death of the earth as we know it within the foreseeable future.
So, no I don't have any interest in your new-found reasonableness. You blew up the bridge of goodwill a long, long time ago. The frog may have fallen for the scorpions sob story, but I'm not a frog.
Not exactly true, and the exactly true statement is the more damning.
A computer model can be used to support a hypothesis. If you have an equation or set of equations which interact in a subtle way to describe a slowly changing characteristic you can build a computer model using those equations. Then you input data about the current state of the system and run the model faster than the actual event. If when you arrive at the elapsed time the data match the prediction from the model, you have support for your hypothesis.
The problem for AWG is that so far:
model prediction =/= data
in real science this invalidates the hypothesis. In the Warmist Cult it means you try to convince the rest of the tribe to sacrifice the denialist to appease the Climate Gods before you throw the bones again.
Don't need to. I follow Lewis's articles with some regularity and recognize your nom de plume.
I'd say he's spot on and quite justified. Now, I know you limeys have different standards about name calling, but I was quite under the impression that telling the truth was still more than sufficient to obtain dismissal of charges about impugning one's honor.
The manufacture of just about any commercial battery is a very environmentally unfriendly process. That's the bit here that surprised me the most: the site will be in the US where environmental regs stop all kinds of good ideas. So even though I doubt electric vehicles will be truly workable in my lifetime, I'll give Musk a big thumbs up for not taking the easy way out of dealing with those issues.
Actually you do. You can apply for the trademark before you start making it, but pretty soon thereafter you need to be using it to differentiate yourself if the industry segment for which you applied to get the trademark. I'm not sure what the period of inactivity is before the trademark can be challenged for non-use.
Ponzi schemes all do that for those who were in on the ground floor. And they all leave even more misery in their wake for those who were left holding the bag at the end.
There's only one sure way to get rich: spend less than you make, invest the difference wisely, and do consistently over the entire span of your life.
You should still be able to get them on property theft. Even if it isn't currency it is something they owned.
Of course that presents a different issue to the Bitcoin fanatics. The whole point of Bitcoin is to escape government involvement. If the government can track and prosecute for theft of Bitcoin, they can do a whole lot more to it as well.
And when you deal with rational investors with fully disclosed business details you don't get that.
But this was neither rational investors nor fully disclosed business details.
The non-criminal "investors" are mostly from the kook conspiracy fringe. Their rage is barely contained at the best of times and for them death threats over the internet are a sort of cathartic release. The business details weren't fully disclosed because the whole MtGox thing was catching lighting in a pan. The people starting it didn't have the first clue and were quickly in way over their heads. But hey it was all working and they were raking in the dosh, so they went all Alfred E Neuman. Besides, a significant part of their business was from people who don't exactly want fully disclosed business details, cause that might alert Interpol et al. to what's up.
I have no sympathy for anyone who got burned by their stock offering.
I'll grant the line workers probably got more screwed than most, would grant suite on the proper grounds, and would likely find in their favor in court. I would regard this as fair, and not such much beneficial to one group or the other, but increasing misery on them in aggregate.
Many of the strategies required to mitigate against possible A.G.W are beneficial in their own right reducing pollution and increasing efficiency, finding alternative energy sources to oil & gas.
AWG isn't really about saving the planet in 100 years. It's a Trojan horse to get through other ideological objectives which the general public have rejected.
You can tell they are ideological objectives because real people don't do things because they are good in this sense or that sense. They do them because weighed amongst a whole range or possibilities both good and bad, that person selects the thing he believes will do the most good for him. It may be that removing pollution is a good thing. It is likely that growing food to live is a better thing. Until you have sufficient food that you can live without considerable concern, removing pollution is a non-starter. Which is precisely the point raised in a post above: cleaning up the environment is a luxury good, and therefore any activity which harms the creation of real wealth harms cleaning up the environment. Current case in point: China.
Science is also not about evidence.
Science is about accurately predicting something in the physical universe based on past experience. AWG completely fails this, which is the only test of science. When Einstein proposed his General Theory of Relativity, one of the things it predicted was the deflection of light due to the presence of a massive nearby object. It had never been thought of or tested before. During the next solar eclipse the position of Mercury was observed. We could calculate its actual position using Newtonian equations. If light didn't bend it would appear in that position. If it did bend according to it would be in another. If it were anywhere else, both theories would have been falsified. Mercury appeared exactly where Relativity predicted it should be. That is science.
Science seeks to isolate variables only so that it can more accurately predict future events.
Those record profits are only records because the government has forced what use to be a lot of competing small companies to merge into ultramegacorps to deal with regulatory paperwork. Break them back into smaller companies and those numbers wouldn't even make the slush pile reports. Furthermore, if you calculate the percentage of profit per dollar invested I think the only worse stock market category in which to invest is airlines.
Wow, talk about rolling all of the classic risk assessment errors into one statement.
1) Assuming there is no risk with one action and risk with the other.
2) Assuming that something that is 10% probable but will kill everyone is more problematic than something which will always kill 10% of the population.
Now we have satellites we believe are measuring the whole planet's data 24/7.
Because all the measurements are done by proxies, and then mathematically massaged. We think we have good cause to trust the proxies, but we could find problems with them.
There are more problems processing the data than the data processors want to admit. Simple things like not having end of file markers on a data set during data storage and transmission from the satellite. Or questions about the reliability of the calibration technique the satellite uses to set its sensors. This is information I've gotten from an AWG agnostic who works directly in processing the data.
Which, objectively speaking is the longer time scale: 100 years or 10,000 years?
Because all the Warmist cult postings I see reference about 50 years of real data, and all the skeptics are looking at stuff that starts at the 10,000 year and goes through 100,000 years.
Has someone alerted the Bar that they have someone who needs to be immediately removed from their ranks?
Even the highly, highly disfunctional US Patent Office clearly states on their website:
...abstract ideas (such as mathematical algorithms), natural phenomena, and laws of nature are not eligible for patent protection.
There was never a ball there to begin with. To sign up for FB, you had to have an email account. It was completely redundant.
And that's before you get to people like me who wouldn't use an FB email account for the same reason I haven't adopted Google's FB equivalent: Both of them already have more than enough of my information. I'm not about to combine ALL of my stuff into one big searchable box. The bastages are going to have to search at least two of them dammit!
the market can bloom. A comment I've often heard from my dad is "With the kind of video you can get on a pocket phone these days, why is it that whenever the news shows you a video clip of a criminal suspect, it is always gray and too blurry to see anything?"
And a friend of mine has another friend who runs a liquor store with decent surveillance equipment. He looks for cheap drives because he treats them as WORM drives. No, re-writes, just fills them up, replaces them, notes the dates covered and location and files them. He says about once a quarter the cops show up asking if he might have tape for such and such dates for alleged event y. So he pulls the drive, hands it to them and tells them to bring it back when they're done.
It's been a while since I played it so I looked it up. The BoardGame Geek description claims the actual company that sells it describes it as a "...game where you take on the role..."
While I concur it is a card trading game, I can also see where someone who hasn't played it and just looked it up on the interwebs might think it was an RPG. Heck, it wouldn't have surprised me if someone had turned it into one by now.
Actually I would be more likely to, although I'd also be prone to do more checking about how the bank was managed. And if it was in business for a good period of time I wouldn't have a problem with it. In fact, part of the problem with the current government guarantee is precisely that it does remove the moral hazard of all the banks engaging in fiscally unsound but legal transactions.
That question is less interesting than you might initially think. In a crisis situation a non-native speaker would draft in his native language and then either have someone translate it for him or use an online translator. In the first case you'd wind up with something decent. In the second case the grammar and spelling would be good, its just the word choices which would throw you. I'm not about to try to chase the link to the alleged document from work, but based on the descriptions here, neither of those sound like the case. They make it sound akin to an old Nigeria scam email (the new ones have at least discovered spell checkers).
Well there's theory and then there's practice. In theory you can do it. In practice, not so much.
Roomie tried when we moved. The additional costs associated with porting the number and the service made it unfeasible. A couple years later a friend's mom tried a VOIP plan on her DSL. It was crap and she asked to be changed back. Following two weeks of problems she gave up and accepted a new number. Mind you, she didn't physically move like we did, just switched carriers twice in less than a one month period.
Two ticketing offices? Oy vey! No wonder things are in their current state.
There should be one ticketing office. It should clearly display the cost and hours of operations for both museums. Maybe a special deal where 1 to 3 pounds gets knocked off the price of buying both tickets and the discount is fairly distributed based on the percentage of the price each museum/tour costs.
As for the tour guide who got shafted for giving "the long tour", somebody in management needs to buy a clue. Granted I'm not likely to be visiting Bletchley Park anytime soon (from this side of the pond the flight takes too long and costs too much for a Saturday trip), but I've had a similar experience. A friend was visiting from out of town. He wanted to see the Annex to the Smithsonian Air and Space museum and made all the arrangements. Our tour guide met us there. He was older than dirt. All of the planes were is some level of dis-assembly because it was the only way to stuff that much gear into the facility. It was hard to see anything clearly. And it was the best tour of my life. The old guy knew every detail about every plane that we could sort of see in the overstuffed storage area. And his eyes were alive as he told you why they were important and details about the restoration and reassembly of the planes. The Annex has moved to a nice new facility where all the planes are properly displayed. But I'll always remember that first tour more fondly.
OK, I get it. Some people don't care about all the tiny details. Fine. Sell a short tour ticket and a long tour ticket. Because some of us do appreciate all the tiny details.
No, he's referring to a plehtora of "A new ice age is coming!" articles printed everywhere in the popular press back in the late 70s. And yes, I read it in the allegedly "conservationist" propaganda publications they made cheaply available to parents to give to their kids. Right up there with water pollution, air pollution, and DDT killing the California Condors.
No he's not kidding. Probably because he has some idea what radiative transfer is and how it works. I rather get the impression that for you lot the phrase is a good bit like "abracadbra" or "open sesame", a magic phrase intended to stifle debate.
And yes, I am familiar with the strawman of greenhouse gasses. Problem is, I think this is another one of those Known Facts like heavier things fall faster than light ones was until Galileo dropped to balls: a lot of handwaving without having conducted sufficiently controlled experiments to account for all variables.
As for the whole 100 year argument (which is actually more like 50, but what's half a century among friends?), its complete bollux on a 10,000 year baseline, and 10,000 itself might be bollux for a climate baseline.
other carriers have long been irked by “over the top” companies like Netflix that make mountains of cash without giving them a cut.
I drop $8.95/month (or thereabouts) to Netflix for the streaming part of my subscription. I drop closer to $200 a month to Verizon. How is it that Netflix is alleged to have mountains of cash? For a single month of Verizon I could pre-pay two years of Netflix.
When an installer for a cable company sees someone else's wires they usually cut them. I recall that being a problem when I was using Comcast for tv, Verizon for phone, and the ancestor to Starpower for my internet.
These days I'm with Verizon on FIOS, but their days may be numbered. Problems connecting to Netflix weren't as bad last night, but still there. You can tell they've got some complicated throttling going on. Finished watching an episode that clipped through cleanly from load to finish. Clicked to watch the very next episode in the queue while my roommate went to move laundry in the basement, refill her water bottle, grab a snack to eat, and settle down on the couch just as the red line reached the end of "buffering". At which point it was another 30 seconds before the episode actually started. Required bandwidth per Netflix: 1.5 to 3.5, available bandwidth according to speed testing: 13-19.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019