Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Is Climate Change the New Evolution?

SlimFastForYou Re:Isn't that anti-science? (1055 comments)

Looks like I can't edit posts on Slashdot (it's been years). I remember hearing about dihydrogen monoxide in my high school chemistry class. And also in a college science class, and once or twice by people I knew. You know, It even sounds more dangerous than carbon dioxide. Did you know that even a small amount of inhilation can lead to death? See also, http://www.dhmo.org/ of http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html

more than 2 years ago
top

Is Climate Change the New Evolution?

SlimFastForYou Re:Isn't that anti-science? (1055 comments)

You may call me a "global warming skeptic" if it pleases. But I wonder, isn't there more species diversity in tropical climates? Despite whether or not there is warming, whether or not it is man-made, solar-induced, etc... I'm kind of thinking of Darwin and his travels and the theory of evolution. For example, the rainforests of the Amazon. Don't warmer climates lead to more rain? CO2 levels not coming at the expense of oxygen levels (plants are able to photosynthesize better). Granted there are some polluting industries that should be kept within the boundaries of being environmentally responsible. Better cars and industrial processes. I'm not denouncing the research and development of "green" technologies and better emissions standards for newer vehicles/equipment (efficient energy utilization), but is it really Carbon Dioxide (plant food which leads to O2 and crops we consume), or is it industrial (toxic) waste that's the greater danger to the planet? I've also heard that the other planets in the solar system are arguably having "global warming" as well and that the sun is causing this. I haven't received a dollar from the oil companies and sometimes even resent them as I fill up my car. Just because I am skeptical of AGW doesn't mean I should be treated as a "creationist" (I watched the NOVA special on Dover's school board and the trial). In many ways, the creationists involved who were on the attack were fools. But "creationism" is a broad brush with which to paint other people. Science is about finding models that fit and discarding ones that don't. But also being open to new findings. Who knows, perhaps Gore (as well as Clinton, Bush, and Obama) scammed us. Strange things happen.

more than 2 years ago
top

U.S. House Says the Internet is Terrorist Threat

SlimFastForYou Re:Sensationalist FUD (457 comments)

You're dead right! I haven't logged in to Slashdot in so long I can't even remember how long it's been. Digg converted me :). But seriously that's exactly right. I loathe the argument that saying X destroys the morale of the troops. If whatever is said are lies, why would it destroy morale? Most people should still know better. If, on the other hand, it's true but still a little morale destroying.. well it's part of the job of being a soldier. If someone is a soldier and finds out something bad about our government and feels a little less like fighting, it's both a good thing and a bad thing. Of course, it depends on who you are.. to a senator or a president obviously it's a bad thing. But the thing that makes this country great.. even in it's bad times is that people are generally allowed to tell it like it is without repercussions. Many places in this world aren't like that, and it's sad. There are a lot of "systems" out there that simply can't exist without repression (North Korea comes to mind). But right now, we are at a crossroads.. our government can repress us more and more.. and it does to an extent but not too bad. Even crazy sounding conspiracy theories (Illuminati anyone?) can be posted, and yet people aren't executed for it. Sure, Guantanamo and other secret prisons are bad, and we should get rid of them, we have a biased press, and the executive branch has a bit too much power right now. But still, it could be much worse and yet we generally still have our basic freedoms. Sure cops are dicks, and we have seen a diminishing of our Constitution lately. And our Congress is generally bought and paid for (with a few exceptions). But I see it as a lack of good leadership, not necessarily completely rotten. (Without explicitly naming him) I hope people will vote for THE right candidate in the upcoming presidential election. It would be a good start. Seriously though, it looks like America will continue to go downhill and it saddens me, but maybe we've just had it coming. Noam Chomsky, love him or hate him, I think put it well when he said that being an empire on the outside and a democracy on the inside are opposed to each-other. But for the empire that the United States is, and the democracy that it is too, I must say that it is doing it surprisingly well. Still, I think that ultimately we as a country will need to cut down on the imperialism, and we will be the better for it when we do. But what do I know, I'm just a random slashdotter who hasn't even logged in for over a year. So yeah, back to what I was originally saying, our troops aren't babies and anyone who says "X will hurt the troops" are treating them like children - which they're not. They're soldiers, they're grown men (and women), and if they can't take a little meaningful criticism that isn't even personally directed towards them, maybe just maybe the army isn't the best place for them. "Sticks and stones ..."

more than 6 years ago

Submissions

top

SlimFastForYou SlimFastForYou writes  |  more than 8 years ago

SlimFastForYou writes "Pluto, beloved by some as a cosmic underdog but scorned by astronomers who considered it too dinky and distant, was unceremoniously stripped of its status as a planet Thursday [8/24/2006]. A planet since 1930, Pluto got the boot because it didn't meet the new rules, which say a planet not only must orbit the sun and be large enough to assume a nearly round shape, but must "clear the neighborhood around its orbit.""

Journals

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?