Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Pretty sure I read this story last decade. (Score 1) 352

The only reason that global warming is so alarming is because the scientific community has absolutely no idea what is causing it

Yes they do.

if it is indeed happening

Yes it is

You may not agree with the positions that this blog poster makes, but he makes some pretty critical points about climate change: . You cannot change the data to suit your needs; that's not science.

There is very little data in that post. There is a graph, which he claims is erroneous, with a link to the data. Then a graph that he claims is the true state of affairs, with... wait for it... no link to any data.

Scientists are just like everyone else: they're people with a job. Some of them are good at it but, frankly, most of them are decent-at-best at it -- just like every other job.

And when the top people in your particular field, having studied the information at hand, arrive at the same conclusion, do you immediately accuse them of collusion in a global plot to deceive everyone?

Comment Re:Why do people continue to believe alarmist crap (Score 1) 156

That contention would be at odds with reports of a possible coming "Little Ice Age" due to the current Maunder-type sunspot minimum.

It is also at odds with reports of no global warming since the late 1990's.

And on a macro scale, it's a bit odd to judge planetary data on merely human timescales. Technically, we're still in an Ice Age, and are merely between continental glacial advances.

Your astonomy now link gives lots of good information, except for one thing: the magnitude of the cooling effect proposed. It also contains drivel, like someone claiming to be a serious scientist saying "There is no strong evidence, that global warming is caused by human activity" and "In the days of the Maunder minimum... Greenland was covered by glaciers”
A two year old article from the Daily Mail saying that there has been no warming since 1998, a year chosen in many of these stories because it was the hottest year on record at the time, is just laughable when all 10 of the 10 hottest years on record have been since 1998.
As for us still being in an ice age, most people here know that. Yes, the earth has been hotter in the past, even with the dimmer sun of the past (it is getting slowly and steadily brighter over millions of years). Changes are not the big problem. The speed of them is.

Comment Re:Why do people continue to believe alarmist crap (Score 1) 156

Yeah damn those scientists and their pesky "facts".

This has nothing to do with facts. We are sick of your "facts". Why is it that the "scientific facts" always seem to be twisted toward your liberal agenda? Our beer is bad, but your red wine is healthy. Our cigarettes cause cancer and are being banned, but your marijuana cures cancer and is being legalized. Our hash browns cause diabetes, but all you arugula chomping vegans are expected to live to 110. Our SUVs are the spawn of Satan, while liberals get to drive their effeminate Priuses in the HOV lane. So don't give us any more of that crap about "facts". You really think we are too dumb to recognize an agenda when we see one?

I'm sick of hearing bullshit about a "liberal agenda". It's a nice undefined catch-all people who identify as rightwing use to descibe any idea they don't agree with. I'm a left winger in a country where our most rightwing politicians are to left of your most leftwing. I like beer. I used to smoke, I liked it but it was fucking up my lungs too much. I'm sure there are medicinal properties to cannabis; there are to nicotine as well (there are indications it helps stave off Parkinson's for example). Smoking either will screw up your lungs. I don't know what arugula is, if it isn't meat I don't want to know. SUVs are the spawn of Satan. Why the hell should people be encouraged to waste fuel driving a tank to drop little Johnny to playschool?

Comment Re:not surprised (Score 1) 105

I've never seen someone not understanding that reply as "do something, anything, and you should be able to see for yourself". I thought that my explanation to what and how I'm searching would be enough.

You are making a claim, and others are saying that they have been unable to substatiate your claim. If you cannot provide an example of something you claim happens every time a certain action is performed, an action other people regularly perform without that result, we have to assume you are talking through your arse.

Comment Re:Oh yes! TOUGH! (Score 1) 729

Because nobody can buy a basic gaming box for about $800.

Nope. Just never happens.

Buy? I just recycle 3 year old retired business desktops from customers. Slap in a 850W PSU, a graphics card, some more memory and an SSD. Not the cutting edge of gaming, but it is cheap.

Submission + - There are four quarks! (

slew writes: Although last year saw the first LHC observations of pentaquark particles, apparently there are indeed tetraquark particles too! And the LHC found four of them (coincidence?) Even more interesting, although they apparently each have a unique internal structure, mass and their own sets of quantum numbers, all of the four particles apparently contain the same quark composition (charm,anti-charm,strange,anti-strange). Weird stuff ;^)

Comment Re:Feasibility of a rerun? (Score 1) 693

It's mostly anecdotal at this point but there already seems to be a lot of buyers remorse. Thoughts on the possibility they'll have a follow-up "are you really sure?" referendum or at least an election where one of the parties campaigns on ignoring the result.

It would not be unprecedented. I'm Irish, and we have re-run constitutional votes twice in recent history to keep the EU project on track. We didn't have the xenophobic bullshit of the Brexit campaign going on though, so we didn't have the likes of Junker immediately shouting to get out.

Comment Re:may might predicts (Score 1) 655

>Unless you are more than 100 years old, you have never lived during a time when there were no commercial airlines.

100 years is definitely "not that long ago". It is a merely 0.1% of RECORDED history, which is itself a mere 100th of a percent of the history of the human race, and that is still only about 1/4 of 1000th of a percent of the history of life.

Can I get the records from 90000 years ago please? (Yes, I am poking fun at your math mistake, and I do agree 100 years is not a long time.)

Slashdot Top Deals

"Confound these ancestors.... They've stolen our best ideas!" - Ben Jonson