
It knows the answer
I asked my Nexus 4 what the answer to life, the universe and everything is, it knows...
37 publicly visible posts • joined 14 Jul 2009
But being Acer it will take you at least three attempts before you get one that works properly, then just after the warranty runs out it, something will break due to the penny pinching Acer production methods. My Acer Iconia tablet, great bit of kit (took me three to get a decent working one) just stopped working. Seems to save a little bit of production money, the power switch is not actually soldered to the motherboard, just held in place by willpower into the positioning holes. It will be a VERY long time until I even consider any Acer kit again.
You have to remember that Mr. Page has proven again and again he has no understanding of the science behind climate change but prefers to write pithy headlines about something he found somewhere on a deniers website. More often than not these take one aspect of a paper that is usually unread (by him) and behind a pay wall. The deniers tent to write an article on one thing mentioned in the abstract as it is so the whole thing gets taken to stupid levels by the time it gets posted here.
Take his proportions given here in this article, he probably still thinks like Dr. Evil that a million is a large number. 7 in 10,000 is very easily detectable and not an insignificant number as he is trying to make out.
I find Lewis' articles usually miss the point, showing how he does not understand the science and how incredibly stupid the deniers argument is. Probably as he picks up the stories from denialist websites anyway and paraphrases what he thinks they mean.
As for the 1998 date, why do deniers latch onto that date? Abnormally warm el nino year, so making a great point as a baseline to support their views, totally ignoring the fact climate change is a gradual process and any moving averages measured.
It is also that most other greenhouse gasses are factored in at CO2 equivelencies , so when talking of CO2, it is common for many people untutored in how to read scientific papers (read el reg journalists) to make a big boob by stupid sensationalist headlines..
Glancing at the paper myself, I feel that it could account in part for the lag seen in the cause and effect of climate change, rather than a 'SMACKDOWN'
I went back to KDE after I switched to Gnome after the release of 4. It is definitely worth another look if you do not get on with Unity.
Interesting to note that it allows an almost traditional desktop setup. Maybe all the usability 'experts' went to bother the Gnome / Unity people.
Is what I get whenever the register gives its rather biased views on climate change. The effect of aerosols is well known, but to some people, such as journalists with an axe to grind, a new paper adding it into an existing model becomes news. Look at the records going back to the world wars, you will see cooling caused by the increase in aerosols, look at massive volcanic activity. Look at the heating effect after 11th Sept 2001 over the USA when the aircraft contrails disappeared, and the albedo reduced.
Many scientists, for example Salter (of the underfunded and backstabbed duck fame) are now working on increasing albedo with aerosols by vapourising seawater (yes making fog). There are also proposals to disperse at high level nano-particles of Titanium Oxide and do the job like that, there is even a patent for that bit of silliness.
I do wish journalists had a clue when they write about some paper, and knew of the context and background.
this is just a pad piece for a book (very badly written and using far too simplistic economics by all accounts) written by a UKIP swivel eyed loon. You know the type, the blog and get fringe publishers and make a big thing how they have written a book and claim it is fact.
Just a rehash of the common lies being put forward by these idiots.
Plants also convert O2 to CO2 during respiration (using the sugar produced in photosynthesis to get energy from it). Ever wondered why flowers are commonly taken away from patients in hospitals at night? The main reason trees are counted as good for CO2 is for carbon capture (tying it up for considerable time), not because of photosyntheses else just planting more grass would be in vogue rather than long lived trees.
... journalists who try and write on scientific papers, usually cribbing from some badly written website or corporate press release. These people have next to no understanding of science, let alone atmospheric or environmental science and inevitably take just one side of a paper (always a paper behind a pay wall which they have not read beyond the free abstract) on a small part of the whole and declare that there is no such thing as anthropomorphic climate change. I would like to cite any article written by Mr Page on this very website as proof.
...when he is clueless about the subject?
Two quick questions: what happens when you mix CO2 with water? What happens when you change the thermocline and halocline in the high latitude oceans?
A hint, you generally do not get win win situations like you describe. Seems to me a common thing with deniers, they can only see simple effects.
Here is a hint, for an ex Navy officer, please go and study some oceanography, or any basic science and you will not sound such a moron (or learn not to copy and paste so much.)
"Don't get me started on OpenOffice's suitability for writing documents you are going to submit to university professors."
Why, turnitin happily accepts the ISO standard ODT files, as well as pdfs etc. I wonder what sort of course makes it hard, My PhD is largely being done in openoffice (now libreoffice) as was my Masters. Not doing anything computing based. I suggest you should have a word with your university to actually support international standards.
You could always use "Save As" a word doc anyway.
You would have thought that an ex navy officer would have some clue about oceanography. Go do some actual research instead of regurgitating crap from other websites about papers that are several month old and hardly cutting edge news.
In the paper, it also mentions a significant freshening of the water, that is a decreased salinity. Just a suggestion that you should pay attention to that, which is arguably much more important, the two are interconnected. But I suppose that would get in the way of your ignorance of science. If you read the actual press release article, it mentions that the cooling is not seen at the poles as would be expected, therefore the the most logical reason is localised conditions, wid as they argue. The lack of similar cooling at the poles would mean that it is not ocean wide cooling, and so your reporting of this is pointless.
I once bought a laptop from DSG. It went wonky after 10 months so silly me thought it was under guarantee, Imagine my annoyed look when I was told I would have to pay £150 for them just to look at it, with me paying shipping, so angry I took the opportunity to cancel the works trade account with PC World.
Just bought a new laptop this week, had a look in the local Currys/PC World to see what was on offer. Got a good idea what was available, then went to John Lewis, paid £100 less for the same thing, and with a 2 year guarantee as standard.
when Mr. Page tries to write about climate change, or should I say paraphrase badly written sceptic websites (great investigative journalism there). It is blatant he does not have the necessary background training in the subject to read scientific papers and so jumps to his less than informed opinions. The articles are all the same, start off with boffins, and end up with a link to the paper behind a pay website that he has not read either (some of us in academia do have access to them and can read for ourselves), I assume this is done as some sort of vilification for the article, but usually is the opposite. Here is a hint, read the article, not just the abstract and some biased and ill informed website for research, or just stick to ranting about how shit UK military kit is.
I went through a phase of reading his books a few years ago. In one he explained the great lengths that have to be done to successfully gain illicit entrance to computer systems. Unfortunately he had the most basic details wrong and showed that he really had no clue. IIRC it involved hiring a campervan to drive about so the IP could not be traced.. Was almost reaching Dan Brown levels of silliness.
...I will read a science / climate piece written by someone who has a clue. Lewis stick to rubbishing the UK arms procurement, it is plain you have no clue about climate change (or science). Also plain you do not read the papers, but simply reword stuff you have got from other websites. If you knew about climate change you would understand that even those words mean that some places will warm, some cool. You may also be aware of the cooling effects of aerosols, and the effects since the drive to clean up emissions (Acid rain and all that).
Please, do some research and don't copy stuff written about old papers, it just shows how clueless you are.
To anyone who actually glanced at the emails, has some scientific training,has a basic understanding of statistics and the science of atmospheric chemistry, has used email as informal private communication, common sense has prevailed. To those that do not have a clue, they say whitewash. Come on, do more than 5 pages saying why it is a whitewash, as in do it yourself, not some vested interest website.
Load Factor of 0.3, not 0.3% . Roughly, in other words generating power 30% of the time though it is a bit more complex. Personally I think expansion of nuclear generation is the only really feasible solution in the near to middle term but that does not sit well with politicians.
I did some research on such systems years ago. Engine efficiency was reduced, needed a very large reservoir to hold the collected particulates and they had to be emptied regularly (every few miles), filters got clogged and needed to be replaced often. Hot, fine particulate matter next to a hot combustion source... and do not remind me of the tests with a solvent. Even looked into a system using a clean air cyclone to periodically scour the system (too complex). Good idea, not very practicable. Cyclones have been used in aerosol research for a long time.
As for those thinking they now have to be worried about Black Carbon, it of possibly the longest measured atmospheric pollutant, Glasgow City Council have been measuring it continuously for nearly 100 years (ish). Ringlemann charts were used to estimate it back in Victorian times and still used.
The main effect with regard to climate change is that being black, it efficiently absorbs the visible energy from the sun, rather than reflecting it, then retransmitting in the Infra Red as it heats up, hence lowering the albedo which atmospheric carbon (CO2, Methane etc.) blocks the few escape wavelengths in the atmosphere for energy escape, this is the greenhouse effect.
I did some research on such systems years ago. Engine efficiency was reduced, needed a very large reservoir to hold the collected particulates and they had to be emptied regularly (every few miles), filters got clogged and needed to be replaced often. Hot, fine particulate matter next to a hot combustion source... and do not remind me of the tests with a solvent. Even looked into a system using a clean air cyclone to periodically scour the system (too complex). Good idea, not very practicable. Cyclones have been used in aerosol research for a long time.
As for those thinking they now have to be worried about Black Carbon, it of possibly the longest measured atmospheric pollutant, Glasgow City Council have been measuring it continuously for nearly 100 years (ish). Ringlemann charts were used to estimate it back in Victorian times and still used.
The main effect with regard to climate change is that being black, it efficiently absorbs the visible energy from the sun, rather than reflecting it, then retransmitting in the Infra Red as it heats up, hence lowering the albedo which atmospheric carbon (CO2, Methane etc.) blocks the few escape wavelengths in the atmosphere for energy escape, this is the greenhouse effect.
Obviously you have never worked with calibrated instrumentation (or large datasets). No matter how careful you are with them, they will loose calibration over time. This has to be corrected for, using detailed and agreed upon methodology, equivalence testing etc.. Normalising also acts to remove 'odd' readings, be they too high or too low, after all we are talking about long term trends (over and above the last 10 years that the climate change deniers only seem to be able to quote) , again data removal has to be detailed and verified.
As a scientist working with air quality data, no-one has ever approached me about this great 'conspiracy' as the science makes perfect sense, but then most people only believe what they want to, or have read by journalists with very little understanding.
... by other idiots, IIRC Jeffrey Archer called for this when running for London mayor. The arguement about having to change times when using the channel tunnel may be relevant to him, but I somehow suspect that a considerably larger number would be inconvenienced travelling internally within the UK.