Nope I gotta agree with all the other people who have replied to you. I can't figure out how this is adding value. To me it just doesn't compute. Why did the seller sell the bike for less than $600? Why did the buyer pay more than $500? If they're willing to compromise, couldn't they have done the transaction directly and saved money without the middleman?
That's not a perfect analogy, but it's not too far off.
It's more like this. There's a classifieds forum which regular users can refresh once every 10 minutes. Special users with a paid subscription can refresh once per second.
You post "Bicycle wanted, will pay up to $500" and someone else posts "Bicycle for sale, $400" then the speedy special user buys the bicycle for $400 and puts it up for sale for $500 before you or the seller can refresh (at best, when they're not doing even shadier things like spamming the forum with fake Wanted posts etc).
Somehow this is supposed to produce value. I think it has a similar effect on the economy to either robbery or counterfeiting currency. I can see no way this produces any value.
Wasn't something like this done after the Flash Crash (or some other recent stock exchange fuckup?)
Exactly. Do your worst, black hats. The system's already rooted by Wall Street bankers.
I would like to add that a boulder fell on a mountain goat in Paraguay this morning and it was also a result of the Democrats' disastrous foreign policy.
Oh yeah that was definitely not smart. Pretty much only military aircraft are ever painted grey. No paint job short of a full livery with the correct identifying marks is an excuse for shooting down a plane, but...that didn't help.
Hard work becomes easy without all those pesky government rules in the way! Imagine the possibilities!
Negative mass reacts oppositely to both gravity and intertia. Oddly, that means that negative mass still falls down in a gravitational field: The gravitational force is opposite, but negative mass responds negatively to force (a=F/m, where both F and m are negative). So negative mass particles repel each other gravitationally, but are attracted to positive mass objects.
Aw dammit, I was hoping we could build antigravity vehicles from this stuff...or at least some negative mass body panels to lighten up my car
This funny-looking shellfish was one of Earth's apex predators at the time. How quaint.
Maybe her shirt had "women are dumb" written on it.
I can only assume your problem with the "97%" meta-study result was not considering those that didn't express a position on the issue in their abstract. They weren't counted either way. But if you're expecting that considering those would move the percentage downward, other studies suggest you'd be in for a nasty shock:
http://skepticalscience.com/97...
Next, how are the graphs not of the same thing? Both compare the predictions of various models with observed temperatures. The only difference is that the one I linked to takes the observed temperatures from 3 different institutions' sensor systems, and the one you linked to takes them from 2 satellites and 4 balloons. Also the date range on yours is slightly wider in both directions.
In case you weren't looking at the right one, it's this one specifically:
http://www.skepticalscience.co...
The study you linked to about overestimations basically makes the "only atmospheric warming" argument, which is what creates the illusion of "the pause." The UK's MET office has a nice page on this:
The Government Control Over All Autonomous Cars Act. It's a working title, we're trying to come up with a backronym for SAFECAR.
So did you not look at the graphs I link to, or do you take issue with them? They show that the IPCC predictions are very accurate. Are you going to argue atmospheric vs. oceanic warming? The IPCC has never admitted to a major inaccuracy (major being greater than 0.01C per decade - about 1% of the current error claimed by Roy Spencer's hogwash). And that admission has become the most overhyped played-out sound bite since "HIDE TEH DECLINEZ!!1!"
I am implying nothing of the sort. The ONLY think I was implying was that the climate models are flawed. I neither claimed or implied any kind of "conspiracy".
OK. Let's say the climate models are flawed. The world's scientists have been notified. Why do you think they've done nothing about it? Your implications logically lead to this question. Or, let me guess, you prefer not to speculate while making these insidious implications?
My weak passwords aren't actually weak but they're relatively simple, I use them for forums etc, my email has a STRONG password because it's the keys to the kingdom of all my accounts, and if I used online banking that would have a strong password as well.
Something that helps to make a simple password unique and stronger yet memorable is to come up with a way to mix in something from each site. For example you could postfix them with the dominant color on the site, for Slashdot that would be green.
They wouldn't bother to manipulate this poll. It has to be something meaningful, like the next time a whistleblower is nominated for Time Magazine Person of the Year.
"The following is not for the weak of heart or Fundamentalists." -- Dave Barry
