There are always the gravitational fields of the star system to react against. Although the orbital mechanics can make many things counter-intuitive.

And one of the things that is observed is that the energy of the emitted photon is observed by an external observer to be altered by the kinetic energy of the moving origin. In the direction of travel the photon will be observed to have been blue-shifted, in the opposite direction it will be observed to have been red-shifted.

Because the ice only exposed to the ocean water on the bottom. On the top is air, and on the sides is either land mass or more ice. One of the ideas for why the area of Antarctic ice is increasing is because the new ice is frozen fresh water from the ice melt. The fresh water, being less dense than the salt water floats on top of the more saline ocean water. And, because it has less salt in it, the freezing point is higher, so it's easier to freeze. VOLUME is AREA*depth. Decrease the depth and the VOLUME drops.

Then there's the cube-squared law, for a given VOLUME, increasing the surface AREA by decreasing the depth, increases the heat transfer capability. So, thinner ice over a larger area can give off or absorb heat more quickly. If the average temp is below freezing, you'll observe more heat given off to the surroundings and more ice forming, if the average temp is above freezing you'll observer more heat absorbed from the surroundings and more ice melting.

The Antarctic ice cap is up to 45.5 million years old. 3000/45,500,000 = ? Then subtract some for the interglacial periods in the last 45.5 million years. That makes the accumulation rate miniscule. As well as having nothing to say about the current rate of accumulation.

QED is apparently mistranslated in this case.

The article says that the melting is increasing sea level by 0.16 mm/year (of 2.6 to 2.9mm total sea level rise/year). And the estimated melted mass is 65 Gigatons/year.

What does your authoritative source have for the measurements of increasing Antarctic Ice mass? Especially in the interior of Antarctica (which is officially a desert climate)?

And your source for data that says ice is accumulating in the Antarctic Interior?

Most of the interior is a desert, no more than a few centimeters of ice crystal precipitation per year.

"Should" means "if this interglacial period were repeating the cycle of previous interglacial periods, the world should be cooling down".

I would classify avoiding having glacial ice sheets covering large tracts of the northern hemisphere as a good thing, yes. As in almost everything, moderation is best.

Except, of course that we're well past the average mid-point of an interglacial period and the climate should be headed for another period of glaciation. And given the current climate trends, the next period of glaciation seems to be moving into the future.

Additionally, Esquire magazine put him into the "Crazy Caucus" section of "The 10 Worst Members of Congress" with Michele Bachman and Steve King.

As a long-time resident of Minnesota, you have my abject apology for putting Michele Bachman in Congress. I'm not in her gerrymandered district, but I'm still embarrassed.

I did find a survey (with, like, percentages and everything...) Here http://www.itworld.com/article....

It seems to reflect Gnomes efforts to be very selective about their users.

We had a PDP 8/I that the EE guys built a high speed paper tape reader for. One I/O addresss made it go forward, the other backward. Watching various sort algorithms run against data on the tape were educational in a unique way.

We also had a paper tape based 4K 2Pass Algol compiler that worked, it waited until you reloaded the freshly punched tape of intermediate format to start the next pass and gave you an loadable paper table on the final pass.

Not bad for a machine that had 8 Opcodes.

Really wishful thinking. While we're seeing articles about "cutting the cable" and binge show watching (without commercials). The television advertising groups are trying to convince their customers that everyone wants to be like television. I spend time and money avoiding commercials, because they waste my life-span.

Of course I understand. Mostly from having to debug and fix some of the multitude of ways that sort of "pattern" gets bollixed up. The biggest source of bugs in that instances of that pattern is the disconnect between the statements preceding each goto and the statements after the label. Do you have multiple labels? A label for each potential failing resource? An unwound set of labels? What convention are you using for the labels?

Or, the another possibility is recording everything that needs to be cleaned up. That introduces more state data that has to be initialized, maintained in a coherent state and cleaned up.

Now suppose that you have to change the order of setup because of a newly discovered hardware restriction. You potentially have to re-order the labels for your gotos, or which cleanup gets done after each label.

If the cleanup is done at the bottom of every block that is executed because of success, it is automatically done in the proper time and place.

And, the get_db acquired locks and did mallocs, compute_v created a new thread to handle something asynchronously.

So, bailing out leaves dangling threads, leaking memory, and deadlocks that show up the next time the function is entered.

It's the easy way out only once.

Or, there's this variation I used while trying to remove a bunch of . (hidden) directories from a user directory. As root of course, otherwise it's not nearly as funny.

rm -rf .*

The key fact is that .. matches .*