Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:BS (Score 1) 192

by hairyfeet (#47978975) Attached to: CDC: Ebola Cases Could Reach 1.4 Million In 4 Months

Then we will get to see evolution in action as the stupid ones who raided the hospital to "rescue" their dying relatives from "bad white medicine" as the witch doctors called it, refuse to give up ritual washing of the bleeding sore covered dead, and generally refuse to listen to anything said by an outsider dies out and those smart enough to listen will survive.

I'm sorry but I have a real hard time feeling sympathy for those that act pants on head retarded and get themselves killed. Hell how many here know how this latest outbreak came about? Everybody from local governments to the Red Cross has been saying to the local population since the mid 1980s "Whatever you do DO NOT EAT BUSH MEAT,ESPECIALLY MONKEYS!!" so what did they find when they went looking for patient zero? A woman who has made a meal of bush meat, specifically monkey, and cut herself while chopping up monkey meat....I'm sorry but if you are THAT fucking stupid, that 30 years of warnings still don't work? Well maybe its time for some good old fashioned Darwinism to weed out the brainless so they can stop pissing in the gene pool.

I know it sounds heartless and cruel but to use a famed car analogy if I stick up 40 signs that say "If you step in front of trucks you will be maimed or killed" show you a video titled" Why stepping in front of trucks is bad" followed by handing you a pamphlet entitled "just say no to stepping in front of trucks" only to have you throw it in the trash, hand your friend a camera and go "Hi my name is Steve-o and this is stepping in front of trucks" and get yourself turned into a mangled mess of broken bones and screams why EXACTLY should I feel sorry for you? After all I did all i could to warn you of the danger, but if you simply refuse to listen what else can you do but let Darwin thin the herd?

Comment: Re:But - what's changing the winds? (Score 1) 106

by geekoid (#47978835) Attached to: Study Links Pacific Coastal Warming To Changing Winds

You are so attached to your provably(and proven) wrong belief that you don't even read the abstract before spew you emotional based nonsense and polluting the comments.

Nothing in the study refute the fact that excess greenhouse gasses are trapping energy.

Unless you are ready to overturn 100+ years of science the proves greenhouse gasses trap energy?

anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) is a fact.
In fact, it's so simply even you could devise a test.
1) Visible light strikes the earth Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
2) Visible light has nothing for CO2 to absorb, so it pass right on through. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
3) When visible light strike an object, IR is generated. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
4) Green house gasses, such as CO2, absorb energy(heat) from IR. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
5) Humans produce more CO2(and other green house gasses) then can be absorbed through the cycle. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes

Each one of those has been tested, a lot. You notice deniers don't actual address the facts of AGW? Don't have a test that shows those facts to be false?
So now you have to answer:
Why do you think trapping more energy(heat) in the lower atmosphere does not impact the climate?

Comment: Re:I barely read the abstract (Score 2) 106

by geekoid (#47978609) Attached to: Study Links Pacific Coastal Warming To Changing Winds

no.
They have shown that a local effect, pacific northwest, might have had a bigger impact on local winds. The fact tat ther wind changes can be do yo e;levate GLOBAL energy trapping isn't addressed in any clear way.

The fact that they used global model and tried to apply them to a local event is suspect.
No matter, it's one study. Lets see follow up.
NOTHING in the study refutes the fact that the lower atmosphere of the earth is warming do to excess CO2 trapping energy.

Comment: Re:Two new deniers are born... (Score 1, Informative) 106

by geekoid (#47978565) Attached to: Study Links Pacific Coastal Warming To Changing Winds

If you don't think excess greenhouse gasses, (CO2, tc) are cause an increase in trapped energy, then you are an idiot. This is proven science.

anthropomorphic global warming (AGW) is a fact.
In fact, it's so simply even you could devise a test.
1) Visible light strikes the earth Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
2) Visible light has nothing for CO2 to absorb, so it pass right on through. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
3) When visible light strike an object, IR is generated. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
4) Green house gasses, such as CO2, absorb energy(heat) from IR. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes
5) Humans produce more CO2(and other green house gasses) then can be absorbed through the cycle. Testable? Yes. Tested? Yes. Could anyone devise a test? Yes

Each one of those has been tested, a lot. You notice deniers don't actual address the facts of AGW? Don't have a test that shows those facts to be false?
So now you have to answer:
Why do you think trapping more energy(heat) in the lower atmosphere does not impact the climate?

Comment: Re:TF2 (Score 1) 87

Like a Linux zealot would ever state that Linux systems has any flaws to begin with.

Linux is better then any OS in every way. In the ways it isn't it is because those are the features you don't need (until it gets them)

You could say the same about Mac Fanboys or Windows Cheerleaders.

Comment: Re:$60 for an iPhone case sounds high, but it isn' (Score 1) 144

by Osgeld (#47974997) Attached to: The UPS Store Will 3-D Print Stuff For You

sigh, selective reading

Originally it was said all most printers are based on open source, I stated no not high quality commercial ones, so point out a commercial grade printer VS a copycat open source one is TOTALLY FUCKING RELEVANT

just cause you want to jump in with your snotty ass attitude in the middle of a discussion does not mean you have all the information

Comment: Re:Book Bans (Score 0) 149

by geekoid (#47973951) Attached to: It's Banned Books Week; I recommend ...

" I would expect only books appropriate for the ages of the students. "
and that is where you fail.

What is appropriated? Who are you to decide?

" The first two Harry Potter books are okay for 8- and 9- year-old children, but each book gets progressively darker."
And? YOU seriously underestimate children.

". I, personally wouldn't want my son to read The Golden Compass until he can hear an opposing viewpoint"
wow. You're a pretty horrible parent. I can't imagine my kids being old enough to read that and not being able to understand different view points. Or maybe you kids are just potato heads.

MY kids have been reading since they where around 2. at 12, their reading level is well above what is laughingly called 'young adult'. ALthoug they still enjoy some YA titles.
Maybe you should red to your kids and explain opposing viewpoints? No, of course not you want to indoctrinate them into what you like instead of respect and trust your children.

You're type of thing that permeated parents love the last 20 years is why no one can have discourse, and why education and critical thinking is failing.
Here is an example of you brilliant thinking that yo are foisting onto you poor children:
" I support traditional marriages,"
WTF does that even mean? It's really nonsense.
Do you mean by state or by church? do you know anyone who says traditional marriage should happen? Or is it a passive aggressive message to remove rights from other people? Do you not understand that marriage among anyone other then nobles is only a few hundred years old?

Comment: Re:"Say something I don't like, and I will sue you (Score 0) 162

by geekoid (#47973621) Attached to: Anonymous Peer-review Comments May Spark Legal Battle

Except he can't defend himself against someone who can continue to make post whether or not they are accurate.

He could spend every day., all day trying to defend each time a comment is made. That would be pretty wasteful.
The person making the comment could actually go through normal peer review channels.
BTW AC comment aren't actually peer review.

Have you ever tried to defend yourself against one or more people making AC comments? It is not possible.

"What man has done, man can aspire to do." -- Jerry Pournelle, about space flight

Working...