Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:NYTimes wouldn't write this about... (Score 1) 437

by Cochonou (#49104825) Attached to: How One Climate-Change Skeptic Has Profited From Corporate Interests
Oh by the way, I an atmospheric scientist and I work with computer models every day. I have serious doubts about how well we can simulate the future climate of earth in 10 years, let alone 100 years into the future. We just recently began incorporating micro-biology into the climate models. They are very crude and in my opinion, it's these very organisms that over the long term, will play an ultimate role in the carbon/oxygen balance. Until we have these features much better modeled, we cannot say with any sort of certainty what the earth's temperature will look like in the long term. At this point, there is still a lot of variability in the outcome, by make very minute changes to the model initial assumptions.

Yes, of course. The current models point to a strong global warming. They might very well be wrong.
The matter at hand is actually quite simple. Knowing that the current models predict a salient danger, would you rather:
- Act now to reduce carbon emissions, given corrective actions are very expensive and might turn out to be useless at the end ?
- Wait for more information before acting, knowing that delaying the corrective actions might have very nefarious results in the end ?
The choice is not straightforward. If it was, there wouldn't be such a debate.

Comment: Re:Accuracy of traditional lie-detector polygraphs (Score 2) 106

by Cochonou (#48743911) Attached to: European Researchers Develop More Accurate Full-Body Polygraph
I would also like to know if there is really a "widespread use" of polygraphs. I understood they were almost exclusively used in the US, and that most other countries actually forbade its use as evidence in courts - which would make the use of polygraph a local idiosyncracy rather than a widespread practice.

Comment: Re:Sixteen children and one infant (Score 1) 275

by MobileTatsu-NJG (#48687561) Attached to: AirAsia Flight Goes Missing Between Indonesia and Singapore

We don't feel that way due to some justification, we just do feel that way because we can't help it and then we rationalize that.

Actually... It is being rationalized on both sides of the debate, not one. Logic is being used, but only for one set of values, leading to a mistaken impression that one is right, as opposed to just having an opinion. Nobody is on any higher ground than "I have buddies here that agree with me". The reason for that is that this article was never about choosing which lives to save. The poster I replied to, in order to pose as a 'smarter than the rest of us' person, attempted to pervert it into that. But since he based it on a misunderstanding of why it came up in the first place, replying to my post about the actual value of the individual lives is fruitless. This scenario doesn't lend itself to this discussion.

None of what you said has any relevance to why the number of children and infants was brought up by the news outlet. If you want to have a hypothetical debate about the value of children, then let's talk about a scenario involving life boats.

Comment: Re:Sixteen children and one infant (Score 5, Insightful) 275

by MobileTatsu-NJG (#48683651) Attached to: AirAsia Flight Goes Missing Between Indonesia and Singapore

Adults have lived some of their life. Kids have missed out on things most believe everbody should be able to do before they die, like their first kiss.

Everybody here actually understands this, I have no idea why you all picked now to suddenly act like you're Mr. Spock.

You can not win the game, and you are not allowed to stop playing. -- The Third Law Of Thermodynamics

Working...