Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

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).


Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser Could Land At Ellington Space Port Near Houston 23

Posted by samzenpus
from the coming-soon dept.
MarkWhittington writes Despite having been rejected in NASA's commercial crew program, Sierra Nevada has been very busy trying to develop its lift body spacecraft, the Dream Chaser. Having rolled out a smaller, cargo version of the spacecraft for the second round for contracts for commercial cargo to the International Space Station, the company has amended the unfunded Space Act Agreement with NASA to add a closeout review milestone that would help transition the Dream Chaser from the preliminary design review to the critical design review step. Finally, Sierra Nevada announced a new agreement on Tuesday with the Houston Airport System to use Ellington Spaceport as a landing site for the cargo version of the Dream Chaser.

Comment: Re:Sea Level Rising (Score 1) 91

by Troed (#49326367) Attached to: The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Introduces the Doomsday Dashboard

With regards to the Wikipedia article claiming a historical 0.0-0.2mm range over the last 2000 years that probably needs to be updated with more recent research.

Thewell-preserved biological remains on the sh tank wall allow us to estimate anRSL rise of 40 ±10 cm at Frejus since Roman times

400 / 2000 = 0.2mm average per year over the last 2000 years. (And as documented in this paper there are other papers that claim higher numbers)


(Slashdot seems to make a mess out of the hyphen in the link - the paper can be found as doi 10.1002/gea.21444 )

Comment: Re:Fuck those guys (Score 1) 569

Personally I think 80% of the blame is with the telco companies who can't get their asses off the couch to agree on a more modern open communication protocol, who instead are still using POTS and it's caller-id cludges which allow anyone in the world to falsify a phone call.

Comment: Re:Who cares? (Score 1) 572

by Troed (#49313505) Attached to: Greenpeace Co-Founder Declares Himself a Climate Change Skeptic

The warming data clearly indicates that rate of temperature of last 50 years is far higher than any other period in history

Why do you believe that? It's not even true for the last 150 years - even less so if we include the rest of the Holocene.

Q: Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and 1975-1998 were identical?

A: So, in answer to the question, the warming rates for all 4 periods are similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.
- Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU)


Until a few decades ago it was generally thought that all large-scale global and regional climate changes occurred gradually over a timescale of many centuries or millennia, scarcely perceptible during a human lifetime. The tendency of climate to change relatively suddenly has been one of the most suprising outcomes of the study of earth history, specifically the last 150,000 years (e.g., Taylor et al., 1993). Some and possibly most large climate changes (involving, for example, a regional change in mean annual temperature of several degrees celsius) occurred at most on a timescale of a few centuries, sometimes decades, and perhaps even just a few years. The decadal-timescale transitions would presumably have been quite noticeable to humans living at such times, and may have created difficulties or opportunities (e.g., the possibility of crossing exposed land bridges, before sea level could rise)


(This post does not question AGW. It does question strange statements regarding our current climate that have no scientific basis)

Comment: "its worst in recorded history" (Score 3, Informative) 413

by Troed (#49313437) Attached to: How 'Virtual Water' Can Help Ease California's Drought

This is nowhere near the worst drought in California's recorded history.

Through studies of tree rings, sediment and other natural evidence, researchers have documented multiple droughts in California that lasted 10 or 20 years in a row during the past 1,000 years -- compared to the mere three-year duration of the current dry spell. The two most severe megadroughts make the Dust Bowl of the 1930s look tame: a 240-year-long drought that started in 850 and, 50 years after the conclusion of that one, another that stretched at least 180 years.

Unless, of course, those proxies are unreliable.


It's hard to think of you as the end result of millions of years of evolution.