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


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Herbivores dying out? Not cows I hope! (Score 1) 146

by F34nor (#49607731) Attached to: Empty Landscape Looms, If Large Herbivores Continue to Die Out

It is not about diversity of opinions, opinions are like assholes, everyone has them, it is about what you can prove. You are free to have an opinion and to argue for it but when it is bat shit crazy or based on FUD and propaganda adults can listen long enough to know you have no idea what you are talking about and then ignore you.

Comment: Re:Herbivores dying out? Not cows I hope! (Score 0, Flamebait) 146

by F34nor (#49607705) Attached to: Empty Landscape Looms, If Large Herbivores Continue to Die Out

This is the exact opposite of liberalism btw but you and Turdblossum always attack other people's strengths. You will never PROVE anything related to something as complex as the climate all you can do is get close enough to make an educated guess. Is Earth warming due to non-human activities yes quite probably. We are in an ice-age right now, granted the very end of one. Every time it has started to really end a large scale fresh water even has refrozen the north pole. This has created abnormally uniform temperatures for about the last 10,000 years. Maybe the only reason wee have civilization is due to ABNORMALLY consistent conditions. If if we can't prove anything at all do you want to RISK climate change that makes it unreasonably hard for us to keep doing the things we like? You know like eating, fucking, and watching TV. As for what you think you're talking a out the LONG carbon cycle is controlled by volcanoes, erosion, shellfish and subduction. The reason fossil fuels are bad is because they are artificial volcanoes that are speeding up the total carbon in the system. C02 is a greenhouse gas. Look up a text book from the 1950s before conservatives conflated FREEDOM with fossil fuels and check. What are you defending anyway? FREEDOM! or just the interests of the most profitable system in human history.

The REAL idea of liberalism is"That makes me uncomfortable because it might lead to me rethinking my position, TAKE IT IN AND TEST FOR TRUTH AND REALITY !" Conservatism either American or Religious is the castle keep defense of the intellect. You lake the meta cognition skill to know that the thing you hate the most you are most guilty of your self. That is epistolic cloture, that is FOX. It is also why you lake the nuts to even use an anonymous internet name instead of AC because you will never actually listen to anyone else's answer, you will just wait impatiently for your turn to blather.


Comment: Re: Invisible hand (Score 1) 536

Because they live on the shoulders of giants and feel they are entitled to the benefits they currently have. They are totally driven by ideology rather than need or practicality. They are also deeply ignorant of the realities of history and why we had institut controls on corporations. "Social security is never going to help me so fuck the old and poor!" "I will be a fortune 100 CEO one day and don't think when I'm rich I should have to pay proportional taxes!" "Corporations are people with human rights who deserve both limited liability and the right to petition government" "Money is speech!" and on and fucking on. In my limited experience the more people bitch about free markets or taxes the less likely they are to have ever earned a living with a few notable exceptions.

If you despair for us just remember 50% of people are dumber than average they just used to die more often before we nerfed the world that's why REAL AMERICANS advocate releasing top level predators into the suburban environments.

Comment: Re: Invisible hand (Score 1) 536

Fuck the invisible hand too. Its bullshit; total unmitigated bullshit.


The Economist Has No Clothes
Unscientific assumptions in economic theory are undermining efforts to solve environmental problems
Mar 17, 2008 |By Robert Nadeau ...The strategy the economists used was as simple as it was absurd—they substituted economic variables for physical ones. Utility (a measure of economic well-being) took the place of energy; the sum of utility and expenditure replaced potential and kinetic energy. A number of well-known mathematicians and physicists told the economists that there was absolutely no basis for making these substitutions. But the economists ignored such criticisms and proceeded to claim that they had transformed their field of study into a rigorously mathematical scientific discipline...

Robert Nadeau teaches environmental science and public policy at George Mason University. His most recently published book is The Environmental Endgame (Rutgers University Press, 2006)

Comment: Re:Let's do the Chicken Little Climate Change danc (Score 1) 235

by F34nor (#49204871) Attached to: El Nino Has Finally Arrived, Far Weaker Than Predicted

Why are you so fucking stupid?

risk = damage x likelihood.

What would the damage be if global climate change is right? Is there 0% chance that CO2 traps heat? Is there a 0% chance that methane traps heat? Id there a 0% chance that ocean acidification will effect us?

I really want to know if you are paid to be shill or you are actually as stupid as you seem.

I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve immortality through not dying. -- Woody Allen