Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:I know why they're annoyed (Score 1) 335

by Hylandr (#46558549) Attached to: Nate Silver's New Site Stirs Climate Controversy

Considering the great number of regular variables in our ocean it's not acceptable to state the water was higher or not. To claim it is because of 'global warming' is a fine collection of bovine excrement.

Average water levels higher? Try the millions of tonnage of displacement on our oceans by shipping, cruise ships and the like. Maybe. localized Gravitational anomalies perhaps ( Hint: our '1G' is an average that varies, it's not absolute. )

There is so much about our earth we don't know. Trying to say an ocean is a few inches higher is laughable at best. You can measure the ocean anytime you want and only measure during your high tides or whatever. It's 'Confirmation Bias' at it's worst. We don't know how the Earth works well enough, and all this green crap could actually be making it worse.

The whole concept of carbon credits is tantamount to profiteering, scaremongering and a form of terrorism all it's own.

I only hope some day all the chicken littles that bought into this shceme will come to their senses and formal charges are brought against the perpetrators for crimes against humanity.

Comment: Re:I know why they're annoyed (Score 1) 335

by Hylandr (#46548175) Attached to: Nate Silver's New Site Stirs Climate Controversy

In respect to this argument, the article posted by OP has it dead on, and you are dead wrong.

Sandy did more damage because people build their houses and boardwalks out of wood on sand bars and low lying coastal areas. The 'raised sea-level' was called 'storm surge', which depending on the tide, can be significantly higher or lower when it makes landfall. Factors like the slope of the seabed coming to the shore play a role also.

The chicken-littles of the 'scientific' community are butt-hurt because they had one of their doom-rattles taken from them.

Comment: Re:I know why they're annoyed (Score 2, Informative) 335

by Hylandr (#46541351) Attached to: Nate Silver's New Site Stirs Climate Controversy

Except the number of Hurricanes actually HITTING the U.S. has dwindled significantly in the last couple years. The one or two that do get through hit in more sensitive areas not prepared for it.

Every year the NOAA has pronounced a more severe storm season that's whimpered despite naming storms they wouldn't have even considered 10 years ago. I know, because I have been watching.

Example:

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/t...

Found at:

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/data/#...

Comment: Re:Talking outta ass (Score 1) 260

by Hylandr (#46497583) Attached to: The Era of Facebook Is an Anomaly

Don't be so sure.

All my younger kids cannot wait until they are old enough to get a facebook account, and my oldest three that do have one are on it constantly.

Chances are very high that lack of facebook consumption by kids is limited by very paranoid parents that are crippling their future in any tech field by not allowing regular access to the Internet.

Comment: Re:-_- (Score 3, Informative) 329

by Reilaos (#46249595) Attached to: Tesla Model S Caught Fire While Parked and Unplugged

A entire car line was recalled for catching fire for no reason earlier last year. People got in hi-speed wrecks and caused fires, happening to be in a Tesla. The latter gets coverage, the former gets hardly any. No spin from what I can see here, just a disproportionate coverage on a car that's already in the spotlight.

Comment: Re:What's the difference? (Score 1) 462

by Reilaos (#46248561) Attached to: Facebook Debuts New Gender Options, Pronoun Choices

What about genetic abnormalities? XXY? XYY? What about those who have Androgen insensitivity syndrome, where they exhibit superficially female organs and female secondary sex characteristics, but are genetically male?

Additionally, you've also mistaken sex for gender, which is a longer post that I'm too lazy to write.

Comment: Re:Error in your calculation: 200 milers *per gall (Score 1) 171

by Hylandr (#43531833) Attached to: Will Future Tesla Cars Use Metal-Air Batteries?

It seems you're assuming (B) is the cost of an entire battery.

I would expect the consumable portion of the battery other than water would be in the form of replaceable rods or plates much like replacing a spark plug or a Diode.

They may want $15,000 for the entire battery, but the Tesla engineers are pretty bright people, and I am sure will find a solution that's easily maintainable. They must have something in mind so far, or I expect they wouldn't have taken it this far.

But you're right though, all this is at this point is speculation. I for one look forward to discovery and implementation of newer technologies. We won't know what will work and what won't until it's been put it on the market and tested 'in the wild'.

Having been a wrecker driver, I think the idea of a battery that goes completely dead on impact by it draining all it's water is beyond awesome. With electric cars these days just touching one of those things after a major accident could send you to the pearly gates.

FORTH IF HONK THEN

Working...