Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Survey bias (Score 1) 111

So what you are saying is that if a child does not get tested for thyroid cancer, the child will cure themselves of it?

It is worth noting that does happen. Plus, sounds like we're not actually speaking of cancer. It's very possible that this won't develop into cancer over the course of a human lifetime.

because that's the craziest shit I ever heard

Yea, right. Now it's crazy to want basic scientific procedures, like use of a control group, followed.

Comment Re:Survey bias (Score 1, Troll) 111

Now, does anyone actually believe what TEPCO says about how much radioactive material went airborne?

That is completely irrelevant.

The one criticism from TFA

Let us note that now there are other criticisms of the research. And lack of correlation with radiation exposure is another warning sign that this research is far from definitive.

It is something that should eventually be pretty clear, the issue now is to get as many cancers diagnosed when it's "easy" to treat.

Unless, of course, the cancers aren't actually cancers and treatment ends up causing more harm than it prevents.

Comment Re:Maybe (Score 1) 357

People that worked 30-50 years for Ford living off of their retirement is quite a different view than your statement of them living off a "meal ticket".

So what? The statement is accurate.

Corporate corruption and a lack of prosecution has forced people into more private 401Ks, but that does not mean it should be that way. How you say it shows ignorance and/or disdain for victims of corruption.

And a lack of planning and political action on the part of the so-called victims. If we're going to be "pedantic", we should note that the situation where someone is entrusted with your money for decades tends to have ended up the same way for millennia as well.

I'm also tired of people who are concerned about corruption only when that corruption goes against them.

Comment Re:Show us the data (Score 1) 415

Your neurosis, in the absence of any facts, does not trump an analysis by Bloomberg.

I already mentioned several facts. The first fact is that words are not actions. Just because someone says they did something, doesn't mean they actually did.

Second, the subsidies and distortions of the market are profound in the two countries they studied, the UK and Germany. Germany in particular has double the usual European mean electricity prices while still having times where they're paying others to get rid of their excess electricity. Third, think about it. Why did they choose two of the more heavily subsidized countries as their examples and then claim that the subsidies weren't really that relevant? Why not use an example where the distortions aren't so severe? They could have chosen examples that didn't have huge subsidies that would have to be filtered out. That's fact three.

To use a car analogy, this is like a couple of cars in a traditional car race, packed with all sorts of illegal performance-boosting technology and then someone deciding they should be allowed to keep their prizes because they would have won anyway. The obvious rebuttal here is that if the racers were such clear winners, then they wouldn't have needed to break the rules.

In a similar fashion, if renewable really is better than fossil fuels, then we should be seeing the replacement of fossil fuels with renewables in the markets where there aren't massive subsidies and other advantages. Instead, we don't. I guess that's fact four.

Comment Re:Show us the data (Score 1) 415

In order to balance the equation you end up needing over 200% of your peak demand in nameplate generating capacity, significantly more than the current inventory,in order to have enough capacity when the renewables are not available (during bad weather for example) and allow for maintenance down-time.

You seem to be determined to put down wind as an energy source. You seem to have done some thinking about this. Seem to. But I really wonder what your motivations are. You neglect to mention that in places that have lots of hydro power, a renewable, it is very common to have natural gas power plants sitting idle for long periods of time, waiting to power up. For example, in British Columbia, Canada, the Burrard Thermal natural gas plant sits idle for long periods of time during times of lower electricity demand and high hydro production. When demand goes up, they fire Burrard Thermal up to meet the excess demand. This has worked for decades. And British Columbia has some of the lowest electricity rates in the world. If you were interested in the validity of your arguments, why would you ignore examples like this? What you post seems like obfuscating propaganda.

Comment Re:Show us the data (Score 0, Troll) 415

It looks like that's exactly what they've done:

The problem with that sort of report is that just because they say they've done something doesn't mean that they actually have. I think I'll take this sort of thing more seriously when countries without massive renewable energy subsidies start throwing up lots of renewable energy.

I think it's a shell game like a lot of scam magic power generators. They cherry picked a few of the most extreme cases where a huge part of the costs are hidden from us and telling us that they've done the magic calculations which show that these hidden parts aren't sufficiently large to skew their claims. It's like a perpetual motion machine or a zero point energy machine where all the testing (and of course, the shenanigans) goes on in some locked room that no one can get near.

I don't buy it and neither should you. Wind and solar power just aren't that good (yet) in places that don't have these ridiculous confounding factors. The physics and economics aren't magically different.

Comment Re:Was there any doubt? (Score 1) 139

Humans are also unusual in that they shit where they eat.

Never been around herd animals, I see. And yes, I can see a case for thinking of this many humans in terms of herd animals.

But really every animal does stuff along these lines. I think it's foolish to think that any other animal carrying out a technological civilization with radical abilities to manipulate their environment won't sooner or later run into these problems.

Comment Re:Proof that you don't want govt spending your mo (Score 1) 233

That said, even though khallow is correct, he still loses, because if he is correct, then he is just as screwed as everybody else.

And just as not screwed. If I were to assert that the Koch brothers or Soros are equivalent to Nobel-level physicists because they are rich, I'd be laughed off of the internet again. But somehow it's ok to suppose that they're spooky good propagandists.

I really don't see that. I think the lot of them are throwing money on a bonfire. Turns out that I don't really think much of the value of their public goods either.

Comment Re:Show us the data (Score 4, Insightful) 415

Yeah unless the wind stops blowing then waddya gonna do then huh? HUH?

When the wind stops you use a natural gas power plant. Duh. DUH!

The point is to reduce the amounts of fossil fuels used to generate electricity. If you still need it sometimes, who cares. You have still reduced the amount of fossil fuels used.

Batteries are becoming cheaper and more reliable. In the end, we will likely store large amounts of power in battery banks when the wind blows and the sun shines. This will further reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. Maybe we still need fossil fuels in the future, but our consumption of them will be reduced by 80%. It won't be the end of the world. Except if your entire fortune is based in the fossil fuel business.

Comment Re:Proof that you don't want govt spending your mo (Score 1) 233

Please name ONE *public good* that Soros/Koch has given the country.

Their political advocacy for starters. For example, they have funded quite a number of NGOs. Now, it sounds like you might disagree with them on the value of those public goods, but so would a number of people disagree with those ancient wealthy Athenians on the value of their respective public goods too.

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (7) Well, it's an excellent idea, but it would make the compilers too hard to write.