Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: why do we care (Score 1) 490

by cinnamon colbert (#47769453) Attached to: Climate Damage 'Irreversible' According Leaked Climate Report

obviously, because global warming may lead to something very bad and very $$; if it doesn't lead to these things, not a lot of people will care.
How do we know global warming might lead to something bad , at least in a quantitative sense ?
All (all) of our detailed knowledge is from computer programs (climate models) which simulate changes in the future

However, It is an observed fact (fyfe) that over the last ten years, the surface temp of the earth has not increased as much as predicted by models; the models fail.
The models also can't reconstruct the last few thousand years (Liu), where we Know what happened.

This anomaly is the main current argument of denialists (those who think global warming is not occurring, or is not manmade, or is not important) and cause for concern among climate scientists.

Several attempts have been made to find the missing heat without great acceptance, eg Cowtan (who are not, afaik, climatologists) say that the missing heat is in the Arctic, which is not well measured by instruments.
It appears that Chen and Tung have found the answer: the earth is warming, but the heat is going into the ocean instead of the atmosphere.

SO: the models are clearly not accurate even on a 10year time scale.
so why should we take seriously alarmist views about the future ?
I guess it is probability: if there is even a X% chance that something really bad could happen, is it worth spending ~ 0.5% of global GDP (~ 850 billion dollars a year) to prevent this possible catastrophre ?

Me personally, my house is about 5 miles and 200 feet up from the Atlantic Ocean, so global warming is good for me: I get beachfront property......

Fyfe
http://hypergeometric.wordpres...

liu
http://www.pnas.org/content/ea...

cowtan
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

chen and tung
http://www.washington.edu/news...

Comment: luck is really important (Score 1) 509

by cinnamon colbert (#47463755) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Future-Proof Jobs?

So our biotech company is folding, and people are scrambling for jobs
our VP/marketing is in the Airport, and she runs into a guy , a rich guy, she hasn't seen in ten years
She says, yadda yadda, company going under, microarray slides, yadda..
and the guy says, I've been looking to aquire microarray technology....

I mean, you can't make this crap up

anyway, maybe your daughter is interested in money and career, and maybe she ain't

However, there are two things I feel pretty confident about:
  for most Americans, the primary or major source of retirment income is soc sec
hence, the most important thing she can do is vote for democrats who pledge to support soc sec

for most working americans, their most important financial asset, far bigger then their house, is the ability to earn a wage
hence, disability insurance is like really important ( i would think that people who consider themselves logical and mathy can figure this one out...)

Comment: why is cool desirable (Score 1) 143

I mean, if SAS works, why waste time on hot cool stuff that may be obsolete in a year or two ?
this whole innovation for the sake of innovation thing is so last century
(see a post on crooked timber about a week or so ago, also P Krugman in his blog flagged a New Yorker article on the cult of innovation)

Comment: doesn't anyone remember (Score 1) 222

by cinnamon colbert (#47183007) Attached to: The Sci-Fi Myth of Killer Machines

the original starwars concept ?
Satellites in space would look for the heat signature of a rocket in boost phase, and decide, in a time to short for humans to be involved, if Russia was launching ICBMs at us

The idea that machines can't be autonomous and deadly is just silly beyond belief
Since we are creating them, they will be like us: Does anyone else think we will get treated the way we (Europeans) treated Amerindians
The potosi silver mine, the mouth of hell ??

Comment: The real story (Score 1) 653

fluke multimeters are about a 100 bucks
Cheap ones that are readily available on ebay (you don't need sparkfun) are under 30

so, the real reason is that fluke is desperate to stop the loss of market share; each multimeter spark notes sells for 15 bucks is a potential 100 dollar sale that fluke lost

Comment: Re:Impossible (Score 1) 387

by cinnamon colbert (#46133931) Attached to: Should Everybody Learn To Code?

just total BS
however, if you can post some data to back up your posistion - and not just anecdotal candidate couldn't understand C indirect pointer stuff - I will gladly apologize

sure, maybe 60% of the population can't become good coders, but they can learn enough to , say use Perl to filter stuff, or at least understand that coding is not magic

Comment: is coding more important then (Score 1) 387

by cinnamon colbert (#46133913) Attached to: Should Everybody Learn To Code?

there are so many hours in the school day.
Look at the world: real problems are war, famine, violence, lack of love
this has nothing to do with coding
I think that rather then take hours out of the k12 curriculum for coding, we should take hours out for psychology.
maybe if children learned more about them selves and others, ti would help with the big problems

Comment: op all wrong (Score 3, Informative) 249

by cinnamon colbert (#45840055) Attached to: Reducing Climate Change Uncertainty By Figuring Out Clouds

the abstract doesn't say they used data, it says they identified a math procedure that caused variation between the models

so, what you have are a lot of complex computer models that vary in output; the authors show that about half the variation is due to cloud mixing
however, we have no idea if the models are in fact accurate, other then Fig 1b of Fyfe etal, which suggests that the models are in fact NOT accurate, so it doesn't matter if you lower the variation between them.
http://www.see.ed.ac.uk/~shs/Climate%20change/Climate%20model%20results/over%20estimate.pdf

I would remind people of history: in the early 1800s, people realized that CO2 absorbs IR, and the late 1800s, they realized that humans were actually putting out enough CO2 to make a diff
Then, around 1900, someone pointed out that the atmosphere is optically thick in the IR (if you could see the color "IR" it would be pitch black all the time), so an increase in CO2 shouldn't matter
This *scientific consensus* lasted untill the 1950s, when people realized that it is emission from the outer atmosphere that matttrs....

so, for 50 years, there was a consensus that CO2 human warming was hooey

Comment: not panic, but people fixing bugs (Score 1) 346

by cinnamon colbert (#45373369) Attached to: "War Room" Notes Describe IT Chaos At Healthcare.gov

jeezum, didn't *anyone* actually read the pdf files ?
I looked at em, and the majority are what you expect - people methodically going thru punch lists and bug reports and fixes
perfectly norma
but no, the media+obamahaters have to make a big deal of it
just once, I'd like one of you obamahaters to acknowlede a FACT
today, there are people who are much better off thanks to PPACA - teenagers with leukemia, people with pre existing conditions, etc

and as for all the media BS about canceled policys - its clear that most of those policys weren't what you wold call "health insurance" eg policys that pay 100 dollars a day if hospitalized...those are like matilda's dad the used car sales man policys

"Our reruns are better than theirs." -- Nick at Nite

Working...