Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:What will it take to abate your fear? (Score 1) 209

by dylan_- (#47803967) Attached to: Study: Antarctic Sea-Level Rising Faster Than Global Rate

That climate change occurs naturally is no reason to think it can't also occur artificially. That's like saying that since fire has existed since the earth began, there's no such thing as arson.

You also fail to understand the "oceans storing heat". We measure how much energy the earth absorbs and how much it radiates. The difference must go somewhere. The amount of atmospheric warming plus the ocean surface warming plus ice melting etc etc don't amount to enough to cover the amount of energy absorbed, so either those things are warming *more* than we measure, or the energy is going somewhere we don't measure. So the deep oceans are the best bet. If you have another theory (that doesn't involve the energy being waved away by the natural cycle fairies) then feel free to share.

Perhaps learn some physics first though, yes? (Why do Americans say "physics" but not "maths"?)

Comment: Re:Oops in title - "sans" ? (Score 2) 147

by dylan_- (#46691903) Attached to: Seagate Releases 6TB Hard Drive Sans Helium

Doesn't "sans" mean without?

Yes, that's because WD's 6TB Ultrastar He6 was hermetically sealed with helium inside, something the company said was critical to reducing friction for additional platters, while also increasing power savings and reliability. Seagate, however, said it doesn't yet need to rely on Helium to achieve the 50% increase in capacity over it's last 4TB drive.

At least, I'm sure I read that somewhere.

Comment: Re:Cherry Picking is Much of the Issue (Score 1) 335

by dylan_- (#46544925) Attached to: Nate Silver's New Site Stirs Climate Controversy
No, it's more like:

If you pick 17 years you get one conclusion.*

If you pick 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 or 34 years you get another conclusion.

(*actually, you don't. I've no idea where this "17 years" thing came from. The temperature data shows a rise over the last 17 years)

Comment: Re:Feynman tutored me in QM at Caltech (Score 1) 106

by dylan_- (#46388357) Attached to: Physicists Test Symmetry Principle With an Antimatter Beam

I'm afraid you've been wrong since 2nd grade then.

The mirror is actually misleading. Here's an alternative question:

Why, when you're facing another person, are your left and right reversed, but your up and down the same?

Bonus question: It's easy to describe what up and down are (down is closer to the Earth, up is further away). How would you describe left and right?

Comment: Re:A very interesting answer (Score 3, Informative) 560

by dylan_- (#46296997) Attached to: How Well Do Our Climate Models Match Our Observations?

Or "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on ... shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate."

Heh, I love it when deniers mindlessly repeat that quote. You don't even know what it means, do you? Because if you did, you certainly wouldn't be mentioning it.

You see, we measure how much energy the Sun outputs. And we measure how much the Earth reflects of that energy (its albedo). We also measure how much it radiates, which - if the Earth was at a stable temperature - would be the same as the difference between the first two. Understand so far? That's what the "CERES data" refers to.

What Trenberth is saying is that the CERES data shows there should be far *more* warming than we're actually measuring! When you take into account air temperature increase, melting ice, sea temperature increase, etc etc it *still* leaves a big chunk of energy to account for. Now, any sane person would therefore assume that the energy can't just vanish: it's got to go somewhere that we aren't measuring.

Not the deniers, they think it's all being whisked away by the natural cycle fairies. Or perhaps they just don't understand what it is they're saying and are mindlessly repeating what they read on some blog. Hey, maybe you can tell us. Which is it?

Comment: Re: follow the money (Score 1) 334

/dev/null seems to have great writing performance but has terrible reading performance. I wouldn't recommend it.

That's because it blocks while waiting on zero point energy. If performance is an issue, you can use /dev/unull instead, if you don't really need high quality nullity.

Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward.

Working...