Forgot your password?

Comment: How do you explain slashdot's reaction? (Score 2) 226

Although I realize you are a "physicist," not a "psychologist," it's still one of those "phy" type words. What do you think of Slashdot's (so far) overwhelmingly negative reaction to its editors asking for questions about the SCIENCE of the show for the show's SCIENCE ADVISOR and instead getting comments about the show's characterizations, humor, laugh track, and a fixation on the size of Kaley Cuoco's breasts? As the show's SCIENCE ADVISOR are you in a position to change or influence any of these "transgressions?"

Is this proof that the Geekdom of Slashdot is not capable of paying attention to the question at hand and has completely missed the point, were all forced to play the cello as kids, are letting their pent up emotions get in the way of asking an intelligent question and instead choose to lash out at a show they all watch, or still, after all these years, are incapable of getting laid? Or all of the above?

Comment: Move along. Nothing to see here (Score 0) 497

by mschuyler (#47416835) Attached to: Climate Change Skeptic Group Must Pay Damages To UVA, Michael Mann

So it's perfectly OK to "hide the decline." After all, it doesn't really matter if tree ring data shows a decline in temperature in modern times when the temperature is obviously rising as shown by accurate thermometers. We'll just use the tree ring data as a proxy for past temperatures anyway. And when we discover the "anomaly" we'll just neglect to extend that graph line because it would be awkward to explain just why that green line is headed down, down, down while everything else is headed up.

After all, we're only coming off the "Little Ice Age" and are in an inter-glacial period. We can explain the "Medieval Warming Period" and the "Roman Warming Period" They're just "local variations," you know.

And so what if Al Gore got his CO2 readings and his temperature readings backwards, thus claiming CO2 caused temperature rises when the rises came first? It makes a very scary looking graph.

And what about the ice core samples from Greenland that show the "Hockey Stick" is such a minor glitch it can't be seen? Don't worry. We can change the scale to make it look bad and besides, no matter what input we use, as long as it's "red noise" (like stock prices) we get a hockey stick anyway! So no matter what we do, we can show how alarming it is!

Oh, and did we put some of our temperature gauges in asphalt parking lots in the south? Don't worry, we've "adjusted" those readings artificially.

After all, we're SCIENTISTS and we can explain everything. Move along. There's nothing to see here.

Chemtrails are real, too....

Comment: Re:4 million people disagree (Score 1) 336

by mschuyler (#46807513) Attached to: Detroit: America's Next Tech Boomtown

4 million people was the figure quoted. 4 million people "disagreed." I assumed that was the population of Detroit. Obviously that was wrong, It's the "Metro area of Detroit" that is 4 million, so you get off on a technicality, but it does NOT CHANGE THE FACT that Detroit's murder rate of 48 per 100,000 is FAR higher than more civilized parts of the country, including San Jose at 4.1 per 100,000.

Add to that the fact that the city is bankrupt through decades of mismanagement, it's houses are being bulldozed. The only thing that keeps the city going is gambling. It's police force is brutal, as is its extremes of climate. And its economy sucks.

Other than that, I'm sure it's a great place to live. Pardon if the rest of the country doesn't flock to live there, Meanwhile the city proper (since you insist on those numbers) has witnessed a decline in population from over a million in 1990 to 713,000 today. In other words, people are leaving as fast as they can.

Comment: Re:4 million people disagree (Score 1) 336

by mschuyler (#46791585) Attached to: Detroit: America's Next Tech Boomtown

Of course you have to make it through the day without getting murdered. Detroit is exceeded only by New Orleans for murder capital of America (48 per 100,000 in 2011). Compare Silicon Valley (San Jose) at 4.6 per 100,000 in 2012. So by this time next year a couple thousand of those 4 million will be dead.

There's a lot more to avoid in Detroit than the snow. I guess that makes me a wuss.

Comment: Re:Frist pots (Score 1) 341

by mschuyler (#46784551) Attached to: I expect to retire ...

It is by design. The "original" retirement age of 65 was set there because that was the average life expectancy. The idea was that if you managed to beat the odds, then a small pension would pay for your food and incidentals while your family was expected to provide the rest until you managed to do the right thing and kick off.

Today, of course, "retirement" has become an entitlement and you expect the government to keep you in the style you have grown to expect with a sufficient pension to maintain your independence.

Comment: How many people create the words they print? (Score 0) 143

by mschuyler (#46689345) Attached to: A Bid To Take 3D Printing Mainstream

The idea that 3D printing won't take off because people are not well-versed in designing their own 3D products with expensive CAD software is like saying printers won't take off because people aren't really good writers and can't afford a word processor. How many people use their printers for printing off their own words from a word processor? How many people use their printers for printing off PDF files, manuals, brochures, etc. from the Net?

Why won't 3D printers take off again?

nohup rm -fr /&