Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re:Thermodynamics (Score 1) 264

by mujadaddy (#49055037) Attached to: NASA: Increasing Carbon Emissions Risk Megadroughts

In order for earth to be considered a closed system

I'm not arguing that the earth is a closed system, I'm pointing out that we are warming the earth. For your closed system point (key word: "your") to be relevant, you have to show that it is, with figures.

I am the one poking holes in your simple theory

Thermodynamics?

you are getting upset because I am making very valid points.

I assure you, while one of us might be upset, it is certainly not I.

You are the one trying to massivly increase my taxes based on your flawed theories

So we can add reading comprehension to argumentation on the list of things you're terrible at, gotcha, thanks.

Comment: Re:Thermodynamics (Score 1) 264

by mujadaddy (#49053533) Attached to: NASA: Increasing Carbon Emissions Risk Megadroughts
Spoiler: You're terrible at argumentation.

Q: Is the earth a closed system?

For that to be relevant, you have to show math proving so, which would involve at minimum data showing that the earth is radiating exactly as much, or more, energy as the sun + society is creating. My argument is that heat is created by society, which is a law of thermodynamics, and, I assure you, much harder to argue against.

Q: Is it possible to reverse the process? A: Yes, return the faked weather data...

What in the fuck has that to do with reversing thermodynamics?

Did I miss anything? Seems even easier to me.

Because you don't understand what you're arguing against.

Comment: Thermodynamics (Score 1) 264

by mujadaddy (#49053239) Attached to: NASA: Increasing Carbon Emissions Risk Megadroughts

Q: Is the heat generated by society affecting the total heat in the biosphere? A: There is no way it could not be doing so, therefore, AGW.

Q: Is it possible to reverse this process? A: There is no current way to reverse this process, therefore the best we can possibly hope for is to slow the rate at which we descend into hell.

Did I miss anything? It seems fucking elementary to me...

Comment: Re:Beating physics (Score 3, Interesting) 517

by mujadaddy (#48998177) Attached to: The US Navy Wants More Railguns and Lasers, Less Gunpowder

There's an interesting thing that hitting a target with a high energy inert round often doesn't do a whole lot of damage. There was a case in WWII of some armed merchant cruisers (i.e. cargo ships with a couple of obsolete guns welded on) were mistaken for cruisers by some German raiders. The raiders engaged at long range with AP rounds and scored some direct hits. The AP rounds went all the way through the unarmored ships and out the other side without detonating (they were designed to penetrate a bit into armor and then detonate: the lack of armor caused the warhead to not trigger). The end result was that the ships wound up with some perfectly survivable 15" holes in them and managed to escape.

Good stuff here. I just have to add that this effect is seen throughout the age of gunpowder: unless gunnery hit the enemy magazine, all they were doing was making pinpricks in the opposing fleet. Keegan's Price of Admiralty describes Lord Nelson's fleet and the HMS Dreadnought being involved in these kinds of battles.

"Right now I feel that I've got my feet on the ground as far as my head is concerned." -- Baseball pitcher Bo Belinsky

Working...