Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:Welcome to Fascist America! (Score 1) 413 413

There is a very interesting read, which is a review of two books, one a biography and the other an autobiography. The article appeared in New Republic sometime in the late 80s or early 90s. It can be found here.

The story is long and complicated. Excerpt: "Whatever his reasons for turning against communism, he remained left of center long after he did so. As late as 1952, by which date he had been publicly denouncing Communists for six years, the Los Angeles County Democratic Central Committee declined to endorse him for an open House seat because they thought he was too liberal. It's tantalizing to speculate on what might have been had the Democrats of Los Angeles not made this bonehead decision. Would Representative Reagan have become Senator Reagan? Might he have ended up as JFK's running mate? Would he have drifted to the right and become a marginal crank like Sam Yorty? Or would he have stayed left and won the White House four or eight years earlier than he did? And — most delicious thought of all — would the ultimate sneer-word of today's conservatives be not McGovernism or Carterism, but Reaganism?"

Comment: Re:Sudden? (Score 1) 268 268

THE USA IS THE ONLY COUNTRY THAT HAS BEEN REDUCING ITS CO2 EVERY YEAR.

Let me repeat that:

THE USA IS THE ONLY COUNTRY THAT HAS BEEN REDUCING ITS CO2 EVERY YEAR.

If you don't believe me, look it up. The US is doing something. The EU and Asia are NOT.

And we are doing it by outsourcing a lot of our production overseas. Yay us!

USA!!! USA!!! USA!!!

Comment: Re:Strangely mixed signals here (Score 2) 268 268

Er, did you read the Forbes link before you shared it? It was about sea ice. The ice loss in evidence is land ice. You are trying to imply that there is a contradiction when there is none?

Moreover, the link is to an opinion piece, not a news source. No wonder it was rejected.

But if you want to talk about the Forbes piece, it claims there is *no* polar sea ice retreat (and the headline is worse, it claims there is no polar ice retreat at all, sea or otherwise). It fails to distinguish between Arctic sea ice (which is retreating) and Antarctic (which is advancing). The latter seems to be occurring due to, among other factors, the inrush of fresh water from melting Antarctic glaciers -- which lowers salinity and raises the freezing point. Really sloppy work by the writer. (Actually I doubt that he was being sloppy. I'm sure he's smart enough to know about this stuff. I suspect he was being disingenuous.)

Sadly, the retreat in the Arctic is primarily in the summer, so it lowers the albedo of the region when that region is in continuous sunlight.

Sadly, the advance in the Antarctic is primarily in the winter, so it raises the albedo of the region when that region is in continuous darkness. Big help, huh?

We have a equal opportunity Calculus class -- it's fully integrated.

Working...