Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re: Politics Feh (Score 0) 130

Are you fracking kidding me? You're equating the group of people refuting the nonsensical anti-AGW claims with science ( "10 of the hottest years occured in the last 18", "oceeans are absorbing some of the heat") with the camp that trots out the same fracking tired arguments that have been refuted over and over again in every fracking thread? Science isn't a "camp", it's the conclusion you reach after looking at the data.

The problem with these threads is there are too many idiot trolls who think themselves oh so much smarter than the people who spend their entire lives studying the topic of climate.

Comment Re: Harvard is the right place (Score 1) 348

Do you fracking understand Saddam was our ally in the Middle East? He kept Iran subdued and under control. With him gone and ISIS going wild we were *forced* into allying with Iran, helping them develop nuclear technology in exchange for their help in the MEast. That's what Bush's fracking legacy is.

Comment Collapse (Score 0) 140

Immortality would realistically cause the collapse of human civilization. Massive cullings would have to be undertaken. Riots, revolts, revolutions would all ensue. Economies would destabilize as the retirement system would lose all meaning. Jobs would never be vacated.

Seriously. If there is anything that might have wiped out all other intelligent species in the galaxy, it's the scientific achievement of immortality.

Comment Re: Get rid of it (Score -1) 389

The federalist papers were written by one man. The founding fathers had a variety of opinions that lay across the entire spectrum. In general the purpose of the Constitution was to replace the weak Articles of Confederation (which couldn't deal with the variety of cross state issues) with a new document that would create a much stronger federal entity.

Comment Re:Climate "Science" (Score 3, Interesting) 444

First, the gold standard of scientific proof is experimentation.

Uh... there's a lot more to science than that. But even if we take your word for it, the climatologists create statistical models based on observable variables and fit those models to collected data. The better the fit, the more accurate the predictions.

Slashdot Top Deals

Is it possible that software is not like anything else, that it is meant to be discarded: that the whole point is to always see it as a soap bubble?