Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:This simply means we're succeeding. (Score 1) 223

Air travel should not be justifiable under any circumstances if AGW is true. It can only be justified if AGW is false.

I just want to amplify Mr Marxist Hacker's comment.

You could start a graduate level course in logic from those two simple sentences. Here they are again:

Air travel should not be justifiable under any circumstances if AGW is true. It can only be justified if AGW is false.

Impressive. It's like saying, "If drowning is real, then no bathing should be justified under any circumstances. Bathing can only be justified if drowning is false."


Comment Re:Doomsday Predictions (Score 1) 641

I'm 61 and I was taught this in school.

This is some very impressive evidence. I'm sure you couldn't be mistaken.

Please cite more than a handful of scientists who actually suggested there would be another ice age back in the 1970s. Otherwise, we're just going to have to disallow your impressive memory of grade school as proof of anything.

And don't forget to schedule that colonoscopy. At your age, it should be done every 5 years. And who knows, you may find that citation.

Comment Re:Doomsday Predictions (Score 1) 641


Read my statement. Now read your response. Do you see any connection?

I said this:

here was never,,,ever a time when more than tiny handful of scientists thought there would be another ice age.

How many of those 18 (count 'em, eighteen!") SPECTACULARLY INCORRECT things scientists said in 1970 include an ice age?

A handful, you say? Speak up, I can't hear you. Oh, yeah, I almost forgot: The predictions of a "new ice age" were concoctions of the media, rather than the result of scientific studies:

Now why don't you try to be a little more honest about that "complete list" of ice age predictions? You're old enough to know better than to peddle that shit here and think it'll just fly unchallenged.

Comment Re:This isn't really that hard to understand (Score 1) 641

No, it is actually VERY VERY SIMPLE.
Yet, later....
Now: to observe the actual effects on the world, is not so easy.

The fact of the matter is that your examples aren't a direct cause/effect. If they were, we could see immediate results yet we don't. Plus the planet is large enough to have large "micro-climates", resulting in even more obfuscation of the data.

Of course, it doesn't help that climate change doomsayers have been at it for 40+ years now, the doomsaying itself a product of how difficult climate science is. Weren't we all supposed to be under 20 feet of water by now? The ice at the poles gone, the poles themselves being the only habitable parts of the world left? And so on, and so on...

Face it; climate science is *hard*. So difficult, in fact, that the weather forecasters still get it wrong. Understanding the science is restricted to the few who have made it their lives to understand it, and of course who knows how biased they are. You'll never sell the general public that way.

No. You have to make the issues smaller and localized. Personable.

Comment Re:so... (Score 1) 641

when a scientist who initially buys into a theory that seems reasonable on its face, and then changes his mind after being confronted by new information, you presume he is SENILE????

Professor Lewis' senility is not connected to his opinions regarding scientific theories.

Are you a physician? Have you examined the professor before rendering your diagnosis?

His impairment is well-known in the UCSB and APS communities.

Slashdot Top Deals

I've never been canoeing before, but I imagine there must be just a few simple heuristics you have to remember... Yes, don't fall out, and don't hit rocks.