Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



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

Comment Re:eating less (Score 2) 254

This is simply not true. About 20 years ago, I lost the ability to walk. (Also sit, stand, etc.) I gained a lot of weight.

Three years ago, I was put on an exercise regime that made it so that I can walk again. It is very intense - so intense that I get tendonitis of my joints once ever few months (and they don't let me stop exercising then either...).

I have not lost any weight at all. I look better, and obviously feel better, but my mass is more, not less.

Comment Re:So global warming is a farce after all (Score 1) 313

Thanks for posting this link. The linked report demonstrates the issue precisely.

On page 7 of the pdf summary report, it talks about the "bad stuff" that is predicted due to climate change. The major data points given are that crop yields will fall. This is in direct opposition to all the science I have read on the topic, for example Obama's EPA.gov site says "Agriculture and fisheries are highly dependent on the climate. Increases in temperature and carbon dioxide (CO2) can increase some crop yields in some places."

They try to paint a highly negative picture, but then provide the data in chart below that. Crop yields are steadily increasing.

Whenever I look into the source data, I see this kind of thing. Dire consequences predicted, but then even a cursory examination of the data show that the prediction has been falsified.

Data points:

*) Fish failures predicted - real data shows that the fish simply move north/south (https://www.epa.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-agriculture-and-food-supply)
*) Crop failure predicted - real data shows steady growth of crop yield (https://www.epa.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-agriculture-and-food-supply)
*) Land flooding predicted - real data shows that the land movement effects swamp any issues with the sea rising (Florida has no problem, Louisiana has major problems) (https://www.epa.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-coastal-areas)

Does anyone have a prediction of "bad stuff" made in an IPCC report that has actually happened? (I am limiting "bad stuff" to things that my children's children will actually care about) The old reports are now old enough that there predictions should be apparent by now. I have reviewed the reports, and the cases I looked at (sea level rise, crop failures, fishing) were all falsified by what happened in reality.

If the IPCC has no predictive power, why should we use it to guide policy?

Comment Re:fascinatingly crafted reply... (Score 4, Funny) 302

Yes, but are you a climate change HOAX denier?

I posit that this is an area on which we can all agree!

Either you are a (climate change) (HOAX denier), or you are a (climate change HOAX) (denier). But we are now all (climate change HOAX denier)s! So let us bask in our reconciliation!

Comment Re: And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... (Score 1) 2837

Not working full time is the underemployed stat. I am very sure about these issues with BLS stats. My research professor for my grad degree did work in econometrics and always commented that the BLS unemployment series was manipulated to hell and back.

But what the hell do I know, not like the labor force participation rate is at historic lows... wait a minute, they are. At least, we aren't seeing a downward sloping Labor force participation rate that walks in step with a downward U3 and U6, indicating discouraged unemployment over 12 months. Oh wait... we are. Not like we are seeing increases in food stamp and public housing... oh we are.

I am not the first to notice this problem with unemployment rate.

Comment Re: And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... (Score 1) 2837

1 - Labor Force Participation Rate, US Oct 2016 (62.8%: anyone over 16, not including your grand daughter or son... raw is 57.9 btw) + US Unemployment rate (4.9%) = 42.1%

Removing the 65+ years age rate (13.5%) lowers it to 28.6%.

This slightly lowers the rate, since a portion of the 65+ is working, but I am too lazy to look that up. But, 28.6% of the population above 16 and below 65 are not employed. Doesn't take in effect stay-at-homes, disabled, etc... Yet, I do not like the U-6, since it only considers those not working but say that they are willing to work and have looked for work in the last 12 months. It eliminates the long-term discouraged. However, isn't that a surprising number, variance of 28.6 to 9.5%.

Are you saying that 19.1% of the potential workforce are disabled, stay-at-home, etc? I can't find a good translational metric for stay at home (29% of mothers but not a good test for current population.. how many are applicable mothers) or disability that would apply, especially since I am slapping this together.

FYI - Underemployment rate is 12.9%

Source is the BLS and the Census

Comment Re:More condoms less climate change (Score 1) 180

Looking at how this study was constructed, I believe most of the reported decline is likely just selection bias.

They did no original data collection - they just reviewed existing data sources. Unfortunately, the existing data sources are from conservation movements. They do not care about the New York rat population (which is doing just fine), those organizations are trying to track the species that are struggling.

So if a species is struggling to survive, it was far more likely to be included in the report than if the species was doing well. Selection bias.

It's depressing how rarely you see good statistics in science these days.

Comment Re:fallacy (Score 3, Insightful) 177

The problem with that approach is that you will tweak the algorithm until it works in 1996.

In other words, you will incorporate 1996 into the test set.

This is the big problem with almost all climate studies, and the reason why people that understand statistics really hate the current climate "science" as it is done. You really do need to make a prediction, and then test the prediction. If you get it wrong, you cannot re-try against the same data set until it works.

Comment Re:Small dick russians (Score 1) 264

You need to look deeper - it's not that Trump works for Putin; It's that Putin's organization is in competition with Clinton's organization. Putin does not want the competition, even in the US criminal market.

It's just business, it's not personal.

Comment Re:Minefield (Score 1) 562

Agreed - By the way, if anyone is considering not voting: please vote anyway.

Both these people are awful. If they win with only 40% of the popular vote because everyone voted for Fred, they will not be able to claim a mandate for sweeping evil changes. If you vote for a 3rd party, it weakens both bad candidates...

Comment Re:Really? (Score 5, Insightful) 244

Um, no. Niel Armstrong really did fly the lunar lander. He really did run it almost totally out of fuel, because he had to avoid a huge rock. If he hadn't done that, the vehicle would have gone splat.

By the way, the computer was completely spazzing out during the landing and was not giving good data. Fortunately it was written in a way that kept the important stuff going regardless.

http://space.stackexchange.com...

also

http://www.dickgordon.com/Apol...

Comment Support Time? (Score 1) 187

If the IT team grabs the equipment after the game, they have a whole week (at least 4 days) to reconfigure and test. And I imagine, given how much the NFL spends on things, they have their "Field communications equipment IT Team" to deal with the Surfaces alone, never mind the headsets and such which fall under the "Field Audio Equipment Team". There's always a chance they've skimped on IT and spent it on extra gatorade bottle holders, but that would surprise me.

Comment Re:State sponsored corporate spies (Score 1) 469

Sorry for the late reply. Metrics are problematic within themselves. If I manage exclusively by metrics, then I have to explain why. Eventually, you will have to explain why your metric based program is causing substandard performance, discrimination against another group, and the flight of employees who see previous potential. You set requirements, put in outreach programs, and check point your processes and policies. That is the actual law and serving it protects you better in the Affirmative Action space.

Comment Re:Remote work (Score 1) 269

Yet, my large city has couple hundred of you, willing to come in the office, network with employees outside of work that are outside their team, and is a crap load more flexible. Let's be honest, why should we hire you?

Not trying to be cruel here, just honest. I have a mortgage in another city. I pay a company to manage it for me. I moved because it needs to happen or I could stay in my little crappy town, with 20% less mortgage cost and a 40% less salary, along with 80% less opportunity. Weigh the benefits and negativities in moving.

Slashdot Top Deals

"If truth is beauty, how come no one has their hair done in the library?" -- Lily Tomlin

Working...