The flu is at least as transmissible, with higher than a 2.5% mortality rate for those that are hospitalized... (remember: there's a lot of people that, while likely infected, are either asymptomatic or whose symptoms don't get them going to the hospital with _both_ the flu and COVID-19) and yet, under the same FUD pretenses that you cite as "plenty of reason for fear", people are convinced not to vaccinate. Even more are selling stocks based on all the FUD. They're idiots, but I'll be happy to buy the stocks as they go into discount season.

Love when the alarmist in the crowd claims that others are the ones âoecrying crocodile tears.â

Most of us seriously donâ(TM)t care because weâ(TM)ve seen this before and the houses we bought 30+ years ago havenâ(TM)t even seen an ounce of the things the alarmists were claiming 30 years ago.

Nobody over here crying while all the rest of people like you are screaming at us.

You didnâ(TM)t read what I wrote.

Weâ(TM)ve had a 1.8 degree rise from 1980.

0.6 degrees from 1988.

If we exactly match the slope from 1988 to now (~0.6 degF since 1988), weâ(TM)ll see 2 degrees in ~20 years.

3 degrees in 2080.

Dude was calling for 3-9 degF from (presumably and best-case lowest estimate) 2025-2050.

His *lowest estimate* will be at best 60 years off.

1988 was over 30 years ago. So letâ(TM)s just say it took 30 years to see a 0.6degF increase in temperature. And letâ(TM)s even give that scientist the benefit of the doubt that he was talking in reference to the 1950-1980 mean temperature. Presuming the slope remains the same, we wonâ(TM)t see a two degree increase for another almost 30 years. Time to 3degF increase? 2080. And that was his LOWEST estimate for âoe2025-2050.â The alarmism is real.

Weâ(TM)re nowhere near 3 degrees from where 1988 was at...

as of today (according to NASA - https://climate.nasa.gov/vital...) we stand at 1.8degF above the 1950-1980 mean, and 88 - being the âoehottest on record to that timeâ was, in fact, only about a half a degree below where we are now.

Hmmm....you don't seem to realize that most of that alarmism wasn't on the Internet because _it didn't exist back then_.

Can you even _imagine_ what not having the internet, let alone having a computer or cellphone, was actually like?

Here's one from 1988 for you though: https://www.nytimes.com/1988/0...

I'm certainly not denying climate change, but the alarmism is - and has always been - bullshit.

This is the saddest part of the alarmism cycle. The anger and animosity just get bigger and the chasm between people gets wider for no good reason.

Hmmm, you clearly haven't lived through even one of the "in twenty years, global warming/climate change is going to destroy the planet" alarmism cycles. Not saying climate change isn't a problem, just that when so many of the predictions are as off as they've been, maybe the alarmists should stop crying wolf. As evidenced, of course, by the fact that we can all get 30 year mortgages _everywhere_.

Agree - this is total flamebait.

"Bing use at 9.75%, just edging in front of Yahoo"

isn't Yahoo using /Bing/ nowadays, even?

subtract Yahoo from Bing and you end up with what Bing REALLY has.

:p

er, s/()/(<>)/ on that last post

| perl -e 'while () { s/\t/ /; print $_; }'

there. fixed it for ya.

...until you have a drive die during a scrub, destroy a zfs filesystem in a deduplicating zpool, or any other number of things that makes ZFS **ANGRY**, that is. and despite all that, I still trust it more than any most linux filesystems.

'Ken Johnson, the company’s vice president and chief technology officer, said his company’s not much interested in hanging its wires up high with power lines. “It’s just much more cumbersome,” he said.' They're talking about a /cable/ company, not a /fiber/ company. You don't put coax next to power lines. Power lines do not interfere with fiber.