Comment Re:Meanwhile (Score 1) 95
Crosswalks are dangerous.
A particular danger at crosswalks is cars making turns. It's often hard to see pedestrians when other cars are blocking the view. (And bicycles are always something to watch for.)
Crosswalks are dangerous.
A particular danger at crosswalks is cars making turns. It's often hard to see pedestrians when other cars are blocking the view. (And bicycles are always something to watch for.)
I mean who wouldn't want to use a famously volatile element in a closed system resembling a bomb that said element will be leaking from and be exposed to insane temperatures.
Because the JTEC is an evolved version of the older AMTEC, Alkali Metal Thermal-to-Electric Converter, in which the working fluid was liquid sodium. The version with hydrogen is much easier to work with. AMTEC looked great in small-scale lab experiments, and for a while in the 90s they were heavily pushed as the successor technology to thermoelectrics currently used in radioisotope power systems, but turned out they were too hard to work with. (I still kinda like the technology, though. It's thermodynamically elegant.)
There's also a JTEC variant that uses oxygen, I believe: https://www.researchwithrutger...
And blindness doesn't exist either. Nor being deaf. These people claiming such just need to try harder, right?
It's more as if there were a Diagnosis of Seeing Manual (DSM) that redefined the definitions to merge blindness with other vision problems into a single category, a spectrum "Visual-acuity spectrum disorder". So people who previously said "I'm blind and need accomodation" now get put in the same category with people who say "I have visual acuity spectrum disorder" because their vision is 20-40.
And I say that that applies to autism to. Social skills is something you need to practise as child, it is not congenital. Some have more talent for this, other less. The latter need to practise. Just like with everything from math to juggle balls.
Autism most certainly does exist. The difficulty here is that in the most recent DSM, autism was redefined as a spectrum, and the "mild" end of the spectrum manifests as socially awkward. But there's no clear dividing line anymore; neurotypical behavior can shade into socially awkward behavior by infinitesimal degrees. And, worse, in the popular conversation about autism, most people talk about the mild form, previously a separate diagnosis of "Asperger's", and the profound version gets ignored.
https://www.hawaiitribune-hera...
https://www.economist.com/scie...
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/1...
(apologies for the paywalled articles, but those are the ones that go into better depth).
Nobody was doing strained-layer epitaxy in the 1950s.
The heat and the light are not physically different things. If the light is absorbed, then the object that absorbed it was heated by that amount of energy.If the heat escaped, that would mean the light was reflected, and it wouldn't be black, it would be white. (Or a mirror, depending on how consistent the angle of reflection is)
Yes and no.
Visible light carries energy, and hence, yes, absorbing visible light will heat the fabric. However, at temperatures less than a thousand degrees or so, most of the heat energy is carried in infrared light. Since the fabric is specified as being black in visible light, it may or may not be absorbing in infrared.
The fact you consider this as "safe" is the problem with society.
Well, yes: we live in a society in which 50-kg small humans coexist in spaces with 1000- and 2000- kilogram metal vehicles travelling at a hundred km/hour, and only the social rules keep them safe.
You've excepted a horrible band-aid for a dangerous situation covering a small minority
The entirety of our civilization's "safety" relies on our society and its rules. It's not a "small minority"-- it's all of it. Every time I drive I put myself in a situation in which I'm less than one second away from flaming death if I should make the wrong move.
Ring wing operatives have long been trying to prove that government doesn't work.
Right-wing operatives have long been pushing that ALL government work should be done by hiring contractors from private industry. This was an example.
The contractor they had been hired by was a company called Opexus; they were hired as engineers working on projects for various agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service, Department of Energy, Defense Department and the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General.
Obviously Opexus didn't do a good job at background check.
A few more sites: https://www.bloomberg.com/news...
https://arstechnica.com/inform...
https://cyberscoop.com/muneeb-...
The kids should cross the street at normal crossings like everyone else, not just anywhere a huge yellow beast stops and flips out a sign.
I'd say the safest place to cross would be in front of a huge, impossible to miss bus, with a flipped-out sign reading "STOP" and with flashing lights.
Of course they overplayed their hand, it was the only way to get funding. One side of this debate got funded and the other didn't.
For years the oil companies were heavily funding people to create doubt about climate science. They eventually got publicly outed for paying for bad science, and stopped because it looked bad.
As for atmospheric science, the main funding for atmospheric science is in improving weather models, including hurricane path predictions and aviation weather. Climate predictions are pretty much just another application of the models made for other purposes.
As for the oil companies, they shifted their strategy to funding "think tanks" pushing libertarian ideas, funding advocacy that the government needs to avoid taking any action on climate change.
You're full of shit; I remember sitting in school watching a video about how the world was going to freeze over ( in 2nd grade no less. Wild times ) by 2000.
I remember when my second grade teacher told us that the earth was hotter in summer because it was closer to the sun!
The lesson is, maybe you should learn more science after 2nd grade.
I'm not worried about people who make errors, discover the errors, and retract the work. I worry about the people who lie, and when the lie is pointed out, double down with bigger lies.
I don't know what the definition of "accountability" is in climate research, but a threefold error is terrible science, it should have been caught in peer review, and everyone involved owes the scientific world an apology.
To be more accurate, this was an error in an economic study. Economists might think their field is a science, but scientists don't.
.. there is no disastrous climate change, just normal cycles. The climate-fanatics almost convinced me that there is some disaster incoming, but thanks for I have still have some brainb capacity left.
The normal cycles-- known as "Milankovitch variations"-- happen on a time scale of tens to hundreds of thousands of years. The current climate change is much faster than that.
If you push the "extra ice" button on the soft drink vending machine, you won't get any ice. If you push the "no ice" button, you'll get ice, but no cup.