Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


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

Comment Re:A simple reality check (Score 1) 497

The global warming "scientists" are the same "scientists" who were running around in the 70s saying that the next ice age was upon us

A single idiot journalist in TIME magazine who wanted to stir things up and boost circulation?

You've been conned by someone and are letting the side down. As engineers we are supposed to apply science and not bullshit.

Comment Re:I'm just guessing they won't study the fraud (Score 1) 497

Why would they deny FOIA requests and conspire to find a way around them?

Look up "distributed denial of service attack" for why.
A bunch of unscrupulous pricks set up a letter campaign to make requests to keep those "evil" scientists too busy to actually work. It was pretty obvious since it was coming in alphabetical order.

Why hasn't Al Gore

People in politics LIE. Ignore the showman on stage and talk to the real people behind the curtain.

Comment The two have been conflated at the start (Score 1) 497

They are connected very tightly by politics - well, money paying for that politics really. One of the arguments pushed strongly by the deniers is that climate change is just a trick to force companies to cut emissions, impose water discharge standards, etc. That was really the start of the PR campaign against scientists some years ago. Since some of the companies involved were donors to Republicans it all got very political.

Before the "debate" was kicked off with millions in PR money conservatives such as Thatcher were on the side of reality instead of PR. The only reason many conservatives are opposing reality King Canute style today is because of donor money from those who think climate change will be used as a reason to cut emissions, impose water discharge standards, etc and that new regulations will cut into profits.

Who knows - if it happened today instead of back then the Koch brothers and others may have donated to Hillary instead and the political situation would be the other way around, but historically it's the Republicans that decided to deny reality despite earlier conservatives listening very closely to scientists. Eisenhower would probably tell all the deniers to fuck off and let him run the country as well as he could with expert advice instead of playing stupid PR games of make believe.

Comment Re:So many people who think they are experts... (Score 1) 219

The problem is that the building did not collapse as intuition

That's only because movies used to show stuff as if cardboard boxes were falling over so the "intuition" of a lot of people was set by cheap special effects.

and plenty of demolition experts testified

No they did not. Various nuts lied about demolition experts that do not exist while the ones that do exist sided with reality instead of Hollywood.

As long as that is not explained

Impact. Dynamic loading not static. When a single floor collapses it hits the floor below pretty damned hard and buildings are not designed to withstand that sort of thing happening. If they were New York would look like the Valley of the Kings in Egypt.

Which would lead to a tilting of the building to the side

Hollywood and cardboard box effects in the 1970s has a lot to answer for. Stuff falls down not sideways. Even when earthquakes provide a bit of lateral movement large buildings collapse into themselves without much tilting - they do not fall sideways intact like a cardboard box as "a layman" has been encouraged to think over the last few decades.

Comment Re:Not sure you have a lot of options? (Score 1) 196

If you do a fresh install of Windows 7 these days? The update process is PAINFUL! You'll literally need to leave the PC downloading updates for a good 8-10 hours or more before it finally starts doing anything obvious

On the most recent one I did updating was completely broken. For days. Even printer drivers were unavailable. It turned that that turning updates off - rebooting - then turning them on again allowed that 8-10 hours or more.
The way it behaves changes frequently.

Comment A bit of an update (Score 1) 219

France USED breeders and then shut them down apart from a tiny research reactor.
A bit of background: In 1968 it looked as if high grade Uranium ore was going to run out since a long list of countries even including Egypt were planning to build reactors. The price of Uranium rose as a consequence.
The French response to that was to plan some fast breeders, build them, run them for decades and then shut them down. They have not built new ones because high grade Uranium ore is no longer a rarity and the demand is not high (there is about a centuries worth in a single mine in Australia and quite a lot in other places).

Various green groups claimed credit for the old reactors shutting down but the reality is something designed in 1968 and built very shortly after was just too worn out in so many components that it was not worth running any longer - especially since the French weapons program no longer needed the material and the competing reactor designs are much cheaper to use.

Slashdot Top Deals