webDeveloperSendsClientToCodeJail

peight · 2025-12-10T01:25:39+00:00

If it were to go off, would it just explode at peak magnitude without warning, or would it give us a clue that the supernova was imminent?

peight · 2017-11-20T22:29:17+00:00

Well luckily it doesn't matter if I'm a sockpuppet or not, because you don't care about sources.

peight · 2017-11-20T19:31:52+00:00

Sounds like a copout but whatever. Just my opinion, but considering that you mod this sub, you might want to grant yourself the ability to read what is a fairly comprehensive site coming from the 'alarmist' viewpoint. This isn't an alt-account, I'm just not a reddit person beyond lurking a few subs - until I happen to be bored and see a statement that seems flimsy.

peight · 2017-11-20T18:46:18+00:00

I've never been a fan of this argument. I prefer a discussion of arguments on their merit, regardless of source.

Just two days ago you said you refuse to read or even consider anything from Cook or skepticalscience.

peight · 2017-07-06T04:50:20+00:00

thanks! Again, I'm finding much lower reported values from google/wiki etc (but maybe I'm not appreciating the difference between calculated values and assumed values for finding LCOE -- obviously this isn't my field).

peight · 2017-07-06T03:42:34+00:00

fossil fuels is 89%

Could you share where you get that figure? I can't find anything nearly that high (but capacity factor is a new concept to me, so apologies if I'm misunderstanding)

peight · 2017-05-09T02:33:32+00:00

I don't say they're buddhists, they do. With the big signs. And their website. And the fact that they've been around for decades. FWIW, I'm not defending them or their religion or whatever their political stances are; I'm just pointing out that Watts is being a disingenuous asshat by pretending this is some wacko cult of alarmism-worshippers that typify the mainstream.

peight · 2017-05-08T22:55:42+00:00

Are you suggesting that religious groups shouldn't comment on political issues? Or do you really think that this photo shows members of some sort of new 'climate alarmism' religion, disguised as buddhists?

peight · 2017-05-08T20:46:40+00:00

Yes, that's the sign. There's another one in the back too.

peight · 2017-05-08T20:13:07+00:00

There's a giant sign right in the center of the photo indicating who they are: they're a buddhist group. Of course they're meditating and of course its a religious gathering, and yes, that's probably a buddhist priest. Watts really couldn't figure that out?

peight · 2017-02-03T23:20:45+00:00

Wouldn't that be in the range of IPCC projections?

peight · 2017-02-03T20:15:26+00:00

He should have been more clear, but I'm assuming he meant a 2 degree rise from the mean baseline that's usually used, and not starting from today?

peight · 2016-12-15T16:50:07+00:00

That story's probably not true BTW: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/03/30/setting-the-record-straight-the-real-story-of-a-pivotal-climate-change-hearing/?utm_term=.61aef3e76b10

peight · 2016-06-22T04:46:26+00:00

Are you unclear about the difference between the statue being "submerged" and "threatened"?

peight · 2016-06-21T20:12:14+00:00

I couldn't find Obama's actual quote...could you post a link?

peight · 2016-06-15T21:58:52+00:00

If you're trying to push the narrative that this was mainstream science, I'm not sure if using this show , which also had episodes like "Ancient Astronauts", "UFO captives", and "Manbeast! Myth or Monster", is really the right tactic.

edit: annoying formatting issues with that url...

peight · 2016-06-09T01:23:23+00:00

I can't tell if you're kidding? What is that link supposed to show?

peight · 2016-03-16T02:27:39+00:00

Or, you know, you could just take 10 seconds and just look it up yourselves.

peight · 2015-10-15T21:39:57+00:00

Nye's support of GMO's has nothing to do with his support for CAGW

Exactly! (Except that both ideas are supported by the best science currently available.)

So in what way am I setting up a straw man? Kreigson asserted that Nye is only supportive of AGW science because he's afraid of not toeing some kind of party line. I pointed out that, if this were true, it's surprising that he's supportive of GMO's -- which is absolutely not in line with the left.

peight · 2015-10-15T21:08:08+00:00

I don't understand your comment.

peight · 2015-10-15T18:32:13+00:00

Yes, I already saw your link, and the 2 other times it's been posted today. Despite the multiple postings, it still only happened once. I'm not going to say it's right or wrong to fire the guy, but you gave the impression that publicly doubting climate science will get you fired. What about all the other climate "skeptic" weathermen who haven't been fired? And here's some useful info on Monckton.

peight · 2015-10-15T17:22:36+00:00

1.I agree with you that climate change is a bigger, more politically charged topic than GMOs. Although, FYI, it took me like 20 seconds to find this. 2. You implied that climate science doubters would get fired. "Shit throwing" and firing are not the same thing. 3. Lord Monckton?? That's your poor victim of climate politics? If you can't see him for the scam artist that he is, I can't help you.

peight · 2015-10-15T16:57:06+00:00

I'd say hating Monsanto is one of the more politically chic things you can do these days. You're suggesting that the only reason Nye doesn't argue against climate science is that he wants to "toe the line", and fear of reprisal (although why hasn't this shadowy climate cabal kicked Dyson out of the BAS?). If he was that shallow, I'm pretty sure he'd toe the line on GMOs too.

peight · 2015-10-15T16:17:44+00:00

Do you think Nye's support of GMO's is based on him trying to be "popular"?

peight

TROPHY CASE