* Posts by peter_dtm

437 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Dec 2009

Page:

Tesla pre-sells all 2012 Model S output

peter_dtm
Stop

well my 1982 house has a 50 amp mains fuse; as did my previous house in the UK - a 1930s house - even when the Electricity supply had to replace the meter; they left the fuse alone and assured me that 50 Amps was still standard.

I think you will find most cars will get charged overnight - 12/7 or perhaps 12/5. and have a look here : http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/ to see that the sort of smoothing wind poser needs may not be best met by intermittent overnight loads. You can't do a good job of smoothing a randomly varied supply with a possibly pseudo randomly varied load.

How do you decide which car charger to turn off ? My job for one has a fair amount of travel involved at irregular times; on demand at that; so I will need (as will many other service providers) to keep the battery topped up. And once you allow one person NOT to be controlled -; well every man and his dog will want the same 'privilege' as well

peter_dtm
FAIL

It is space and weight - it' called energy density and it is of key importance when designing motive power. If your fuel energy density is not high enough then your vehicle will never be efficient or viable. See http://wiki.xtronics.com/index.php/Energy_density for an energy density comparison between different fuels - note the disclaimer at the top...

be nice if battery prices were coming down - other than at a linear crawl; about the same as usable battery capacity is going up - slowly.

From the Tesla web site the sports version will draw 40A at 220 Volts if your house (most UK houses have this) has a 50A main breaker. That leaves you 10 amps to run heating/washing machines/dishwashers/lights/TVs/Computers. It also takes 6 hours to charge.

This gives us a demand of 8800 watts (220V times 40Amps).

This gives us a figure of some 52.8KW/hours capacity (8800 watts times 6 hours) when new.

No figures appear available for how the battery ages - but if we are kind we can assume it is no worse than a loss of 20% capacity after 5 years - ie 20% less range

The domestic grid in the UK is planned around a concept called 'Diversity'. i.e. not everyone will draw 50 Amps at once. The Coronation Street adverse effect is I presume known - the National Grid puts another power station on line when the adverts come on and people make a cuppa ?

I wonder what is going to happen when a few hundred Electric cars start drawing 40 amps each from the same sub-station ?

If we already have so many people in fuel poverty how are they supposed to handle this; they can't afford to put a 1KW electric heater on; never mind 8.8 KW so they can use personal transport.

Problems to solve before an electric fleet is viable :

Grid Infrastructure - how to supply DOMESTIC premise with enough current capacity to charge cars

Grid Infrastructure - how to generate all the extra KW needed ?

Battery - better energy/weight (energy density)- currently coming down slowly has achieved an energy density about 10 times worse than petrol.

Battery - cost

Battery - manufacture of toxic device

Battery - disposal of toxic substances

Note just under 19 cars require a MW of power - one 1MW capacity wind turbine in the UK provides on average 24% of capacity. - so 19 cars need provision of FOUR medium sized Wind Turbines (and a conventional power station to have 1MW excess capacity for when the wind don't blow/blows too hard)

At the moment the whole schema does not stack up; and we need some pretty major advances before it does.

UK CB radio crowd celebrates three decades of legality

peter_dtm
Happy

lots of 4x4 clubs use cb.

We had a local exercise couple of weeks ago - local government emergency guys; cops; local 4x4 club and RAYNET (Radio Amateur Emergency Network) - went well - cb used for cab to cab chat by the 4x4 drivers; RAYNET used for county wide co-ordiantion and control. Good excuse to see some one else's hobby and although it took all Sunday - a good exercise. CB and Hams all working well together - which was not always true.

peter_dtm
FAIL

well there you go

back in the day ALL model radio control was licenced in the 11 metre band ONLY.

I do remember watching a pose of RC guys hunt down an idiot cber after his transmissions had put a 2 metre long RC Wellington bomber into the ground.; like everyone else watching we all hoped they caught him.

Credit card companies plan to sell your purchase data to advertisers

peter_dtm
Happy

I wonder ...

add this to your email signature :

tick box and return email to indicate this email is not de facto accepted as a written instruction to apply section 11 of the DPA98 act; failure to do this will mean your organisation accepts this as a written request to apply section 11 of the DPA98 with immediate effect

a sort of consumers revenge for all those sodding opt out boxes ....

peter_dtm

yes - the Electoral role

and the phrasing they use on the opt out sort of reads backwards as well; so I suspect lots of people tick the wrong box - probably what happened with your relative

Massive study concludes: 'Global warming is real'

peter_dtm
Mushroom

you do understand the meaning of the word 'significant ' ?

as in (from your quote)

any significant “global warming” in the 20th century.”"

significant means outside NORMAL range by at least two standard deviations

What Watts and many skeptics say is ; well you had the quote right :

any significant “global warming” in the 20th century.”"

the warming is insignificant; and any warm that may be attributable to man is even more insignificant if it is even measurable.

But then the AGW crowd all seem to have this significant problem with understanding what the skeptics are saying; and they do so like to TELL us what we are saying. They tell us what we think so often they believe it themselves.

And the is extreme doubt about how the surface data is manipulated and looked after; would you believe you bank if they just told you that you account was £50000 overdrawn; and no you can't see your statements and no you can't see our calculations. Why do the climate scientist lose/hide the original data; why do they not SHOW they reasons and calculations ? Why do they refuse and fight FOI requests to see the data/calculations ? If you're happy with that state of affairs I have an invoice made out in your name that you need to pay .....

peter_dtm
FAIL

dead right we doubt the A.

no one has yet provided a testable repeatable experiment to demonstrate that CO2 (never mind man generated CO2) has the effect on climate that the Hypothesis of AGW say happens.

To be testable and repeatable a scientist puts all his data; models and calculations out where people can see them (as BEST is doing; but CRU for instance doesn't)

Then you make a prediction; then you test it. So far AGW hypothesis has made exactly NO predictions that have been found to occur in the real world (though; if you read the Climate Science papers you will see lots and lots of MODELS being used to show CO2 is responsible; but models are NOT reality and don't count). And several predictions that have falsified the models - GIGO if you build a model assuming CO2 is a key; then the model will show CO2 to be the key. That doesn't change reality one little bit (except for the warming caused by all those computer runs of computer models)

peter_dtm
FAIL

umm - this was in part triggered by Anthony Watts (WUWT blog) carrying out a site standards survey. The data he provided to BEST only went back 30 (THIRTY) years.

Where did the siting data for the preceding 30 years come from ?

If it didn't exist when Watts went looking for it; from where did BEST magic it ?

peter_dtm
FAIL

and the source for this amazing 'fact' is ?

peter_dtm
WTF?

can't help it

let's see - nothing like a fact based argument to uphold your beliefs ?

There is an unproven hypothesis that CO2 emitted by man is causing climate disruption/change/global warming.

The models used to make this prediction are models of a chaotic system and are built on the assumption that CO2 is one of the main drivers for climate change.

Let me make the key part clear

*** are built on the assumption that CO2 is one of the main drivers****

so; like all models; what you build is what you get. Let's see - if my model assumes that CO2 is a main driver and then my model SHOWS CO2 to be the main driver what have I proved ?

Interestingly the models all make one very clear and unambiguous prediction and that is :

If CO2 is a major driver of climate change it will cause a 'hot spot' in the troposphere. This is the tropo hot spot that gives the models so many problems. Why ? because we have been unable to measure anything like the predicted temperature rise - one short term series satellite data appears to show a marginally measurable rise - but no where near that predicted. No other tropo temperature records show even a suggestion of a rise.

If you really want to put you children at risk continue to try and destroy our cheap energy culture that has raised everyone's standard of living and everyone's life expectancy around the world. If you take away cheap energy how are you going to farm and feed the billions ? Indeed think of the children; think of how your grandchildren are going to feel if they know that our generation were so stupid that we broke the machine that keeps us alive and keeps us out of dawn to dusk peasantry and saves us from a brutalized 30 year life expectancy. Your children are far more at risk from if we break modern society than they would be if the climate warmed by 5 degrees (the earth; after all has been there; done that before). Mankind has always done well during the cyclic warm periods of this interglacial; and badly during its cold periods.

peter_dtm

so how did all the sea life survive when the atmosphere contained over 1000ppm ?

the sea is alkaline. the sea also contains many orders of magnitude MORE CO2 desolved in it than the atmosphere contains. Yup; many ORDERS OG MAGNITUDE. Even if all the CO2 was to instantly dissolve into the sea; it would hardly be measurable in its effect on the CO2 concentration or alkalinity of sea. There's another problem to this scenario - the warmer water is; the less CO2 it can hold. Yup thats right; as the sea warms up it outgases CO2.

So we don't need to worry about fud about an acid sea (even if all the CO2 currently still locked up in limestone was to be released the sea would STILL be alkaline) any more than we need to worry about CO2 in the air until it approaches some 1000ppm (at which point most plants are growing like crazy and need less water [pop along to your nearest commercial green house grower to see this] and a few humans will start showing some minor symptoms of excess CO2. Plants would appear to like around 5000 ppm CO2; however most animals would be in really serious trouble by then.

And to get a feeling for this; non-Climate Scientist scientists seem to estimate human contribution to CO2 content of the atmosphere at <<3%.

peter_dtm
Alert

you really won't like this

no - the middle ages warm period can be observed (and has been) in S America; N America NW Europe; NE Europe; the Stepps; China; and other countries in Asia. The signal for the event is observable across all land masses. Ok so the land only covers 1/3 of the surface - does that make 'local to land' only

And where is the Little Ice Age - you know that 'local; event that froze the Thames and is recorded all across Europe; Russia and the East ?

Do not ever get bored with trying to find reasons your GCM disagree with reality ? Prior to the publishing of the Hockey Stick the MWP and LIA were so well known they were taught in schools around the world (now there was consensus science for you; and they are not MY MWP or LIA; they are the planets). The only person documented to have inverted a graph - and to continue using said graph after that had been pointed out was that great showman AL Gore.

What about the tropo hot spot ?

All the GCM predict it. It is not there.

So the hockey stick is a bust (because it's stats are so appalling bad before we even get to the data) and the predictive models that are used to give scary figures like 50000 climate refugees by 2010 and some main road in New York NY will be 20' under water; and 'our kids won't know what snow' is ; and the temperatures rising (well of course it is; were coming out of a little Ice age) and all the other fud.

There is no proof that the hypothesis that CO2 is a primary driver of climate dynamics has any congruency with reality. Without that there are NO reasons for reducing CO2 levels; on the contrary; given the known behaviour of CO2 as a fertilizer; there are plenty of reasons to encourage MORE CO2 output

peter_dtm

no

the hockey stick graph was taken apart and trashed in a later peer revued paper

as was the attempt to ridicule the trashing.

but then of course it was all about how appaling their statistics were

and there still remains the other 'little' problem with the hockey stick nonsense :

Where are

1) The global middle ages warm period

2) The Little ice age

3) the other variants and changes that occurred in the early 20th century ?

The hockey stick graph is so bad it should not be mentioned in the same sentence as science.

If the CRU didn't falsify the data why are there no published examples of how their code works on the (now magically found) original data ? Where is the code that is used to get their results ?

It ain't science unless the data and the methodology are available for testing.

Here's a hard fact for you :

The computer models (GCM) used ALL predict troposphere warming; if CO2 is a contributor to climate change.

The tropo hotspot predicted can NOT be measured.

The hot spot is a necessary signal IF CO2 is involved in driving the climate warmer (caused by its increase in ppm). Since a necessary result from the GCM has NOT been observed there is something seriously wrong with the GCM. Or don't you believe that real world measurements always trump climate model estimations ?

peter_dtm
Alert

but but but

but you *DID* say you were in favour of reducing CO2 emissions

WHY ? it's plant food and good for the green plants (and therefore good for us)

peter_dtm
Alert

why

why on earth do you want to cut down on CO2 -- historically we are still in a low CO2 environment. Further; CO2 is proven to be very beneficial to plant growth at all levels tolerable by Humans (up to at least 1000ppm).

CO2 is plant food (basic biology tells us this; a consensus that has been around a very long time)

peter_dtm
FAIL

FUD continues

this is also part of the NOT YET peer reviewed paper

Sceptical Berkeley Scientists Say, “Human Component Of Global Warming May Be Somewhat Overstated”

It always seems to coma as a shock to those creating alarm about AGW that most skeptics actually know damn well that the world has been warming - what else do expect when we are still coming out of the Little Ice Age.

In fact most skeptics know something the alarmists don't seem to understand

The Climate changes.

It always has; and always will. And not only that but in terms of past climate it is still on the cold side; and CO2 levels are still on the low side

You want some FUD ? Well sometime in the next 10 000 years we are due to have another period if glaciation - I think you'll find that man emitted CO2 isn't going to make any difference to this potentially catastrophic event one way or the other - but compared to a couple of degrees of warming an Ice Age will definitely be orders of magnitude more damaging to Life on Earth.

Chinese giant halts rare earth shipments to hike prices

peter_dtm
Alert

oh goody

look for further increases in your gas & 'lecky bills as the cost of those useless wind turbines goes up as a result of the large rare earth magnets they all come equiped with.

A rise in the cost of a wind turbine will result in the rise in the subsidies we pay to have the useless machines planted in the country side.

More fuel poverty; as useless windturbines become more expensive

NB Usless is used in its engineering sense : not fit for purpose; or : does not work as claimed

Watchdog mauls Euro database of 'pirates'

peter_dtm
WTF?

well; what else do you expect; they can't even get their accountants to sign off on their accounts.

Deep inside ARM's new Intel killer

peter_dtm
Mushroom

$diety's sake

don't even let the gov know there's a successful UK company - they'd find some one to stuff it up - and if they didn't manage it they'd surely tell Brussels. And they *know* electronics is a German thing........

either way they'd be stuffed

OccupySF BOFH runs protest network on pedal power

peter_dtm
FAIL

No engineering here at all; just demonstration of a total lack of ability to solve a problem. They stay in their comfort zone and use the wrong technology to try to power the ..... wrong technology.

they have a problem - getting power for assorted bits of kit

they have totally failed to achieve a workable (never mind reliable) solution.

$deity help them if they ever have to resolve a real power crisis

Sixth of Britain's cellphones have traces of poo on them

peter_dtm
Mushroom

ever wondered how our parents and grandparents before them (even unto the 4th generation) survived ?

If you kill all the bacteria on your skin you'll get skin diseases pretty damn quickly - there used to be a name for it - some syndrome or other and it is EXTREMELY unhealthy to be obsessively clean if you don't need to be. Personally - I was taught not to wee on my hands

Since most of you don't work in sterile conditions - you don't need to be obsessing about being sterile.

A bit of dirt and several billion bugs are good for you a lack of either is already known to be bad for you

Is this the next stupid alarmism ?

Where am I going tomorrow? My electric car charger wants to know

peter_dtm
FAIL

so ; most people seem to have worked out how seriously flawed (current technology) battery cars are. And how far off a viable battery is.

They also seem to be aware of the time required to charge the battery.

What no one has looked at is the fondle slab interface ....

SAP - are you serious ? Who; apart from SAP programmers and Finance Directors have ever had a good experience with SAP ?

The average punter is NOT going to accept Some Awful Program as the front end to looking after their car; it will take them longer to update the diary than it will take the car to charge for a 1000 mile journey.

And then it will probably not cope with decimal points and confuse the luser even more by insisting the electricity supply tells it the unit costs in 0,001£ increments

The toxic mix of Such A Problematic interface. and wrong technology (batteries) is about as certain a fail as electric cars being good for the environment (they are probably WORSE than ICE in terms of environmental wear and tear)

peter_dtm

go and check exactly how heavy those battery packs are.

now add in ealth n safety

now add in the grid infrastructure for supplying the charging stations

peter_dtm
Pirate

why not just make it BETTER and assume better will continue to be cleaner and greener - which is; by and large ; the history of all new tech since the invention of fire

peter_dtm
FAIL

err look here

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

I think you will find that the period of the day after the night and before corrie is peak demand

peter_dtm
Pirate

you can go three times as far now

but the batteries will weigh 3 times as much (so you won't go three times as far as you have to cart that extra couple of tonnes of battery around with you) and take up 3 times the volume - so the car will be at least half as big (so it won't go three times as far because of the increased drag - and weight of the monocoque shell)

and of course - with a mains fuse of only 50 amps in your house it will take three times as long to charge.

And with out the subsidies that the Leaf etc all get (some 30% plus of price) it's going to cost three times as much.

And do three times the environmental damage in making the battery and disposing of it after 5 years - at about the same cost as a new car

dead right they are not toys - they are expensive guilt removal bling suitable for either people who are genuinely interested in different tech; or look-at-me-aren't-I-good psueds

peter_dtm
Pirate

no

look at charge gauge and think - that'll take 3 hours to charge

the difference with a liquid fuel car is - that'll take 5 minutes to fill...

Royal Navy halts Highlands GPS jamming

peter_dtm
Alien

or maybe a Carrington effect flare has knocked all the satellites out ?

Or the engine died & so did the batteries ?

Or there was a nuclear war ?

Or someone managed to break the gizmo with the big red button ?

oh look - it's not safe to go to sea - all sorts of BAD things *might* happen - best stay in bed where it's safe .....

peter_dtm
peter_dtm
Pirate

Hear Hear !

and if they can't manage that - well the gene pool is far better off with out them !

I can't believe any one seriously paid any attention to these idiots - if you go to sea you read NTM (Notice to Mariners); even more than you look before you cross that busy main road.

peter_dtm

they don't actually 'jam' the signal by generating competing large RF transmissions. They degrade the signal by playing around with the information that your GPS decodes to work out where it is.

Mil grade GPS have extra functionality where they can receive corrections for the 'jamming' in real time.

ALL civilian GPS are only as accurate as the military feel like letting them be - read the small print of the free to use at own risk license no one can ever be arsed to read.

Obviously you are unaware of the change in use of the term 'jamming'

peter_dtm
Pirate

obviously not

any 'skipper' claiming such a title (instead of 'suicide pact leader') would know roughly where he was at all times.

If he needed to make a mayday call he would then give his approximate position. If he is that incompetent that he doesn't know where he is; he probably also has flat batteries in his emergency gizmo - if he even bothered to turn it on in the first place or understood how to use it.

Any one relying solely on the 'big red button' deserves; as a minimum; an honorary mention in the Darwin Awards.

Any one relying on GPS as the sole navigation tool deserves their place in the Darwin Awards - and should be encouraged to try out for membership BEFORE going to sea (I'd suggest playing Russian roulette with all chambers loaded); where they will needless put other peoples lives' at risk

Google breaks South African embargo on Dalai Lama

peter_dtm
FAIL

Zummz doesn't normally spout his religion - just his racist homophobic policies

Dinosaur-murdering space boulder family found innocent

peter_dtm
Trollface

it wasn't satan

it was Slartibartfast and friends

Slarti got an award for the Fjords

Just ask Mr Dent - and remember the answer's 42

Schoolkids learn coding at GCSE level in curriculum trial

peter_dtm
Unhappy

just and only that

and don't you dare suggest they use something other than microsoft; the exams are set only using microsoft word; excel and powerpoint.. My experience (kids now 18 & 16) of school ICT is that there is no interest in anything outside 'teaching' microsoft office. They don't cover pc mainteance and don't you dare suggest they talk about networking. I get the impression most ICT teachers think networking is something you use facebook for,

peter_dtm
Coat

Optional

To all those who have just discovered that they don't teach programming anymore.

They don't teach

English Language

English Literature

Maths

Physics

Chemistry

Biology

either

They show politicised science via video. No experiments; no basics; no theory of science. Questions asking about what you think is important; or what somebody thinks is the correct answer to a political question.

They think maths is arithmetic; and do obscene things to make division simple ('long division' is apparently conceptually way too difficult to do)

English Lit is a series of disconnected simplified passages from 'significant' (political term) 'modern' books

English Language - would appear to be English as a 2nd or 3rd pigdin language; no grammar; and the use of a full stop and capitalization is considered to be advanced; and clever (and therefore to be sneered at).;

And having given up French ('cos I'm useless at languages) before O levels; my French is still seriously better than either of my kids GCSE passes.

In short; the modern school system is an absolute disgrace.

(O levels 1970; A levels 1972)

9/11: The day we lost our privacy and power

peter_dtm
Pint

optional

and how many Europeans have travelled outside the EUSSR ?

typical - most Europeans have no idea how BIG the US is. Can you; perchance name all the US states ? and their Captials ?

Here's an easy one - Statte capital of New York is ?

Now on a blank outline map of North America draw :

US/Mexico border

US/Canada Borders (What; you didn't know there is more than one)?

Now draw in Idaho; Montana; District Columbia

Lack of geographical knowledge is not any indication of lack of intellegence

And there are plenty of Brits who have never ever travelled out of their local area; even if they physiclly go to Lanzaroti or Greece; their heads remain firmly in the UK trash culture

CERN: 'Climate models will need to be substantially revised'

peter_dtm
FAIL

some

as is the rebuttal of the dis-proven theory that the MWP was local not global.

MWP was global - just like the Roman Warm Period and the Little ice age

peter_dtm
Pirate

The title is required, and must contain letters and/or digits.

Human produced CO2 is a very small part of the natural CO2 output

CO2 appears to lag temperature by some 800 years. 800 years ago we had the Middle Ages Warm Period; so we would expect to see an increase in natural CO2 output.

The precautionary principle is only applicable if applying it does not destroy the very thing you are trying to protect. The cost (in terms of destruction of standard of living; jobs etc) compared to the effects of global warming just doe not make sense. What about all the benefits of warming - more CO2 means more crops for less water; a quick check in history v climate reveals that warm periods are ALWAYS beneficial for Humans; cold periods are ALWAYS detrimental. The precautionary principle actually would suggest getting MORE CO2 into the atmosphere to help try and prevent the next Ice Age - due sometime in the next few thousand years; but perhaps as close as the next 100 - we just don't know....

peter_dtm
Mushroom

another title ?

hence the well earned sobriquet 'Watermelon' - someone who is (now) Green on the outside but remains firmly Red on the inside.

tell me again what happened to all those communists & socialist following the total and abject failure of their political theories

peter_dtm
FAIL

oops - almost forgot this

you really need to check out who funds :

WWF

Greenpeace

UEA CRU

you will find all the big oil companies in the lists of donors.

However all AGW proponents boast about relieving funding from Governments (demonstrable biased in favour of CAGW) and those well know advocate groups like Greenpeace and WWF; Terri and many 'progressive' (translated means luddite) advocacy anti science organizations. Does this fact then automatically disqualify CAGW scientist from being allowed to report their research and findings; after all they are funded by organisations with massive interest in getting the 'right' result ?

French letter shock: Tax us more, demand rich people

peter_dtm
Stop

blank

so - how did they get money to make investments ?

1) Inherited -- taxed massively now; so all that wealth HAS ALREADY BEEN TAXED

2) Paid with income - and that would be TAXED income wouldn't it ? If not then I am sure the tax authorities would be investigating them

So all the investments have already been taxed

AND

their increase in value is also taxed.

And 'living of investment income' is what all NON-STATE pensioners do; as well as anyone who spends money received from savings accounts; shares dividends or insurance policies.

Of course clever people minimize their tax liability (contry to current socialist doctrine; minimizing (avoiding) tax liability is not illegal; and is something any sane person should do - its like shopping for the cheapest price [ a form of tax avoidance as you also minimize the VAT you pay]); and I look forward to the far distance day when I can afford to retire and live on my investment income (thank you G Brown - that ain't now ever going to happen)

peter_dtm
Mushroom

this is a title

does anyone on here believe they pay too little tax ?

you do ? - well send a cheque to HMRC for what ever you feel you have been under charged.

there easy.

Me; I believe I am over taxed - basically because there is so much historic proof out there and current examples that demonstrate that PEOPLE spend their money far more effectively than governments

No this is nothing like any of the strawman arguments above regarding fighting terrorism and other stupid comparisons.

.This is out of the 'Look at me aren't I a good little socialist' play book - if any of those people seriously believed they were paying too little tax they would do one of three things

1) quietly get on with paying whatever they felt the shortfall was; and quietly getting on with their life

2) quietly donate the excess money to suitable charity/charities

3) Do 1 or 2 with maximum publicity to assuage what ever stupid guilt complex they suffer from; thereby proving that it isn't about the benefit their 'generosity' may cause but purely about their public image and how they feel about themselves.

Why drag a compulsory increase in tax FOR OTHER PEOPLE ? OOOHH I know; no one who earns money pays enough tax; everyone should pay more - there; aren't I susch a GOOD and NOBLE person ? - bollocks

Self serving selfish idiots. When they have given all their money and assets away and forgone their life of privilege by living on average pay in an average house with the average amount of staff (no servants; accountants or lawyers) then they may have cause to suggest that other people MIGHT like to do the same

Phone-hack backlash BBC in embarrassing headline gaffes

peter_dtm
Thumb Down

MHz

Hz - cycles per second (herz)

m - millie

M - mega

- rule of thumb for most SI multipliers

upper case = multiplier

lower case - divisor

mHz = millie herz

MH = mega herz

notable exception k = kilo as in

km = kilometres (1000 metres) or kHz (1000 Hz)

CERN 'gags' physicists in cosmic ray climate experiment

peter_dtm
Stop

oh dear

quote AC

You also seem to mis-understand how basic science works - come up with a theory, observe the theory, respond to the results and change your theory based on new evidence, repeat. That's how science works.

end quote

that's what I said

hypothesis (it is only a theory AFTER the proof is in and a consensus formed that it accurately describes a facet of the real world - which takes years and lots of experiments)

Experiment

INTERPRET the results

MODIFY (if necessary - or scrap) hypothesis

No interpretation - no modification.

and if you did read it you would also notice that I object to paying IF science is not done ie if the interpretation that is required by the scientific method is not made.

CERN is not an EU institution by the way and is one of the best things around - full of science & engineering. Not to mention IT. And some really GOOD engineering; that allows for some amazing science. In fact why don't we cut all politicians pay by 20% across CERN member countries and give it all to CERN (ok it would probably only pay for a minutes worth of their electricity bill)?

Why is Europe not logical - because the people who make up the member states that were allowed to have referendums said NO. And the people of the UK who were promised a referendum about membership of a nation-state were never given one. And because Common Law and Napoleonic Law can not co-exist - and why should we give up Common Law ?

And because most of what we are told about the EU has been lies; the UK politicians ALWAYS deny that the whole purpose of the EU is a single state (not even federal). If it was GOOD THING why do they have to lie about it ? What is logical about that ? I have found that big lies are normally told to hide big nasty truths - and the EU is based on a big lie.

Power and £ to CERN ! Devil take the lying eurocrats

peter_dtm
Stop

hate to break this to you but

yes it does !

More CO2 is inordinately beneficial to plants (more crops for less water just for starters). Humans are comfortable all the way up to (and beyond) 1000ppm. Plants thrive best at 5000ppm (but by then humans and most animals are in serious trouble). SO more does mean better - lots more may; however; be too much of a good thing.

So at a mere 350ppm we are starving the plants and we can comfortably increase CO2 for quite a long time.

And if CO2 does warm the climate - consider this little problem :

Does man thrive where it is warm or where it is cold ? Ask yourself why the Viking colony on Greenland managed to get established; and then what killed it off.

peter_dtm
Coat

Why

Why do an experiment ?

To test an hypothesis

What do you do with the results of the experiment ?

Interpret them in terms of what the experiment was supposed to test (ie agrees with the theory/disagrees with the theory)

What do you do with the interpretation of the results ?

Modify the theory so it better describes the real world ie MORE interpretation.

The result HAVE to be interpreted otherwise the experiment is a waste of time and money – and since I have been forced to become a ‘citizen’ of the EUSSR; rather than remaining a subject of the nation of my birth I object to the waste of my tax £

but I suspect I'm not welcome here as I do logic not emotions; and so belong in the past of real science not in modern feely cuddly post normal science; so I'll just get me coat

peter_dtm
Stop

nag nag nag nag - ok here's a title

the screamed about changes to the sea are somewhat less (by an order of magnitude) then normal aquarium ph indicators can resolve.

The oceans are alkaline. They will remain alkaline even if we continue burn fuel to make cheap energy.

And you are aware of course that rain is naturally acidic ?

peter_dtm
Stop

no you don't unless

consensus science is bad science if the consensus shuts down investigation and innovation.

consensus science in the 50s said organ transplants were impossible. Hell; consensus 'science' in some parts of the world said transplants between different races were impossible (and where was the first successful heart transplant done ? oh yes; where the consensus science said that it could not work.)

Look up Lysenko science for a modern day example of politics driving consensus science.

However if the people in the consensus do not shut down questions and research that would break the consensus then it is probably a good thing.

There in lies the rub. To be valid science; consensus science demands skeptics.

Page: