Mr Ham

I've had a quick look at some of the masks on the nexus and none of them really pique my interest. I really was hoping someone could whip this up because its pretty much exactly what I'm looking for.

I was hoping someone could knock together the mask Dr McNinja dons as Kid Ninja. Linky to the comic here. I want to use it with the vanilla Dark Brotherhood armor. Thanks in advance! (sans cloak, abs, purple nerps)

And yet CO2 concentrations are well above the natural maxima. Nothing natural would cause a sudden spike like that. [image] hence the "I agree that humans have had a negative impact on the climate in recent years" part at the very beginning of the quote from me in your post. Er... so if you're not attributing climate change to wholly natural or mainly anthropomorphic causes what's your point?

And yet CO2 concentrations are well above the natural maxima. Nothing natural would cause a sudden spike like that.

I highly doubt the UEA CRU is "one the the leading centres for climate change study". The BBC uses data from the MET Office which draw their data from a number of sources including the Royal Meteorological Society, National Centre for Atmospheric Science, the Hadley Centre and the Walker Institute as well a multitude of institutions outside UK. Inconsistencies with UEA's data would've been found against other institution's data before being released. Furthermore, in response to the UEA being hacked, the MET Office responded by stating "The bottom line is that temperatures continue to rise and humans are responsible for it. We have every confidence in the science and the various datasets we use. The peer-review process is as robust as it could possibly be." 1 The bottom line is, predictions are fallable; they can be true or false. Now if you really feel so strongly that a whole branch of the scientific community is simply a con, I doubt I'd do very much to sway you even if I did give a rebuttal. I simply find the sheer volume of scientific claims too overwhelming to deny. Sure, some of these publications are simply to get money and attention, can you honestly deny every single paper? Oh, and can you explain how climate change and the weather are interchangeable terms?

The weather is not a suitable basis for any conclusions about climate change. Furthermore, a single institution manipulating empirical data hardly spells the end of the anthropomorphic climate change debate. Current CO2 levels are nowhere near historical variation, even if we were at the peak of the natural warming period. The precautionary principle still holds.

Are you seriously comparing a stupid, impractical sports car to a viable and functional hybrid car? If you're the kind of person who spends hundreds of thousands of dollars on a hybrid Porsche which has a top speed of 320 km/h I don't think you care about the environment, at least not as much as being a smug, pretentious hipster. (By the way, the Porsche is made of carbon-fibre-reinforced plastic, magnesium and aluminium and is probably even worse for the environment than the little Reva. Oops?)

The relation is called "motion". And time is a function of motion. Yes I know but exactly what that relationship is,is not something I fully understand Whats not to understand? Motion can be expressed as a function of time, ie, the equations of motion?

I'd like to see you use engineering equations with non-SI units! Ideal gas law anyone? :tongue:

Hogwash! The means to measure and quantify time is a construct, yes. But time certainly exists! Does one moment differ from another? Of course! So then time exists. Nevermind all this silly dimension stuff and whatnot, as long as there is a progression of events, there is time! To say time doesn't exist because the way its measured is artificial is to say length doesn't exist, or that mass doesn't exist; and these most certainly DO exist.

Why were we discussing limiting food/resources? Is there any documented record that diminishing resources was a factor in the introduction of the one-child policy?

What Aborigines do you refer to? Indigenous Australians? Its rather alarming to hear that native Americans and Polynesians were so callous. Do you have any links to original research?

There is a HUGE difference between the chinese government being "stupid" and them simply not caring.

We debate to share ideas and opinions. If someone has a valid point which you cannot refute, I think it obligatory that you review your own views and either adapt them or adopt your opponents. Anything else would be intellectual cowardice; knowing full well your own views are inferior you still refuse to change them. In that way we "force" our views onto other people.

But constant positive reinforcement by his family and friends may have spared the psychological trauma with the same results...

IT'S A MIRACLE! PRAISE GOD! In other words, strange things that are unexplainable have been labeled as the work of god. Perhaps (and I mean this to no offense) Jesus walking on water was a glitch (Water Walking glitch Fixed in patch 13234123512.131.1b) And who said Jesus walking on water actually happened?

No, but if Ted is well-mannered, studious and outgoing there's a good chance little he'll rub off on little Jimmy, who spends the majority of his day with Ted, not his parents.

Friends and peers, not parents, have the greatest impact. I dare say anyone who disagrees is clearly not in touch with the youth of today.

Our computing capabilities are increasing exponentially (as highlighted by Moore's Law). If this were a simulation, the framework for the simulation would also have to increase at a greater exponential rate. Regardless of how great a head-start the framework has, there will be a convergence between the two exponential functions. So what then?

Superstition gives way to religion. Therefore superstitions should be feared. [/troll]

Oh wow... Um.. I'm going to say this as lightly as possible. There is no point in involving yourself in a debate if you're going to disregard valid arguments. A debate is an exchange in opinions and facts to achieve a common consensus. You gain nothing by rejecting other people's arguments because you don't want to accept them. Yeah, some ideas and concepts are going to be hard to accept. But for goodness sake don't let emotion interfere with logic. If you're not willing to being open-minded about this debate and think arguments through, you have no place in debating forum. The BP executive sat in his expansive mansion, a glass of whisky in hand, watching the news-reel for the day. Images of an oil spill endangering animals' lives and putting peasants out of work gave him much enjoyment. Sipping his brandy and curling his waxed-tip moustache, he throws another handful of hundred dollar bills into his fireplace and quietly chuckles to himself with satisfaction. Yeah I was never a very good writer. But seriously so what? So the guy takes a little time off with his family? Maybe he needs some time to think about how his company is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy. Maybe he needs to forget the lives his and his co-workers have ruined. Maybe he needs to get away from all the blame and responsibility hes garnered from an accident. Or maybe, just maybe, hes quietly chuckling to himself in satisfaction because he actually WANTED all this negative attention, because he WANTED this to happen.

You can't just disregard science just because we haven't physically observed it. Yes, I understand you don't want to accept something that isn't solid fact but that's the way science is. Current plate tectonic theories aren't certain but they are highly, highly probable. Just like quantum physics, elementary chemistry, molecular biology, materials science, etc. Ignoring science for lack of absolutes would be the end of science in general (and I think Heisenburg might have something to say about that). What factual data? In what way is 'data' about climate change any more credible than geophysics? Global Warming (at least whatever contribution man has made to it) is still little more than a myth. Yes we have rising concentrations of 'Greenhouse Gases'. But correlation doesn't imply causation. Whatever data we have on the actual change in temperatures is obscure and confounding at best. The Hadley Institute affair was a great consciousness raiser for the merit of scientific 'fact'. And yet we still have people with vested interests exploiting the concern of the general population. Yes we need to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels but we need to be mindful of the limits of renewable energy. People are so concerned for the need for alternative energies that they're willing to disregard the costs and potentials of the technologies still in their infancies. The last thing we need is blind investments in under-developed technologies which could themselves be just as damaging as the technologies they are superceding. Rather, we need sensible discussion and execution of a long-term plan to adapt to, not control our changing environment. It is not the strongest of the species that survives nor the most intelligent but the one most willing to adapt. Have you forgotten about iron ores? Copper? Tin? Aluminium? We kind of need those...

Well its hard to argue with you if you don't believe in plate tectonics. Can you honestly argue against plate tectonics? Are you denying that convection cells in the mantle drive plate tectonics? If we're not drawing oil from the crust where are we drawing it from? The mantle? Surely, you jest. Even so, the ore and minerals being mined every second far outweighs the mass of oil and gas being pumped out anyway. You're not against mining too are you?

Plate tectonics happen below the crust in the mantle. Thus whatever effect oil has on plate tectonics is negligible, if not infinitesimal.

Are you trying to suggest that the meaning for our existance is to masturbate aliens? :blink: