"Deadly temperatures for humans"
-
OK, how about we agree to disagree? :) The people from non-metric countries can continue struggling to understand metric units when trying to learn science.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
OK, how about we agree to disagree?
Well of course.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
The people from non-metric countries can continue struggling to understand metric units when trying to learn science.
Huh? Where do you get that from? I've been around quite a long time and I was taught both and am comfortable in either. What makes you think that someone taught Imperial would struggle with Metric? Far more likely that someone taught Metric would struggle with Imperial.
me, me, me "The dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't have a space program. And if we become extinct because we don't have a space program, it'll serve us right!" Larry Niven
-
OK, how about we agree to disagree? :) The people from non-metric countries can continue struggling to understand metric units when trying to learn science.
Doesn't change the fact that his original post is a bad attack piece on par with CSS for failing to get something.
Mind you, its incredible that anyone would print such a scientifically lame piece as this. Yeah, at 100 `C its going to be pretty untenable, but I am pretty sure we all know that anyway, so just what IS this article saying thats newsworthy?The article was talking about 95F. The fact that he couldn't figure out that no one would bother to check to see if being in temps that are near the boiling point of water says a lot. He went after the "science" of the article because it allowed him to take a jab at someone while making his position seem stronger.So basically yet another example of a climatologist making suppositions and guesses in a field he is unqualified to do so in.And so he attacks a climatologist without even grasping the point. He accuses someone of having an agenda when he DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER to read the article enough to realise it was about being in current heat waves. Now the article didn't really help much, as if you look at the Newspapers in Chicago during a heat wave you will see that people drop like flies if exposed to 100F temps for a few days. But at least it made sense.The extraordinary thing is that this kind of pure bunkum gets published. Its really extraordinary how badly 'science' is performing these days.I would say the extraordinary thing is that he was so tainted by his need to attack a climatologist that reading comprehension went out the window.If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
OK, how about we agree to disagree?
Well of course.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
The people from non-metric countries can continue struggling to understand metric units when trying to learn science.
Huh? Where do you get that from? I've been around quite a long time and I was taught both and am comfortable in either. What makes you think that someone taught Imperial would struggle with Metric? Far more likely that someone taught Metric would struggle with Imperial.
me, me, me "The dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't have a space program. And if we become extinct because we don't have a space program, it'll serve us right!" Larry Niven
digital man wrote:
Huh? Where do you get that from?
That's just what I hear. Not, like, an insurmountable hurdle, but a hurdle nonetheless.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
OK, how about we agree to disagree?
Well of course.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
The people from non-metric countries can continue struggling to understand metric units when trying to learn science.
Huh? Where do you get that from? I've been around quite a long time and I was taught both and am comfortable in either. What makes you think that someone taught Imperial would struggle with Metric? Far more likely that someone taught Metric would struggle with Imperial.
me, me, me "The dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't have a space program. And if we become extinct because we don't have a space program, it'll serve us right!" Larry Niven
ahem, excuse me, I come from a country that uses the metric system, I live right now in a country that uses the Imperial system... people around here don't know anything about the metric system, if I say something in the metric system, they will just go nuts and ask me to convert it. So, probably you're just one of the few, Outside is 85 degrees... is too hot, it's almost the temp to boil water... aaaah wait, 85F, it's like 27 C, it's safe to go outside :laugh: We are going to walk 3 miles, ah only 3 miles... wait that's almost 5km... here, let me get the car (yes, I'm lazy) ;P I know both worlds, Imperial system sucks, metric system is simple, effective, easy to learn
I want to die like my grandfather- asleep, not like the passengers in his car, screaming!
-
Okay, so from what I understand the Jet Stream is normally powerful enough that it takes warm air from the gulf of Mexico and carries it across the Atlantic. This warm air is a buffer and shields the UK from snow and cold temperatures that considering their positioning should be all too common. Why does this matter? El Nino has a habit of messing up weather patterns. It peaked in the winter, and it appears the Jet Stream was weakened. The fact that El Nino seems to be happening more and more (and La Nina less and less) is just a coincidence, right? England got cold because the temperature differences that keep it warm lessened. El Nino or global warming are both possible explanations for that. I always like the people talking about snowstorms as if they disprove global warming, but they seem to overlook Vancouver needing to make snow in the middle of Winter this year for the Olympics. But hey, obviously warming is false. Because Global warming would mean the world is warmer even if a stupidly weird weather pattern is messing up everything.
If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
Okay, so from what I understand the Jet Stream is normally powerful enough that it takes warm air from the gulf of Mexico and carries it across the Atlantic.
No, you got it completely wrong. Its the GULF stream that carries warm WATER from the gulf to the north east atlantic.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
It peaked in the winter, and it appears the Jet Stream was weakened.
No, in fact the GULF stream has been further south than usual for about 5 years giving wet cool summers and cold winters.
ragnaroknrol wrote:
England got cold
As did the USA, Europe, China, Russia etc etc etc. (This winter and the last four). As for Vancouver it shows that weather is seldom predictable.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
fat_boy wrote:
Ah, so when his stupidity is pointed out he retorts with a penis size quip in the thought that having a bigger dick makes him some how more right.
Again you attack me and not the point I made. I threw that in as an attempt to lighten the mood after you called me a moronic fucking prick Would you like to tell me again how one article about freak snow fall in two small towns in the mountains entitles you to tell me that the previous summer in my home was cool and how that could in anyway be relevant to your original point was appears to be that ??? some scientist 'making suppositions and guesses in a field he is unqualified to do so in'. He's in good company eh?
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
It mocks itself.
Again, why? Just because you're not used to it or it looks odd to you or the divisions appear arbitrary doesn't make it useless or bad. I was taught Imperial and Metric so interchange between them without a thought though I still prefer F for temperature (don't ask why - just seems to make more sense when trying to determine what to wear for the day). In the end they all do one thing: assign some unit of measure between one point and another. What does it matter what they are called or how they divide up as long as everyone who uses that particular unit understands what they mean and how to apply them? Hourses for courses, old chap.
me, me, me "The dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't have a space program. And if we become extinct because we don't have a space program, it'll serve us right!" Larry Niven
Have to agree there is all about what your use too. Me i can't get to grasps with Feirenheit for tempurature but im more at ease with Kilo and grams than i am with pounds and grams. and a pint of beer should only be served in a pint glass from the UK. PERIOD!
Marc Clifton wrote:
That has nothing to do with VB. - Oh crap. I just defended VB!
-
fat_boy wrote:
No, I worte this: "record snow in most parts of the world (yes, even in New South Wales "
No you wrote "after yet another bloody cold winter and summer with record snow in most parts of the world" Nice selective self quoting!
fat_boy wrote:
Ha, what a wimp! You stated it pal, calling me a prick, and now you cant even stand and fight!
But you are a prick, that much is obvious.
fat_boy wrote:
SO, a gutless chicken as well as a fool, and incapable of maintainig a consistent argument.
My argument is very simple and consistent. Summer in NSW Australia 09/ 10 was not unusually cold and a touch of snow as described in the article you linked to is not significant or meaningful.
"My house is blue, and my car is red (but its wheels are black)" Now, do you think 'wheels' applies to house or car?
Josh Gray wrote:
ut you are a prick, that much is obvious.
Oh, feeling brave again are you? Excuse me while I snigger.
Josh Gray wrote:
touch of snow as described in the article you linked to is not significant or meaningful.
But a record nonetheless, and also a recoed for cold I expect too. (Since cold and snow do go together)
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
fat_boy wrote:
A furlong is the lenght an ox can plough before needing a rest.
Ah yes, a distance we in the modern world are very familiar with. ;P
fat_boy wrote:
A pint is a perfect container for beer, none other will do.
Imperial pint, or US liquid pint?
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Ah yes, a distance we in the modern world are very familiar with.
Ah, well, I am sure there is somehting an eight of a mile can be applied to... How about the longest distance between pubs for example?
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
Imperial pint, or US liquid pint?
What, IMPERIAL OF COURSE!
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
digital man wrote:
Huh? Where do you get that from?
That's just what I hear. Not, like, an insurmountable hurdle, but a hurdle nonetheless.
-
Doesn't change the fact that his original post is a bad attack piece on par with CSS for failing to get something.
Mind you, its incredible that anyone would print such a scientifically lame piece as this. Yeah, at 100 `C its going to be pretty untenable, but I am pretty sure we all know that anyway, so just what IS this article saying thats newsworthy?The article was talking about 95F. The fact that he couldn't figure out that no one would bother to check to see if being in temps that are near the boiling point of water says a lot. He went after the "science" of the article because it allowed him to take a jab at someone while making his position seem stronger.So basically yet another example of a climatologist making suppositions and guesses in a field he is unqualified to do so in.And so he attacks a climatologist without even grasping the point. He accuses someone of having an agenda when he DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER to read the article enough to realise it was about being in current heat waves. Now the article didn't really help much, as if you look at the Newspapers in Chicago during a heat wave you will see that people drop like flies if exposed to 100F temps for a few days. But at least it made sense.The extraordinary thing is that this kind of pure bunkum gets published. Its really extraordinary how badly 'science' is performing these days.I would say the extraordinary thing is that he was so tainted by his need to attack a climatologist that reading comprehension went out the window.If I have accidentally said something witty, smart, or correct, it is purely by mistake and I apologize for it.
Oh boo hoo. Who cares if it is 95F or 95C its stil a weather scientist making claimns about the human body. And did he actually back his statements up with experiments? Nope. He 'calculated' that at 95 (whatever) we are dead after 6 hours. (or nearly so). So tell me sunshine, just how DO you calculate that?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Uh, so heat stroke is all in their heads, and pointing out that their climate modeling points to a world rendered pretty difficult to live in due to the tendency of humans to up and die in certain conditions is political?
Distind wrote:
Uh, so heat stroke is all in their heads,
Yeeeaaaahhh suuuurrre... Looks like you got my point completely (sarcasm intended). Sorry, did you entirly miss the bit where I wrote that we actually know all this already? So given that you did, re-read what I wrote, and then try to work out how in any way this paper is scientific or constitutes new findings worthy of publishing? Ahhh, you cant can you. I think now you get my point.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Oh boo hoo. Who cares if it is 95F or 95C its stil a weather scientist making claimns about the human body. And did he actually back his statements up with experiments? Nope. He 'calculated' that at 95 (whatever) we are dead after 6 hours. (or nearly so). So tell me sunshine, just how DO you calculate that?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Oh boo hoo. Who cares if it is 95F or 95C its stil a weather scientist making claimns about the human body.
afraid to say it does matter 95 degree Celsius = 203 degree Fahrenheit 95 degree Fahrenheit = 35 degree Celsius this was taken from this page doing the work for me temperature converter thingy
Marc Clifton wrote:
That has nothing to do with VB. - Oh crap. I just defended VB!
-
- 95 degrees Fahrenheit, not Celsius. Nowhere in the article is the Celsius scale used. 2) It's the "wet bulb" temperature, which is described as basically skin temperature while sweating (Remember, we sweat to cool ourselves down). It's somewhat lower than air temperature, and relates to humidity too. If it's humid out, we can dissipate less heat via sweat, so we can't keep our body temperature regulated as easily. 3) It says that about a 12-degree temperature increase would bring some humid areas above that 95-degree wet bulb limit. This isn't a "We're all gonna die" story, though I'm sure there's a bit of bias in that direction (Don't have much time right now, so not reading in detail)... It's basically saying, "Ok, if global warming is real, this is how much it'll take before people start dropping dead." If anything, I think it downplays global warming, since if I remember right, the predictions are for a temperature rise of maybe a few degrees in the next century, right? This study basically implies that at that rate, it would take several centuries before it becomes unsuitable for humans. Of course, it says nothing about farming, livestock, plant life, sea levels, etc... That's out of the scope of the article. EDIT: You should actually read articles and understand them before you start using them as examples of bad science or bad journalism... You don't want to start sounding like Pillowpants.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
Ian Shlasko wrote:
You don't want to start sounding like Pillowpants.
Too late. :laugh:
me, me, me "The dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't have a space program. And if we become extinct because we don't have a space program, it'll serve us right!" Larry Niven
-
Distind wrote:
Uh, so heat stroke is all in their heads,
Yeeeaaaahhh suuuurrre... Looks like you got my point completely (sarcasm intended). Sorry, did you entirly miss the bit where I wrote that we actually know all this already? So given that you did, re-read what I wrote, and then try to work out how in any way this paper is scientific or constitutes new findings worthy of publishing? Ahhh, you cant can you. I think now you get my point.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
So given that you did, re-read what I wrote, and then try to work out how in any way this paper is scientific or constitutes new findings worthy of publishing?
Because a relatively sound explanation of "We'll throughly be fucked at X" is generally something good to have. That's the point that damn well know we want to stop before, as if we don't we're fucked. It certainly has nothing to do with your rant above, just an effective end point to measure against to shut up both people like you, and those who took the day after tomorrow to be a documentary.
-
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
OK, how about we agree to disagree?
Well of course.
Ravel H. Joyce wrote:
The people from non-metric countries can continue struggling to understand metric units when trying to learn science.
Huh? Where do you get that from? I've been around quite a long time and I was taught both and am comfortable in either. What makes you think that someone taught Imperial would struggle with Metric? Far more likely that someone taught Metric would struggle with Imperial.
me, me, me "The dinosaurs became extinct because they didn't have a space program. And if we become extinct because we don't have a space program, it'll serve us right!" Larry Niven
-
Josh Gray wrote:
It's funny how a dick head with a chip on his shoulder can tell me what the weather was like in my own home over the last six months.
Oh really? So you actually live in thoise vilages where they had summer snow do you? Ah, I guess not., Thats why you were completely ignorant of the fact untill I pointed it out to you. Yes, it is funny how even a dick with splinters can tell YOU more about the weather in YOUR country. Kind of makes you pretty stupid then doesnt it. At least more stupid than a dick with motes on it any way.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
One village means squat. Two, slightly more squat. It snowed in Texas this year, at the same time up in places that it's typically cold it was about 60. New York in general had a fairly mild winter and most of the major storms came towards the end of it rather than being distributed through out. The 'Blarg this place was cool for a day' argument doesn't hold much weight when part of global climate change is that shit starts going wonky and that causes problems for those who live in those places. Doesn't mean it's all going to freeze over, doesn't mean every where's gonna get hot, it means shit is going to change and we don't know what the hell to do when it does, and we don't know quite how it's going to. That last bit of uncertainty drives people with the slightest bit of scientific curiosity nuts.
-
One village means squat. Two, slightly more squat. It snowed in Texas this year, at the same time up in places that it's typically cold it was about 60. New York in general had a fairly mild winter and most of the major storms came towards the end of it rather than being distributed through out. The 'Blarg this place was cool for a day' argument doesn't hold much weight when part of global climate change is that shit starts going wonky and that causes problems for those who live in those places. Doesn't mean it's all going to freeze over, doesn't mean every where's gonna get hot, it means shit is going to change and we don't know what the hell to do when it does, and we don't know quite how it's going to. That last bit of uncertainty drives people with the slightest bit of scientific curiosity nuts.
Ah, the old 'the world is going to hell in a hand cart' mentality. Well, you arent the only one to think like this. 1977 1984 1999 200 2001. Global cooling, global warming, nuclear war, aids, pestillence death and war. Well, it never did happen. Guess whats also not going to happen.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
fat_boy wrote:
So given that you did, re-read what I wrote, and then try to work out how in any way this paper is scientific or constitutes new findings worthy of publishing?
Because a relatively sound explanation of "We'll throughly be fucked at X" is generally something good to have. That's the point that damn well know we want to stop before, as if we don't we're fucked. It certainly has nothing to do with your rant above, just an effective end point to measure against to shut up both people like you, and those who took the day after tomorrow to be a documentary.
Distind wrote:
Because a relatively sound explanation of "We'll throughly be f***ed at X"
Groan. Let me say it agiain. You think we dont know this already? How does this constitute new research worthy of being published?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription