Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Global warming, a myth?
Yeah. Those rapidly disappearing glaciers, stronger hurricanes, floodings and fires are just figments of our imagination.
The only one talking out his ass here is you, junior.Oooo....A stupid leftbat cartoon from those weekly urban arts & entertainment rags!
That'll fix their wagons!
Yeah, you're talking about his ass was way better.
He's an ass Nazi, right?
The only one talking out his ass here is you, junior.Oooo....A stupid leftbat cartoon from those weekly urban arts & entertainment rags!
That'll fix their wagons!
Yeah, you're talking about his ass was way better.
He's an ass Nazi, right?
Well, yes it is a model. A model is everything from a small physical representation of an object to a dynamic mathematical computer simulation. A model may be a simple equation, a drawing, the digitized representation of an object in a CAD system or the dynamic fluid flow equations in a finite element analysys.
A model would be a representation of something, or in the computer modeling sense not only 3D but realistic in it's behavior and actions.
CAD is a 2D computer drafting program. Drafting is a drawing and a drawing is 2D. It can give 3D measurements and draw from various angles to get the idea of how the thing that it represents is to be built, but it is still a 2D drawing.
To represent 3D you need a 3D modeling program. Notice the fact it is called a modeling program and not a CAD program... Yeah because it's in 3D and not 2D...
For a self-proclaimed scientist you're not very knowledgeable on the simplest of concepts...
You didn't know CO2 breaks down naturally over time, and you didn't know modeling and drafting are different things, and didn't why they are, what was your field again? I bet you got one of those new "green degrees". Something like an associates degree in sustainable developmental bullshit...ROFL
So, if you redefine what CAD means to only that which is obsolete, than your words could be construed as meaningful.
I guess redefining English is no more presumptuous than redefining science.
A model would be a representation of something, or in the computer modeling sense not only 3D but realistic in it's behavior and actions.
CAD is a 2D computer drafting program. Drafting is a drawing and a drawing is 2D. It can give 3D measurements and draw from various angles to get the idea of how the thing that it represents is to be built, but it is still a 2D drawing.*
To represent 3D you need a 3D modeling program. Notice the fact it is called a modeling program and not a CAD program... Yeah because it's in 3D and not 2D...
For a self-proclaimed scientist you're not very knowledgeable on the simplest of concepts...
You didn't know CO2 breaks down naturally over time, and you didn't know modeling and drafting are different things, and didn't why they are, what was your field again? I bet you got one of those new "green degrees". Something like an associates degree in sustainable developmental bullshit...ROFL
So, if you redefine what CAD means to only that which is obsolete, than your words could be construed as meaningful.
I guess redefining English is no more presumptuous than redefining science.
Are you claiming I redefined CAD or that it is old and obsolete? LOL, first no redefining necessary schmuck, it's already what I said it was. Second, 2D drating is not obsolete, it's still the basis of pretty much every design you see out there. COntractors don't carry IPADS tothe work site to ensure everything is built to specs, they carry blueprints, and those blueprints are made using CAD...
MORON...
Hard numbers, hard evidence, sources.Some?...Specifically how many people?...A loose percentage?...Source?OK sure, non reproducible, non causal, conjecture is not evidence.
You should be able to tell me with some certainty what catastrophes will happen in the earth is a couple degrees warmer but you can't.
The human race will survive in a warmer climate even if it means more intense storms.
That is a fact.
"The human race will survive in a warmer climate even if it means more intense storms."
While I hate to agree with an empty skull, I do fully agree with this statement.
Unfortunately only some of the human race. And it will take most of our output for a long time. And the slower we move the more costly it will be.
That's why you see all of this action going on around the world.
Most?...Specifically how much output?...A loose percentage?...Source?
Costly?..In terms of what?...How were these figures determined?...Source?
So, if you redefine what CAD means to only that which is obsolete, than your words could be construed as meaningful.
I guess redefining English is no more presumptuous than redefining science.
Are you claiming I redefined CAD or that it is old and obsolete? LOL, first no redefining necessary schmuck, it's already what I said it was. Second, 2D drating is not obsolete, it's still the basis of pretty much every design you see out there. COntractors don't carry IPADS tothe work site to ensure everything is built to specs, they carry blueprints, and those blueprints are made using CAD...
MORON...
Inventor and Inventor Professional | Features | Autodesk
Software for mechanical design and simulation
Autodesk® Inventor® and Autodesk® Inventor® Professional 3D CAD software provides functionality for advanced mechanical engineering design, finite element analysis, motion simulation, data management, routed system and mold design, as well as enhanced CAD productivity solutions.
We've come long way since ammonia developed blueprints.
Good thing you don't project....Much.I think that the wailing of the climate regressives speaks for itself. They have been judged irrelevant by those that understand science. The only allies that they can find are those who don't understand science.
While they argue how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, the world has moved on.
They had been told that they are entitled to what they want to be true. They believed, oh how they believed. But it was all a lie. They are entitled to nothing. If they want relevance they have to do what the rest of us did. Work. Study. Learn. Debate. Consider objectively. No free lunches.
I think that the wailing of the climate regressives speaks for itself. They have been judged irrelevant by those that understand science. The only allies that they can find are those who don't understand science.
While they argue how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, the world has moved on.
They had been told that they are entitled to what they want to be true. They believed, oh how they believed. But it was all a lie. They are entitled to nothing. If they want relevance they have to do what the rest of us did. Work. Study. Learn. Debate. Consider objectively. No free lunches.
AGW is objective science. They want cheaper science. They want it to be true that returning the carbon dioxide that fossil fuels are made from to the atmosphere from wence it came will be different than when it was last there. Pretty dumb, huh?
But, they consider themselves priviledged. Entitled to what they want.
Why? Rush and his cohorts told them that they can have what they want if they only believe hard enough.
What a crock. But appealing to the weak minded. We can't afford to follow the weak minded any more.
We're moving on. They're staying here because progress is just so scary.
Fine. Don't call us, we'll call you.
What an amazing concept for a "based (kinda-sorta) on a true story" melodramatic teleplay!The Cult of Denialism was born in the final years of the 20th century as a political entertainment/campaign stunt. Clinton had been a very successful and popular President and his Vice President, Al Gore, seemed certain to follow him into the White House.
The political line up:
Republican strengths: A popular 24/7/365 propaganda machine through Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. Monica Lewinski.
Republican weaknesses: No qualified candidates.
Democrat strengths: Clinton's success and popularity. Gore's environmental vision.
Democrat weaknesses. Clinton's penchant for Monica.
The Republican strategy was simple and obvious. Use the propaganda network to drag Clinton down by his, ahem, weakness. And turn Gore's vision into a sinister plot, both through the manipulation of the public by the propaganda network. In other words, lower the street cred of the strong Democrat team down to below that of the weak Republican team.
It seemed, at first, destined to fail, and, it did by popular vote. However several Supreme Court justices owed their career to Bush Sr so, in the end, we had our first Supreme Court appointed President.
As the country spiraled downward by an inept administration, it became necessary for the GOP to double down on their strategy to get, OMG, Bush re-elected. And they did.
But the Cult of Denialism took on a life of its own. For one thing it is the kind of political challange that invites partisanship. It pits business against the people, rich and poor against the middle class, responsible people against irresponsible, industrialized countries against developing countries, past and present against the future, science against politics, states potentially benefitting from either the "new" climate or the energy infrastructure transformation against those negatively impacted.
All in all, quite a free for all. But, in the end, a necessary adaptation by humanity to a new environment. The very definition of evolution.
All of the real issues now are in the realms of engineering and business and politics in a technological slugfest to determine which solutions fare best in the race up the learning curves. Lots of contenders. Lots of big buck betting. Lots of losers and a few very big winners. The stuff that capitalism thrives on, but government must lead to make sure that it's the big picture that we are pursuing and not just the unstructured whims of the marketplace.
Exciting times. Defining times. The best and worst of human traits in battle for the future.
Fossil fuels had their time on stage and we always knew they were of limited supply. Our relentless quest for more for more and more people is largely based on unlimited inexpensive energy and we are entering the times of more and more costly fossil fuels. More costly to extract, transport and process, and more costly to dispose of their waste.
Times they are a'changing. Relentlessly. Inevitably, progressively. Opportunity and risk abound. Not for the faint hearted.
Yes, the times they are a changing. McIntyre (who you so despise because...well he's right and kicks your collective asses to the kerb at every opportunity) was correct yet again and Briffa et al were as usual WRONG!
Hey Ya! (mal) McIntyre was right – CRU Abandons one tree Yamal Superstick
This must be personally satisfying for Steve McIntyre, though I doubt the folks at RealClimate will have the integrity to acknowledge that he was right, and they were wrong.
It seems that in the latest publication from CRU’s Keith Briffa, they decided to leave out those elements (The most influential tree in the world) Steve identified that led to the Yamal Superstick.
Hey Ya! (mal) McIntyre was right ? CRU Abandons one tree Yamal Superstick | Watts Up With That?
Yes, the times they are a changing. McIntyre (who you so despise because...well he's right and kicks your collective asses to the kerb at every opportunity) was correct yet again and Briffa et al were as usual WRONG!
Hey Ya! (mal) McIntyre was right CRU Abandons one tree Yamal Superstick
This must be personally satisfying for Steve McIntyre, though I doubt the folks at RealClimate will have the integrity to acknowledge that he was right, and they were wrong.
It seems that in the latest publication from CRUs Keith Briffa, they decided to leave out those elements (The most influential tree in the world) Steve identified that led to the Yamal Superstick.
Hey Ya! (mal) McIntyre was right ? CRU Abandons one tree Yamal Superstick | Watts Up With That?
The Cult of Denialism was born in the final years of the 20th century as a political entertainment/campaign stunt. Clinton had been a very successful and popular President and his Vice President, Al Gore, seemed certain to follow him into the White House.
The political line up:
Republican strengths: A popular 24/7/365 propaganda machine through Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. Monica Lewinski.
Republican weaknesses: No qualified candidates.
Democrat strengths: Clinton's success and popularity. Gore's environmental vision.
Democrat weaknesses. Clinton's penchant for Monica.
The Republican strategy was simple and obvious. Use the propaganda network to drag Clinton down by his, ahem, weakness. And turn Gore's vision into a sinister plot, both through the manipulation of the public by the propaganda network. In other words, lower the street cred of the strong Democrat team down to below that of the weak Republican team.
It seemed, at first, destined to fail, and, it did by popular vote. However several Supreme Court justices owed their career to Bush Sr so, in the end, we had our first Supreme Court appointed President.
As the country spiraled downward by an inept administration, it became necessary for the GOP to double down on their strategy to get, OMG, Bush re-elected. And they did.
But the Cult of Denialism took on a life of its own. For one thing it is the kind of political challange that invites partisanship. It pits business against the people, rich and poor against the middle class, responsible people against irresponsible, industrialized countries against developing countries, past and present against the future, science against politics, states potentially benefitting from either the "new" climate or the energy infrastructure transformation against those negatively impacted.
All in all, quite a free for all. But, in the end, a necessary adaptation by humanity to a new environment. The very definition of evolution.
All of the real issues now are in the realms of engineering and business and politics in a technological slugfest to determine which solutions fare best in the race up the learning curves. Lots of contenders. Lots of big buck betting. Lots of losers and a few very big winners. The stuff that capitalism thrives on, but government must lead to make sure that it's the big picture that we are pursuing and not just the unstructured whims of the marketplace.
Exciting times. Defining times. The best and worst of human traits in battle for the future.
Fossil fuels had their time on stage and we always knew they were of limited supply. Our relentless quest for more for more and more people is largely based on unlimited inexpensive energy and we are entering the times of more and more costly fossil fuels. More costly to extract, transport and process, and more costly to dispose of their waste.
Times they are a'changing. Relentlessly. Inevitably, progressively. Opportunity and risk abound. Not for the faint hearted.
