If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
ClimateGate - A Question for Ed Seedhouse and Paul Beckwith
ClimateGate - A Question for Ed Seedhouse and Paul Beckwith
Do you think that ClimateGate (Climate Gate) has and/or will hurt the movement to do something about what many believe, i.e., Global Warming caused by man?
I already know you are strong believers, but, I am curious about the effects of the scandal, for lack of a better word.
Do you think that ClimateGate (Climate Gate) has and/or will hurt the movement to do something about what many believe, i.e., Global Warming caused by man?
That depends largely on how much press it is given and how it is spun.
I already know you are strong believers, but, I am curious about the effects of the scandal, for lack of a better word.
I am NOT a "strong believer" and I consider it an insult for you to call me that. All anyone has to do to convince me that "global warning" is not real or not caused largely by humans has to do is to provide actual evidence that this is so. I have seen none as yet so I remain convinced by the current evidence, which is overwhelmingly that global warming is indeed occurring and that it is largely caused by the activity of people.
Re: ClimateGate - A Question for Ed Seedhouse and Paul Beckwith
The last glaciation centered on the huge ice sheets of North America and Eurasia. Considerable areas in the Alps, the Himalaya and the Andes were ice-covered, and Antarctica remained glaciated.
Canada was nearly completely covered by ice, as well as the northern part of the USA, both blanketed by the huge Laurentide ice sheet. Alaska remained mostly ice free due to arid climate conditions. Local glaciations existed in the Rocky Mountains, the Cordilleran ice sheet and as ice fields and ice caps in the Sierra Nevada in northern California.[1] (from Wikipedia)
Our glaciers and ice caps are actually remnants of the last 'glacial period' which peaked around 18,000 years ago when ice sheets extended all the way to New York-
the entire Great Lakes are just one little puddle left over from this vast ice sheet that has been MELTING for 18,000 YEARS!
Please provide evidence that global warming since last glacial period cause by human activity.
A computer beat me in chess, but it was no match when it came to kickboxing
The question sounds like it comes from somebody who does not understand the Scientific Method.
That is a weakness of what you call the movement. It is based upon Science. As we see every day, one gets more traction basing an appeal on fear or nostalgia or ... or even song (video here. Tom Lehrer sings Pollution.). Sure, if we succeed in keeping this car on the road, it will in some part be due to the passion of people for whom Science is not foremost. But those are people other than Paul and Ed.
You'll find different lyrics for the song. Doesn't mean that pollution is good. Sometimes he'd even name a locality, if it rhymed.
That depends largely on how much press it is given and how it is spun.
(Maybe supporter would be a better word? Maybe you could tell me what word would be more appropriate?)
Is this really about "spinning" or reality here? If this "scandal" is a fact, then it is not about spinning, but about what is real and what is not. The actions taken by those involved remind me of many in the OBAMA government!
Here is another story which one can't tell yet whether it is for publicity or really serious.
Canada was nearly completely covered by ice, ...
the entire Great Lakes are just one little puddle left over from this vast ice sheet that has been MELTING for 18,000 YEARS!
Here's something I read in the New Scientist at the library a few days ago.
Europe was plunged into a mini (1300 years) ice-age which took hold in months due to that melting glacier in North America.
Today we have a reasonably comfortable pew based upon equilibria. But change can come swiftly as world climate finds new equilibria.
The linked disaster for Europe had natural causes. But that isn't the end of the story.
Jared Diamond has an interesting theory that the reason there are so few, maybe none (they famously bred dogs for meat), domesticated meat animals developed in the New World, is that when people arrived here, their hunting technology was so advanced that they killed off all domesticable game animals before they had a chance to domesticate them. By contrast, Old World animals had evolved defences (including fear of Man) along with Man's gradual tech advances. Not having domestic animals had grave consequences, especially for the original Americans, starting with the arrival of the Conquistadores. Technological man has proven to be adept at making macro changes such as acid rain lakes, collapse of fisheries, holes in the ozone layer, loss of arable land, microclimates around cities, extinctions ... There are those who think that mother nature will infinitely absorb, without changing her face to us, the detritus of our technology. Nothing else works that way. Even in our own lives, daddy eventually tells us it is time to leave home, if we don't realize it ourselves first.
The last glaciation centered on the huge ice sheets of North America and Eurasia. Considerable areas in the Alps, the Himalaya and the Andes were ice-covered, and Antarctica remained glaciated.
Canada was nearly completely covered by ice, as well as the northern part of the USA, both blanketed by the huge Laurentide ice sheet. Alaska remained mostly ice free due to arid climate conditions. Local glaciations existed in the Rocky Mountains, the Cordilleran ice sheet and as ice fields and ice caps in the Sierra Nevada in northern California.[1] (from Wikipedia)
Our glaciers and ice caps are actually remnants of the last 'glacial period' which peaked around 18,000 years ago when ice sheets extended all the way to New York-
the entire Great Lakes are just one little puddle left over from this vast ice sheet that has been MELTING for 18,000 YEARS!
Given, purely for the sake of argument, that all of the above was true, none of it is evidence against global warming in any way, shape or form. You demand evidence from me, but apparently you don't even understand what is and is not evidence.
So, you are the one claiming that the current evidence based scientific orthodoxy is wrong, and thus it is up to you to provide the evidence, not to me. First I advise you to go get a clue about what is and what isn't evidence.
There is evidence aplenty widely published and easily available that significant global climate warming, caused by people, is presently happening. I choose to accept that evidence because it is good strong evidence and men and women who are actual climate scientists, and whom I highly respect, say so.
All I and they require to change opinion is evidence. Not rhetoric, of which you no doubt have a plentiful supply handy, but evidence.
I find the problem to be that one cannot tell whether all the science quoted now is real or not. I am sure some is, but...
All one has to do talk to real actual climate scientists, and read their findings. For that, one could do worse than to start with http://www.realclimate.org/.
What gets in most of the public press is about 90% or more spin. If you don't understand this already then you are without any intellectual defenses at all, and at grave risk of being gulled, as indeed it appears you have been already.
What gets in most of the public press is about 90% or more spin. If you don't understand this already then you are without any intellectual defenses at all, and at grave risk of being gulled, as indeed it appears you have been already.
I'm surprised people from B.C. are taking such a harsh stand in view of the record on global warming.
I can't see why guys from B.C. are hung up on climate change and pollution. B.C. mines coal, other minerals, oil and gas. They have the forestry industry and the pollution from the paper mills. Every time they have a forest fire, which is often, all that pollution spews into the air. B.C. is a province which depends on pollution to sustain its citizens.
How can you explain this? B.C. doesn't even discourage pollution. They tax it to turn a buck with the carbon tax.
How about using your "intellectual defences" and explain this in a logical manner which is consistent with your stance.
What gets in most of the public press is about 90% or more spin. If you don't understand this already then you are without any intellectual defenses at all, and at grave risk of being gulled, as indeed it appears you have been already.
Is there any chance, Ed, that you believe/say this because I am leaning away from your opinions?
There is evidence aplenty widely published and easily available that significant global climate warming, caused by people, is presently happening. I choose to accept that evidence because it is good strong evidence and men and women who are actual climate scientists, and whom I highly respect, say so.
All I and they require to change opinion is evidence. Not rhetoric, of which you no doubt have a plentiful supply handy, but evidence.
"Various types of paleoclimatic evidence suggest that the climate of the Earth has varied over time. The data suggest that during most of the Earth's history, global temperatures were probably 8 to 15° Celsius warmer than they are today. However, there were periods of times when the Earth's average global temperature became cold; cold enough for the formation of alpine glaciers and continental glaciers that extended in to the higher, middle and sometimes lower latitudes. In the last billion years of Earth's history, glacial periods have started at roughly 925, 800, 680, 450, 330, and 2 million years before present (B.P.). Of these ice ages, the most severe occurred at 800 million years ago when glaciers came within 5 degrees of the equator."
Earth undergoes constant changes. The misleading assumption that it's caused by the humans is not supported by evidence that cooling and warming of Earth happened before in the very long history of Earth.
What additional evidence do you require?
A computer beat me in chess, but it was no match when it came to kickboxing
Re: ClimateGate - A Question for Ed Seedhouse and Paul Beckwith
The stolen emails are from one place. All its work/research could be ignored and it would not affect the other science going on around the world. The vast majority of the raw data can be found on the web, for all to see.
No doubt the rest of the emails (only a selection was released) will be released before the next series of world talks next year.
Re : ClimateGate - A Question for Ed Seedhouse and Paul Beckwith
Here we can see how much the ice on the Mount Kilimanjaro disappeard in the past century... It is good to mention that for the past 11 000 years it was covered by ice.
Glacier Peak Wilderness in 1973
The same view as seen in 2006, where this branch of glacier retreated 1.9 kilometres (1.2 mi)
There is no need to talk about whether or not there is climate changes, but we need to find a way to stop them.
Re: ClimateGate - A Question for Ed Seedhouse and Paul Beckwith
Ernest, just do some Googling yourself to find out what has caused climate change in the past (i.e. orbital changes, i.e. Milankovitch cycles have caused may ice ages in the past)...
The difference now is the level of carbon dioxide is much higher than variation with the cycles before (200 ppm for previous ice ages, <300 ppm for warm periods, and now approaching 390 ppm. Also the ocean is more acidic now than at any time in many millions of years (due to absorption of huge amounts of carbon dioxide).
Tweet
Glacier Peak Wilderness in 1973
The same view as seen in 2006, where this branch of glacier retreated 1.9 kilometres (1.2 mi)
Comment