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.
Scientists did not manipulate climate date, you are completely blinded by ideology.
Actually they did manipulate climate data as evidenced by the climategate emails, cherry picked tree core samples, destroyed data, documented stonewalling of requests for access to their data sets, conspiring to prevent access to information requests, destroying emails or requesting that emails be destroyed to hide evidence against their pet theories and manipulations designed "to hide the decline" in the hockey stick graph which you defend so vociferously despite the fact that it has been so thoroughly discredited.
The ship has sailed. You missed the boat. Posting a link to an anonymous Internet website where someone that I don't know makes assertions that are not supported by anything but his assertions is what passes for evidence in your mind?
Your posting of the rantings of that so called "NASA scientist" paper on the Journal of Cosmology indicates to me that you lack the benefit of a liberal education which allows you to do the critical thinking required to filter the large mass of "data" that we are bombarded with. That was old news repackaged for a slow news day. NASA has disavowed his conclusions. He shouldn't be using NASA to lend credence to crackpot theories like extraterrestrial origins of bacteria which are likely earthly contamination of his samples.
Pretty soon AGW theories will be confined to the supermarket tabloids where they belong with the news of Bigfoot/Loch Ness monster sightings and alien abduction theories.
It appears that the Ontario Liberals have finally clued in to the fact that their Green Energy policy is a prescription for economic suicide. Many of the "investors" in these frauds perpetrated on taxpayers and energy consumers are finding that they spent the money but are not getting the promised returns because of a lack of infrastructure allowing them to connect to the electrical grid and start selling power at 20 time the going price paid to conventional producers.
It is possible that there will be another climategate where the individuals and companies allowed to connect to the grid are scrutinized for ties to the governing party.
If not, then rock paper and scissors may be more your style...
Scientists did not manipulate climate date, you are completely blinded by ideology. Or just thick as a brick. Or dumb as a plumb...whatever...
I will end this post with the immortal words of Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-Missouri):
Scientists manipulated climate data, suppressed legitimate arguments in peer-reviewed journals, and researchers were asked to destroy emails, so that a small number of climate alarmists could continue to advance their environmental agenda.
….
Mr. Chairman, if the families in my district have been able to tighten their belts, surely the federal government can do the same and stop funding an organization that is fraught with waste and abuse. My amendment simply says that no funds in this bill can go to the IPCC. This would save taxpayers millions of dollars this year and millions of dollars in years to come. In fact, the President has requested an additional $13 million in his fiscal 2012 budget request.
My constituents should not have to continue to foot the bill for an organization to keep producing corrupt findings that can be used as justification to impose a massive new energy tax on every American.
Vlad, there is loads of climate change data out there. If you are any good at math then have a look at some of the exercises on this interesting link...
I read all about this in the paper some time ago and also read in that original article that some other scientists were ripping the conclusions. I have no disagreement with scientists who use the scientific method properly, which excludes most of the ones that you usually quote on this forum. HTH.
Actually Scientists are the ones attacking the recent "life in space" paper and NASA is disassociating itself from it as well, as you can read about here.
So now we find Vlad is agreeing with the scientists, we can expect him to shortly change his mind and start to support the flawed paper I suppose.
Looks like we have confirmation of life elsewhere. Google "Journal of Cosmology" and have a look at the paper. Bacteria identified in chondritic meteorite. Science story of the century if it pans out...
Well, if there's life elsewhere, then we can all stop worrying about climate change on Earth. So what if man exterminates himself, there's life elsewhere, and maybe the next intelligent life form won't invent something called "income tax" to keep the worst of the species alive.
In other news, support for the Green Party has hit another low. This time Elizabeth May is going to parachute into a BC riding and hope that she won't repeat the results from the last three ridings she was parachuted into. Better hope the Conservatives don't win a majority or the $2 per vote bounty is likely to end.
Looks like we have confirmation of life elsewhere. Google "Journal of Cosmology" and have a look at the paper. Bacteria identified in chondritic meteorite. Science story of the century if it pans out...
I think those reports are about as credible as Al Gore's climate "science". It looks like they have a bit of a jump on April Fools' Day. I think its neat how their fake bacterium looks like it has a little face and really complements the fake data from tree core samples used to hide the decline.
Leave a comment: