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.
A Cadillac in the driveway is fine as long as you leave it in the driveway and never drive it. In addition it should be white or light colored (or silver with high reflectivity). With these colors that reflect sunlight back upwards it will have a higher albedo than the black asphalt on the driveway that it covers up.
My driveway is white! :D
Unfortunately my car is black.
Paul, do a 6 month study. Is it better to have a white car in a black driveway or a black car in a white driveway?
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Bob, It's good to see you weighing into the debate on global warming. You are coming to the debate very late. There have been some very lengthy threads. When I was debating the issue, I spent some time researching on the internet. Youtube is a great source of material.
Here is one youtube video that I found excellent. It is a lecture entitled "The American denial of Global Warming" by Naomi Oreskes, Professor of History at the University of California. It is almost an hour long, but time well spent if you want to get up to speed on Global Warming. It is about 2 years old, but still very relevant.
The first half deals with the science, the second half deals with the key individuals on the skeptics side. All from an historical viewpoint.
I don't think I'll ever really get into this issue, in terms of source materials, etc. But I am concerned, and in a secondary way, would like to try to keep up a bit. I'll watch the video - thanks.
Here are some disconcerting facts from a vegetarian perspective I recently read ( I hope the stats are accurate ):
1. The world's livestock produce more greenhouse gases than all forms of transportation combined;
2. 24% of all land on the planet is used for beef and dairy farming; 20% of all land is used for grazing - twice the area used for crops; 70% of all agricultural land is now used for livestock; 18% of all greenhouse gases come from cattle farming;
( non-climate fact: a typical meat-eater requires as much as 2.1 acres of farmland to meet annual dietary needs, compared with just half an acre for a plant-centered eater. )
Seems like this is a major source of man-generated greenhouse gases, that is under our control. Will we do anything about this aspect of global warming?
Robert Gashgarian has an interesting point of view on the whole Climate Change debacle. Even if the Climatologists are wrong, what is wrong with working towards renewable energy sources(but the scientific evidence supports them anyways)? Putting all those pollutants into our atmosphere can't be having any benefits and we will have to change energy sources once the fossil fuels run out. We might as well all work together to help change what we use to fulfill our energy needs in the future.
Seems like this is a major source of man-generated greenhouse gases, that is under our control. Will we do anything about this aspect of global warming?
Bob
If you want to see a major source of man-generated greenhouse gases come on over after I have chowed down on some bean soup.
;)
The latest studies show that carb restricted diets yield the best results from a health perspective.
Here is a somewhat different take on Climate Change:
Social Exploitation and Climate Change
'Climate is a complex system that is little understood and even less successfully controlled by humans; environment is any system in which humans necessarily exist, and people’s relationship to this system – especially to the other people within it - in turn affect the ability of the system to sustain itself. With this in mind, it becomes more poignant to examine how our current climate problems have at their root social problems. Addressing these issues, in many cases grave human rights violations, is an immediate, effective and lasting agent of positive change, while current abstract climate rhetoric centered around the environmental symptoms eclipses the real issues and generally propagates the ‘business as usual’ strategy.'
Consider this:
The most largest producers of C02 are tied to production and use of oil, and extraction of minerals. Every major mineral extraction venture is tied to grave human rights violations - the entire history of colonization revolves (continues to revolve) around resource domination.
The Iraq war is motivated and fuelled by oil production, the Afghan war is arguably motivated by strategic control of mineral extraction.
It takes the equivalent of 10, 000 cars to fuel an aircraft carrier's trip to Afghanistan.
The greatest environmental sacrifice zone, The Athabasca Tar Sands, are a hot point for Native resistance against ongoing genocide that resource extraction has inflicted on their people.
Regardless of their contributions overall to climate change, urban sprawl, automobile culture, and excessive consumption are directly related to pollution and toxicity which degrade standard of living at a local level.
In every instance of major environmental destruction, including greenhouse gas production, we find tied to it grave social injustices. This is something that science cannot refute. Not to say that science does not have a place in the argument, only that science removed from its social context (purposely) obscures progress. A new mentality is growing that the industrial-capitalist model that served us during the last century is at best no longer relevant, and at worst continuing to facilitate and protect those that profit off rights violations and environmental damage. Many environmental groups thus seek to check and balance these political, economic, and social issues, with the understanding that advances in social justice are synonymous with advances in environmental justice.
( written and copyright by Brian Armstrong, 2010 )
1. The world's livestock produce more greenhouse gases than all forms of transportation combined;
This is a claim, but where's the evidence? I notice you provide none.
In any event the wording might have been chosen to be deliberately misleading, and facts cited without context are indeed often used by those who wish to mislead others.
Now the greenhouse gass produced by livestock is methane, and a little research shows that "while methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, there is over 200 times more CO2 in the atmosphere. Hence the amount of warming methane contributes is 28% of the warming CO2 contributes."
If you live in the Toronto area and wish to learn more about climate change you can attend the conference at U. of T. Friday sessions on August 13 from 1 - 5 are all free... http://ccc-2010.ca/registration
Very seriously - trying from a progressive stance to tie climate change to human rights/social exploitation.
You have a rebuttal in mind?
Bob
I'll mark it. I'd give it a D. The composition rambles. It doesn't really deal with many of the points mentioned. As an example, it deals with Iraq and Afghanistan in the same sentence. While using the term "arguably", there isn't one given.
The essay jumps around the world.
"Environmental Justice" is a nice term but what does it mean? Does it mean something should be stopped under any circumstances or does it have to do with the size of the monetary compensation?
Very seriously - trying from a progressive stance to tie climate change to human rights/social exploitation.
You have a rebuttal in mind?
Bob
Bob, you can tie almost any major topic to human rights / social exploitation. Religion, just to use one obvious example.
Don't believe the Star Trek vision of the 24th century. Social exploitation will go on for as long as man exists in this physical universe.
Think about the social exploitation that will be necessary if AGW theories are correct and the trend must be stopped to save the species. It will dwarf all previous exploitation.
BTW, it is a myth that humans have any "rights" at all. Just ask the Repiglicans -- er, Republicans -- who voted down a bill to pay health care costs for rescue workers from 9/11 who are now afflicted with illnesses brought on by their rescue work that infamous day. Despite their brave and heroic work, those workers have no right to good health unless they can pay for it themselves.
Last edited by Paul Bonham; Thursday, 5th August, 2010, 04:18 PM.
Reason: grammar
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Tweet
Comment