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.
An article about the future of obama's climate change plans in 2011 and 2012. physorg.com is also a great resource for a lot of scientific articles.
I'm sure Obama will figure out a way to be a one term president.
In the meantime, let me give you the Dec. 31st weather forecast for Whale Cove.
Forecast Details:
Light snow during the morning will transition to snow showers during the afternoon. Dangerous wind chills may approach -25F. High 8F. Winds NW at 20 to 30 mph. Chance of snow 60%. Snowfall around one inch.
Finally I get a chance to post on this non-chess-related and unpostable topic! Today, Dec. 31, 2010 there are blizzards and snow foulups all over New York City and environs while Toronto, much farther north, only has a light snow dusting.
What does this prove as far as climate change is concerned??!
Absolutely nothing! Any scientist (or reasonable person) knows that that you cannot make long term predictions from short term events.
What is the time scale here? Months, years, decades, centuries or thousands of years?
Long term the Earth should be warming up by the existence of human beings and their vehicles alone; but more than that you really can't say!
And of course there's the chance of a catastrophic event like an asteroid collision...
I have no idea what time scale the AGW, climate change, weather buffs are talking. It appears they mix and match. Like that picture which looks like it came from a tourist brochure.
I'm of the opinion it's all about money. Solar is heavily subsidized by governments.
There was one catastrophic event when the volcano in Iceland blew. The ash in Europe was so bad the airlines wouldn't fly through it for a couple of weeks. I also know about the snowstorms in the U.S. Every time there is such a disruption the value of my airline shares decline.
As a resident of Ontario this is costing you a lot of money.
During the recently completed municipal elections I had candidates and/or their representatives come to the door asking for my vote. I asked if they were environmentalists. All said they were. I told them I don't vote for environmentalists. When asked why I don't vote for environmentalists, my reply was that I can't afford them.
Cap and trade in the U.S. appears to be finished. The Senate did not pass the bill.
The U.S. seems to have a bit of a problem. There are new nuclear reactors coming. Their main plant, USEC INC, is still using gaseous diffusion technology to make the SWU's which fuel the light water reactors. They also buy a lot of the SWU's from Russia in the Megaton to Megawatts program which was recently renewed for a few more years. Besides being WWII technology, the biggest input cost is electricity. They need to go ahead with centrifuge technology and their main plant needs a 2 billion dollar loan guarantee to build it. The structure is on hold with only the test cascades running.
In the meantime, our taxes and high wages are driving jobs "offshore" so it will get more interesting in a few years. The main things we'll have to sell is our natural resources.
Many of the manufacturing places I used to go to do service work are not there anymore. I don't only mean the companies are gone, I mean the companies are gone and the buildings have been leveled to the ground. Some are simply being used for other purposes.
What does this prove as far as climate change is concerned??!
Absolutely nothing!
Russia nearly burned down last summer, Australia was fighting it's own massive fires in their last one, and this spring was barely managing the floods caused by much warmer air than normal carring in massive loads of water and dumping it on the land.
The permafrost in our own north continues to melt and Iqaluit is basically sinking into the resultant mud, while the Polar bears in Hudson's bay can't find any Ice to hunt seals from and so many of them are starving. Oh, and the measured mass of the polar and Greenland icecaps are hitting record lows.
But a cold spell in some Canadian city disproves global warming as far as Gary is concerned, so there's an end to it, right? No need to bother with any of those boring old scientific measurements, 'cause Gary can always find someplace where it's cold.
Last edited by Ed Seedhouse; Friday, 31st December, 2010, 02:24 PM.
The permafrost in our own north continues to melt and Iqaluit is basically sinking into the resultant mud, while the Polar bears in Hudson's bay can't find any Ice to hunt seals from and so many of them are starving.
Considering the length of Hudson Bay in miles, and it's location, I'd say your claim is mostly bullsh*t. Would you like to quantify the number of Polar bears which have starved in the past year for the reason you stated? As an example, how many Polar bears do you figure starved this past week for lack of ice?
Did you get the memo there are no longer large herds of Buffalo running across the prairies? Do you figure that was climate change?
I'll try to keep you up to date on the weather in Whale Cove. Like you say, it is in Canada and should be of great interest to this discussion. It has an airport and is on the shores of Hudson Bay. You know. The place where you claim the Polar Bears can't find ice.
Considering the length of Hudson Bay in miles, and it's location, I'd say your claim is mostly bullsh*t.
Gary would already know all about it if he got his news anywhere other than Fox news.
"Nosing into frigid wind (above) a polar bear sniffs for prey. About 1,200 of these majestic carnivores haunt the western edge of Canada's Hudson Bay. Here near the southernmost tip of their range, they're treading on thin ice.
Like all polar bears, those on Hudson Bay need solid ice as a platform for hunting seals and seal pups, their main prey. Yet the bay is frozen only in winter and spring, so from July to November bears must live off their fat reserves. For millennia they've coped, but climate change may be tipping the balance. "Though there's considerable variation, spring breakup is two weeks or so earlier now than it was 20 years ago," says biologist Ian Stirling of the Canadian Wildlife Service. His data show that birthrate and adult bear weight are both down about 10 percent from 1980. "If the trend continues and the ice disappears from Hudson Bay," says University of Alberta biologist Andrew Derocher, "it's pretty clear that these bears will disappear too.""
Here's a way to save the bears and also make a dent in the global warming trend.
Only 1200 bears you say. Lets transport the bears to antarctica! They can feed of the penguins of which there are millions. Also this will cool antarctica as the penguins are mostly black and absorb a lot of sunlight.
Not only that, but Gary can buy shares in the airline that transports the bears and thus profit handsomely!:)
Your article doesn't mention the deaths but an opinion of a couple of weeks less ice. The Bears "might" be underfed for a couple of weeks but "starving" doesn't seem to be in that article you linked.
Stick to the facts. Just the facts as you imagine them. :)
I like that idea about transporting them to Antartica.
I only have shares in Air Canada and Jazz Air. I bought them when the prices got very low and it was thought they would not do well. I still have a lot of the things I bought when I was writing that depression thread. Some I sell and rebuy when they drop. :)
Stick to the facts. Just the facts as you imagine them.
Hardly worth the bother since Gary isn't interested in mere facts. If he were he could find them easily enough.
Notice he isn't challenging the massive forrest fires and mega heat in Russia last summer, nor the extreme flooding in Australia going on right now, all possible because of the extra heating in our atmosphere.
Notice he isn't challenging the massive forrest fires and mega heat in Russia last summer, nor the extreme flooding in Australia going on right now, all possible because of the extra heating in our atmosphere.
I notice you are careful to use the weasel word "possible".
In an case, adjectives such as "mega" and "extreme" aren't worth a reply. They don't quantify the magnitude, or lack thereof, but ask the reader to use his or her imagination.
Hot is a steel mill around the furnaces. I would expect to walk out of one of those mills into the cool air of what you refer to as "mega heat in Russia". You see, heat is relative and subjective.
No greater proof of Gary's utter scientific evidence is possible. Case closed.
I hope Gary will feel free to visit the inside of an oven running at four hundred degrees Celsius any old time. He will of course be completely unhurt because the motion of molecules (which is, objectively, what heat is), is completely subjective.
Or he could immerse himself in liquid nitrogen for say ten minutes because the cold he feels will all be perfectly subjective and he will emerge unharmed.
But alas, contrary to Gary's imagination, heat is a perfrectly objective phenomenon caused by the motion of atoms and molecules. And if the molecules and atoms in your body stop moving, you will stop too. But you are welcome to try the experiment and report back, or not.
Tweet
Comment