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.
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Transitioning to compact fluorescent lighting or LED lighting from the traditional incandescent lighting is a no-brainer economically and environmentally. Unless of course you have no brain...
" David Suzuki warns Tory scheme to cancel green energy plans is ‘absolute insanity’ "
- is he speaking for a majority of those involved in advocating for/against Climate Change?
Bob
The voters in Ontario get to say if they support the provincial Tories. It appears to me the Liberals will likely win around 20 or less ridings. Have you noticed how many Liberals are not contesting the next election?
" David Suzuki warns Tory scheme to cancel green energy plans is ‘absolute insanity’ "
- is he speaking for a majority of those involved in advocating for/against Climate Change?
Bob
I think the idea that we can afford to triple electricity rates which is implicit in the Green Energy Plan is the only absolute insanity on the table here. There was a big article today where Dalton McGuinty and Dwight Duncan (who I personally like but whose policies I am not that fond of) were bristling at the idea that Ontario was a have not province now. Ummm.... yeah we are. Hopefully that can be turned around. The biggest loser in all this are the other have not provinces who are in danger of being crowded out by Ontario's growing need for transfer payments. The pie is staying the same size so the money is coming out of the transfer payments for the other provinces. The biggest loser in this is the other province which is the biggest recipient of such transfers, Quebec.
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Suzuki is correct, killing the Green Energy Act is "insanity". Look at the rest of the world marching forward rapidly to develop renewable energy sources. Ontario is marching forward with them. The subsidies will lower as the technology improves and prices drop due to economies of scale. Welcome the Renewable Revolution, and ignore the naysayers that want to hold Ontarians back...
Suzuki is correct, killing the Green Energy Act is "insanity". Look at the rest of the world marching forward rapidly to develop renewable energy sources.
Most of the rest of the world is cash strapped. Some nations on the verge of bankruptcy, waiting for a handout. The value of the Euro lies in the woes of the U.S. dollar.
Is this Suzuki fellow someone of importance in your community? Possibly he would like to personally fund that act.
It is clear to anyone who depends on reliable power that the Ontario grid has been a lot less reliable lately. Killing the green energy act will probably help restore sanity to electrical power generation. The McGuinty liberals are going to lose in large part due to their environmental policies and the economic fallout from their foolish doctrines.
It is clear to anyone who depends on reliable power that the Ontario grid has been a lot less reliable lately.
I don't know if a change of government will do much to increase the reliability. It's an aging power grid, as far as I know, and the amount of upgrades which can be made in any year is likely limited. It's not even a case of only the province being involved. There are also the local power utilities.
The video I posted mentioned near the end the demand is less because of manufacturing which had closed down and didn't reopen. I guess lack of supply is not the problem. Which makes me wonder why the big push for expensive energy sources.
I notice the rating agencies are looking at lowering the U.S. debt rating. I consider that a wink and a nod to the wise regarding the value of the bonds. Probably at this point any excuse for lowering the rating will do.
I doubt governments have much more money to throw at climate change. The U.S. could be (note the weasel words) on the verge of another recession and they haven't fully recovered from the last one. High unemployment and a housing industry which hasn't recovered.
Canada is having problems. With ever increasing taxes here in Ontario industry is not thriving. Oil is what's greasing the Canadian economy. The model seems to be sending all our oil to the U.S. and they send us all their money. We send them close to two million barrels a day and the price is almost $100.00 U.S. a barrel. The U.S. dollar is starting to be worth very little compared to ours.
I was reading that a company in the Waterloo area is planning on reducing their work force by 2,000 workers.
Our forestry industry hasn't recovered as far as I can see. We're involved in costly wars we can't afford.
It's cheaper to import than to manufacture in most cases.
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
I haven't really taken sides in this AGW debate, but even so, this came as a surprise to me: here's some peer-reviewed science that pretty much blows the bulk of the alarmist claims out of the water. The following is quoted from James M. Taylor, who is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News, writing in Forbes about a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing:
"Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.
'The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show," Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. "There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.' "
Taylor also writes:
"Together, the NASA ERBS and Terra satellite data show that for 25 years and counting, carbon dioxide emissions have directly and indirectly trapped far less heat than alarmist computer models have predicted.
In short, the central premise of alarmist global warming theory is that carbon dioxide emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain amount of heat in the earth's atmosphere and preventing it from escaping into space. Real-world measurements, however, show far less heat is being trapped in the earth's atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict, and far more heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models predict."
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
I have not researched these reports yet (I am on vacation); however I can say this:
The term "alarmist" is not used by bona-fide scientists. In these quotes it is used repeatedly and this immediately sends up red flags as to the validity of the reports.
James Taylor is a well known climate change denier whose works at the Heartland Institute which is well known to be funded primarily by Exxon and other oil companies. It represents the interests of big oil, big corporations, and the fossil fuel industry, as well as the Koch brothers.
The articles appeared in Forbes business magazine, a magazine of big business. Do you ever see Forbes articles on climate change from climatologists, NO...
Roy Spencer is another well known denier with connections to the fossil fuel industry, and again the term "alarmist" that he uses shows his position.
Climate change models by different groups around the world using various appoaches to modelling and simulations make links from radiation budgets, to energy budgets, to temperature changes, and are consistent in matching warming that is occurring today from CO2 and other greenhouse gases (difference in models gives variance). Google the IPCC and look at some of their chapters on these topics for more information.
In addition, the information from Taylor, Spencer, and the Heartland is repeatedly invalidated by climatologists; nothing is different in this case...
Last edited by Paul Beckwith; Tuesday, 2nd August, 2011, 12:36 AM.
Reason: spelling
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Our planet is rapidly approaching "tipping points" in climate. Billions of trees died in the Amazon in 2010 (as in 2005), for these years the Amazon rainforest was a carbon source instead of a carbon sink. The link is the news story, look at the links for the details in the actual scientific paper.
Sea ice is tracking for another record low this year, google NSIDC and look at the Arctic report for the details.
Either of these two FACTS can push the climate over into another regime, the likely scenario is that when one goes it will cause the other to also go, changing the climate regime and hammering humanity. The only uncertainty is which will go first; my Ph. D. thesis will hopefully determine this...
Tweet
Comment