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.
You did read the part where I said it's not for my benefit, but because you made a claim about Spencer without any backup whatsoever? So all these posts you just made, with all these links, you should have done alongside your initial claim. Talk about dropping the ball.... and you're in university, as a mature student no less, you really should know better. I should forward this to your profs, you'd lose a grade instantly. Actually two, for telling people that you are trying to swing to your point of view to "do your own googling". That's like a car salesman telling a customer to go to all the other dealerships in town before making a decision. You don't sell many cars that way.
So, according to the internet gods, Spencer is a right-winger and doesn't believe in AGW or in theory of evolution. Extreme right-wingers, like extreme left-wingers, are suspect, I'll agree. Evolution, creation: nothing mutually exclusive there. Fossil fuel funding: definitely a red flag.
So now the question shifts to the study itself and Spencer's role in it. Would you go so far as to say he fudged data? Or would you be more benign and say he's just arriving at wrong conclusions because of his vested interests? And if he's doing that, what can you tell us about the ACTUAL DATA of this particular study? Is it true or false that the data strongly refutes the AGW computer models? Why or why not?
The models are highly simplistic in their assumptions and their ability to make predictions. It doesn't take Spencer to cast doubt upon them. Their proponents did a pretty good hatchet job on them as documented in the climategate emails. If you can't work the models backwards to make predictions based on actual data what is the point of the models? This was why it was necessary to use the "neat trick" to "hide the decline".
But Gary, why do you hate me so much. :(:(
At least I know how to spell. :D
There you go. You have one good quality. You can spell.
I don't hate you, Bob. I've never met you, that I can remember. I have never given the CFC money for anything while you were president nor have I ever played in anything you organized (that I know of or can recall). Why would you think you rate an emotion as strong as "hate" from me? That part I don't understand. Can you explain?
Now I must run. I want to have a look at Kevin's blog. :)
There you go. You have one good quality. You can spell.
I don't hate you, Bob. I've never met you, that I can remember. I have never given the CFC money for anything while you were president nor have I ever played in anything you organized (that I know of or can recall). Why would you think you rate an emotion as strong as "hate" from me? That part I don't understand. Can you explain?
Now I must run. I want to have a look at Kevin's blog. :)
Don't deny your feelings Gary. I feel the dark side of the force is strong within you. Search your feelings. Let your anger and hatred grow. Admit it, you hate everyone! :o
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Links to oil companies is no different to links to leftwing groups. Both have agenda's. Pressure goes both ways.
What does one former Nasa scientist have to say about getting government funding to do research?
“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”
Don't deny your feelings Gary. I feel the dark side of the force is strong within you. Search your feelings. Let your anger and hatred grow. Admit it, you hate everyone! :o
Do you see it in the tea leaves or is there a voice telling you these things?
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Mr. Bonham and others; do yourself a favour and subscribe for free to Climate Progress. Here is a complete trashing of Roy Spencer by real climate scientists...
Regarding Gary and Vlad's sudden concern about birds, they should call for the elimination of cats which kill orders of magnitude more birds than wind turbines.
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Updated ratings:
Vlad Drkulec 970 (loses 30 points for his comment on climate change models since he knows absolutely nothing about them, for example how many there are, who develops them, and the methods with which they approach the problem,; also loses 20 for his innane wind generator comment in ignoring scale of problems (i.e. failing to discuss cats))
Gary Ruben 1180 (for completely blowing bird kill issue out of proportion and being inconsistent about the environment, does he suddenly love birds and bats?)
Paul Bonham 1550 (Gain of 50 points for reading about the climate deniers, and showing a genuine interest in the views of other climatologist on these frauds)
Tom O'Donnell 1700
Chris Mallon 1700
Bob Gillanders 1820 (gain of 20 for humor while under attack from Gary's venom)
Larry Bevand 1900
Beckwith 2321 (for switching careers to study climate change I am assigning myself my highest chess rating)
Rating increases of 50 points are awarded automatically to any players who get on the automatic email list (free) of climate progress (just google it) and post links to an article or two which demonstrates they are reading stuff as a free subscriber. Think of all the fun you will have debunking lies from the koolaid drinking deniers...
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
"Vlad Drkulec 970 (loses 30 points for his comment on climate change models since he knows absolutely nothing about them, for example how many there are, who develops them, and the methods with which they approach the problem,; also loses 20 for his innane wind generator comment in ignoring scale of problems (i.e. failing to discuss cats))"
Cats allowed to wander outdoors are an environmental CATastrophe. There,... does that make you happy?
Gary Ruben 1180 (for completely blowing bird kill issue out of proportion and being inconsistent about the environment, does he suddenly love birds and bats?)
I have shares in Transalta, the company those who worry about the birds want to shut down operations.
It would seem from the article you could get a nice chopped Bat salad there. Don't let the feathers get caught between your teeth. I've never been there but apparantly the nature group has been.
I also used to breed tame birds ('tiels) so do have an active interest in the safety of our feathered friends.
Beckwith 2321 (for switching careers to study climate change
Your careers may be in a jeopardy.
"Deep cuts at Environment Canada...
News that scientists, meteorologists and engineers are among 776 jobs on the chopping block has department officials facing tough questions about how they plan to cope."
Tweet
Comment