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...
I am predicting the demise of sea ice and that the planet will be different. Why do the dynamic duo of illiterates (not you Gary or Dobrich) interpret the end of the world into that? They are even worse than Fox. Pathetic examples of ignorance.
I am predicting the demise of sea ice and that the planet will be different. Why do the dynamic duo of illiterates (not you Gary or Dobrich) interpret the end of the world into that? They are even worse than Fox. Pathetic examples of ignorance.
You've made a strategic error there by picking a particular date. You should have kept predicing change in the 'future', far enough so that most of us won't be around anymore. By naming September 30th as the date of a significant negative change in the earth's climate you have made a real beginner's error in disaster prediction. Most of us will still be around on October 1st. Really if you are going to get any good at this disaster alarmist stuff you are going to have to get up to speed on this. Didn't all those peer reviewed articles you read give you any clue?
Since you are a self-proclaimed expert I would have expected something a bit better than just 'the planet will be different'. The planet is different every day.
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Paul, are you ready for some "peer review" scrutiny of your article? I am not suggesting here I am your peer in climatology, I am just a layperson, but if you would kindly indulge me, here we go:
PIOMAS (Pan-Arctic Ice Ocean Modelling and Assimilation System) data concludes the following:
5% probability of arctic sea ice vanishing by 2013,
50% by 2015, and 95% by 2018.
But you are predicting arctic sea ice vanishing this year, by Sept 30th. To quote you, "Probability that sea ice is gone by end of melt season 2012 is getting larger and larger on a daily basis".
Questions:
You claim that the PIOMAS data does not account for the effects of cyclones. Can you confirm that assertion? That would seem to be a major shortcoming of the climate model PIOMAS used by the Polar Science Center.
How many cyclones are normal in the arctic? Are they increasing?
If arctic sea does vanish completely this year, how quickly will it return in the winter months?
You've made a strategic error there by picking a particular date. You should have kept predicing change in the 'future', far enough so that most of us won't be around anymore. By naming September 30th as the date of a significant negative change in the earth's climate you have made a real beginner's error in disaster prediction. Most of us will still be around on October 1st. Really if you are going to get any good at this disaster alarmist stuff you are going to have to get up to speed on this. Didn't all those peer reviewed articles you read give you any clue?
Since you are a self-proclaimed expert I would have expected something a bit better than just 'the planet will be different'. The planet is different every day.
It doesn't surprise me that Paul is backpeddling furiously from his previous prediction of humanity being mated (ie game over). The end of the world as we know it doesn't necessarily imply the end of the world. Its just a memorable REM tune with the punch line "And I feel fine." October 1st won't be qualitatively any different than September 30th. Its all just hype to sell more newspapers and get more government research funding. It doesn't mean that we need to take it at all seriously.
It doesn't surprise me that Paul is backpeddling furiously from his previous prediction of humanity being mated (ie game over). The end of the world as we know it doesn't necessarily imply the end of the world. Its just a memorable REM tune with the punch line "And I feel fine." October 1st won't be qualitatively any different than September 30th. Its all just hype to sell more newspapers and get more government research funding. It doesn't mean that we need to take it at all seriously.
Peer does not mean someone who has happened to peer at the material, it means someone who has professional standing in the field. Paul has never published anything peer reviewed but I don't think you can claim to be his first 'peer' reviewer.
Head in the sand? Interesting these climate change scientists are good at the one-line put-downs but I hope at the end of the day that they realize that snappy lines are not what prove their case. The video you posted is a PR piece. I can put one of those together in a few minutes. Much harder to actually explain the science. I wonder why they choose the PR route andnot the science? I also hope they know that ostriches don't actually do that, bury their heads in the sand that is. Seems like some of these climate guys missed their calling and should have been Don Rickles type stand ups. Your mother is so fat that when she sits around the house she sits around the hosue and doesn't believe in climate change...Take my wife please, she doesn't believe in climate change...
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Monday, 13th August, 2012, 05:07 PM.
Peer does not mean someone who has happened to peer at the material, it means someone who has professional standing in the field. Paul has never published anything peer reviewed but I don't think you can claim to be his first 'peer' reviewer.
Actually in the leaked emails there were some indications that they conspired to prevent dissenting viewpoints from being published.
I think Bob is actually just as qualified to pass judgement on the evidence as Paul is, though at least in Bob's case he truthfully doesn't claim to be an expert.
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
I have many peer reviewed publications; Zeljko obviously does not know how to do searches. Wrong again.
It is incredible that there are still deniers at this stage in the game, even more incredible that they are rabid deniers.
I wonder if readers of this thread recall Vlad's predictions on sea ice. In case they do not he claimed that the ice was recovering and growing since 2007. He cannot even get the trend correct. Vlad is not one to show any respect for science. Tarot cards perhaps, crystal balls maybe, but not science.
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Hi Bob,
The PIOMAS results do not consider cyclones occurring in the Arctic in the summer.
Cyclones are usually extremely rare in the summer there, in the past they have been a winter phenomena and have just blown snow around on top of the thick ice layer. The rare one in the summer (previously when there was a decent ice cover) the ice layer prevented the sea water from being agitated and mixed.
Now the ice is much thinner and weaker and has many water gaps between ice sheets. When the sea ice melts there is a layer of predominantly fresh water close to zero degrees Celsius at the surface. The cyclone was powerful enough to create waves 2 to 3 meters high which sliced through the ice, breaking it into smaller chunks with much larger surface area; it also mixed the cold relatively fresh surface water with warmer saltier water from below, in fact as far down as 500 meter.
Also, cyclones are usually only lasting a few days before dissipating. This one lasted over a week and could even reform, and it is huge with a diameter over 1000 km and an area nearing 1 million square km. It is also not clear what the mechanism will be to dissipate it when it is spinning around in the Arctic drawing water vapor from the ocean and warm air from lower altitudes on the Arctic ocean coasts. In fact one paper projected that these things could churn away for as long as a month.
With the sea ice in its present weakened state another cyclone or two in the basin over the next month to month and a half left in the melt period there is a reasonable probability that the sea ice will not sustain this onslaught.
I have many peer reviewed publications; Zeljko obviously does not know how to do searches. Wrong again.
It is incredible that there are still deniers at this stage in the game, even more incredible that they are rabid deniers.
I wonder if readers of this thread recall Vlad's predictions on sea ice. In case they do not he claimed that the ice was recovering and growing since 2007. He cannot even get the trend correct. Vlad is not one to show any respect for science. Tarot cards perhaps, crystal balls maybe, but not science.
Prove it. You get upset when I 'cyber-stalk' you so I didn't do a search but I'm sure you can give us the links to your publications in peer reviewed journals. And at this point I take nothing you claim at face value. For example I remember you claiming that the article on a handful of corporations controlling the world economy being peer reviewed turning out to be baloney. The one that claimed SunLife was the most powerful Canadian corporation.
Also frankly there are too many Paul Beckwith's around for me to bother doing a seach myself. It's far too common a name.
It is a pity though that you can't fool all the people all the time isn't it?
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Tuesday, 14th August, 2012, 03:41 AM.
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Hi Paul,
Thank you for that vivid description of the effects of the cyclone. It was easy to picture how this accelerates the melt. If the arctic sea ice is not gone completely this year, it will no doubt set another record.
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Thanks Bob. You will find much more info in two ppt presentations that I have fired off to many scientists. The first is from Aug 10th analyzing what happened to the ice in the last cyclone.
I just finished the second one ten minutes ago. Looks like another cyclone is heading there by around Aug 19th or 20th. It looks quite ominous for sea ice. Still 30 to 45 days of melting left, likely 45.
Re: THE NEW One and Only Climate Change Whatever...
Mr. very unpleasant sour grapes downer aka Kitich. I do not remember exactly how many peer reviewed papers I have; I think that are about 12 to 15 or so. That does not count conference presentations of which there are ten or so. Not something I track too closely. Oh, I have two patents also. I have nothing to prove to you so find them yourself. Doofus...
Which university teaches this as good form in a public debate?
He has lost the debate and recognizes the fact in his heart, though it be black as coal. He is more interested in preaching to those who are already saved and converted to his newfangled religion.
It is interesting reading the opinion pieces on the CBC and in the local paper which seem to be increasingly hysterical when reporting this information war that is being waged with respect to AGW. They know they are losing but can't bear to face reality. Personally the next strategic move for the forces of Truth, Good and Light should be to fairly rapidly defund the CBC. If hockey goes for an extended strike/lockout we really won't need them anyway.
Tweet
Comment