Unfortunately I fear they will not., #
|Well the EU and the government have made that completely clear. It will not matter what we vote at tte next election,. The EU will win.
So dont bother having any more election at all, #
-- If I had all the money I've spent on drink... ..I'd spend it on drink. Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)
The reason you post to usenet, probably under a fake name, is that if you dared to be so nasty in real life, 90% of the people would walk away and the other 10% would take you out back and break your nose.
Any time you'd like to discuss electronics, I'm ready.
We just had a brainstorming session about how to make a really bad, jitterey clock oscillator that won't ever correlate to another oscillator. The answer is "DDS".
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
A little positive feedback can increase the gain of a system without making it unstable. But in this game, 3x or 4x gain increase is very close to infinite.
The net climate feedbacks may well be negative. You are correct, we've had ice ages in the past and recovered, at least temporarily, from every one, so if there are positive feedbacks they are moderate.
The danger to life on earth is the inevitable next ice age.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Even if that is true, loading up on CO2 won't prevent it. CO2 levels have been high before and the ice ages still come. No point in aggravating it by poking the bear with CO2.
Rick C.
Tesla referral code +
Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed drunken fantasys. None of that has ever happened with me.
Your desperate attempt at diversion that fools absolutely no one at all, noted.
Only once the voted-for outcome of the previous election actually takes place.
-- "It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong." -- Thomas Sowell
You're just like Our Dave. making things up as you go along.
-- The reason you think government is the solution is because you think freedom is the problem. But the truth is that government ensures that the most evil, ruthless people end up in control, because the state is a single point of failure, and a high-value target of corruption. Alan Lovejoy
Which will occur when we leave this inter-glacial. Sometime during the next 5000 years, supposedly.
-- "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
Historically the record shows that usually the voted-for outcome /doesn't/ take place.
That's why another election is the corner stone of democracy, so that the politicians that lied can be held to account in the light of the failure of their claims and promises vs reality of the real world.
Not wanting another election/referendum in the light of new knowledge is something that only fascist/communist bastards would argue for.
By then, we can move the orbit of earth to keep the temperature safe. Reasonable ways have been suggested.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
He did answer the question, but it wasn't the answer John Larkin wanted.
John Larkin has redefined persistent tinkering as "design" which makes him a designer - if only in his own eyes.
Sounds exactly like John Larkin.
As it has John, with his morbid fear of designed-for-the-job transformers.
Pro sports depend on a fallible human body. Everybody knows that they are going to get retired fairly soon, and all the work they put into being excellent is going to become irrelevant.
Design skills last a lifetime, and grow with practice. There's a lot more accumulated advantage to resent.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Well it hasn't happened yet since we are not due to exit the EU until
29th march 2019.
Yah. we know this. That's the case for an ordinary election where you are elections people to office. This was a referendum in June 2016 on a major constitutional change. The change was voted for and therefore ought to come into effect. What is actually happening is that various non-democrats, while pretending to be democrats, are trying to prevent the voted-for change taking place.
That chance occurs at the subsequent scheduled election.
What we are lacking in the UK is a constitutional mechanism for the people to vote on a constitutional change such that, if it passes, it takes effect with no further intervention required by anybody. In part the problem there is not having a codified constitution whose text can simply be changed. Note that this is not the same as saying that we have *no* constitution, it's simply that ours exists as various acts of Parliament and other docs. So we have Magna Carta, the Habeas Corpus Act, the Bill of Rights, and various others that I can't be bothered to look up. So you have to rely on Parliament enacting it.
California (at least) has such a mechanism where an initiative which passes (even by one vote) directly re-writes the state constitution. However that led to Prop 13 which in turn, so people kept telling me, led to school districts going bust. It also led in IIRC the 1980s, to my amusement, to no less than four initiatives on vehicle insurance costs being voted on, all overlapping and/or contradictory. I heard that they all passed, leaving a big mess for the state supreme court to sort out. I never did hear what the outcome of that was.
-- "Please stop telling us what you feel. Please stop telling us what your intuition is. Your intuitive feelings are of no interest whatsoever, and nor are mine. I don't give a bugger what you feel, or what I feel. I want to know what the evidence shows." -- Richard Dawkins
And they aren't going to be happy after they leave either, as they get to realise precisely how spectacularly stupid their mistake was.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
We gonna get a vote on that? :-) Trouble is it would change the length of the year and perhaps the day, too. Whose calendar we gonna use after that?
-- "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." -- Christopher Hitchens
Exactly. And who will they turn to as their (next) saviour?
While history doesn't repeat, anybody else think the current situation rhymes with "Weimar Republic"?
The people who are measuring methane levels in tundra permafrost areas - it is already happening, and more warming will make it happen faster.
That's not an assumption - temperatures are rising a lot faster in the Arctic than over the planet as a whole, and they have already risen enough to free up appreciable amounts of methane.
We know that methane oxidises to CO2 in the atmosphere. The average lifetime is about 9.1 years at present, but more methane would depelete the hydroxyl radicals that oxidise it.
The Natural Philosopher seems to get his philosophic information by staring at growing trees, which isn't the usual meaning of the term.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Or as ready as he'll ever be. Just don't forget to tell him how brilliant his designs are in every paragraph, otherwise he'll get peevish and resentful.
Until you filter the raw output properly.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
John Larkin can never get this right.
The sum of a geometric series is
if the common ratio r is less than one the sum over an infinite series is finite.
If r approaches one the sum can be very much larger than the first term, but still finite.
To get 3x or 4x r is 0.66 or 0.75, which is quite a way short of one.
The last ice age didn't kill off life on earth, and it certainly didn't make us extinct.
Now that we have worked out how to fiddle with the global thermostat, we should be able to put off the next ice age as long as we've got fossil carbon to dig up and burn - another argument for not digging all of it up and burning it right now.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
(0.04)
g.
lis
e
The supposition amongst people who have looked hard at the numbers is now t hat the current interglacial would have lasted about another 40,000 years - it looks very like one that lasted 50,000 years - until we started dumping extra CO2 into the atmosphere.
Enough of the CO2 we've already dumped into the atmosphere will still be ar ound in 40,000 years to make it unlikely that the usual mechanism would fli p the planet from inter-glacial to ice age.
Digging up some the fossil carbon that we'd wisely left underground and bur ning it might be an easier way of stopping the flip back to an ice age.
Or we could move a continent or two. Ice age are pretty rare in geological terms, and it takes a rather specific arrangement of land masses to make th em possible. Messing around with the convention currents inside the planet could do the job (though not all that quickly - continental drift is only a few centimetres a year).
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
You have got to be kidding. In 100 - 200 years humans will be moving asteroids around the solar system with ease using technology we can't imagine. Ice Ages will be a thing of the distant past - assuming we survive to get there that is. Do you have a clue as to how much carbon there is contained in the asteroids and outer planets waiting to be harvested?
Just over 100 years ago the biggest threat to city life was horses and their byproducts, today it might be vehicles (I think pesticides and fertilizers are a bigger danger), in 100 years who can possibly guess?
No one has a clue on setting the global thermostat - the suggestions for fixing the 'problem' are more risky than the problem! This is like the Smokey the Bear idea of forest management - that 'solution' made forest fires much worse and we are still seeing the results.
You honestly think people KNOW how to fix the temperature 'problem' when they can't even manage forests? There have always been charlatans and pipers who will solve the latest perceived problem...for a price.
John
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.