finknottle

I wouldn't, and that's the point. If the sun is going to go nova, sit back and enjoy the fireworks. If the basic climate patterns go off kilter, whether caused by man or not, then I do not believe even a complete cessation of man's activities can reverse it. They will seek a new equilibrium.

I don't care *because* in my determination it is real and there is now too much inertia to do anything about it. If I weren't at that point then the question would be more relevant.

So you think I unfairly see all discussion of global climate change as being about Al Gore? Try reading the thread. Precisely three posts went by before we had "Hey Al, whatcha got to say about THIS?" Only after four more Gore digs (not in response to any comments) did PatPatPatSack begin on the other side, after which Gore was periodically re-introduced by the anti-warming crowd. As to whether or not 'climate change is man-made' is critical to whether ANY resources should be devoted to it, please explain why. Is it neccessary to determine whether or not the bird flu virus is man-made before we decide to combat it? How about fighting forest fires? An asteroid screaming down on us, or the sun going nova? It seems perfectly reasonable that you can accept or reject the evidence of trouble without coming to a definitive conclusion about its cause. And with conclusion in hand, you can weigh your options.

I find it ironic that you chastise him for carrying Gore's luggage when I have yet to see a discussion of global warming which is not moved to a political debate about Gore. Don't want to talk about GW? Attack Gore instead. Argue that man's contribution has not been fully determined. That will make the issue go away.

I don't care if it is man-made or not, but I find the science convincing. And I agree that the political realities will prevent anything we do here from slowing down what is happening elsewhere. So yes, I think we can kiss our asses goodbye. Or at least the asses of our descendents. So what is worse - fatalism or denial? Shall we reject our inconvenient calculations?

Cycles hold, until they don't. There was concern (no evidence either way, other than that our 12,000 year warm period was longer than any previous one) that the cycles of ice ages and warm ages was coming to an end. Other than the notion that it would happen in our particular warm period, this would not be shocking given that the cycle was geologically unusual, and only in place for about 2.5 million years. For the previous 100 million years the earth was uniformly hotter, no ice ages, with about 20% of todays land masses submerged.

Play on, Nero.

Maybe they feel that these papers are an excellent argument for global warming. With the exception of the second paper (which I couldn't retrieve in full), all seem to accept the data behind global warming. Here's the opening before the first quote which the poster neglected to include: "The average air temperature at the Earth's surface has increased by 0.06 °C per decade during the 20th century1, and by 0.19 °C per decade from 1979 to 19982. Climate models generally predict amplified warming in polar regions3, 4, as observed in Antarctica's peninsula region over the second half of the 20th century5, 6, 7, 8, 9. Although previous reports suggest slight recent continental warming9, 10, " They are only marveling at certain counter phenomona. But this is not surprising. Only an idiot believes that an average increase of x degrees means every location will increase by x degrees. The phenonoma of global warming, should it come to pass, will be important not for the temperature rise per se but rather the disruption of current climate patterns. With new wind currents and sea currents, some places will get warmer, some colder. Some wetter, some dryer. Europe, for example, will freeze if the Atlantic conveyer shifts direction.

And don't forget the panic about wide-scale nuclear war, aids, macro-economics, and the bird flu epidemic. Let's face it - in a chaotic universe, scientific modeling is worthless, will never produce anything usefull, and we shouldn't try.

(Not a slam on you - ) I am really tired of hearing the line about how scientists used to say we were entering a new ice age. The genesis of that is the observation - first popularly accepted a few decades ago - that the ice ages followed a cyclical pattern starting a million years ago. Roughly, 120,000 years of ice age seperated by 10,000 year warm periods such as the one we are in. And this summer has gone on for about 12,000 years now - ergo we are due to slip back into an ice age. Unless, of course, the pattern changes naturally (very coincidental over millions of years) or because of man's actions. But ignoring the observations that the earth is in fact warming at an accelerating rate (not known back then) the reasoning that we should expect another ice age within a thousand years or so (based on past patterns) is still sound. Nevertheless the contradiction between the early history-based prediction and the later measurement-based prediction is constantly cited as an example of why not to believe scientists about global warming.

Well, he's essentially correct on this point. By population, Fiji/Tonga/Samoa contribute an extraordinary number of athletes to the NFL. A far greater percentage of their populations grow up to become NFL pros than do Americans, which is amazing since the sport it is either unheard of or second to rugby there. My math is correct if there are 6 islanders on NFL rosters. I havn't checked, but I bet the average number is around 10. There's a long tradition that goes from todays Ngata back through Mosi Toutupu and Jack Thompson (aka the Throwin' Samoan).

Having been to Dubai many times, I found that the article overstates the dark seemy side. It also overstates the worker unrest angle. There are only now occasional rumblings, and I see no reason to believe it will threaten the regime. The difference between the UAE and the US is that there are no illegal aliens, and migrant workers must leave when their employment ends. If you are unhappy with the working conditions you will be returned to your country and replaced by someone who want to be there at that wage. This is clearly understood and universally enforced. So basically, I don't see that the angry masses can ever materialize. Something to ponder: we could easily replace our illegal workers with legal south asians who would be thrilled to make 1/3 the pay. If we are willing to turn a blind eye to the illegality on the grounds that the workers are necessary at those wages, why shouldn't we bring in even cheaper workers? Just to dispell some pre-conceived notions, the migrant workers are not all south asians building towers on a dollar a day. I remember a cab driver from the Philipines (his father was US military) who was brought in after passing a competative training course - language, sites, etc. He liked it better than his time in San Diego. The hotel industry is a popular destination for western europeans in their post-graduate soul searching phase. I think it is fair to say that if you walk around Dubai, *nearly everybody* that you see - blue collar to white collar - is an expat. Regarding the strategy, I think their foresight should be applauded. One need only look to Las Vegas to see that a city can survive in the desert on tourism and tradeshows. Dubai has surpassed Vegas as the premier entertainment center and is a top financial and commercial center to boot.

I was struck by how little discussion there was about his call to eliminate the deficit in 5 years, followed by a call for funding on all sorts of discretionary programs and to keep the tax cuts.

That's natural variation. The post you were refering to is wrong - the caps do not melt regularly. In fact, the way we know about the atmosphere in geologic times is by looking at the oxygen content etc in polar ice cores - the deeper, the older. They don't go away. Antarctica has been frozen for about 20 million years. I'm not sure about the arctic, but I'm guessing that the north pole has been frozen for at least 4 million years, probably 6. The poster might have been thinking about the ebb and flow of the ice ages. If so, we are actually in the warm summer part of the cycle, and a long one at that. That's the root of the observation popularized a few decades ago that - absent something breaking the cycle - based on the pattern, the earth should otherwise be slipping back into another 30,000 year ice age within a thousand years or so.

They have international rugby. Which I think is why the NFL keeps underwriting these farces. It's not about convincing the world to watch football, its about maintaining the illusion here that the NFL is the only football-like sport out there. The CFL is no threat, its only barely hanging on in one country. Rugby is worldwide, and they'd rather people not know that its out there. Remember the broadcast of the preseason game in Japan? How they kept talking about how there are no fields suitable for football in that baseball-mad country? Guess what - rugby is pretty big there, and there are a ton of fields. All the big companies sponsor teams in the professional leagues. But the NFL didn't want even a mention of the sport, so they went out of their way to play on a diamond.

But, but, but - I thought the reason we had to start JP last year was because you can't develop sitting on the bench!

I do think this was a good draft for us, but I'd caution anyone against reading too much into a draft based on how many starters you get. The easiest move in the world for a new GM/coach pair is to declare all the hold-over players crap and cut them (so the coach gets a pass on the year) and then play all the rookies (so the GM looks like a drafting genius). It's a management thing.

My hands-down choice isn't even on the list: the Redskins. They - and most in the national media - believed after 2005 that the Redskins would go deep into the playoffs in '06. To get over the top they spent the off-season giving huge contracts and draft picks to get the final pieces of the puzzle: Randle El (used mostly for punt returns and the occasional gadget play) and Brandon Llyod (fell to #3 receiver by seasons end) at receiver, Archuleta (highest paid safety, basically benched) and Andre Carter (never made an impact of defensive line) for the defense, and TJ Duckett (38 carries all season) as insurance for Portis. Only Andre Carter exceeded his 2005 numbers. The Redshins also have about 20 assistant coaches, 5 of which make more than many head coaches. And they have Gibbs, who the national media believes in.

Yeah, Rosenhaus and the other agents would never sue a team for not honoring the terms of a clients contract, those guys are wusses. I bet if we represented in court the players who are cut we'd clean up.

The best 'real world' analogy is the record industry. They sign you, give you money and promote you, and get your exclusive services for a certain number of years. But if you stink they may decide not to produce the albums they promised. And what about the artists who sign contracts, become big hits, and decide they want a better deal? And how far do they get? Hahahaha!

Bull. If WM was on the other side of the line, he would get zero respect and recognition in this new group.

I'll be interested to see how the other cities did with Christmas Eve attendence. Given our recent history and where we were going into the game, I would think there should be more enthusiasm than the average across the league.

You've make an excellant argument for professional Foosball being the most demanding sport of all.

My recollection is that once they started observing it, they noticed it was growing and that the rate was accelerating. That was the issue.

The estimates I've seen put Bison numbers at about 100 million worldwide at their peak. There are 1.4 billion head of cattle today. This whole debate echoes back at least to the Reagan administration, when he ridiculed efforts to limit aresols because of the growing Antartic ozone hole, citing studies that cows were the largest producers of methane. The US economy has never been the same since we banned hair spray.