I would wait for i7 930 or even better 32nm Westmere quads instead of getting i7 920. They were already listed to come in March 2010, so far Xeon parts only, but i think they fit into 1366 socket. Personally i am holding out for hexacore Gulftown CPU... it will cost arm and leg, but f*ck it, we live only once[e digicons]:D[/e] I can not wait to see 12 buckets to render in 3dsmax[e digicons]:dur:[/e]
[quote who="Jonnan001" reply="553" id="2486272"] There is no bullet-proof. End game - no theory is bullet-proof and the mere fact that you seriously seem to expect that indicates you don't really understand science. Climate Change is a strong theory. If you want bullet-proof. Well, it's good to know what it is to want. But Climate Change makes predictions, those predictions have been tested, and those tests have proven pretty darn accurate of 30+ years. It's detractors h
AGW or not, merry Christmas to everyone.[e digicons]:D[/e] [e digicons]:beer:[/e]
[quote who="Mumblefratz" reply="529" id="2484551"] they cant explain the cooling in the recent years {they said it, not me}You mean they can't explain the cooling that hasn't in fact occured? Currently the rate of warming has slowed down (0.29C/decade) but it's still an *increase* and the idea that there has been no warming in recent years has been debunked literally dozens of times in this thread alone. If you claim black is white, up is down and wa
And you claim the sceptics come again and again with the same arguments...cause hockeystick is the latest and the ultimate evidence of AGW, never used before...
[quote who="Jonnan001" reply="520" id="2483964"] Quoting Timmaigh, reply 493 So i read the rebuttal of Easterbrook´s work and still same question comes to mind....how do i know whom to believe? For example the part about ocean cycles - PDO...Easterbrook says they are important regarding climate change, this guy - Chris - says it is not true.... My whole point is there are both arguments pro and contra AGW....i really do not know what the truth is a
[quote who="Mumblefratz" reply="495" id="2483212"] So i read the rebuttal of Easterbrook´s work and still same question comes to mind....how do i know whom to believe?You might also just wait a year. If 2010 turns out to be the warmest year on record wouldn't you agree that he's full of shit?[/quote] There is actually -17 Celsius degrees outside and i am not at Siberia, so right now i am more inclined to believe him hehe. But seriously i have no problem to admit he
[quote who="Mumblefratz" reply="494" id="2483207"] until then i am against any actions.That's OK however I do have the following suggestion. [/quote] Do not really need that, i am 3 hundred meters above sea level [e digicons]:thumbsup:[/e]
So i read the rebuttal of Easterbrook´s work and still same question comes to mind....how do i know whom to believe? For example the part about ocean cycles - PDO...Easterbrook says they are important regarding climate change, this guy - Chris - says it is not true.... My whole point is there are both arguments pro and contra AGW....i really do not know what the truth is and i am not going to make decision about this myself...and because it is the pro-AGW side, who is crying for
And what about this graph? It tells something different, but i am sure it was already "debunked". Now only why should i believe those who debunked it and not this Easterbrook guy? They are all scientists after all...
[quote who="lifekatana" reply="459" id="2482000"]No you ****. Global Cooling was one paper in the 70ties, and it got a bit of media attention. However the scientific community wasen't saying this. This was a hypothese of one guy. One paper. Noone took him seriously like noone(with brains that is) takes AGW deniers serious. [/quote] If you actually tried to read the link i provided, you could see i was not talking about the global
[quote who="lifekatana" reply="455" id="2481885"]Timmaigh this has already been discussed. That study is bull.[/quote] Ok, but how do you know it is bull, if you are not climate scientist yourself? Just because the scientists, who advocate AGW, "debunked" it? And how do you know their arguments are right? What if their "debunking" of this study is wrong? What i am trying to say, there are still too many unanswered questions regarding climate, so it would be unwise to take acti
I have found interesting article which claims it is actually cooling, not warming [e digicons]:)[/e] http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10783 Off course i am not a scientist, so i really cant tell, if there is something truthful about this, but the guy who wrote it is apparently scientist, professor at University...not just some random guy. and there are other scientists, who are claiming this - Russians called Abdusamatov and Sorokhin or so...so he is n
[quote who="CrusaderScott" reply="4" id="2470099"] Quoting HorseStrangler, reply 3It looks silly to be honest. That's pretty much my opinion too. When I heard Cameron saying he was coming back to save cinematic sci-fi, I was excited because sci-fi certainly needs to be saved when it comes to the movies. I had visions of original ideas or even movies based on some classic novels...instead I get the Thundercats saving Ferngully. My expectations are
[quote who="WIllythemailboy" reply="363" id="2477172"] nd if you do even a bit of math, it becomes blindingly obvious that even at 350 ppm, the atmosphere is effectively opaque to the wavelengths CO2 absorbs, doubling the concentration would have a completely negligible effect on heat. http://www.john-daly.com//artifact.htm (the original article is in german) Or for a fuller explanation http://brneurosci.org/co2.html Neither of these autho
Barenaked Ladies - One Week?
[quote who="The_Silencer" reply="60" id="2471602"]So the show is not going to be aired again until March 2010?[/quote] Yes, the same with Flash Forward and Stargate apparently. Wonderful. There is only one word for it - retarded.
[quote who="Yanxa" reply="1937" id="2470520"] Imho, DS9 was the weakest of all the shows - it was so...un-Star Trekkie. Still, we can't change history..sadly. Lmao I[/quote] Aaaaagh.....heresy! [e digicons]:D[/e] DS9 the WEAKEST out of the lot? You cant be serious! If you look on the trektoday forums, you will find out that DS9 is in contrary considered by the majority of the trekkies there as the best one (talking about the TNG-DS9-VOY-ENT line
[quote who="inerz" reply="195" id="2468509"]>>Define "SOMETHING" please I'm sorry did you miss out on the last 12 years since the Kyoto Protocol was ratified? im just gonna copypaste some tidbits from wikipedia to you here: The objective of the protocol is the "stabilization and reconstruction of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system."
[quote who="inerz" reply="183" id="2468106"]im basically retyping the points made in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORv8wwiadQ&NR=1&feature=fvwp as it seems sceptics have completely missed this simple and elegant point. look, if you do nothing about global warming then there are 2 options: 1a. global warming was not caused by manmade gases and we did nothing, so all is good, we spent no money on useless clean tech and we keep pollutin
OK, so i just saw the last available episode of the "Flash Forward" (until March 2010, what the f...? [e digicons]>:([/e] ) and i definitely enjoyed it...IMHO out of the quartet SGU, "V", Fringe and this, it is the best and most immersive one.
[quote who="Thoumsin" reply="17" id="2456498"] problem : seem that 166 gb ram, two Xeon quad core at 2.66 ghz and a NV8800 Ultra 768mb is not enough for these game... can only use the max graphic setting on 1vs1 game with small map !!! [/quote] [e digicons]:omg:[/e] You have a quite good computer, Thoumsin
[quote who="joasoze" reply="9" id="2456208"] I say let people do what they want sexwise. I guess there isnt much to discuss here, cause neither will change views.[/quote] So you would let paedophiles do "what they want sexwise?" I hope not.... [e digicons]:D[/e]
[quote who="joasoze" reply="4" id="2456139"]Fringe: Its ok, but it has a simple way of solving all problems. This scientist knows a bit about EVERYTHING, and he can always solve any problem. Its a bit like Numbers and Star Trek, where they always can find some weird solution that will solve any problem. I would have liked problems that were more long term and more related to people and their motivations, rather than always introducing some weird science. My rating 6/10 [
So, another week is here and i decided to start new thread about shows i recently started to watch: "Fringe" is the show created by JJ Abrams/Orci/Kurtzman....the guys who made new Trek or Lost. So far i have seen about eight epizodes and it is lot like X-files. The main characters - FBI agent, former scientist and his son - are investigating series of weird events known as the Pattern. I think it is quite good, but i would prefer it to be less episodic. The other show,
