Talk-Polywell.org

Schneibster wrote:Meanwhile you claim there is a long-term trend in the average concentration of water vapor. Provide evidence.

I did not. You claim that the time individual molecules stay in the atmosphere matters. Provide evidence.

Diogenes wrote:If what you say were true, then Atheists would not evangelize. They would be content to let people believe as they wish, though they themselves choose not to. In practice, Atheists are defacto Anti-Theists.

In practice, most atheists don't evangelize. They're the ones you simply don't notice.

That doesn't mean there can't be a long-term trend for the average concentration of water vapor. But there isn't. Maybe you've noted this mysterious phenomenon where water falls from the sky. So because rain exists there can be no change in the average concentration of water vapor in the atmosphere...

I agree with the core of the article but I would caution against disregarding chance as a factor in wealth creation, at least at the individual level. (At larger scales one would expect it to average out, but given the huge effect some discoveries have that isn't always the case.) Most start-ups fai...

That doesn't mean there can't be a long-term trend for the average concentration of water vapor.

Schneibster wrote:Third, water vapor only stays in the air for days;

Given that water constantly evaporates somewhere on Earth, why does it matter how long an individual molecule stays in the atmosphere? Surely it's the average concentration that matters, not the identity of molecules in the air at any given moment.

Reduce. Reuse. Compost or burn. Best to get at least something useful out of it.

On the other hand, genetically engineered harvester lifeforms could transform today's landfills into the mines of tomorrow.

It is curious that one piece of paper that guarantees (legally) a payout after N years should cause such an entirely different outcome than another piece of paper that bears the same value. Where would all these new dollars rush to? Clearly not into buying consumer goods, since the owners of Treasur...

You can't swap out your monetary system. If you can replace it at all it's slowly. Hypothetically speaking, what would/could happen if the US government took over the Fed role of generating reserve money, stopped issuing Treasuries and generated money to cover any budget deficit out of thin air ins...

It seems that the power that be have realized that we have a real problem: http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2013/10/04/manufacturing-day-highlights-the-skills-gap-faced-by-american-business?goback=.gde_2666729_member_5793407085601378307#%21 Mike Rowe has been talking about this for years. But...

And for the umpteenth time, those non-rational beliefs are the only thing which keeps a lid on human nature. You let that loose unconstrained by those irrational beliefs and there will be blood. Atheism is not the absence of non-rational beliefs or self-constraints. Most human behavior is not based...

GIThruster wrote:You can keep saying it, but no one is going to believe you.

Is that a reply to Stubby or Diogenes?

So basically he's saying that at least some liberal policies actually do work and don't contradict human nature. Hmm.

The Left admitting that wealth requires productivity would help political discourse just as the Right admitting that motivation is not proportional to personal gain.

JLawson wrote:They imagine the cheating of their opponents because they couldn't imagine NOT cheating their opponents.

I'm not sure which side you're speaking of.

choff wrote:Segalstad also explains oceans hold 50 times more CO2 than the atmosphere and these two CO2 reservoirs operate in equilibrium. Doubling atmospheric CO2 (an IPCC bogeyman) requires increasing ocean CO2 by a factor of 50.

Huh?
So 1:50 and 2:2500 are the same?