About miketabcdefg

Biography

Name:
miketabcdefg
Sex:
Male 
Local Time:
22 Jul 2017 02:09

Statistics

Date Joined:
12 Feb 2011
Last Visit:
21 Jul 2017 (3 hours ago)
Page Viewed:
5,201 times
Friends:
84
Followers:
1
Days in Chat:
6
Days on Site:
6
Forum Posts:
143
Stories:
Badges:
2

Latest Forum Posts More forum posts »

Topic: Presidential offspring - out of bounds or fair game..?
Posted: 20 May 2017 19:46



I don't believe it is man-made. If it is, could somebody please explain to me how we made the last ice age... plus the one before that... plus the bits in between when it wasn't cold. According to science we have been through all this before.



Please point to sometime in the past where humans have dumped enormous quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in ridiculously short periods of time. At any time, not just in correlation with the ice ages. According to the science and basic history, this hasn't happened before, though according to the science CO2 has varied markedly in atmospheric percentages for various reasons associated with increased volcanism, increased weathering, melting of permafrost releasing locked methane (oxidising to CO2), locking away of carbon in limestone, oil and coal deposits over countless millennia, all of which aligned with changes in the earths temperature. At the moment humans are dumping it into the atmosphere. A simple mass balance of the fossil fuels burnt accounts for all of it (plus some because of uptake in oceans and weathering reactions).

The temperature changes aren't always increases when CO2 increases, as the first and most major snowball earth is thought to be caused by life starting to produce masses of oxygen which eventually (once other oxygen sinks were used up) converted methane, a much stronger greenhouse gas, to carbon dioxide.

There are many reasons the climate changes (changing insolation, increasing solar activity, changing volcanism, asteroid impacts, changing atmospheric concentrations even by dumb bacteria let alone supposedly smart humans, changing planetary orbit characteristics, changing continental distribution, etc) and science is doing a pretty good job of understanding them, though the job is never finished. What's clear at the moment is that we are causing it, that it is going to disrupt the planets ecological balance markedly at a time that it's already under enormous pressure from other human activities and that it's happening ridiculously quickly in geological terms and whilst it may appear slow in lifetime terms at the moment, in human societal terms it'll cause serious disruptions.

For the accepted reasons for the ice ages please refer to the Milankovich cycles which relate to the changing orbital nature of the planet. As this forcing isn't enough on its own also refer to how the warming caused by the changing insolation caused other feedbacks dependent on methane locked in permafrost and changing weather patterns from changing glacial topography all dependent on current continental distribution.

What staggers me most about comments such as these is how it is any way seen to be a logical argument in refutation on AGW. If you were in a car crash and were seeking to absolve yourself of blame would you argue that "the car has been crashed before and I wasn't even in it, therefore I can't be at blame this time"?

And in reference to a previous comment about snowball earth refuting AGW, how is it logical to cite a theory that is far more contentious in scientific circles because of the far more limited evidence available to support it, to try to refute another (even ignoring it's used incorrectly) that has a staggering amount of evidence to support it that is not at all contentious except in the details.

Topic: Presidential offspring - out of bounds or fair game..?
Posted: 13 May 2017 19:14

Depends on whether you think it's ok to have an affair with a married women, but really, no offense but I think Ivanka at least is out of your league... wait, what was the question again?

Topic: Forgetting your birthday
Posted: 30 Mar 2017 13:02

Could care less about my birthday. In the past, the first time I've remembered it's actually my birthday is when my mum has rung me up to wish me a happy birthday. I don't tell people when it is because it means nothing and I feel fake having to pretend i care when someone gushes over it. There's one proviso, in workplaces in the habit of having a cake everytime it's someones birthday. I guess anything can be justified by cake, but even then I can buy my own cake.

What someone does on every day of the year is far far more important than that one, and i do have a habit of coming to work with sweets for no reason at all now.

Topic: covers: love 'em or hate 'em?
Posted: 12 Mar 2017 23:33



Never knew Stevie Wonder was in Steppenwolf <img src="/forum/images/emoticons/laughing7.gif" alt="laughing6">

He was a member of Steppenwolf but you just couldn't see him ... or was it the other way around.

Not sure what it is about that song but I've made that mistake before and not learnt from it it seems.

Topic: covers: love 'em or hate 'em?
Posted: 12 Mar 2017 13:33

Some covers are better but it's up to personal taste and often it simply depends on on which version you heard first. Also if the cover matches the style of music you're into at the time makes a big difference.

A few good ones mentioned above. And a couple more off the top of my head in vastly different styles...

Higher ground, Chilli peppers, originl steppenwolf.
Can't get used to loosing you, the Beat (or british beat or english beat) original popularised by Andy Williams - not sure who wrote it)
Voodoo People, Pendulum, original prodigy.

Queens of the Stone age did a decent version of Tom Waits Going out West though I still prefer the original and with all the other covers of his definitely. But Tom Waits is a good example of preference, his voice is very much an individual preference and lots of people prefer the covers.

Also lots of trip hop out there that grabs a kernel of a song and turns it into something totally new. Sometimes they almost lift the entire song and put some layers over it, change it around a bit, speed it up - whatever - to turn it into something totally new.
Chinese Man - I've Got That Tune - grabbed an old jazz number (Washboard Rhythm Kings Hummin' to Myself (1932)) and transformed it.
Kid koala on 12 bit blues sampled lots of old scratchy blues and gave them a modern feel but still keeping the old scratchy feel.


Topic: Your thoughts about AI
Posted: 02 Mar 2017 12:51

A agree with seeker..

But I'm not sure it requires quantum computing for intelligence rivaling human intelligence, and to be honest I think we should be aiming higher than that. Much better to create an intelligence that isn't so swamped by so many cognitive bias's. The difficulty will be in identifying whether a truly 'intelligent' machine has been achieved. I put that in inverted commas because mostly people use the term to mean self aware intelligence. I only assume other people are self aware by their similarity to myself (and the negative of this informs bigotry in its many forms). Will we ever be able to assume self aware intelligence in any computer, or only in some sort of anthropomorphised form. Perhaps once we've worked out how to map the human neural networked brain structure into another substrate, perhaps growing a similar biological version with machine connections. A fair way off but certainly not out of the realms of possibility.

When it comes to it, on some measures computers are smarter than us, certainly on any intelligence that requires simple linear thinking. Once upon a time someone who could do calculations very quickly would have been considered very smart, simply because most of us can't. Computers have been great at doing simple sequential calculations very quickly and so we've diminished that in importance. Attempts to get computers to play the more complex games with too many permutations by using simple number crunching brute force showed their limitations. That is all changing now. Computers can now win these games using pattern matching and learning algorithms and are now proving to be better at diagnosing, say, x-rays by being presented with many x-rays with known diagnosis. However they are very limited in their breadth of knowledge and using that information to tie in a broader diagnosis. That will change.

But well before that happens, computers will be able to replace most of our jobs through advances not only in computer processing power but also material science and machine dexterity, they don't need to be that smart to do that. This has been happening for decades but is about to move into many more realms, not the least of which is self driving vehicles. Think of all those truck drivers, delivery drivers out of jobs. Cue serious, but ultimately unsuccessful, protests. Where will it lead? Who knows what the social and cultural impacts will be when so many more of us have leisure time/nothing constructive to do (take your pick). Perhaps we'll be like the Roman elite, and it'll all be gluttony and orgies. The bigger question is who will be in control, and decide on the distribution of wealth. Are we heading towards having a basic human income, many say it'll be the only sustainable way.... Cue, 'but that's socialism', by many, especially in the US.

Detailed pic of Cognitive Biases. In all our inglory.

Topic: Fart Rape
Posted: 27 Feb 2017 01:07



http://www.dailyrandomfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/fart-Gas-Fact.jpg



At the risk of taking anything in this thread seriously, i had to check this one out thinking it was going to be total nonsense, but ...

Using the smallest tactical warhead ever produced, (1/2000th the size of nagasaki), and assuming farts are close to atmospheric pressure then to achieve the yield required you need to be farting at 59ml/sec (or 2 fl oz for those in the US). Serious fart rate that, and although i did actually drop one while calculating this i was not able to check the flow rate to see if it's in the ball park. Now to go and get a life.

Topic: Is equality such a difficult concept to grasp?
Posted: 26 Oct 2016 13:15

It's not a difficult concept to grasp; it's a difficult concept to accept if you're used to feeling like you're better by the virtue of your birth.


As the saying goes ... "When you're accustomed to privileged equality feels like oppression."

On the competition front. Unfortunately often the measures in the competition don't directly relate to the outcomes rewarded.

Topic: do you believe in God?
Posted: 24 Sep 2016 16:40

Yes He is...

He paints the sunsets, and dresses the meadows with a thousands of wildflowers,
He gives us each other, and love, and these things resplendent to admire, and inspire,
to find the greater in side to overcome with His love as our power...


It us that fucks everything up... nuff. Pfft.

We didn't fuck it ALL up - we had some good inspiration...


All things dull and ugly,
All creatures short and squat,
All things rude and nasty,
The Lord God made the lot.

Each little snake that poisons,
Each little wasp that stings,
He made their brutish venom.
He made their horrid wings.

All things sick and cancerous,
All evil great and small,
All things foul and dangerous,
The Lord God made them all.

Each nasty little hornet,
Each beastly little squid,
Who made the spikey urchin?
Who made the sharks? He did!

All things scabbed and ulcerous,
All pox both great and small,
Putrid, foul and gangrenous,
The Lord God made them all.

Amen(to monty python).

Topic: If aliens came to our planet...
Posted: 24 Sep 2016 16:24

We are a class M planet. meaning water. The rarest commodity in the universe. If they have the technology to travel light years to our location then I don't think we would be of particular interest to them. We'd be like bugs.

At the risk of taking Star Trek classifications way too seriously... A class M planet is characterised by liquid water AND a nitrogen and oxygen atmosphere. Water is actually very abundant in the universe, unsurprising since hydrogen and oxygen are abundant throughout the universe and highly reactive. The reactivity of oxygen however means that it is not likely to be ubiquitous as free oxygen. It took life processes well over 1 billion years to start producing it here so finding it anywhere would be a good indication of potential for life. But since loosely intelligent life didn't appear here until recently, after 4 billion years and less than 1 billion before this planet becomes uninhabitable, free oxygen does not mean little green men, or big purple women, or translucent giant smart aardvarks or anything beyond microbes really.

If they did come though, I think they'd be fascinated with an emerging intelligent lifeform much as we are with our evolutionary history and the unknown of how life may unfold elsewhere.

Most likely though, if there are other intelligence's watching us, they created us and this is all some big simulation so nothing to worry about unless they want to tweak the simulation because it not quite going in the trajectory they would like.

back to top

Badges Awarded To miketabcdefg All Badges »

Image Gallery

3 Images

Friends Comments

soft_curves
Posted: 03 Jul 2014 19:26
soft_curves
Posted: 27 Apr 2014 20:02
Lush
Posted: 01 Jan 2014 00:20
Happy Birthday from the Lush team.
DanielleC
Posted: 19 Nov 2013 01:07
miketabcdefg
Posted: 23 Oct 2013 16:21
Lush
Posted: 30 Dec 2011 18:11
Happy Birthday from the Lush team.
back to top
 


Attach a note to this member, which only you can see.

Tell us why

Please tell us why you think this profile page is inappropriate.

Reason