[Info-vax] Intel junk...Kernel-memory-leaking Intel processor design flaw forces Linux, Windows redesign

[Dirk Munk]

Doomsdrzej wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 12:33:59 +0100, Jan-Erik Soderholm
> <jan-erik.soderholm at telia.com> wrote:
>
>> Den 2018-01-05 kl. 04:36, skrev Roger Blake:
>>> On 2018-01-04, chrisv <chrisv at nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>> Might I say that was an awesome post, sir.
>>> His post was sheer idiocy. CO2 is not a pollutant - period.
>>>
>> No, it is a natural part of the atmosphare, but it is a balance.
>> It has to be in the right proportions. To much (and in particual
>> if we continue to burn fosile fuels that ads carbone that was
>> bound millions of years ago) and the climate will be hurt.
> You can't _hurt_ climate. The Earth always balances itself out and
> there are thousands of years of data showing this. Some periods are
> cold; some periods are warm. In the end, there is a balance regardless
> of what its living creatures do.
>
>>> Human caused "climate change/global warming" is junk science at
>>> its worst. Even Reid Bryson, the scientist who was the father of
>>> modern climate science, stated that it is "a bunch of hooey."
>>>
>> I could probably name the scientist that has the opposite view, but
>> the space in one posting would not be enough.
>>
>> And why pick one that has been dead for 10 years? The views on global
>> warming has changed over the years and a lot has happend the last decade.
> Please demonstrate how.
>
>>> As I said, I absolutely refuse to reduce my own carbon emissions and
>>> in fact continue to see ways to increase them.
>> OK. fine. You'll be sorry and your children will be hurt. But then, if
>> you could reduce your C02 emission, what would be the issue?
> Reducing CO2 emissions should be voluntary in the same way that
> companies having a $15 minimum wage should be voluntary. In the United
> States, some companies did so and as a result show that they can
> afford to pay people that well without there being any kind of
> consequences. In Ontario, for instance, the $15 minimum wage was
> forced and companies now have to cut back somehow to afford to pay
> people that well. The liberal approach to CO2 emissions involves
> forcing companies and the people to make significant sacrifices and
> the end result is that it will do damage to the economy and the
> standard of life in the _hope_ that we will somehow be able to slow
> the evitable in a very insignificant way at a time when none of us
> will still be alive. The best governments _should_ hope for is to
> raise awareness about the potential problem and encourage people to
> make whatever changes they can which is not at all what they've been
> doing with schemes like the Paris Climate Accord.
>
>>> (Do you dumbass hippies
>>> really believe that your stoopid windmills are solar panels are capable
>>> of keeping people warm and alive in the deep freeze that so much of the
>>> U.S. is currently experiencing?)
>> That weather phenomenon is probably also caused by the disturbed climate
>> caused by the CO2 emissions. So in the case of the current US weather
>> issues, you could say that it is, in a way, self-inflicted.
>>
>> Anyway, you could probably start with more efficient cars, shutting down
>> all AC equipment and so on. This cold is just a temporarily storm and
>> has little to do with the overall climate issues. One can not use the
>> amount of snow on the back garden to judge about the climate at large.
> Just watch this:
>
> <https://hooktube.com/watch?v=NjlC02NsIt0>
Wonderful video. He made us believe the sea level isn't rising.The only 
problem is that the sea level is rising, that is measurable.

However, it is true that the earth has known warmer and colder periods, 
even in the past 2000 years. The problem is we can determine this from 
descriptions about what was going on, but people didn't have 
thermometers to record the temperatures.