kerbiloid

We have two types of photoreceptor cells: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_cell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_cell The cone cells work in bright daylight. They have three subtypes, each with sensitivity diagram looking like a gaussian bell with maximum at some wavelength. So, the colors are measurable combinations of the cone cells output signal. The rod cells work in weak illumination, their maximum is at ~500 nm, so they have no combinations, and we treat their vision as grayscale (while actually it's green-blue). Most of animals don't have the red cone cells, and see a tiger or a leopard as grass-green, while monkeys and their humans see them orange.

https://www.interfax.ru/russia/916521 11:57 Moscow Time, 2 burns: 243 s retroengine, then 76 s landing engine.

Banned for totally agressive antiveganism.

Banning instead of cheating is cheating.

A hot cuperconductor = a gauss gun, a plasmagun. That easily available to everyone? And no men in black in the office?

So, the X-axis should be marked in centuries. A millenium later we'll can see a clear sinusoidal picture. If two scientists learn the subjects from the same books, their models can be very similar and matching each other. But they are still models. The geocentric astronomers and the alchemists were having various models which were matching each other very well, just differing in details. They need a lot of oil-based chemicals and plastic. If it's more profitable to use oil for their production, then the combustion is bad, and the owners are green. The oil is the same, the market agenda differs. (Avoiding the possibility, that the proper agenda is told to Exxon from above. According to wiki, they are just 2..3% of the world oil production, after all. So, if a political decision was made, the experts would follow it anyway. See the tobacco, which is absolutely useless poison, but still. Couldn't it be prohibited?) If the models predicts 100 kya with 0.1° accuracy, it will definitely predict tomorrow with 1°. (Looks through the window...) The prediction of stochastic processes is like publishing the future bookmaker results for the next year. You can predict average with wide interval of uncertainty. In the world when a bottle of wine is "from Northern slope of the hill, 1954 year". Because the local conditions affect very much. For example, we almost never have the predicted rain, but have to daily pump out the underground water from the basement. The sunny side of the house is +35°C, the shadow side is +25°C. In the mountains the temperature jumps every half-hour, depending on a portion of cold air from top. In the desert there can be +60° days and +10° nights. So, the 0.1° accuracy of the models looks rather optimistic, if they speak about the real planet, rather than its virtual model. How does it prove the world-wide hurricanes, tornadoes, and tsunamies 10kya? They are uncheckable in the past, first of all. If the uranium half-life probably has not changed last several billion years, the multi-factor stochastic process, like the climate and weather, is by orders of magnitude more complicated to predict. Tomorrow somebody will discover that anomalous solar activity 20 kya, together with oceanic currents change due to Atlantis sinking brought a significant input in climatic change, and the models will be need an update, with changed results. Unreal? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Agassiz Or count the versions of the Universe age. Or remember the "Dark Matter". The models are just models, not direct evidence. It describes regular hurricanes, happening without ocean level change. According to the < 1 m apocalyptic alarms, the post-IceAge 100m should be something absolutely devastating. But the same models tell that mammoths and furry rhinos got extinct from the changed pastures, not gone by wind. The humans were always living along the coastlines. So... What to say. Now I see that the climate agenda is propagated by the concrete manufacturers lobby... They need a Wall. Saving money 100 years ago, and making them for the next 100 years. Isn't opened here.

Unlikely the beliefs had appeared before the instinctive disgust/fear, and the non-believers still usually do not enjoy the view too much. The horror movies aren't filmed for the jungle aborigines. Those people aren't aware about the germs (which are on every inch of the rural place and tools), and calmly perform various close contact rituals with the same corpse.

The coastline has enough evidences of the sea level.

There is a difference between the model-based extrapolation by 20% of the measurement range (take a century, estimate next twenty years), and 1 000%. Unless the function is very simple, you get almost qualitative estimation, rather than quantitative one. What do the models say about the 10kya ocean level raise by 100 m? Why no trace of hurricanes and tsunamies?

Before you build a model, you should collect raw data. After building the model, you can extrapolate. And while building the model, you are intrapolating, the extrapolation is much less accurate, unless you have a straight line. The estimation of the far past condition is extrapolation by 100 000 years, when your empiric data are just from 100 year long range. This means almost random set of values.

Chart 1: Not zero-based, most of diagram is black, estimated. Real data are blue and red, and they just show 320→410. Chart 2: Actual data are 1900..2020, and they just 1° growth (if we consider the 1900 data relevant). Chart 3: Model-based. Such large charts with such small actual data range. Like if somebody was going to impress the readers. In 1988 Tesla and lithium batteries were a far future, together with all other greenergetics. This doesn't mean that once the world got green, the Exxon owners won't be active proponents and manufacturers of solar windmills, and the most active fighters against carbon and oil. As this text shows, their prognoses depend on the Exxon owners' business. If it's oil, then oil. If not oil, or plastic windmills, then their prognoses will show exactly this priority. Exxon, Shell, BP, etc. exist not for principles, but for their owners' profit, regardless of this profit source. Not necessary. Merge two white noises, and you get the same white noise. Merge datasets with different precision, and you have one, polluted with another one. Also, it's not the measurements of actual temperatures in the past. It's measurements of depleted traces. Watch the weather prognoses. They are based on actual modern precise data, but almost never match the actual tomorrow weather.

Ten smallest tanks in history

2nd correction is done at 06:40 Moscow Time, burn 24.3 s. https://t.me/roscosmos_gk/10462

You're in BanDonald's.

Floor 4133: Clowns.

A software, full of bugs. Klendathu Hill.

It's a French restaurant. You can enjoy the cup of fly broth, and the fly itself is cooked on another plate. Waiter! Coffee and croissant with boiled sausage and ketchup.

Perhaps this had to do with competing against Neanderthals and the like. *** The thing which is strange, why are the humans instinctively afraid of deads, and decayed faces. Obviously, they are almost at the at end of the queue of dangers. And why do the people of Polinesia and Dravidic India depict/impersonate something dangerous with tongue out and popped round eyes. As I had heard it in one video series, this is like a rotting corpse with members popped out. Sounds reasonable. (Can't add the images, as probably the forum staff won't be happy, but put in a row faces of angry leopard, angry ape, and rotting corpse).

The people live in real world, where nobody will publish or hire a person with a reputation of scientific freak, except in a freak show. Remember Boltzmann, Wegener, many others... So, it's important to follow the mainstream and not deviate too radically. Btw, the blackholes are just a hypothesis. There are other... marginal... explanations of the phenomenon. The Mendelian genetics was obsolete long ago, but its basic theses are a pure arithmetics, and they stay. Also it doesn't take into account, say, mithochondrial DNA, genetic exchange between bacteria, crossingover, etc. It's a primitive basis. No, because they demonstrate excessive confidence in a highly stochastic process prediction, even without possibility of direct measurements (they can measure only depleted traces). And because they say that several more centimeters will mean a global catastrophe, when just 10k years ago the ocean level had raised by 100 meters, and no global hurricanes happened. Another sample of a disproved school of science. Lysenko was not alone. Another sample is Marr, in linguistics. In school, they were teaching us that weather is the most neutral theme, and the British always discuss it at five o'clock. The problem which stayed unclear, how can the British drink tea at five o'clock, when they work till six.

Being the Steel Rat yourself is cheating. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_Can_Be_The_Stainless_Steel_Rat

Isn't?! This article is even too kind for them! Just watch any Holy Wood postapocalyptic series, say, the Walking Dead, or others, and not be jumping on your seat and crying "Idiots! What are they doing?!" by the hired climatologists, whose job is to study the ancient climate for money. There is no such thing as "20°C" or "57°F" temperature. There is 293 K, and every measuring tool has its officially defined "class of accuracy", i.e. precision in percents. Even 5% error means 15 K of absolute error. And any "0.1 K" for the ~300 K value is what a student gets a "fail" on Metrology exams, unless the climate archaeologists use mercury thermometers from far past. They can't have enough large sampling to get this accuracy from average. Even the aviation meteorological network doesn't provide such precide values. The whole history of science is based on trained specialist studies, having responsibilities, and a decade later disproved by the other such scientists. For example, because every scientists follows his school models and ideas, until they get too obviously erroneous. Every scientist adds new bricks to his school tower, finding an appropriate place for them. Until the tower falls down. They can't. They can only say what it definitely could not be. And the range is wide. A question about any specialist: a climatologist, a historian, an archaeologist, an astronomer, etc. If an archaeologist has found an artifact, which looks absolutely matching a specific historical culture, definitely not fake or dug for fun, what will he do: 1. Presume, that they were making artifacts from later epochs? (And be a freak). 2. Presume, that the famous culture is not so ancient, and belongs to the artifact epoch? (And be a freak)? 3. Throw the artifact away and forget it, telling to nobody? As probably most of specialist aren't ready to flush down their reputation, diploma, career, and life in toilet just for a stupid artifact, this makes any such study unfalsifiable, and thus non-scientific. Say, in physics it's much harder to do so, and in mathematics is almost impossible. They have presented their interpretation based on widely accepted models of their community. is the most obvious symptom of false. "Our cream protects your skin by 55.685% better than others!"

Poor and pure. Pure Poor Dustrial Hill.

Are being banned.

When you can see a science in Interstellar at all.

Urban.