atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#1664: Extended solar minimum!

Today finally realizes that we're in an extended solar minimum. In the process of saying so they demonstrate a bit of bias. I can't link to the post, so here's the whole thing:
The sun is entering its 27th consecutive day of spotlessness, quiet and calm.


Indeed, the sun is being remarkably quiet. After a promising eruption of sunspots in early July raised hopes that Solar Cycle 24 was gaining strength, the sun reversed course and retreated to peaceful slumber. Only four weeks after behemoth sunspot 1024 amazed onlookers, solar minimum has never seemed deeper. The sun's 77% rate of spotlessness in 2009 confirms the ongoing minimum as a century class event.
"After a promising eruption...raised hopes...." WTF?

Anyone who is actually interested in science would/should be salivating over the notion of an extended solar minimum. With all the scientific instrumentation we've got at our disposal, an extended solar minimum gives us an interesting peek into the workings of the sun. For the most part science advances because of anomalies, the things which don't fit the standard models or the typical behaviors.

Why are they so eager for a solar maximum? Given the site's uncritical acceptance of man-made global warming, could it be they are fervently hoping an extended solar minimum won't disprove their notions before they can be enacted into law?

* * *

Neil Armstrong's government travel voucher for July 1969 includes his moon trip. Since he was aboard a government vehicle, though, he was not reimbursed for mileage.

* * *

Dick asserts that this is an argument for abortion-on-demand. I assert that this is an argument for making stupidity hurt a lot:
We live in a small house located in Arkansas, wich is barely enough room for all of us. I have no job or anny source of income so my sister pays for my rent, my phone bill, water bill, gas bill, ALL MY BILLS.
Woman has five children. Woman is a single mother, pregnant with a sixth, and is auctioning off naming rights for the sixth.

She didn't figure out what causes babies after the first two or so?

Dick's post is meant ironically; if I know him, he's saying the woman is so stupid that she is a walking argument for abortion-on-demand. But to those who take his post as saying, "This woman should be able to get abortions" let me say, you're a moron.

This woman could have aborted all (or any) of her kids had she wanted to. Abortion has been legal in the United States for 25 years. Clearly she does not want an abortion; obviously she is perfectly comfortable with the idea of pumping out children she cannot support and leaning on her sister for everything.

This makes her egregiously stupid. Look, one child, maybe two--the human reproductive process is robust and not easily defeated, and stuff happens. But six kids?

And while we're about it, where the fucking hell are the kids' fathers?

* * *

Two hundredths of an inch?

1/50" is not very big. Understand, most rulers only go down to 1/16"; sometimes you'll get one which is ruled to 1/32" in the first (and maybe last) inch. Anything smaller is rare, though I have seen some ruled to 1/64".

To see what 1/50" looks like I had to get out one of my micrometers. It's the thickness of about six sheets of 20 lb bond copier paper.

So I have to ask:

a) Why the hell does the trench have to be the exact width of the cable? Can it not be larger than the cable?

b) Why didn't anyone check this nonsense while the shit was being built? It seems to me that it would have been a very simple prospect for someone to take an outside micrometer (or a telescope gauge and an inside micrometer) and check the steel liner before it was set in concrete.

Perhaps someone did just that and figured, "Eh, 0.002" ain't that big a deal."

No, 0.002 should not be "that big a deal" but apparently the people who design the power systems for these large cranes are screeching morons. As are the people who put in this cable trench.

* * *

I ought to just get it over with and simply go up on a tower with a megaphone and yell YOU'RE ALL SCREECHING MORONS! It'll piss some people off but at least it's efficient.

* * *

I like using "screeching" as an intensifier for "moron". First, it's euphonious; second, it provides a wonderful context. The mental image it gives me perfectly fits my opinion of people who are that woefully stupid.

Artist's conception of a screeching moron:

* * *

(actually I grabbed that from 4chan several weeks ago.)

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 1 comment