New efforts!

[LaughingAlex]

One thing that needs to be changed back to what it was originally was this: the voting of someone out of a league when you are running an Incarnate Trial.  It used to be that the League star holder could kick anyone at anytime.  Now granted that can lead to some abuse of power, but some people would just not care about the voting and vote no to keep someone in the league that was being disruptive.  I ended up seeing that people who should have been voted out that end up staying being assigned to a solo team for the rest of the trial if they didn't shape up their behavior.

Also the system needed a tune up so that whoever had the league star before everyone zones in retains the the league star after they enter the trial instead of having to ask repeatedly for the star back.

Well, to prevent leader abuse of kicking, world of warcraft from what I read, implemented an anti-kick measure in that, someone kicking players to frequently would get an ever increasing cooldown for how long they have to wait before kicking someone.  So to prevent abuse one could implement that.  At least city of heroes had the star system, a player could label someone locally as a jerk if that player was really crossing the line.  I had a modest list for that.

[Power Gamer]

Was kicking really a prob in CoX?

I can't remember kicking more than a handful over 7 years, and I was only kicked 3 or 4 times.

[Sinistar]

Was kicking really a prob in CoX?

I can't remember kicking more than a handful over 7 years, and I was only kicked 3 or 4 times.

Needing to kick someone all the time wasn't the problem, it was that voting system they put into leagues/trials where everyone had to vote.  A rather unreliable way to boot someone that was being disruptive.

[Sinistar]

Well, to prevent leader abuse of kicking, world of warcraft from what I read, implemented an anti-kick measure in that, someone kicking players to frequently would get an ever increasing cooldown for how long they have to wait before kicking someone.  So to prevent abuse one could implement that.  At least city of heroes had the star system, a player could label someone locally as a jerk if that player was really crossing the line.  I had a modest list for that.

Yeah the star system was a great way to remind me of certain people.

[Joshex]

I want the facts and not the hype of a global warming/cooling chicken little panic.

We live near a variable star. It waxes and wanes and while man may have some affect on our climate - we have only been industrialized for 200 years. Climate is measured in 100's of thousands of years and what I am showing is everything about the warming and cooling is within the natural variation the sun has already shown.

I know not everyone is a space geek - but I love the stars and how the galaxy works. Now if you want to argue pollution - I am right with you on that. I don't however see anything we have done in 200 years to override the thousands of years of normal cycles in heating and cooling.

Ok Iron, out of all the things I could have replied to I reply to yours because I already posted a long article on face book so I can copypasta.

Spoiler for Hidden:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-warming-media-propaganda/5364444

"warmers" take advantage of the fact that most people have never been and will never go to an arctic climate to see the situation for themselves. And most people who do go only go in the 'summer week' because there is less chance of bad weather.

Whats even funnier is that we just got over a historically cold summer, and that the winters are not getting progressively warmer. If global warming were real then winters temperature averages would not be rubber-banding (getting warmer then colder hovering around the same mean temperature) and we WOULD NOT have a cold or cool summer.

It's a scam, not just any scam; a government reliance scam (meant to make people fear nature and rely on corrupt governments to fix nature), one that pulls in billions of pounds/dollars a year for research.

there is very little truth to global warming claims, if at all in some cases.

global warming claims that 'green house gasses' emitted by humans burning things and farm animals are causing temperatures to warm because they build-up in the high atmosphere and cause the entire planet to warm and never dissipate or go away. - flawed statement for 5 natural scientific facts

1: Green house gasses- flawed there is no sort of magic gas which traps heat, it can refract or bend heat but not trap it, the closest that comes to this is clouds made of H20 which because of their density and 'crystaline' frozen particles have a greater chance to reflect heat.

2: Humans (the surfs) burning things and cattle farts (those damned do-it-yourself farmers who make money without paying the rich). When approached about Carbon Monoxide (the product of cars burning petrol) Warmers state that cattle farts are much worse and in more quantity than all the billions of gallons of petrol burned a day. - this is one of those things only city dwellers would believe because they mis-guess the size and nature of cattle farms having never seen them.

3: They build up? 1;trees breathe carbon based gasses as well as other 'green house gasses' they use photosynthesis to make it into oxygen and other harmless substances which we breathe/eat and make into carbon gasses and waste, it's a cycle. 2; Outer-space is cold, around -400 degree Celsius cold (the temperature of a comet) the upper atmosphere is cold because of earths heat fighting against this cold and losing. The lower atmosphere where planes fly (30k feet up) is also cold! in fact it's too cold for even greenhouse gasses!, when gasses become too cold they become heavier and fall! some mix with the clouds and become acid rain (which gets absorbed and digested by plants). Either way they sink down to tree level and get absorbed through the air or ground.

4: The high atmosphere, they never get there! only extremely light gasses can reach this height such as ozone (O3), being light they are not dense and cannot reflect heat or light, they refract it but only very slightly.

5: they don't go away? yes they do because they cool and fall and get absorbed by plants.

end of arguments there is no way to prove global warming true!

the only factor that could warm the planet is out of the government's reach to fix, and it is a scientific fact "the earth gets one inch closer to the sun every year" but as we are miles upon miles upon miles away from the sun we wont reach it in the lives of the entire human race, in fact we probably wont reach where Venus is currently for several million years. yes it's true we could see some negative effects slowly over time even in our life time the temperatures might raise a couple degrees in average and UV rays will get stronger.

global cooling, no data yet.

[Noyjitat]

Can we move the political global warming and climate change crap to general chat please? It's fine to debate and discuss politics imo, I just think it doesn't belong in the 'task force hail mary' section.

[LaughingAlex]

Ok Iron, out of all the things I could have replied to I reply to yours because I already posted a long article on face book so I can copypasta.

Spoiler for Hidden:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-warming-media-propaganda/5364444

"warmers" take advantage of the fact that most people have never been and will never go to an arctic climate to see the situation for themselves. And most people who do go only go in the 'summer week' because there is less chance of bad weather.

Whats even funnier is that we just got over a historically cold summer, and that the winters are not getting progressively warmer. If global warming were real then winters temperature averages would not be rubber-banding (getting warmer then colder hovering around the same mean temperature) and we WOULD NOT have a cold or cool summer.

It's a scam, not just any scam; a government reliance scam (meant to make people fear nature and rely on corrupt governments to fix nature), one that pulls in billions of pounds/dollars a year for research.

there is very little truth to global warming claims, if at all in some cases.

global warming claims that 'green house gasses' emitted by humans burning things and farm animals are causing temperatures to warm because they build-up in the high atmosphere and cause the entire planet to warm and never dissipate or go away. - flawed statement for 5 natural scientific facts

1: Green house gasses- flawed there is no sort of magic gas which traps heat, it can refract or bend heat but not trap it, the closest that comes to this is clouds made of H20 which because of their density and 'crystaline' frozen particles have a greater chance to reflect heat.

2: Humans (the surfs) burning things and cattle farts (those damned do-it-yourself farmers who make money without paying the rich). When approached about Carbon Monoxide (the product of cars burning petrol) Warmers state that cattle farts are much worse and in more quantity than all the billions of gallons of petrol burned a day. - this is one of those things only city dwellers would believe because they mis-guess the size and nature of cattle farms having never seen them.

3: They build up? 1;trees breathe carbon based gasses as well as other 'green house gasses' they use photosynthesis to make it into oxygen and other harmless substances which we breathe/eat and make into carbon gasses and waste, it's a cycle. 2; Outer-space is cold, around -400 degree Celsius cold (the temperature of a comet) the upper atmosphere is cold because of earths heat fighting against this cold and losing. The lower atmosphere where planes fly (30k feet up) is also cold! in fact it's too cold for even greenhouse gasses!, when gasses become too cold they become heavier and fall! some mix with the clouds and become acid rain (which gets absorbed and digested by plants). Either way they sink down to tree level and get absorbed through the air or ground.

4: The high atmosphere, they never get there! only extremely light gasses can reach this height such as ozone (O3), being light they are not dense and cannot reflect heat or light, they refract it but only very slightly.

5: they don't go away? yes they do because they cool and fall and get absorbed by plants.

end of arguments there is no way to prove global warming true!

the only factor that could warm the planet is out of the government's reach to fix, and it is a scientific fact "the earth gets one inch closer to the sun every year" but as we are miles upon miles upon miles away from the sun we wont reach it in the lives of the entire human race, in fact we probably wont reach where Venus is currently for several million years. yes it's true we could see some negative effects slowly over time even in our life time the temperatures might raise a couple degrees in average and UV rays will get stronger.

global cooling, no data yet.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/07/climate-change-conservatives_n_6124028.html  Funny, proof of something I said earlier.

Truth is getting hurtful now, perhaps any climate discussion should be removed at this point?  Do you want me to bring the phosphorus out and really hurt both groups?  I'm sorry man but, that writing is so right-wing and blantly biased and tries to mix politics into the arguement as it has with that one.  Think i'll just, go play through the rest of spec ops now........

And is there anyone who wants to just remove the climate change posts from both sides?  The deniers will continue roaring beating their chests untill the other side gives up and anyone who does post anything to disprove them will find they just don't read the articles anyways and it's a huge derailment.

[LaughingAlex]

Can we move the political global warming and climate change crap to general chat please? It's fine to debate and discuss politics imo, I just think it doesn't below in the 'task force hail mary' section.

Not to mention lines are starting to get crossed, agree it'd be better just, removed.

[blacksly]

Will someone please turn off the sun for a 100 years so we can eliminate it as a factor?

Thank you.

That would be an interesting way to limit the variables.

[dwturducken]

http://www.theonion.com/video/in-the-know-coal-lobby-warns-wind-farms-may-blow-e,20876/

[pinballdave]

I will take a stab at this climate change... I believe that complex life in the ocean will become unviable sooner than the planet bakes from a climate change. The overfishing, pollution, predation of top tier organisms will reduce our seafood choices to clams, maybe oysters, plankton and krill, if you can find them. I believe this will lead to a famine of biblical proportions.

[Power Gamer]

Since I had that species-change operation last year to a blue whale, I guess I'm home free.

[Ryo Kinsaru]

Since it sounds inevitable, I will start thinning the shrimp, lobster, and tuna (sashimi, sushi) populations now so as to save future generations from knowing what they're missing, thereby eliminating any sense of loss.

[LaughingAlex]

http://www.theonion.com/video/in-the-know-coal-lobby-warns-wind-farms-may-blow-e,20876/

Made me laugh LOL.

[rebel 1812]

And alot of deniers had been debunked man, really you going to go there, here, of all places?  Firstly there is a reason climate change is CALLED climate change now rather than just global warming, because the warming of a few places can mean one place might cool due to changing air/water currents.  Thats to be expected.

Now, think for a few seconds about a larger ice cap, could that be a good thing?  Yes but does it mean we should pump more crap into the air and into the oceans?  No, because when the ice cap receeds again, it'll just be worst.

http://www.nature.com/news/climate-change-the-case-of-the-missing-heat-1.14525

So next time it receeds, and we pump more methane and carbon dioxide, do we really want to make it worst?  Heck, I honestly would rather emissions be cut simply because, do you know anyone who was around in the days the emissions were not regulated?  Have you even seen what cities look like when polution isn't kept in check?  Nasty stuff.

And I get a feeling you probably hate the guy but;
http://billmoyers.com/2014/05/16/eight-pseudo-scientific-climate-claims-debunked-by-real-scientists/

Debunked everything you just said, sorry.  Read about that months ago, but I get a feeling you'll believe what you want to, your wired that way.  Not the first of that, allignment to argue that and while you have strong points in other areas, you gotta learn to not give into only believing what you want to believe.  Some people are far better educated at the topic maybe you should, I don't know, listen to them. 

It also points out the land ice and the difference between land ice and sea ice.  Sea ice makes little to no difference on the ocean compared to land ice.  Very big difference.

Ironwolf seems the much more reasonable and educated of the two.  Alex's arguments all are appeals to authority.  The problem being our authorities are corrupt fat cats with an agenda. 

[Ironwolf]

If you read the article from NASA - THEY not me are saying there is a pause in warming and they can't explain it.

I am not a "denier" and the reason I said this was callng me names is that they - the true believers speak denier like calling someone a moron. I have some facts - I don't make predictions other than stating what we see now happened before in the solar cycle. I used NASA as often as possible because even though they do have some bias - they also have scientists that just want the facts and lay them out free of judgement.

I did the same with both my daughters and my grand daughters with smoking. I listed all the terrible health issues along with the facts about my dad's health when he had a heart attack - the doctor said - You are in good shape, you eat well, your weight is great and you smoke 3 packs of cigarettes a day - what do you think caused your heart attack?

My dad - so I have to quit smoking?

Doctor - you don't have to quit unless you want to live longer.

My dad quit.

[LaughingAlex]

Ironwolf seems the much more reasonable and educated of the two.  Alex's arguments all are appeals to authority.  The problem being our authorities are corrupt fat cats with an agenda.

So you say let the coorporations who only care about money to have the say?  :S

[Nyx Nought Nothing]

Ironwolf seems the much more reasonable and educated of the two.  Alex's arguments all are appeals to authority.  The problem being our authorities are corrupt fat cats with an agenda.

Yeah, it's all a hoax. You should listen to NASA scientists before actual climate scientists. i mean NASA is focused on actual rocket science and astronomy, and climate scientists and the NOAA are too focused on things like studying and analyzing stuff about the earth's climate like the shortsighted sillyheads they are.

On a related note we do, regardless of your stance on near term climate changes, anthropogenic or not, have only a few tens of millions of years before Earth becomes uninhabitable as the sun's output gradually increases and the inner edge of the "goldilocks zone" moves out beyond Earth's orbit. Of course the odds of humans still being around then is virtually nil, but it does mean that in time it will all become academic anyway.

[Sinistar]

A quote from Bablyon 5 Season 1:

Mary Ann Cramer: I have to ask you the same question people back home are asking about space these days. Is it worth it? Should we just pull back? Forget the whole thing as a bad idea, and take care of our own problems, at home.

Cmdr. Jeffrey Sinclair: No. We have to stay here. And there's a simple reason why. Ask ten different scientists about the environment, population control, genetics, and you'll get ten different answers, but there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on. Whether it happens in a hundred years or a thousand years or a million years, eventually our Sun will grow cold and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us. It'll take Marilyn Monroe, and Lao-Tzu, and Einstein, and Morobuto, and Buddy Holly, and Aristophanes, and - all of this - all of this - was for nothing. Unless we go to the stars.

[Dr. Gemini]

Yeah, it's all a hoax. You should listen to NASA scientists before actual climate scientists. i mean NASA is focused on actual rocket science and astronomy, and climate scientists and the NOAA are too focused on things like studying and analyzing stuff about the earth's climate like the shortsighted sillyheads they are.

Actually, NASA scientists include actual climate scientists. In fact, one of the biggest American activists for man-caused climate change, James Hansen, was a NASA scientist for a couple decades until last year.

So, you should listen to NASA scientists and "actual climate scientists", you just should not take what they say at face value. Science is no different than any other field. While the romantic view is of people who spend their lives trying to find out the truth of the universe, the fact is they are just as agenda driven due to money and egos as everything else. If you ever look at so much of the science we take as truth today, ranging from how long ago humans came to the Americas to theoretical physics, the people who changed what was known at the time were, more often than not, harassed, ostracized, insulted, for times ranging from years to decades before their work was finally acknowledged as being the new standard. We see that in the anthropomorphic climate change debate in that there are only two stances, you're with us or against us. It's difficult for a scientist who wants to have a career, or funding, to take any point of view but agree when even taking a neutral point of view gets you called a denier.

If you want to know what is really going on, you have to research for yourself, and look at all points of view, and apply critical thinking. Science is not created by majority opinion, it's created by evidence. That's what's missing in creating a link between man and climate change. The usual "proof" boils down to man creates greenhouse gasses therefore man is changing the climate. That is no different than my saying paper kills you because every dead person has had contact with paper. It ignores every other factor involved.