Climate Change

[CRGreathouse]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM

[cheesehead]

(Trying to turn back from the "warring" to the "warming":)

- - -

"Rising sea levels: Survival tips from 5000 BC"

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...html?full=true

WITH rising seas lapping at coastal cities and threatening to engulf entire islands in the not-too-distant future, it's easy to assume our only option will be to abandon them and head for the hills. There may be another way, however. Archaeological sites in the Caribbean, dating back to 5000 BC, show that some ancient civilisations had it just as bad as anything we are expecting. Yet not only did they survive a changing coastline and more storm surges and hurricanes: they stayed put and successfully adapted to the changing world. Now archaeologists are working out how they managed it and finding ways that we might learn from their example.

The sea-level rise that our ancestors dealt with had nothing to do with human-induced climate change, of course: it was a hangover from the last ice age. As the massive ice sheet that lay on North America melted, the continent was buoyed upwards. As a result, the northern Caribbean, on the other end of the same tectonic plate, sank, making seas in the region rise up to 5 metres over 5000 years.

Although the cause of this rise was very different to what we face today, the effects were probably the same. Rising waters not only nibble away at coastlines, they also mean that hurricanes and storm surges reach further inland. Higher seas also mean that groundwater becomes contaminated with salt, and as the water table rises the waterlogged land becomes more likely to flood.

Despite these changes, excavations of ancient houses in what is now the province of Ciego de Avila in northern Cuba suggest that the region was inhabited between 5000 BC and just 300 years ago. One of the best-preserved ancient sites is the village of Los Buchillones (see image), now 150 metres out to sea, which was inhabited from AD 1260 until the mid-1600s by people known as the Taino. ...

. . .

So how did they survive as the waters rose? The first clue comes in the proverbial wisdom that every real estate agent knows: location, location, location. Palaeoclimatologist Matthew Peros of the University of Ottawa in Canada and his colleagues have taken sediment cores between the modern shore and the remains of the village, and these show that houses in Los Buchillones were built on stilts over a lagoon (see image). The land barrier that lay between the lagoon and the ocean would have provided the village with some protection from storm surges. Other settlements in the area were in similarly protected pockets, or built on the leeward side of hills.

Building in sheltered spots may seem an obvious precaution, but Cooper argues it's a crucial bit of know-how that the region has since lost. Modern towns and cities, he says, tend to be in more vulnerable, exposed places.

Perhaps surprisingly, building over water may also have made the homes less at risk of flooding. While living in the hills or on higher ground inland may seem a safer bet as the coast becomes less predictable, flood water rushing down hillsides during storms can destroy even the sturdiest house. Building over the lagoon meant that flood water, whether rushing in from the sea or down from the land, could pass underneath the house, minimising damage. This approach seemed to work: radiocarbon dating of Taino posts has shown that they were in place for hundreds of years. What's more, the bark is still on the posts, which tells Cooper that they had never been knocked over and reset. "Unless you're an archaeologist, you can't remove them from the mud without the bark coming off," he says.

. . .

So don't sell that beachfront property short just yet. If it's properly protected by barrier islands, all we have to do is raise all those hotels and highrises up on stilts ...

[__HRB__]

1st 3 episodes:


Haven't seen E2 & E3 yet, E1 was kinda lame, but it took me a while to get used to King of the Hill, too.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by __HRB__

1st 3 episodes:

Don't post that here!
That is a link to stolen material. It is copyright. The torrent is not hulu or some other offical site. I would suggest that the mods snip your post between the legs.

[__HRB__]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

That is a link to stolen material. It is copyright. The torrent is not hulu or some other offical site. I would suggest that the mods snip your post between the legs.

Mr. Law & Order, how do I steal something that is on my DVR?

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by __HRB__

Mr. Law & Order, how do I steal something that is on my DVR?

If you are not familiar with the current state of affairs in regards to unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material via the internet, I would suggest that you bone up on it. Recording something on you VR (VC or DV) is fine, however distributing copies thereof (for profit or not) is generally not legal.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by __HRB__

Mr. Law & Order, how do I steal something that is on my DVR?

Mr Uneducated-in-intellectual-property-law: the topic in question has nothing to do with stealing (at least, not in either US or UK or EU jurisdictions) and everything to do with whether you, and through your actions, the people & organizations supporting mersenneforum.org are implicated in the distribution of copyrighted material without the permission, express or implied, of the legal owners of the copyright.

I could point you to the relevant legal documents in the UK and EU but as you are apparently in the US, I will leave it to you or one of your compatriots to uncover them so that you may read them.

As always, IANAL. However, I have studied the UK legislation in fine detail and I have talked to UK and US lawyers in some depth about intellectual property law as it applies in the UK and the US. Keeping abreast of IP law was a requirement in each of my previous two jobs.

Paul

[CRGreathouse]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

Recording something on you VR (VC or DV) is fine, however distributing copies thereof (for profit or not) is generally not legal.

In the US, even that right has become untested waters thanks to the DMCA. It is not a guaranteed right, unlike (say) the doctrine of first sale.

Originally Posted by xilman

Mr Uneducated-in-intellectual-property-law: the topic in question has nothing to do with stealing (at least, not in either US or UK or EU jurisdictions)

I agree. Theft is different from copyright infringement.

Originally Posted by xilman

I could point you to the relevant legal documents in the UK and EU but as you are apparently in the US, I will leave it to you or one of your compatriots to uncover them so that you may read them.

US law actually differs significantly from EU law in this respect. (And in many other ways: there's almost no equivalent to moral/author's rights, for example.) The relevant part here may be another part of the DMCA: the 'safe harbor'/takedown provisions.

[__HRB__]

Originally Posted by xilman

Mr Uneducated-in-intellectual-property-law

A law that regulates the ownership of ideas or concepts is absurd. And it's Mr. Uneducated-in-intellectual-property-law, Redcoat.

Originally Posted by xilman

I could point you to the relevant legal documents in the UK and EU but as you are apparently in the US, I will leave it to you or one of your compatriots to uncover them so that you may read them.

Please don't. I didn't have to read more than one page in the Bible either to decide that the contents are trash.

Originally Posted by xilman

As always, IANAL. However, I have studied the UK legislation in fine detail and I have talked to UK and US lawyers in some depth about intellectual property law as it applies in the UK and the US. Keeping abreast of IP law was a requirement in each of my previous two jobs.

The enforcement of IP laws is a subsidy for absurd business models, and I'm sorry to hear that you think you spent your time wisely by keeping abreast with them.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by __HRB__

And it's Mr. Uneducated-in-intellectual-property-law, Redcoat.

I defer to your greater knowledge of the American language. However, in English unadorned "Mr" is perfectly acceptable.

Paul

[__HRB__]

Originally Posted by xilman

However, in English unadorned "Mr" is perfectly acceptable.

Of course.

FYI, Redcoat is a slang term for an English soldier, made popular sometime around 1776.