Recent Comments

They're just padding stats and running up the score.

-Kirk Herbstreit NCAA '14

They just got the "running up the score" part messed up and gave them to the other team.

GT got an interception, a forced fumble, a fumble recovery, and a safety all on one play. They were just padding stats.

Agreed. My favorite bar is in Ft. Lauderdale.

If not doing the bow and arrow leads to 5+ touchdowns a game, I'm all for not seeing it again (for that reason only. okay, maybe garbage time in January.)

Really the only oddity here is the Bristol combo. Would have been Maroon, Maroon, Military/White, Orange, and likely maroon the rest of the year (unless Frank retires again).

Perception depends on the distribution and whether you count away games, but it's not a "different helmet every week" as some like to say.

Can you discuss "Chromium 6" non-politically? Is it a real thing? Is it really a concern, and does your industry have an effect on it?

August Burns Red is incredible, I saw them at Warped a few years ago and have been following for awhile. Their drummer, Matt Greiner, is world class.

For those with 15mins free time and interested in stuffing the voting box for Isaiah, he's down about 700 as of late Thursday night.

An all out assault on the box could bring it home for him.

1.) I would love to see where you get this result, on the average year the amount of eruptions is approximately 35. This is an average trend, it's a fact, it cannot be argued. This includes both active and dormant volcanoes that are still emitting by lava (google it). Regardless the average output of volcanoes per year is somewhere around 200 million tons of CO2 which, yes seems like a good chunk. But it absolutely falls in comparison to human releases which come into a whopping 26.8 billion tons per year. Do a little math and the volcano output comes out to less than 1% of carbon emissions, which is totally short of making a difference.

http://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/archive/2007/07_02_15.html

if you don't trust the government I'll be more than happy to dig up some papers and show you some results from research myself (my research isn't pertinent to this what so ever so I am a completely unbiased source trust me)
Likewise check out this site I have some of my students doing for a lab coming up, it calculates your carbon footprint. Take that average and multiply it by the human population (7.4 billion) if the average person lived like the average American it would be even worse. Trust me I'm guilty of it too, I don't live this hippy recycle everything and save power all of the time lifestyle, buuuuuuuut its not a good look fersure.

http://www.nature.org/greenliving/carboncalculator/

2.) Yes the Earth has been going through these phases and many people also argue the solar maxima and minima being a factor (trust me its not I've done direct research on this jank and solar flares impact on the climate in undergrad....which GO HOKIES was cool as hell). But to say we're in one of those phases is not a good excuse....if that is the case we're in for the sharpest temperature drop in the history of forever. Our temperature is growing at an exponential rate rather than a sinusoidal rate. That is take a nearby calculator and plot y = sin(x) vs y = 10^x and note the difference. Temperatures have reached a higher peak than ever under our current atmosphere. Yes there was a trend, a great one, but it has completely shattered in the last 100 or so years, which has coupled with a boom in the population and also a massive spike in the carbon emissions from factories and other sources. Coupled with the fact that we know and have proven that carbon dioxide holds in radiation better seems to point to pretty definitive evidence that yes CO2 is heating things up more and at a faster rate than ever before. The fact that the Sahara desert has shifted has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the atmosphere but rather what I would assume would be the jets shifting. The amazon exists right on the equator, life can exist on the equator. That's a thing. Likewise even if it didn't have to do with this and had to do with Earths orbit, that doesn't mean the Earth on a whole is receiving or losing more radiation. Seasonality determines a lot of our weather patterns. Case and point if the tilt were off and for whatever reason storms didn't form over the Sahara during the summer we would never get hurricanes. It's a very unique system that requires the perfect variables (IE warm water and strong storms coming off the Sahara). My point is that even if the tilt was off, that would not effect GLOBAL temperatures year round, its not like the Sahara is suddenly putting off all of this extra heat to make the difference

3.) SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO FALSE. Companies (real estate and the like) are hiring meteorologists to determine sea levels rising. At the current rate (this just in it might even speed up)
http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/ocean/critical-issues-sea-level-rise/

I think national geographic is pretty reputable, if not once more I can dig around for some scientific papers with scientific evidence (remember I work with these guys I have access to anything and everything). Even the lower estimate of 2.5 feet puts a good chunk of Miami and parts of NYC under water, sure its not going to be overnight but something has to be done about this. Engineers are going to have their work cut out for them keeping these cities afloat A la the Netherlands. And as mentioned below no this is not a complete analogy, water will be added in this scenario. Worse yet, what a lot of people don't understand is the shifting of the jet stream. These are really really really driven by the jet stream, and basically influence weather globally. If this shifts expect hurricane positions to shift and rainfall positions to shift which could shift the positions of deserts and flooding and lakes. This could further put major cities underwater and put some cities in the middle of deserts (BOTH BAD ECONOMICALLY). The point that all of this is driven from is the fact that antartica and the North Pole both have ice developing on top of them so when it melts it does in fact add to the ocean levels because its above land not above water. They're not just floating on the oceans, this means as the water melts it will be added to the oceans. Likewise as it melts, it melts quicker as there is less ice surrounding it to keep it cool. SCIENCE. Seriously you want an experiment take a 2' x 2' block of ice record how long it takes to melt the first tablespoon. Then record how long it takes to melt the next...so on and so forth.

http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-i...

Please read the whole article and not just the title theres legitimate concerns that we could be facing an irreversible trend here shortly that sees the poles shrinking and never turning back. Increased snow fall is covering our flaws right now to the naked eye but the evidence is there if you look hard enough. The polar ice caps are shrinking and once that threshold gets overcome (growth versus shrinkage) we're in some serious shit

4.) I am completely on board with you here, I agree there are better ways. Unfortunately if there's one thing we're really good at its arguing for a really really long time and then doubling down saying "Told ya so" until the issue has come and its even harder to cope with at this point. Fact of the matter is though that this could be a real issue for my generation and the generation after. Its scary, and its not a scare tactic. That being said the first time in the last....long time, CO2 emissions decreased in a year was 2015, and ironically the economy spurred that year. LETS NOT MAKE THIS POLITICAL but iunno how much of an impact that actually plays

I'm sorry if this came off as offensive in any way shape or form your edits got your point across a lot better and I'm more than happy to have a serious discussion about this. I respect your opinion and would love to discuss this further and have a very respectful conversation regarding the topic as you are handling yourself with a very level head!!!!

Chachl or is Chachi, let me drop some straight knowledge on you. I actually studied solar variability a lot in undergrad (totes by accident basically around the water cooler with another undergrad at SPACE@VT). Basically we use satellites to study solar intensity IE which measures how much radiation is coming out of the sun. (It was through an instrument called EVE...cant remember the exact satellite, blame the 3 years and booze) basically though while we do have a solar maxima and minimum (every 11 years) basically all that functions to show is an increase or decrease in solar flare amounts not energy. If there is a change in energy its so minute we hardly notice and it can be ignored (think of it as a difference of 10 cm when your GPS directs you to your friends house). The instruments studying it are REALLY accurate trust me on this. Historically we dont have many instruments studying incoming radiation (because that'd take a global network or a satellite system) however we do have global temperature records from people and from ice cores both of which have accurately displayed temperature trends. (I can cover how these work if you'd like?). As for sea level changes checkidy check this out...

dunno how many arial pictures youll find from the 1800s but that chart is pretty telling.

http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/sealevel.html

NOAA is absolutely awesome at life and science trust them. Sea level rates since 1900 have increased on avg .06 per year, since 1990 the rate has been 1.2 inches....thats a pretty stark increase and it may not seem like much but people in bangledash literally have to move further upshore every year

Dadi didn't really play Whip though. He just blitzed 90% of the time

ITT was basically a giant scam that had the side effect of educating some people well enough for them to obtain gainful employment. Not seeing how that is a political topic...