Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » small mobile laptop rig - suggestions?
|
|
| Re: small mobile laptop rig - suggestions? [message #80337 is a reply to message #80335] |
Mon, 19 February 2007 13:53   |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
d by analyzing 928 abstracts, published in refereed
scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and listed in the ISI
database with the keywords "climate change" (9).
The 928 papers were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of
the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals,
methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position.
Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either
explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with
methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic
climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the
consensus position."
******
And finally, here is the Bush administration's perspective on the IPCC
report, from: http://www.energy.gov/environment/4704.htm
******
"The Administration welcomes the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change report, which was developed through thousands of hours of
research by leading U.S. and international scientists and informed by
significant U.S. investments in advancing climate science research,"
U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman said. "Climate change is a global
challenge that requires global solutions. Through President Bush's
leadership, the U.S. government is taking action to curb the growth of
greenhouse gas emissions and encouraging the development and deployment
of clean energy technologies here in the United States and across the
globe."
******
So we are at consensus, both scientific and political.
The discussion has moved on to what to do about the challenge of human
influenced global warming.
> On the otherhand, I reduce, reuse and recycle and have spent thousands of
> dollars making my home energy efficient and drive as clean and efficient a
> car as I can afford...I'm doing my part and will continue to due so...but
> not because of scare tactics and bullshit science but because it's the smart
> thing to do.
Great!
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:460edd9e$1@linux...
>> The fossil fuels lobby would love to make this about Al Gore instead of
>> about global warming. Because then anyone who doesn't happen like Al Gore
>> might be more inclined to bu
|
|
|
|
| Re: small mobile laptop rig - suggestions? [message #80338 is a reply to message #80337] |
Mon, 19 February 2007 13:59 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
y their spin.
>>
>> If you don't happen to like Al Gore, check out the actual science. Try and
>> avoid the spin from the fossil fuels lobby if you can. Stick with facts
>> and assess the risks yourself.
>>
>> Here are a couple of useful web sites:
>>
>> http://www.realclimate.org/
>>
>> http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>> Don Nafe wrote:
>>> The man who invented the internet wouldn't know a scientific fact if it
>>> was weighed down with 2000 lb weight and dropped on his chicken little
>>> head!
>>>
>>> DOn
>>>
>>> "Bill Lorentzen" <bill@lorentzen.ws> wrote in message
>>> news:460ec4f9@linux...
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6IPHmJWmDk&mode=related& amp;search=
>>>>
>>>> It's a British documentary showing another viewpoint about global
>>>> warming and CO2. It's a viewpoint that is different from that of the man
>>>> who invented the internet...
>>>>
>I've wondered about this here before, but I may be getting more serious about
it:
I've been running Paris on a Mac G4, which means I'm stuck in OS 9. That
means I can't use any of the newer Waves and UAD-1 plugins because they only
write their software for OS 10. So, if I switch to PC I'll be able to use
the new plugins and hopefully will be rid of the intermitent weird noises
I get w/ UAD-1 plugins.
SO, can anyone give me an idea how much I'd have to spend to put together
a rock solid state-of-the-current-art PC to run my audio stuff on? I'd also
need a new stereo editing/mastering program. What do you folks suggest?
I assume I can still use my two Samsung LCD monitors and my Magma 13 slot
expansion chassis. Can a PC network thru my Apple Airport system to get
online, print, etc?
Sorry for so many stupid questions. I am, indeed, a PC idiot!
Gantt
"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>
>XP home
>rod
>"Gantt Kushner" <ganttmann@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>DAMN! Another reason to think about switching platforms... What version
>>of Windows are you using?
>>
>>gantt
>>
>>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Running 4.5 here, on a PC with Paris. That's the latest, (except for the
>>latest
>>>latest, with the Helios) with all the Neve stuff. Runs great.
>>>Rod
>>>"Gantt Kushner" <ganttmann@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>This raises a question that I've been wondering about for a while now
>-
>>>What
>>>>is the most recent version of the UAD-1 FX you PC guys are able to use?
>>>
>>>>Can the Neve EQ's and comps run in Paris on PC? On Mac we're stuck back
>>>>in UAD-1 v.3.9.
>>>>
>>>>Gantt
>>>>
>>>>"Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Tom. I'd be real interested in what you find out. I'm tempted to buy
>it
>>>>before
>>>>>the 31st (tomorrow) if it works, but if there's something that breaks
>>it
>>>>>in Paris, the...NOT.
>>>>>Anyone else been able to use this in Paris on a PC???
>>>>>Rod
>>>>
>>>
>>
>DC wrote:
> Remember, in the 1970's the same people were squealing
> about global cooling.
That's pretty funny, Don. Who were those "same people" and what speech
impediment caused the "squealing" that you think we all remember?
What I
|
|
|
|
| Re: small mobile laptop rig - suggestions? [message #80339 is a reply to message #80338] |
Mon, 19 February 2007 14:18 |
excelav
Messages: 2130
Registered: July 2005
Location: Metro Detroit
|
Senior Member |
|
|
remember about the 70's is some pretty cool music.
Anyway, here's some info on the stock mid century global cooling objection.
From: http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/4/14560/6189
"Objection: There was global cooling in the '40s, '50s, and '60s, even
while human greenhouse-gas emissions were rising. Clearly, temperature
is not being driven by CO2.
Answer: None of the advocates of the theory of anthropogenic global
warming claim that CO2 is the only factor controlling temperature in the
ocean-atmosphere climate system. It is a large and complex system,
responsive on many different timescales, subject to numerous forcings.
AGW only makes the claim that CO2 is the primary driver of the warming
trend seen over the last 100 years. This rise has not been smooth and
steady -- nor would it be expected to be.
(graphic, go look at the link to see it)
If you look at the temperature record for the 1990s, you'll notice a
sharp drop in '92, '93, and '94. This is the effect of massive amounts
of SO2 ejected into the stratosphere by Mount Pinatubo's eruption. That
doesn't mean CO2 took a holiday and stopped influencing global
temperatures; it only means that the CO2 forcing was temporarily
overwhelmed by another, opposite forcing.
The situation is similar to the cooling seen in the '40s and '50s.
During this period, the CO2 warming (a smaller forcing at the time) was
temporarily overwhelmed by by other factors, perhaps foremost among them
an increase in human particulates and aerosol pollution. Pollution
regulations and improved technology saw a decrease in this latter kind
of emissions over the '60s and '70s, and as the air cleared, the CO2
signal again emerged and took over. Below, courtesy of Global Warming
Art, is an image of the current understanding of the factors and their
influence for the climate of the past century.
(graphic)
As the graph shows, in addition to aerosol pollution (the sulphate
line), volcanic influences were increasingly negative during the period
of global cooling, and solar forcing slightly declined. All forcings
taken together and run through the model are a very good match for the
observations. (Please see the source page for details of what model and
what study this image is derived from.)
Rather than confounding the climate consensus, mid-century cooling is
actually a good test for the climate models, one they are passing quite
convincingly.
Addendum: The opposing effect of cooling from airborne pollutants is
often referred to as "Global Dimming", and Real Climate has a couple of
articles on it:
Global Dimming?
Global Dimming II
One emerging concern is that as the pollution causing this effect is
gradually cleaned up, we may see even greater greenhouse gas warming."
Worse, the ice core evidence shows
> that increases in carbon dioxide level historically follows warming
> not precedes it. Carbon may not be the problem.
That's unlikely.
From: http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/12/22/231145/76
"Objection: In glacial-interglacial cycles, CO2 concentration lags
behind temperature by centuries. Clearly, CO2 does not cause
temperatures to rise; temperatures cause CO2 to rise.
Answer: When viewed coarsely, historical CO2 levels and temperature show
a tight correlation. However, a closer examination of the CH4, CO2, and
temperature fluctuations recorded in the Antarctic ice core records
reveals that, yes, temperature moved first.
Nevertheless, it is misleading to say that temperature rose and then,
hundreds of years later, CO2 rose. These warming periods lasted for
5,000 to 10,000 years (the cooling periods lasted more like 100,000
years!), so for the majority of that time (90% and more), temperature
and CO2 rose together. This remarkably detailed archive of
climatological evidence clearly allows for CO2 acting as a cause for
rising temperatures, while also revealing it can be an effect of them.
(graphic)
The current understanding of those cycles is that changes in orbital
parameters (the Milankovich and other cycles) caused greater amounts of
summer sunlight to fall in the northern hemisphere. This is a small
forcing, but it caused ice to retreat in the north, which changed the
albedo. This change -- reducing the amount of white, reflective ice
surface -- led to further warmth, in a feedback effect. Some number of
centuries after that process started, CO2 concentrations in the
atmosphere began to rise, which amplified the warming trend even further
as an additional feedback mechanism.
(You can go here for a discussion of exactly this question by climate
scientists, with greater technical detail and full references to the
scientific literature.)
So it is correct that CO2 did not trigger the warmings, but it
definitely contributed to them -- and according to climate theory and
model experiments, greenhouse gas forcing was the dominant factor in the
magnitude of the ultimate change.
This raises a warning for the future: we may well see additional natural
CO2 come out of the woodwork as whatever process took place repeatedly
over the last 650K years begins to play out again. The likely candidates
are out-gassing from warming ocean waters, carbon from warming soils,
and methane from melting permafrost."
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.comGlobal warming is not being denied by anyone who reads the data. The
earth is clearly warming, according to actual measurements.
The science of how CO2 helps trap heat in a "greenhouse effect&quo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: small mobile laptop rig - suggestions? [message #80343 is a reply to message #80341] |
Mon, 19 February 2007 16:08 |
Aaron Allen
Messages: 1988
Registered: May 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
/>
>>> so...but not because of scare tactics and bullshit science but because
>>> it's the smart thing to do.
>>
>> I think that's to be applauded and I don't disagree that some of the
>> models that arebeing put out there (by both sides) are flawed, but to me,
>> it's one of those obvious things and I just don't get how something so
>> relavent as global pupulation can be overlooked. It's as idiotic as when I
>> hear people saying that we *started* a war in Iraq when the war that was
>> started by Sadaam never ended. The fundamental facts are being overlooked
>> for the sake of political posturing while a very real disaster looms on
>> the horizon because there is no commonality of purpose..
>>
>
>Sorry if I left the impression that everyone in fossil fuels is ignorant
about global warming, far from it. Thanks for clarifying, Deej!
I agree that we should be using the opportunities we have with our
finite fossil fuel resources to lay the groundwork for the smoothest
possible transition to a renewable energy strategy.
This will probably require people getting out of their partisan fighting
stances and well worn rhetorical grooves and actually working together.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
PS. You might want to double check your population figures:
http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/world.html
DJ wrote:
> Global warming is very real IMO.
>
> Even the people in the fossil fuels business (me, for instance) know that
> they produce sulphur based pollutants and C02. The only way, IMHO, to
> explain away global warming is to explaining away the theory that C02
> doesn't cause it. I ain't buying that one. Those who try to compare what is
> happening now to what has happened in the past with climate change are
> missing one serious fundamental.......never in the past have there been so
> people on this planet burning so much carbon and never before have we had
> the science to live as long as we do now, and for our spawn to survive the
> in such staggering numbers. Also, if you stop and think about it, up until
> 50 years ago, we had major disease epidemics that culled the global
> populations drastically and systematically and some pretty devastating wars
> on a fairly regular basis that also culled the population, especially in
> continental Europe and Asia, thus delaying the exponential population
> explosion that we have seen over the last 30 years or so. I
|
|
|
|
| Re: small mobile laptop rig - suggestions? [message #80344 is a reply to message #80343] |
Mon, 19 February 2007 17:37 |
Chris Ludwig
Messages: 868
Registered: May 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
n 1970, the world
> population was 39 billion and change. right now it's estimated to exceed 67
> billion. All of these folks are competing for and using vcarbon based energy
> resources (and farting on a regular basis ;o).
>
> The solutions we're proposing right now are too little too late (again IMO)
> There are ways to reduce energy consumption but this will add to the costs
> that none of us want to pay. At some point, diminishing returns will be
> reached and alternative energy sources will start look more competitive. The
> bigger problem is that the point of diminishing returns is quickly being
> reached as far as global supply is concerned (yeah....that peak oil
> voodoo...too bad it's as real as the day is long). This is already the
> driving factor in our effort to survive in the brave new global economy.
> It's gonna be expensive no matter what though. We are already starting to
> see the price of products based on corn as food to rise as the shift to
> ethanol starts to ramp up. the only way to sustain anything like the economy
> we have right now and become energy independent would be to build new
> refineries here,, build coal fired power plants, nuclear energy and drill
> every drop and bubble of oil and natural gas that we have here within our
> continental soveriegnty while rolling huge amount of the revenue from the
> sale of that to alternative energy R&D. Big problem there.......the energy
> interests won't do it and the environmentalists won't do it so we're gonna
> be hosed in 20 years, if not *much sooner*.
>
> the real problem is that there are just too many of *us*. I think we're
> getting ready so see some stuff right out of the worst imaginable horror
> movie that the most twisted mind could dream up.
>
> Mother nature has always had a way of levelling our karma and our doomsday
> religiousity will do the rest. I've always believed that things happen if
> enough energy is directed toward the particular end one is trying to
> achieve. Well.........lots of folks believe that Armageddon is inevitable
> and by god, it's our duty to make sure that it happens the *right* way so
> that you go to hell and I don't.
>
> shit!!!!....where'd I put my meds?
>
> ;oP
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:460edd9e$1@linux...
>> The fossil fuels lobby would love to make this about Al Gore instead of
>> about global warming. Because then anyone who doesn't happen like Al Gore
>> might be more inclined to buy their spin.
>>
>> If you don't happen to like Al Gore, check out the actual science. Try and
>> avoid the spin from the fossil fuels lobby if you can. Stick with facts
>> and assess the risks yourself.
>>
>> Here are a couple of useful web sites:
>>
>> http://www.realclimate.org/
>>
>> http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>> Don Nafe wrote:
>>> The man who invented the internet wouldn't know a scientific fact if it
>>> was weighed down with 2000 lb weight and dropped on his chicken little
>>> head!
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: small mobile laptop rig - suggestions? [message #80350 is a reply to message #80341] |
Mon, 19 February 2007 21:29 |
JCampbell
Messages: 18
Registered: September 2006
|
Junior Member |
|
|
have at most 3 PCI slots. The rest are
>>PCI-e. So if you have a more than 2 card Paris system your SOL.
>>
>>
>>Chris
>>
>>
>>Gantt Kushner wrote:
>>> My wife has an HP laptop for work, running Windows XP Media and XP Pro.
> Are
>>> there PCI expansion chassis that can make a laptop work w/ Paris? I've
> seen
>>> questions about this, but I don't recall if anyone's tried it...
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Gantt
>>>
>>> "Gantt Kushner" <ganttmann@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've wondered about this here before, but I may be getting more serious
>>>>
>>> about
>>>
>>>> it:
>>>>
>>>> I've been running Paris on a Mac G4, which means I'm stuck in OS 9.
> That
>>>> means I can't use any of the newer Waves and UAD-1 plugins because they
>>>>
>>> only
>>>
>>>> write their software for OS 10. So, if I switch to PC I'll be able to
> use
>>>> the new plugins and hopefully will be rid of the intermitent weird
>>>> noises
>>>> I get w/ UAD-1 plugins.
>>>>
>>>> SO, can anyone give me an idea how much I'd have to spend to put
>>>> together
>>>> a rock solid state-of-the-current-art PC to run my audio stuff on? I'd
>>>>
>>> also
>>>
>>>> need a new stereo editing/mastering program. What do you folks
>>>> suggest?
>>>> I assume I can still use my two Samsung LCD monitors and my Magma 13
> slot
>>>> expansion chassis. Can a PC network thru my Apple Airport system to
> get
>>>> online, print, etc?
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for so many stupid questions. I am, indeed, a PC idiot!
>>>>
>>>> Gantt
>>>>
>>>> "Rod Lincoln" <rlincoln@nospam.kc.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> XP home
>>>>> rod
>>>>> "Gantt Kushner" <ganttmann@comcast.net>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed May 06 13:25:43 PDT 2026
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.46809 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
