He advocating a Citizen's Dividend of 17%. 17% of what I'm not sure, but the general idea of a citizen's dividend is that profits from government own commons, like oil drilling permits and royalities, mineral rights, timber rights, should be charged and paid out to citizens directly instead of going into government's general funds.
Typical retail clerk, probably per store policy, in a power outage will be to say "Can't do it." Can't/won't take cash because "the computers are down". You can tote up the costs and add the tax and have exact change, but they still won't make the effort to accept it because "the computers are down".
People without kids...if I worked there and said "Boss, I can't come to work today because I've got to take my turtle to the vet." or "Sorry I'm not productive today, I spent all night playing WoW and din't get any sleep."
Those excuses aren't materially different than "Got to take Susie to the pediatrician." or "Susie was crying all night so we didn't get any sleep." except for the whole kid thing.
Being out-of-the-office is being out-of-the-office, and being unproductive is being unproductive.
Does everyone have flexibility to take time off or be unproductive or just breeders?
Seems about right for the bean counters. But we have the same battle at home. I'm perfectly happy to let the in-house temps drop to 58F in winter, and I do when my wife is out of town. It's perfectly comfortable to me, but my wife would stab me in my sleep and burn my corpse for warmth if I did it when she was here. In summer 74F is about the maximum I'd like my house to be, and even then my wife is wearing a sweatshirt.
Wasn't making a determination on the use of the shotgun. That's immaterial to disagreeing with the comment: "If it didn't land, then it's not in your yard. If it is flying then it is in FAA airspace." That statement is false with or without the shotgun, except in so far as the shotgun was useful in determining the probable altitude of the drone as almost certainly being below 500 feet.
"Private landowners retain their right to exclusive use of the airspace for the reasonable enjoyment of their property up to 500 feet above their lands.[3]"
FAA airspace begins above 500 feet. No shotgun will knock down a drone at 500 ft, so the drone must have been below that, probably more like 50 feet, well within the "exclusive" zone.
It's relevant vis-a-vis people who complain we're "killing the earth". While it may be true that our actions may be very very bad for innocent flora & fauna around us, and a tragedy for humans, Nature has done the same thing before with other species. As a result, the Earth improved markedly for oxygen-breathing creatures like humans. Yeah, we came along a *lot* later, but if it hadn't happened before we would not be here at all.
AGW maybe (probably) bad for us and our fellow travelers, but indistinguishable long-term from what Nature does on her own. Perhaps 20M years from now some CO2-breathing lizard-plant-person might be writing a paper about the Great CO2 Extinction Event caused by the waste products of a (now extinct) bipedal mammal species right up there with the Great Oxygenation Extinction Event caused by the waste products of cyanobacteria.
Most of the "solutions" advocated for the "inevitable" problems predicted are simply extremely thinly veiled SJW wet dreams that don't do anything to actually help solve the problem or deal with a result.
Right after we get a global agreement to drop CO2 injection to 0, if we mean business, we can start that migration today. I mean, even if we somehow got society to stop burning stuff it'll still take a long time to recover, right? So the seas will continue to rise (despite what HRH Obama once claimed) and temps will still keep going up, so we've got to begin to plan for the inevitable negative consequences for the damage already done.
Governments should start denying building permits for any new structures or infrastructure that is within 70m of current sea level (which is how much sea level would rise if all the ice covering Antarctica, Greenland, and in mountain glaciers around the world were to melt). Government can also stop encouraging people from living in those zones through subsidized flood insurance.
Given that civilization now is doing quite a bit better than civilization was 150 years ago in many aspects, perhaps we could chose the temperature from 10 years ago instead of 150 years ago. Or why not the temperature when civilization started to take off, say about 4000 years ago. Or when "A major technological and cultural transition to modernity began approximately 1500 CE in western Europe, and from this beginning new approaches to science and law spread rapidly around the world." Wouldn't that be just as valid?
At least the person who made the point that 1850 is about the start of the industrial revolution and thus forms the starting point for humans dumping CO2 into the atmosphere made an effort.
Re: single temperature...I'm simply talking about the same temperature used in these discussions--if temperatures have increased 0.02 degrees C every year, whatever the temps used as the basis for that calculation. Stop being intentionally obtuse.
Free oxygen is toxic to obligate anaerobic organisms, and the rising concentrations may have wiped out most of the Earth's anaerobic inhabitants at the time. Cyanobacteria were therefore responsible for one of the most significant extinction events in Earth's history."
What's the relevance of that?
That humans will not be the first species on Earth to devastate the climate to the detriment of other species by overproducing atmospheric gases. Probably won't be the last either.
What is the temperature of the Earth *supposed* to be?
IOW, what is the *ideal* temperature for the planet, and while you're at it, show your work explaining how that particular number was derived.
It seems to me that the AGW folks chose temps circa 1850 or so as the gold standard, at least partly (but to me probably mostly) because that's about when decent measurements and record keeping began. Of course this ignores all temperature variations that preceded that.
They're kind like the Amish, who seem to have decided that technology circa 1850 or so is exactly the level of tech that is allowed. Why not technology circa 0AD--if Jesus didn't need the tech, why should the Amish?
If the AGW folks picked temps from about 15000 years ago, we'd *really* be in the dumper right? I mean, we'd have destroyed all that ice-pack covering swaths of North America, sea level would have risen 100ft, and the temp went up what? Like 8 degrees C? Talk about warming!
None of my comments should be construed to mean I think that humans are not contributing to climate change or that I'm fine with pollution. But this is nothing new, either.
Wikipedia: "The Great Oxygenation Event (GOE), also called the Oxygen Catastrophe, Oxygen Crisis, Oxygen Holocaust, Oxygen Revolution, or Great Oxidation, was the biologically induced appearance of dioxygen (O2) in Earth's atmosphere.[1] Geological, isotopic, and chemical evidence suggest that this major environmental change happened around 2.3 billion years ago (2.3 Ga). Cyanobacteria, which appeared about 200 million years before the GOE,[4] began producing oxygen by photosynthesis. Before the GOE, any free oxygen they produced was chemically captured by dissolved iron or organic matter. The GOE was the point when these oxygen sinks became saturated and could not capture all of the oxygen that was produced by cyanobacterial photosynthesis. After the GOE, the excess free oxygen started to accumulate in the atmosphere.
Free oxygen is toxic to obligate anaerobic organisms, and the rising concentrations may have wiped out most of the Earth's anaerobic inhabitants at the time. Cyanobacteria were therefore responsible for one of the most significant extinction events in Earth's history."
And it's gone on just fine. Sure a massive global overheating may kill off a lot of flora and fauna, humankind included. But I'm pretty sure the Earth will keep right on trucking and in a few dozen million years will have a whole new set of flora and fauna and perhaps new intelligent species.
Here I thought a guns was designed to fire a bullet at the target the operator points it at. No gun I own has ever killed any animals or people despite firing thousands of rounds, because the only thing I point them at are inanimate (paper, steel) targets.
Slashdot Mirror
There'd be calls of sexism, racism, every kind of -ism imaginable. People would be protesting at Google headquarters.
Something like this http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
He advocating a Citizen's Dividend of 17%. 17% of what I'm not sure, but the general idea of a citizen's dividend is that profits from government own commons, like oil drilling permits and royalities, mineral rights, timber rights, should be charged and paid out to citizens directly instead of going into government's general funds.
Typical retail clerk, probably per store policy, in a power outage will be to say "Can't do it." Can't/won't take cash because "the computers are down". You can tote up the costs and add the tax and have exact change, but they still won't make the effort to accept it because "the computers are down".
People without kids...if I worked there and said "Boss, I can't come to work today because I've got to take my turtle to the vet." or "Sorry I'm not productive today, I spent all night playing WoW and din't get any sleep."
Those excuses aren't materially different than "Got to take Susie to the pediatrician." or "Susie was crying all night so we didn't get any sleep." except for the whole kid thing.
Being out-of-the-office is being out-of-the-office, and being unproductive is being unproductive.
Does everyone have flexibility to take time off or be unproductive or just breeders?
Take a year off getting paid for downloading an offspring leaving you colleagues to cover your job. 6 weeks is one thing, but a year?
I mean, it's Netflix's choice how to spend their profits, but there's human nature to deal with too.
You know. unlimited downloads, but only for the first 2GB.
Seems about right for the bean counters. But we have the same battle at home. I'm perfectly happy to let the in-house temps drop to 58F in winter, and I do when my wife is out of town. It's perfectly comfortable to me, but my wife would stab me in my sleep and burn my corpse for warmth if I did it when she was here. In summer 74F is about the maximum I'd like my house to be, and even then my wife is wearing a sweatshirt.
Only cool place in the building is labs and server rooms, so sometimes that's were I move when I work nights & weekends.
They constantly move the thermostat up and down in large swings base don how they feel *RIGHT NOW*.
First world problems caused by other first world problems (like closing or failing to provide public restrooms).
Face sideways a little instead of straight at the wall ought to let the reflected pee bounce away from us, right?
Wasn't making a determination on the use of the shotgun. That's immaterial to disagreeing with the comment: "If it didn't land, then it's not in your yard. If it is flying then it is in FAA airspace." That statement is false with or without the shotgun, except in so far as the shotgun was useful in determining the probable altitude of the drone as almost certainly being below 500 feet.
"Private landowners retain their right to exclusive use of the airspace for the reasonable enjoyment of their property up to 500 feet above their lands.[3]"
FAA airspace begins above 500 feet. No shotgun will knock down a drone at 500 ft, so the drone must have been below that, probably more like 50 feet, well within the "exclusive" zone.
It's supposed to be under my seat in the event of a water landing...
Yeah, I could travel like that too.
Maybe?
And our scientists just got around to noticing last week?
It's relevant vis-a-vis people who complain we're "killing the earth". While it may be true that our actions may be very very bad for innocent flora & fauna around us, and a tragedy for humans, Nature has done the same thing before with other species. As a result, the Earth improved markedly for oxygen-breathing creatures like humans. Yeah, we came along a *lot* later, but if it hadn't happened before we would not be here at all.
AGW maybe (probably) bad for us and our fellow travelers, but indistinguishable long-term from what Nature does on her own. Perhaps 20M years from now some CO2-breathing lizard-plant-person might be writing a paper about the Great CO2 Extinction Event caused by the waste products of a (now extinct) bipedal mammal species right up there with the Great Oxygenation Extinction Event caused by the waste products of cyanobacteria.
Most of the "solutions" advocated for the "inevitable" problems predicted are simply extremely thinly veiled SJW wet dreams that don't do anything to actually help solve the problem or deal with a result.
Right after we get a global agreement to drop CO2 injection to 0, if we mean business, we can start that migration today. I mean, even if we somehow got society to stop burning stuff it'll still take a long time to recover, right? So the seas will continue to rise (despite what HRH Obama once claimed) and temps will still keep going up, so we've got to begin to plan for the inevitable negative consequences for the damage already done.
Governments should start denying building permits for any new structures or infrastructure that is within 70m of current sea level (which is how much sea level would rise if all the ice covering Antarctica, Greenland, and in mountain glaciers around the world were to melt). Government can also stop encouraging people from living in those zones through subsidized flood insurance.
Given that civilization now is doing quite a bit better than civilization was 150 years ago in many aspects, perhaps we could chose the temperature from 10 years ago instead of 150 years ago. Or why not the temperature when civilization started to take off, say about 4000 years ago. Or when "A major technological and cultural transition to modernity began approximately 1500 CE in western Europe, and from this beginning new approaches to science and law spread rapidly around the world." Wouldn't that be just as valid?
At least the person who made the point that 1850 is about the start of the industrial revolution and thus forms the starting point for humans dumping CO2 into the atmosphere made an effort.
Re: single temperature...I'm simply talking about the same temperature used in these discussions--if temperatures have increased 0.02 degrees C every year, whatever the temps used as the basis for that calculation. Stop being intentionally obtuse.
Free oxygen is toxic to obligate anaerobic organisms, and the rising concentrations may have wiped out most of the Earth's anaerobic inhabitants at the time. Cyanobacteria were therefore responsible for one of the most significant extinction events in Earth's history."
What's the relevance of that?
That humans will not be the first species on Earth to devastate the climate to the detriment of other species by overproducing atmospheric gases. Probably won't be the last either.
What is the temperature of the Earth *supposed* to be?
IOW, what is the *ideal* temperature for the planet, and while you're at it, show your work explaining how that particular number was derived.
It seems to me that the AGW folks chose temps circa 1850 or so as the gold standard, at least partly (but to me probably mostly) because that's about when decent measurements and record keeping began. Of course this ignores all temperature variations that preceded that.
They're kind like the Amish, who seem to have decided that technology circa 1850 or so is exactly the level of tech that is allowed. Why not technology circa 0AD--if Jesus didn't need the tech, why should the Amish?
If the AGW folks picked temps from about 15000 years ago, we'd *really* be in the dumper right? I mean, we'd have destroyed all that ice-pack covering swaths of North America, sea level would have risen 100ft, and the temp went up what? Like 8 degrees C? Talk about warming!
None of my comments should be construed to mean I think that humans are not contributing to climate change or that I'm fine with pollution. But this is nothing new, either.
Wikipedia: "The Great Oxygenation Event (GOE), also called the Oxygen Catastrophe, Oxygen Crisis, Oxygen Holocaust, Oxygen Revolution, or Great Oxidation, was the biologically induced appearance of dioxygen (O2) in Earth's atmosphere.[1] Geological, isotopic, and chemical evidence suggest that this major environmental change happened around 2.3 billion years ago (2.3 Ga). Cyanobacteria, which appeared about 200 million years before the GOE,[4] began producing oxygen by photosynthesis. Before the GOE, any free oxygen they produced was chemically captured by dissolved iron or organic matter. The GOE was the point when these oxygen sinks became saturated and could not capture all of the oxygen that was produced by cyanobacterial photosynthesis. After the GOE, the excess free oxygen started to accumulate in the atmosphere.
Free oxygen is toxic to obligate anaerobic organisms, and the rising concentrations may have wiped out most of the Earth's anaerobic inhabitants at the time. Cyanobacteria were therefore responsible for one of the most significant extinction events in Earth's history."
And it's gone on just fine. Sure a massive global overheating may kill off a lot of flora and fauna, humankind included. But I'm pretty sure the Earth will keep right on trucking and in a few dozen million years will have a whole new set of flora and fauna and perhaps new intelligent species.
Here I thought a guns was designed to fire a bullet at the target the operator points it at. No gun I own has ever killed any animals or people despite firing thousands of rounds, because the only thing I point them at are inanimate (paper, steel) targets.