I feel as if you've got a mental "Catch-22" going on here.
Assume the threat is real, and that there's a true need to show our allies in the are that we're serious about honoring our commitments. A side benefit of showing China that we won't be pushed around is of course a plus.
Large corporations (Northrop, Raytheon) build and maintain these things. How is it "corporate welfare" to build and deploy a needed thing (per the assumption above) if that's who builds them in the first place? Is it "corporate welfare" to GM when a town buys a new fire engine? Is it "corporate welfare" to the Sierra Club when the state of Colorado enters a partnership with them to plant trees? Is it "corporate welfare" when town hall goes down to Staples to buy a palette of copier paper for the office?
There certainly is such a thing as corporate welfare, but buying needed things ain't it.....
....(and I haven't examined the various data sources to make a judgement on that yet) but thank goodness! This means that we've finally recovered from the effects of the last Ice Age!
Of course, it also means we're going to start the downhill slope back into the next one if historical records are any indication....
First, I agree with you last sentence...you work here is dung.
You're precisely wrong about "industry and consumers" not caring about the environment. Recycling, efficiency improvements, CFL and LED light bulbs..these are all working because industry and consumers care. Yes, more about their pocketbook than the environment but they're not exclusive...you don't have to love one or the other.
You seem to be repeating the talking points about "greenhouse gases", so it's unlikely you actually have any real data (that's okay; no scientist does). What I find curious is how you seem to be angry without actually suggesting anything--and, if I might ask, what precisely are you doing to "stop spewing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere?
Did you buy the computer you used to post in this thread? Thank you for supporting China (where it was likely made), big oil (for the plastics that went into it), and big coal (for the power running it)! If you meant what you said, you'd at least run your house on solar or wind power (as I am doing...my electrons come 100% from that big ball of fire up there)...how 'bout it?
I'd rather focus on the positive.....though you partially put your finger on the nub of the problem. Quite frankly, the government (any) is poorly suited at *best* to conduct space exploration.
Fortunately private companies are stepping up and stepping in. Right now they're in their infancy, but if they can work out the kinks and bring down the costs they'll rapidly surpass the various governments at Getting Things Done.
NASA (or China, or Japan) may well get the first mission to mars done, but the astronauts will be wearing Nike patches and drinking dehydrated Pepsi ("The Official Drink of the Mars Mission!") products.
Even Al Gore, who championed the corn-to-ethanol nonsense, has admitted it was just to try to gain votes in the 2000 election.
If we're going to make ethanol, there should a.) be NO subsidies and b.) the feds have no business mandating squat about it. Drop the extra tolls on imported sugar and let refiners figure out what works best.
Agree with most of what you say, but to use that as an excuse not to do anything is pure sophistry.
The folks who are demanding that the US "do something or we won't" are in fact demanding that the US give up its sovereignty on this issue, aren't they? Sounds like it to me, especially with the calls for a "global solution" or "global oversight body" on the thing.
If you believe in AGW, do something about it...don't whine and complain and dilly because not everybody concurs. Just get'er done.
I remember that article! I assume (and they touch on this in the article) that it's due to dust and microscopic particles forming raindrop nucleotides.....amazing stuff.
I wonder if this effect can be tracked over time? Was it worse in the '50s and '60s when there weren't good smog controls? What about in the early Industrial Revolution...lots of particulate matter due to coal and horse dung? I know asthma reports during that timeframe were particularly bad, so it would make sense.
I would also think that correspondingly there wouldn't have been as big a "heat island" effect back then, since there wasn't much paving and buildings were a bit more porous and probably held less heat.
Do you not stop smoking because your neighbors don't? Of course not...if you really believe smoking is bad for you then you stop. Period.
Do you not stop eating meat simply because your neighbors have bacon BBQs every Sunday? If you object to eating meat and really believe in that philosophy, then you stop...you don't point at the others and say it won't make any difference.
Act on your principles. IF you believe in AGW, using the United States' skepticism (whether you agree with it or not) as an excuse to not do anything is a demonstration of partisanship, not principle. Maybe your example will inspire others. Maybe you'll fall flat on your face as the world careens into a new Ice Age. That's the risk you take....judging from the position of most AGW supporters it's no risk at all, so surely principle is more important here?
The continued whining that the "US isn't doing it, so we won't either" is just pathetic.
...I pretty much use metric extensively and nearly exclusively in the work environment. At home I shift back and forth depending on what I'm doing.
People who want to "force" change are just being silly. Over time the nation will probably move towards metric, or the rest of the world will move back to Imperial units....whichever is fine.
It's a poor excuse for an engineer of whatever nationality who can't handle a couple of different measurement systems in the time being. Chillax....it'll happen over time.
....had nothing to do with "climate change" or "global warming" or whatever the AGW supporters are calling it this week. Even the climatologists said as much:
...is an interesting place. It "stick out" more than the rest of the continent and hence is surrounded by more water, and it's home to at least 6 surface volcanoes (http://icecap.us/images/uploads/AntarcticVolcanoes2.jpg).
A few years back scientists discovered at least a bunch of sub-oceanic volcanoes with at least one merrily bubbling away. They remarked on how warm the waters were and how this had caused unique "oases" of lifeforms all along the extent. (http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_releases/press_release.php?id=1541}
These and the unusual "surrounded by water" nature of this area are more likely contributors to localized melting.
I'm on a contract that still uses Ada for part of its function; pretty much the only reason is because the government won't pay to have it rewritten in a new language. It's amazing how few engineers still really understand most of it though....
Slashdot Mirror
Interceptors != missiles.
Ferret
Don't really work?
Fascinating. Cite?
Ferret
Kerry was against it before he was for it...
Ferret
I feel as if you've got a mental "Catch-22" going on here.
Assume the threat is real, and that there's a true need to show our allies in the are that we're serious about honoring our commitments. A side benefit of showing China that we won't be pushed around is of course a plus.
Large corporations (Northrop, Raytheon) build and maintain these things. How is it "corporate welfare" to build and deploy a needed thing (per the assumption above) if that's who builds them in the first place? Is it "corporate welfare" to GM when a town buys a new fire engine? Is it "corporate welfare" to the Sierra Club when the state of Colorado enters a partnership with them to plant trees? Is it "corporate welfare" when town hall goes down to Staples to buy a palette of copier paper for the office?
There certainly is such a thing as corporate welfare, but buying needed things ain't it.....
Ferret
....(and I haven't examined the various data sources to make a judgement on that yet) but thank goodness! This means that we've finally recovered from the effects of the last Ice Age!
Of course, it also means we're going to start the downhill slope back into the next one if historical records are any indication....
Ferret
Answer: The Economy.
Reason: It really exists.
Ferret
I would submit, sir, that you haven't really been paying attention if you've "never EVER" seen any facts that disparage Obama.
Ferret
First, I agree with you last sentence...you work here is dung.
You're precisely wrong about "industry and consumers" not caring about the environment. Recycling, efficiency improvements, CFL and LED light bulbs..these are all working because industry and consumers care. Yes, more about their pocketbook than the environment but they're not exclusive...you don't have to love one or the other.
You seem to be repeating the talking points about "greenhouse gases", so it's unlikely you actually have any real data (that's okay; no scientist does). What I find curious is how you seem to be angry without actually suggesting anything--and, if I might ask, what precisely are you doing to "stop spewing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere?
Did you buy the computer you used to post in this thread? Thank you for supporting China (where it was likely made), big oil (for the plastics that went into it), and big coal (for the power running it)! If you meant what you said, you'd at least run your house on solar or wind power (as I am doing...my electrons come 100% from that big ball of fire up there)...how 'bout it?
Ferret
If he will leave to go to Australia and stay there, I'll gladly pay his way.
Ferret
....I'll never buy a copy of Office 2013, Microsoft.
Great move guys.
Ferret
Wow, that's a pessimistic outlook.
I'd rather focus on the positive.....though you partially put your finger on the nub of the problem. Quite frankly, the government (any) is poorly suited at *best* to conduct space exploration.
Fortunately private companies are stepping up and stepping in. Right now they're in their infancy, but if they can work out the kinks and bring down the costs they'll rapidly surpass the various governments at Getting Things Done.
NASA (or China, or Japan) may well get the first mission to mars done, but the astronauts will be wearing Nike patches and drinking dehydrated Pepsi ("The Official Drink of the Mars Mission!") products.
Ferret
Even Al Gore, who championed the corn-to-ethanol nonsense, has admitted it was just to try to gain votes in the 2000 election.
If we're going to make ethanol, there should a.) be NO subsidies and b.) the feds have no business mandating squat about it. Drop the extra tolls on imported sugar and let refiners figure out what works best.
Ferret
Superb summary sir! Well done.
Good to see not everybody buys the party line.
Ferret
Agree with most of what you say, but to use that as an excuse not to do anything is pure sophistry.
The folks who are demanding that the US "do something or we won't" are in fact demanding that the US give up its sovereignty on this issue, aren't they? Sounds like it to me, especially with the calls for a "global solution" or "global oversight body" on the thing.
If you believe in AGW, do something about it...don't whine and complain and dilly because not everybody concurs. Just get'er done.
Ferret
I remember that article! I assume (and they touch on this in the article) that it's due to dust and microscopic particles forming raindrop nucleotides.....amazing stuff.
I wonder if this effect can be tracked over time? Was it worse in the '50s and '60s when there weren't good smog controls? What about in the early Industrial Revolution...lots of particulate matter due to coal and horse dung? I know asthma reports during that timeframe were particularly bad, so it would make sense.
I would also think that correspondingly there wouldn't have been as big a "heat island" effect back then, since there wasn't much paving and buildings were a bit more porous and probably held less heat.
Very interesting.
Ferret
Indeed....
Ferret
That's disingenuous at best.
Do you not stop smoking because your neighbors don't? Of course not...if you really believe smoking is bad for you then you stop. Period.
Do you not stop eating meat simply because your neighbors have bacon BBQs every Sunday? If you object to eating meat and really believe in that philosophy, then you stop...you don't point at the others and say it won't make any difference.
Act on your principles. IF you believe in AGW, using the United States' skepticism (whether you agree with it or not) as an excuse to not do anything is a demonstration of partisanship, not principle. Maybe your example will inspire others. Maybe you'll fall flat on your face as the world careens into a new Ice Age. That's the risk you take....judging from the position of most AGW supporters it's no risk at all, so surely principle is more important here?
The continued whining that the "US isn't doing it, so we won't either" is just pathetic.
Ferret
....why ANYBODY would commit suicide, much less one as wealthy and talented.
Ferret
...I pretty much use metric extensively and nearly exclusively in the work environment. At home I shift back and forth depending on what I'm doing.
People who want to "force" change are just being silly. Over time the nation will probably move towards metric, or the rest of the world will move back to Imperial units....whichever is fine.
It's a poor excuse for an engineer of whatever nationality who can't handle a couple of different measurement systems in the time being. Chillax....it'll happen over time.
Ferret
....had nothing to do with "climate change" or "global warming" or whatever the AGW supporters are calling it this week. Even the climatologists said as much:
http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2012/12/07/csu-researchers-say-sandy-wasnt-influenced-by-global-warming/
Ferret
...you do NOT register a gun!
Ferret
...is an interesting place. It "stick out" more than the rest of the continent and hence is surrounded by more water, and it's home to at least 6 surface volcanoes (http://icecap.us/images/uploads/AntarcticVolcanoes2.jpg).
A few years back scientists discovered at least a bunch of sub-oceanic volcanoes with at least one merrily bubbling away. They remarked on how warm the waters were and how this had caused unique "oases" of lifeforms all along the extent. (http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/press_releases/press_release.php?id=1541}
These and the unusual "surrounded by water" nature of this area are more likely contributors to localized melting.
Ferret
I'm on a contract that still uses Ada for part of its function; pretty much the only reason is because the government won't pay to have it rewritten in a new language. It's amazing how few engineers still really understand most of it though....
Ferret
What a novel idea. I wonder if it will actually be practical?
Ferret
EXCELLENT link!
Ferret