"But filtering soot by adding smokestack scrubbers (which 1st world countries started doing many decades ago) is a heck of a lot cheaper and less disruptive than destroying the world economy to eliminate CO2."
Man made aerosols have a significant cooling effect. Oblig graph. The obvious solution that is staring everyone in the face is an international ban on new coal fired plants. They were all built in my lifetime and will all need replacing in the next 30-40yrs. The western world has given the coal industry billions over the last decade for so called "clean coal" (10 billion in Australia alone), where's the beef?
Pea soupers caused by burning coal killed large numbers of people for over a century. The industry did not clean up voulentarily, it had to be forced to do it despite bogus claims it would destroy the economy and leave millions freezing to death.
Banning new coal plants will not "destroy the world economy", however it will destroy those parasitic corporations who are unwilling to change and this is why we see so much anti-science propoganda surrounding the issue.
The OP claimed "government intervention" in this specific case not some other case and he did it without a shread of evidence, I never claimed auDA or the government were good/bad/indifferent, just that auDA did this off their own bat.
Some people don't need a prod to attempt to suck up to government OTOH they could have done it deliberately knowing many people would blame the government. I don't know their "hidden" motive and neither do you.
"Incidentally, Eratosthenes was one of the head librarians at Alexandria" - Yes I have been a fan of Carl Sagan since cosmos first aired in the 70's. Also Alexander the Great took Egypt from the Pharohs and installed Ptolomey who later declared himself a king, but I wasn't aiming for accuracy, I was aiming for sarcasm.
"Part of my job is clearing the BS that I have to deal with from my directs' path so that they can do their best work"
Indeed, that is the most important part of the job.
I've been a boss and found it wasn't worth the aggravation. The best boss I ever worked with (as opposed to for) had been in the business for 40yrs yet he could make you feel like you were telling him something new when you answered his "silly" questions. He was a cockney and tough as nails but only brought out that side when his considerable charm and patience didn't work. He's dead now and they just don't make gentlemen like that anymore.
It's not that simple. While I would love to see Anthony Watts behind bars he has the excuse that his website was displayed in the "climate crock of the week" video that he tried to take down. Since he has trouble understanding all sorts of things it is not a streach to claim he belived he was telling the truth and thus did not commit purgery.
Yeah, Ptolomey had no respect for the law either, first he nicked Egypt from the Pharohs and then he had an army of scribes copy all the scrolls he could find and stuffed them in his so called "library" of Alexandria. Eratosthenes and other authors tried to sue but lawyers hadn't been invented so he was SOL.
Actually we do kill the vast majority of our cows and then eat them. However their farts are not the source of problematic methane levels, that would be melting permafrost. The problem with cows is a land use issue not a flactuance issue. Melting permafrost releases vast quantities of methane, the reason methane and CO2 coincide in the geologoic record is because methane breaks down into CO2 and H2O in under 150yrs (150yrs is basically instantaneously on a gelogic scale)
The memo you speak of was posted in the 90's by "skeptics" who claimed that the term "global warming" was a conclusion rather than a phenomena.
I suggest you ease up on the mercury tainted fish, it's known to cause brain damage.
Darwin is mentioned in the first comment to the realclimate article. Their response make sense to me...
"Response: The point is that individual stations are being cherry picked. An honest assessment would pick sites at random, as we have done. It is of course possible that some stations have problems that CRU didn't catch. Picking on those isn't objective.--eric"
The first link in this previous rant of mine points to one of many papers that describe how the raw records have been adjusted for things such as the urban heat island effect, altitude, equipment siting and measurement bias, time of day, etc.
As my previous post points out there is nothing wrong with being a skeptic, I consider myself reasonably skilled at the art but you may disagree. However if you are genuinely skeptical about where attempts to corrupt the scientific process are coming from then it could be enlightening to move back from the individual trees and investigate the political forest. For example, where did you hear about problems with the Darwin records and why do you think it could be important? Is the Darwin example similar to the broken station at the south pole that is still a favorite cherry of less honest "skeptics" such as those found at the "icecap" website? What organisations are behind such websites or are they really just confused amature scientists who are honestly having trouble distinguishing between the Artic and the Antartic?
"I wouldn't accept a cheque for a house, especially not if I was incommunicado and thus unable to verify it immediately"
You're probably not a real estate agent or a bank, I bought my last (Aussie) house at auction, terms of the auction were $45K deposit at the hammer drop on a Sunday afternoon. Now unless you have previously filled out a pile of paperwork at the bank a normal electronic banking account will not let you transfer anywhere near that amount.
I told the agent prior to the auction I didn't have a cheque account and asked would he take $2k cash and I would pay the balance with a bank cheque the next day, he said if I didn't have the money at the hammer drop he couldn't accept my bid. I had to call up my Lady Friend who does have one and was nice enough to cover it for me until the next day. Banks also require a couple of bank cheques from you at settlement, they will not accept any other form of payment.
As for cash, banks here must report any transaction above $10k to the taxman, if the taxman can't explain where you got a few hundred grand to buy a house with cash then they are going to ask questions, it's their job. As for the drug squad following the money trail is often how they catch big time dealers, they are good mates with both the taxman and the titles office.
Yes the buddy system is hardly confined to missile silos. I was a day labourer and factory worker in Oz during the 70's & 80's, standard industrial saftey rules say that no worker is to be alone where machinery or confined spaces are involved.
The raw data is in pretty good shape and easily accessible. However this is just a collation of what is held on paper etc, so the conspiracy theorists still have an escape hatch wich their brain can escape through.
Hat tip to the article on Realclimate for the link. I'm sure you know of realclimate, they're the guys who won't show anyone their raw data.
"It may come as a surprise to some that the first compilation of world-wide meteorological data was published by the Smithsonian Institution in 1927, long before anthropogenic climate change emerged as an important issue (Clayton et al., 1927). This volume is still widely available on the library shelf as are updates that were issued periodically. This same data collection provided the foundation for the World Monthly Surface Station Climatology, 1738-cont. As has been the case for many years, any interested party can access this from UCAR (http://dss.ucar.edu/datasets/ds570) and other electronic data archives." - Realclimate
I await the analyisis of the of the slashdot skeptics.
"And since we have found they were suppressing opposing viewpoints in journals"
Please try another myth. The papers you are referring to were published in the IPCC reports, given their quality and history they shouldn't have been. Besides, Mann does not work for the UEA CRU.
Replying to an ad-hom with another ad-hom is normally called a retort. Besides I'd say that the words "Grow up. Your faux apathy rhetoric..." are an astute observation, not an ad-hom.
Slashdot Mirror
"But filtering soot by adding smokestack scrubbers (which 1st world countries started doing many decades ago) is a heck of a lot cheaper and less disruptive than destroying the world economy to eliminate CO2."
Man made aerosols have a significant cooling effect. Oblig graph. The obvious solution that is staring everyone in the face is an international ban on new coal fired plants. They were all built in my lifetime and will all need replacing in the next 30-40yrs. The western world has given the coal industry billions over the last decade for so called "clean coal" (10 billion in Australia alone), where's the beef?
Pea soupers caused by burning coal killed large numbers of people for over a century. The industry did not clean up voulentarily, it had to be forced to do it despite bogus claims it would destroy the economy and leave millions freezing to death.
Banning new coal plants will not "destroy the world economy", however it will destroy those parasitic corporations who are unwilling to change and this is why we see so much anti-science propoganda surrounding the issue.
The OP claimed "government intervention" in this specific case not some other case and he did it without a shread of evidence, I never claimed auDA or the government were good/bad/indifferent, just that auDA did this off their own bat.
Some people don't need a prod to attempt to suck up to government OTOH they could have done it deliberately knowing many people would blame the government. I don't know their "hidden" motive and neither do you.
Yep, your post is a geat example of standard conspiracy crap, all bluster and no evidence.
"the second you step up above average they cut you off at the knees"
Did I miss something? AFAIK, taxation rates have not changed under Labor....oh it's timmarthy, never mind.
"this is clear cut government intervention"
No it's clear cut corporate intervention, unless you want to go for the standard conspiracy theory crap.
"Satire and Parody are constitutional free speech issues, not something that can be restricted by a TOS."
Not in our constitution mate, as with the UK free speech in Oz is a tradition not a commandment.
"Incidentally, Eratosthenes was one of the head librarians at Alexandria" - Yes I have been a fan of Carl Sagan since cosmos first aired in the 70's. Also Alexander the Great took Egypt from the Pharohs and installed Ptolomey who later declared himself a king, but I wasn't aiming for accuracy, I was aiming for sarcasm.
"Part of my job is clearing the BS that I have to deal with from my directs' path so that they can do their best work"
Indeed, that is the most important part of the job.
I've been a boss and found it wasn't worth the aggravation. The best boss I ever worked with (as opposed to for) had been in the business for 40yrs yet he could make you feel like you were telling him something new when you answered his "silly" questions. He was a cockney and tough as nails but only brought out that side when his considerable charm and patience didn't work. He's dead now and they just don't make gentlemen like that anymore.
A good boss will goof around with you and upper management generally goof around all day at golf clubs and political dinners.
It's not that simple. While I would love to see Anthony Watts behind bars he has the excuse that his website was displayed in the "climate crock of the week" video that he tried to take down. Since he has trouble understanding all sorts of things it is not a streach to claim he belived he was telling the truth and thus did not commit purgery.
Yeah, Ptolomey had no respect for the law either, first he nicked Egypt from the Pharohs and then he had an army of scribes copy all the scrolls he could find and stuffed them in his so called "library" of Alexandria. Eratosthenes and other authors tried to sue but lawyers hadn't been invented so he was SOL.
I'm sure that want all that info to pursuade people to stop buying thier games and do something healthy instead. They woundn't dream of selling it.
True but the principle is the same regardless of the location of the orifice
Actually we do kill the vast majority of our cows and then eat them. However their farts are not the source of problematic methane levels, that would be melting permafrost. The problem with cows is a land use issue not a flactuance issue. Melting permafrost releases vast quantities of methane, the reason methane and CO2 coincide in the geologoic record is because methane breaks down into CO2 and H2O in under 150yrs (150yrs is basically instantaneously on a gelogic scale)
The memo you speak of was posted in the 90's by "skeptics" who claimed that the term "global warming" was a conclusion rather than a phenomena.
I suggest you ease up on the mercury tainted fish, it's known to cause brain damage.
"Then you'd have canadian spaceships, united statian spaceships, chinese spaceships..."
That would sell tickets to watch the action from orbit.
Hitler wasn't a major world player?
"a sixty-year old politician will be far less threatened than a twenty-something"
I will bet my left testicle you will change your mind about that statement when your my age.
Now get off my lawn and take your damned asteroid with you.
WTF? We have some of the best wine growing areas on the planet.
Darwin is mentioned in the first comment to the realclimate article. Their response make sense to me...
"Response: The point is that individual stations are being cherry picked. An honest assessment would pick sites at random, as we have done. It is of course possible that some stations have problems that CRU didn't catch. Picking on those isn't objective.--eric"
The first link in this previous rant of mine points to one of many papers that describe how the raw records have been adjusted for things such as the urban heat island effect, altitude, equipment siting and measurement bias, time of day, etc.
As my previous post points out there is nothing wrong with being a skeptic, I consider myself reasonably skilled at the art but you may disagree. However if you are genuinely skeptical about where attempts to corrupt the scientific process are coming from then it could be enlightening to move back from the individual trees and investigate the political forest. For example, where did you hear about problems with the Darwin records and why do you think it could be important? Is the Darwin example similar to the broken station at the south pole that is still a favorite cherry of less honest "skeptics" such as those found at the "icecap" website? What organisations are behind such websites or are they really just confused amature scientists who are honestly having trouble distinguishing between the Artic and the Antartic?
"I wouldn't accept a cheque for a house, especially not if I was incommunicado and thus unable to verify it immediately"
You're probably not a real estate agent or a bank, I bought my last (Aussie) house at auction, terms of the auction were $45K deposit at the hammer drop on a Sunday afternoon. Now unless you have previously filled out a pile of paperwork at the bank a normal electronic banking account will not let you transfer anywhere near that amount.
I told the agent prior to the auction I didn't have a cheque account and asked would he take $2k cash and I would pay the balance with a bank cheque the next day, he said if I didn't have the money at the hammer drop he couldn't accept my bid. I had to call up my Lady Friend who does have one and was nice enough to cover it for me until the next day. Banks also require a couple of bank cheques from you at settlement, they will not accept any other form of payment.
As for cash, banks here must report any transaction above $10k to the taxman, if the taxman can't explain where you got a few hundred grand to buy a house with cash then they are going to ask questions, it's their job. As for the drug squad following the money trail is often how they catch big time dealers, they are good mates with both the taxman and the titles office.
Yes the buddy system is hardly confined to missile silos. I was a day labourer and factory worker in Oz during the 70's & 80's, standard industrial saftey rules say that no worker is to be alone where machinery or confined spaces are involved.
Heh, didn't have to wait long for the "skeptics", 10 mods so far, 3-troll, 2-offtopic, 5-informative.
The raw data is in pretty good shape and easily accessible. However this is just a collation of what is held on paper etc, so the conspiracy theorists still have an escape hatch wich their brain can escape through.
Hat tip to the article on Realclimate for the link. I'm sure you know of realclimate, they're the guys who won't show anyone their raw data.
"It may come as a surprise to some that the first compilation of world-wide meteorological data was published by the Smithsonian Institution in 1927, long before anthropogenic climate change emerged as an important issue (Clayton et al., 1927). This volume is still widely available on the library shelf as are updates that were issued periodically. This same data collection provided the foundation for the World Monthly Surface Station Climatology, 1738-cont. As has been the case for many years, any interested party can access this from UCAR (http://dss.ucar.edu/datasets/ds570) and other electronic data archives." - Realclimate
I await the analyisis of the of the slashdot skeptics.
"And since we have found they were suppressing opposing viewpoints in journals" Please try another myth. The papers you are referring to were published in the IPCC reports, given their quality and history they shouldn't have been. Besides, Mann does not work for the UEA CRU.
Replying to an ad-hom with another ad-hom is normally called a retort. Besides I'd say that the words "Grow up. Your faux apathy rhetoric..." are an astute observation, not an ad-hom.