What does the RSS record show since, say, 1997 - the last big El Nino?
Re:Meanwhile, still no global warming in last 19yr
on
Paris Climate Deal Adopted
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Since the last big El Nino (1997) RSS shows a slight decline in temperature. So maybe not forever - but definitely for the last 18 years. And curiously enough, if you look at the RSS data prior to that big El Nino you see basically a flat line, too. We don't have the "continual rise" in temperature so often modeled and predicted as we have, it appears, flat (or actual declining) temperatures with occasional big events that cause a shift in the baseline. Something none of the current models used for the COP21 talks even considers.
The previous Administrations (Republican and Democrat) have been very kind to the educated and wealthy - maybe that's the reason for the base supporting Trump. Don't equate education with intelligence (hey, Freeman Dyson wouldn't be considered educated by many, today) - you're looking at a large swath of America upset with the UniParty we've had over the last 20 years. It's been about Big Government and business (fascism - both from the Democrats and the Republicans) - not about individuals. Trump is seen as an alternative to the usual modus operandi.
You're right - denying a visa is an incredibly violent thing. Taking that application and saying "no" is as bad as cutting of a head - or burning someone alive.
Corporations can't throw you in jail. They cannot summarily sieze all your assets. They cannot bar you from traveling abroad. They cannot force your employer to hand over your paycheck. Only Government can do that. Government is the ultimate power for oppression - its why dictators and big corporations try to influence Government. Corporations and individuals on their own do not have such power - only Government does. Sorry you don't see the truth.
Oh, and back to the original thread - I see you have nothing else to complain about the fact that Hansen et al. just make data up, build - and continue to support and extol - models that are fake, and are trying to use the power of Government to dictate exactly how you can live.
If Government were limited, then corporations wouldn't have the pull they do. Ultimately Government becomes fascist - it and the big corporations get together for their own benefit. You can try to stop the big corporations - but that also stops the little ones, and the micro businesses as well. Or you can limit big Government's reach and power. That's what the founding fathers tried to do, and it worked for nearly 150 years. But when Government expanded into all aspects of life - it made the ability of corporate/Government power (fascism) to run more and more of your life. The threat isn't a corporation - it doesn't hold a gun to my head. The threat is Government, which can (and does) hold a gun to my head.
So, publishing helps you get funding - keeps you employed, so to speak. I assume publishing a bogus paper doesn't help so much does it? Or one that says everyone else is wrong, and the organization funding your research is wrong as well? Not a popular paper I suppose...
As far as Hansen et al. cooking the books, here's one good source but you can literally go through the raw data, and see how it's been adjusted many times, and it happens regularly. Interesting that nearly all the adjustments tend to make the temperature increase "higher" than what the actual data said, too...
Of course, the adjustments warning of massive calamity that can only be saved by huge "investments" and control by Big Government - the same entity that provides all those NIH and other grants - have no financial impact on those who do the adjustments, right?
What Exxon does is of no import to Hansen "cooking the books". And if you are a scientist, you know the pressure to publlish papers. Do you publish papers about models you've worked on that do not match the data? How does that work when you're trying to secure funding? And as far as Watts Up With That - can you point to errors in what they publish? Or is it simply a case of tarnishing them by association - an extremely NON scientific thing to do?
First off, science has always worked by adjusting models. Climate science is all computer modeling, so it is highly subject to this. You seem to be going to sources of information that are not scientific. I go straight to PubMed when I want to find out what is known or not known.
So while I respect your right to your opinion, I think you may not be looking at the actual science, but rather at the opinions of non-scientists.
Oh, I go straight to the record of climate - check out RSS or UAH. You'll see a big divergence from the Hansen/GISS model. And Hansen/GISS keeps tweaking the data to "fix" the model - rather than tweaking the model to better match the data. It's backwards But when you have an agenda to push - which makes sense?
Continues to push bad science. Along with Michael Mann. Their data is shown to be highly manipulated, not what was claimed, and the models built don't follow realit - but they insist they are correct and must be used for setting political policies. Real science wouldn't hide data, wouldn't support models that continue to be in error, and wouldn't constantly "readjust" past, good data to make the models work. Not to mention using his children as foils to sue the Government over his beliefs.
That we actually have both. And Government funds both of them - it's the common thread. It's kind of why a very large, all-inclusive Federal Government is a bad thing. Getting back to a Constitutionally limited Federal Government (all things not expressly delegated to it by the Constitution are reserved for the States or the People, respectively - that 10th Amendment) would go a LONG way to breaking the hold both groups have.
James Hansen. Paul Ehrlich. Just for starters - a couple of guys who are trying to use science to push a radical transformation of society - even when the science doesn't support their conclusions.
The design of this ship makes it hard to target and spot from over-the-horizon distances. If you can't spot or target the ship, all those cruise and ballistic missiles are worthless.
“We must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.” - Dwight Eisenhower. Ike also warned against Government funded research and the danger of scientific elites running the Government... Do we ever read about that warning?
There's that little company called 3M - Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing... There's a LOT of money in the Midwest, it's just not as flashy as Silicon Valley riches.
The donation you get is the same as a personal donation level, and is capped at a maximum of 50% of your AGI. With a charitable trust (or non-profit) you get 100% reduction of taxes by spending 90% of your income. With personal or LLCs, if you spent 50% of your income on charitable giving, you end up paying full taxes on the other 50% - and 2/3rds taxes on the first 50% (you only get 1 dollar tax credit for every 3 dollars donated). Perhaps you need to educate yourself first, might help with your anger issues...
Learn how taxes on income/profit in an LLC work. They flow through to the owners as personal income - meaning, Zuckerberg has to pay income tax on any profits his LLC earns. It's not an accounting dodge or fraud vehicle at all. Educate yourself. In actuality, a trust is a MUCH better vehicle for deferring taxes, especially a "non profit" trust where it can earn lots of profits, and as long as it gives away 90% of those earnings (meaning - it only keeps 10%), the retained profits are tax free. Oh, and members of the trust can use assets of the trust without penalty or income issues (trust owns the cars, jets, homes that the members/directors use).
They flow through to the owner. So if the LLC makes investments and earns income - that income flows through to Zuckerberg and he pays taxes on them. In fact, a trust is a BETTER tax deferral vehicle as it's a separate entity, and most who set up trusts use the assets of the trust (homes, cars, etc.) without paying for them OR paying taxes on the profits earned by the trust. And if the trust earns profit, as long as it gives away 90% of the profit (meaning, it keeps 10%) it does so tax-free.
No, an LLC is a worse tax deferral vehicle than a trust.
That summary sounds like something you'd read in The Onion.
That is where it belongs. Helium-3 is the dumbest, most impractical solution to our energy problems imaginable. Unicorn farts would be a more realistic power source.
Lizard men are NEVER benevolent. Think about snakes and komodo dragons - are THEY benevolent? The reptilian way is to kill and eat others. Clearly "Beforeitsnews.com" is a lizard man mouthpiece, the publisher hoping he'll be the last to be eaten!
First off, there is no such thing as an international patent. You file a patent in one country, and then can file for a PCT which - if it's granted in the first country - means other PCT signatories will agree to "respect" the patent. But you really still need to file in those other countries to get true protection (I recommend filing in the US, Germany, Japan, and China - you'll cover the biggest markets in the world, ones counterfeiters will not ignore, and you will cover the source of most counterfeit goods - and China is very protective of their own filed IP).
Next, roll it yourself. Prove it's capable of actually making money. So you invented something - big deal. Unless you can make money with it, it's worthless. So start your own small business, show that there is a market for it. You don't have to sell tens of millions or make millions in revenue. Just a small stream will show it's commercially viable.
THEN pitch the idea of licensing or buying the company to bigger players. Target contract manufacturers, not direct end-customers. I've had a LOT better success getting factories to license my patents, then they reuse them with their bigger clients. Going straight to the end customer (Microsoft, Apple, Dell, etc) is very hard to do; getting their CM to accept it (the Foxconns, Flextronics, Fosters, and Quantas of the world) would be more receptive.
The Lizard Men living inside the hollow Earth won't allow it. They've already positioned plates of ultra-dense titanium right where we'll drill so we can't punch through...
Slashdot Mirror
What does the RSS record show since, say, 1997 - the last big El Nino?
Since the last big El Nino (1997) RSS shows a slight decline in temperature. So maybe not forever - but definitely for the last 18 years. And curiously enough, if you look at the RSS data prior to that big El Nino you see basically a flat line, too. We don't have the "continual rise" in temperature so often modeled and predicted as we have, it appears, flat (or actual declining) temperatures with occasional big events that cause a shift in the baseline. Something none of the current models used for the COP21 talks even considers.
The previous Administrations (Republican and Democrat) have been very kind to the educated and wealthy - maybe that's the reason for the base supporting Trump. Don't equate education with intelligence (hey, Freeman Dyson wouldn't be considered educated by many, today) - you're looking at a large swath of America upset with the UniParty we've had over the last 20 years. It's been about Big Government and business (fascism - both from the Democrats and the Republicans) - not about individuals. Trump is seen as an alternative to the usual modus operandi.
You're right - denying a visa is an incredibly violent thing. Taking that application and saying "no" is as bad as cutting of a head - or burning someone alive.
Corporations can't throw you in jail. They cannot summarily sieze all your assets. They cannot bar you from traveling abroad. They cannot force your employer to hand over your paycheck. Only Government can do that. Government is the ultimate power for oppression - its why dictators and big corporations try to influence Government. Corporations and individuals on their own do not have such power - only Government does. Sorry you don't see the truth.
Oh, and back to the original thread - I see you have nothing else to complain about the fact that Hansen et al. just make data up, build - and continue to support and extol - models that are fake, and are trying to use the power of Government to dictate exactly how you can live.
If Government were limited, then corporations wouldn't have the pull they do. Ultimately Government becomes fascist - it and the big corporations get together for their own benefit. You can try to stop the big corporations - but that also stops the little ones, and the micro businesses as well. Or you can limit big Government's reach and power. That's what the founding fathers tried to do, and it worked for nearly 150 years. But when Government expanded into all aspects of life - it made the ability of corporate/Government power (fascism) to run more and more of your life. The threat isn't a corporation - it doesn't hold a gun to my head. The threat is Government, which can (and does) hold a gun to my head.
So, publishing helps you get funding - keeps you employed, so to speak. I assume publishing a bogus paper doesn't help so much does it? Or one that says everyone else is wrong, and the organization funding your research is wrong as well? Not a popular paper I suppose...
As far as Hansen et al. cooking the books, here's one good source but you can literally go through the raw data, and see how it's been adjusted many times, and it happens regularly. Interesting that nearly all the adjustments tend to make the temperature increase "higher" than what the actual data said, too...
Of course, the adjustments warning of massive calamity that can only be saved by huge "investments" and control by Big Government - the same entity that provides all those NIH and other grants - have no financial impact on those who do the adjustments, right?
What Exxon does is of no import to Hansen "cooking the books". And if you are a scientist, you know the pressure to publlish papers. Do you publish papers about models you've worked on that do not match the data? How does that work when you're trying to secure funding? And as far as Watts Up With That - can you point to errors in what they publish? Or is it simply a case of tarnishing them by association - an extremely NON scientific thing to do?
First off, science has always worked by adjusting models. Climate science is all computer modeling, so it is highly subject to this. You seem to be going to sources of information that are not scientific. I go straight to PubMed when I want to find out what is known or not known.
So while I respect your right to your opinion, I think you may not be looking at the actual science, but rather at the opinions of non-scientists.
Oh, I go straight to the record of climate - check out RSS or UAH. You'll see a big divergence from the Hansen/GISS model. And Hansen/GISS keeps tweaking the data to "fix" the model - rather than tweaking the model to better match the data. It's backwards But when you have an agenda to push - which makes sense?
Continues to push bad science. Along with Michael Mann. Their data is shown to be highly manipulated, not what was claimed, and the models built don't follow realit - but they insist they are correct and must be used for setting political policies. Real science wouldn't hide data, wouldn't support models that continue to be in error, and wouldn't constantly "readjust" past, good data to make the models work. Not to mention using his children as foils to sue the Government over his beliefs.
That we actually have both. And Government funds both of them - it's the common thread. It's kind of why a very large, all-inclusive Federal Government is a bad thing. Getting back to a Constitutionally limited Federal Government (all things not expressly delegated to it by the Constitution are reserved for the States or the People, respectively - that 10th Amendment) would go a LONG way to breaking the hold both groups have.
Huh? Nah, I rather side with Freeman Dyson...
James Hansen. Paul Ehrlich. Just for starters - a couple of guys who are trying to use science to push a radical transformation of society - even when the science doesn't support their conclusions.
The design of this ship makes it hard to target and spot from over-the-horizon distances. If you can't spot or target the ship, all those cruise and ballistic missiles are worthless.
Wait, we had a free market approach to healthcare? Not since the 1930s...
“We must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.” - Dwight Eisenhower. Ike also warned against Government funded research and the danger of scientific elites running the Government... Do we ever read about that warning?
Poorly.
There's that little company called 3M - Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing... There's a LOT of money in the Midwest, it's just not as flashy as Silicon Valley riches.
The donation you get is the same as a personal donation level, and is capped at a maximum of 50% of your AGI. With a charitable trust (or non-profit) you get 100% reduction of taxes by spending 90% of your income. With personal or LLCs, if you spent 50% of your income on charitable giving, you end up paying full taxes on the other 50% - and 2/3rds taxes on the first 50% (you only get 1 dollar tax credit for every 3 dollars donated). Perhaps you need to educate yourself first, might help with your anger issues...
Learn how taxes on income/profit in an LLC work. They flow through to the owners as personal income - meaning, Zuckerberg has to pay income tax on any profits his LLC earns. It's not an accounting dodge or fraud vehicle at all. Educate yourself. In actuality, a trust is a MUCH better vehicle for deferring taxes, especially a "non profit" trust where it can earn lots of profits, and as long as it gives away 90% of those earnings (meaning - it only keeps 10%), the retained profits are tax free. Oh, and members of the trust can use assets of the trust without penalty or income issues (trust owns the cars, jets, homes that the members/directors use).
They flow through to the owner. So if the LLC makes investments and earns income - that income flows through to Zuckerberg and he pays taxes on them. In fact, a trust is a BETTER tax deferral vehicle as it's a separate entity, and most who set up trusts use the assets of the trust (homes, cars, etc.) without paying for them OR paying taxes on the profits earned by the trust. And if the trust earns profit, as long as it gives away 90% of the profit (meaning, it keeps 10%) it does so tax-free.
No, an LLC is a worse tax deferral vehicle than a trust.
That summary sounds like something you'd read in The Onion.
That is where it belongs. Helium-3 is the dumbest, most impractical solution to our energy problems imaginable. Unicorn farts would be a more realistic power source.
Especially since unicorns HATE to eat beans...
Lizard men are NEVER benevolent. Think about snakes and komodo dragons - are THEY benevolent? The reptilian way is to kill and eat others. Clearly "Beforeitsnews.com" is a lizard man mouthpiece, the publisher hoping he'll be the last to be eaten!
First off, there is no such thing as an international patent. You file a patent in one country, and then can file for a PCT which - if it's granted in the first country - means other PCT signatories will agree to "respect" the patent. But you really still need to file in those other countries to get true protection (I recommend filing in the US, Germany, Japan, and China - you'll cover the biggest markets in the world, ones counterfeiters will not ignore, and you will cover the source of most counterfeit goods - and China is very protective of their own filed IP).
Next, roll it yourself. Prove it's capable of actually making money. So you invented something - big deal. Unless you can make money with it, it's worthless. So start your own small business, show that there is a market for it. You don't have to sell tens of millions or make millions in revenue. Just a small stream will show it's commercially viable.
THEN pitch the idea of licensing or buying the company to bigger players. Target contract manufacturers, not direct end-customers. I've had a LOT better success getting factories to license my patents, then they reuse them with their bigger clients. Going straight to the end customer (Microsoft, Apple, Dell, etc) is very hard to do; getting their CM to accept it (the Foxconns, Flextronics, Fosters, and Quantas of the world) would be more receptive.
The Lizard Men living inside the hollow Earth won't allow it. They've already positioned plates of ultra-dense titanium right where we'll drill so we can't punch through...