Head straight for IBD's cartoon section if you want another fix.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Brilliant political cartoon by Michael Ramirez
Head straight for IBD's cartoon section if you want another fix.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Which observation would disprove global warming?
Penn Gilette started recording un-edited thoughts on crackle.
I've watched all P&T Bullshit episodes, so listining what he has to say directly sounded as a good idea. One of his first vidos posted there under "weather opportunists" was about teh dreded global warming.
He asked extremaly viable question - what global warming alarmists consider as an observation that disproves their theory?
This one is really worth pushing.
Skeptics should step on alarmists until they classify symptoms of escalating global warming AND these, that disprove their theory.
Right now greenies can (and DO!) simply attribute anything as global warming side effect. It's hot - obviously global warming. But... when it's cold - it's also global warming! Severe hurricane season in the US? Global warming. No hurricanes in 2007? Silence. Etc. Whatever happens it's either indicator of global warming, or weather, complexity etc.
Most of scientific basis for this whole "earth is burning" hype stems from climate models. After feeding such a model with data and pushing red button they produced scenario of climbing temperatures. However accuracy of such models is questionable. There's a lot of data and process that occur in our planet are pretty complex. Additionaly it's quite probable that some models were ment to produce certain scenarios. Well, even limited bias - feel that "too cold" scenarios are in need of tweaking twice as frequent than the same feel with "hot" ones - could impair results!
If these models were running for 20 years without major changes, and the most accurate of them was used and the rest of them scrapped - we could place some trust in it. But if it's unproven?
There's also one interesting developement - teh righteous models of doom - have predicted drastic warming in the antarctic, that is cooling at the moment. Was it enough to at least acknowagle that they lost one point here? You guessed it: "It isn't surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn't be expected to be equally exact for all locations,"
Did any models predict this: "Extreme cold weather is occurring worldwide. On Dec. 4, in Seoul, Korea, the temperature was a record minus 5 degrees Celsius. Nov. 24, in Meacham, Ore., the minimum temperature was 12 degrees Fahrenheit colder than the previous record low set in 1952. The Canadian government warns that this winter is likely to be the coldest in 15 years."
Another issue is linking temperatures to industries' carbon dioxide emmisons.
If global warming was rock-solid, it's links to industry would still be weak. Carbon dioxide is only a fraction of greenhouse gases and industry accounts only for a fraction of it's production. If you're going to travel with two friends you'll produce roughly the same amount of carbon dioxide traveling by car and... running! One good season for vulcanos can trump years of humanities factories in greenhouse emmision.
I think the worst that scenario that may happen si this one. I've acquired it using climate model so it's so very accurate! Behold:
In next decade developed countries cave to bandwagon of greenies, politicians and grant-yanking scienists that have scientifically weak theory. They literaly sacrifice industry cutting emissions to the bone. Lifespan drops 10 years and Asia - not buying Gore-acle's story - takes the top. China and India don't care about thier carbon dioxide, as they're progressing they change to less polluting technologies from practical reasons. But for this decade - they pump extreme amounts of greenhouse gases (so much that they break terrible barier of... behold 5%! of natural level!)
Temperature... drops some grades Celsius down.
Greens are hanged on tree's branches, Gore commits suicide while his energy gobbling mansion is stormed by angry mob, reason and science are losing authority - all of it, not only climate alarmists.
Huge meteor is sighted enrout to Earth. Evidence is rock-solid, calculation are extremaly accurate. Only way to avert disaster is to spend trillions world-wide in rockets to launch 2000 nuclear warheads to change it's trajectory. No one is going to sacrifice decades of developement for "this crazed scientists, on greenies leash, that took down western civiliastion".
...
K-Boom.
I've watched all P&T Bullshit episodes, so listining what he has to say directly sounded as a good idea. One of his first vidos posted there under "weather opportunists" was about teh dreded global warming.
He asked extremaly viable question - what global warming alarmists consider as an observation that disproves their theory?
This one is really worth pushing.
Skeptics should step on alarmists until they classify symptoms of escalating global warming AND these, that disprove their theory.
Right now greenies can (and DO!) simply attribute anything as global warming side effect. It's hot - obviously global warming. But... when it's cold - it's also global warming! Severe hurricane season in the US? Global warming. No hurricanes in 2007? Silence. Etc. Whatever happens it's either indicator of global warming, or weather, complexity etc.
Most of scientific basis for this whole "earth is burning" hype stems from climate models. After feeding such a model with data and pushing red button they produced scenario of climbing temperatures. However accuracy of such models is questionable. There's a lot of data and process that occur in our planet are pretty complex. Additionaly it's quite probable that some models were ment to produce certain scenarios. Well, even limited bias - feel that "too cold" scenarios are in need of tweaking twice as frequent than the same feel with "hot" ones - could impair results!
If these models were running for 20 years without major changes, and the most accurate of them was used and the rest of them scrapped - we could place some trust in it. But if it's unproven?
There's also one interesting developement - teh righteous models of doom - have predicted drastic warming in the antarctic, that is cooling at the moment. Was it enough to at least acknowagle that they lost one point here? You guessed it: "It isn't surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn't be expected to be equally exact for all locations,"
Did any models predict this: "Extreme cold weather is occurring worldwide. On Dec. 4, in Seoul, Korea, the temperature was a record minus 5 degrees Celsius. Nov. 24, in Meacham, Ore., the minimum temperature was 12 degrees Fahrenheit colder than the previous record low set in 1952. The Canadian government warns that this winter is likely to be the coldest in 15 years."
Another issue is linking temperatures to industries' carbon dioxide emmisons.
If global warming was rock-solid, it's links to industry would still be weak. Carbon dioxide is only a fraction of greenhouse gases and industry accounts only for a fraction of it's production. If you're going to travel with two friends you'll produce roughly the same amount of carbon dioxide traveling by car and... running! One good season for vulcanos can trump years of humanities factories in greenhouse emmision.
I think the worst that scenario that may happen si this one. I've acquired it using climate model so it's so very accurate! Behold:
In next decade developed countries cave to bandwagon of greenies, politicians and grant-yanking scienists that have scientifically weak theory. They literaly sacrifice industry cutting emissions to the bone. Lifespan drops 10 years and Asia - not buying Gore-acle's story - takes the top. China and India don't care about thier carbon dioxide, as they're progressing they change to less polluting technologies from practical reasons. But for this decade - they pump extreme amounts of greenhouse gases (so much that they break terrible barier of... behold 5%! of natural level!)
Temperature... drops some grades Celsius down.
Greens are hanged on tree's branches, Gore commits suicide while his energy gobbling mansion is stormed by angry mob, reason and science are losing authority - all of it, not only climate alarmists.
Huge meteor is sighted enrout to Earth. Evidence is rock-solid, calculation are extremaly accurate. Only way to avert disaster is to spend trillions world-wide in rockets to launch 2000 nuclear warheads to change it's trajectory. No one is going to sacrifice decades of developement for "this crazed scientists, on greenies leash, that took down western civiliastion".
...
K-Boom.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Sunday, January 6, 2008
Why don't people get it?
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr from Mises institute hit's the nail on the head in his article about socialisms appeal. This one got into my "ammo box" bookmarks directory for further use against ethatists. Recomended read.
I almost feal sorry for flame mail to mr. Rockwell after his anti-interentionist article
(it's based on BS - outrageous figueres than Lancet and ORB pulled out of their collective assess. Lancet coordinator of field work denied answearing a question about his methods?! And ORB ... check them out. This method is going to prove what? You wan't to assess casualties - count the bodies. You wan't to smear neo-con's make polls and than talk ppl into desirable answears.)
I hope mr. Rockwell was busy with great work for world economies sake, while missing everything happening around Iraq intervension in the media, blogoshpere and on the ground.
I almost feal sorry for flame mail to mr. Rockwell after his anti-interentionist article
(it's based on BS - outrageous figueres than Lancet and ORB pulled out of their collective assess. Lancet coordinator of field work denied answearing a question about his methods?! And ORB ... check them out. This method is going to prove what? You wan't to assess casualties - count the bodies. You wan't to smear neo-con's make polls and than talk ppl into desirable answears.)
I hope mr. Rockwell was busy with great work for world economies sake, while missing everything happening around Iraq intervension in the media, blogoshpere and on the ground.
Friday, January 4, 2008
Virtual... reality?
This is just an example of how far 100% commercial computer game went in pursuit of realistic graphics. Infinity Ward (developer of Call of Duty) programmed their game to entertain players.
Americas Army dev team had different goal. Their tab was paid by US Army, players may download it free of charge. It's designed as a recrutiment tool. Developers went all out for realism (leaving off some gory parts - if you die - you just die... no lying in the pool of blood without legs).
Technology acquired while developing this game is used outside of virtual reality.
New addition to CQB training is in big part due to experience with Americas Army game. It's strange shoothouse without wooden silhouettes of enemies. They're substituted by ... projections. Recriuts storm a room with live ammo and see enemies projected on the walls. "Bots" may run, surrender, look for a gun or shoot back. Program analyzes hits, so if you shoot projection's leg it won't instantly die, just get wounded.
Is line between real and virual getting blurrier by the day?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
