Call me a cynic, but I have seen more honesty displayed by used-car salesmen. He can really go back to dance with Ahmadinejad as far as I am concerned.
350.org is thus called because 350 is the cumulative IQ of the members of that organization.
A motion has been tabled last year to change the name to 352.org as lifelong member Mrs Rogers of Bluff, AZ remembered to lock the front door of the house after letting the cat in, thereby single-handedly increasing the IQ of McKibben’s group by two points.
However, the motion’s text has since been misplaced, and unless they get to 355 at least, nobody will have a clue where to find it.
Let’s forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with eating bluefin tuna.
Bluefin is a delicacy, not usually eaten as steaks. It is usually three small slices, certainly no more than five or six, on a plate containing three or four species of fish.
In the controversies surrounding fishery management and questions of species abundance in the US and Europe, environmental organizations may tend to overstate the issues, and for very good reason: Environmental organizations are essentially lobbyists and mostly depend on public donations for their livelihood. Therefore, they tend to overstate in order to attract the attention of the public to a given issue. And that is precisely how public opinion has been shaped on the issue of bluefin.
Anyone who reads the news knows that these days NOAA is not considered a compliant partner of US fishermen. NOAA’s decision to not place Atlantic bluefin under protection of the Endangered Species Act at the end of May 2011, was not a capitulation to the bluefin fishermen, but an historic decision based upon exhaustive study undertaken over 12 months and involving US and European scientists and fishery management specialists both inside and outside of government. Some of the best minds in bluefin science had input into this exhaustive process. There is no doubt that if NOAA had any way of validating the probability of extinction or even the threat of extinction, they would have listed the bluefin under ESA. The simple fact is that there is no creditable pelagic scientist who will sign their name to a statement saying that Atlantic bluefin is, 1/ endangered with extinction, 2/ threatened with extinction or, 3/ near [or “on the edge of..”] extinction.
As to the issue of commerce driving the bluefin to extinction, we can thank the media for this misunderstanding. There are no US bluefin fishermen who have Mercedes parked in front of their homes. Practically every article written on bluefin never fails to mention that bluefin sells in Tokyo for upwards of $150,000 “for one fish”. It is amazing to me that journalists have never even bothered to check on this. Auction data from Tsukiji Market for bluefin is available every day online. US bluefin fishermen receive approximately $4-8/lb for their fish, less than they would get if they fished for scallops. The US bluefin fishery is a small, artisanal fishery in which the fish are caught sustainably using hand techniques. The Pew has recently validated this statement. No industrialized fishing methods are allowed. Each vessel is a sole proprietorship, owned by its captain. The US bluefin artisanal fishery is the most highly regulated bluefin fishery in the world. The limit per day in season is three fish and the minimum size must be 73”. A fisherman would be very lucky to catch three fish in one day. It is true, however, that once every year or so, usually in Dec or Jan, an Asian restauranteur dramatically bids up the price of one bluefin at Tsukiji Market as a publicity stunt and this is what finds its way into the media.
Come al solito, la partita politica in Italia in questo momento non si gioca sul piano delle idee (non c’è la tradizione anglosassone del think tank), e forse neanche su quello dei sentimenti (che appassiona i francesi, che si chiedono sempre se ciò che funziona in pratica funzioni anche in teoria).
Si tratta, oggi come ieri, di un problema di “potere”…quindi bisognerebbe mostrare di “poter fare”. Occorre un inusitato moto di rottura, vuoi con le aliquote fisse, vuoi con la semplificazione tributaria tout-court, vuoi con l’abolizione delle Province.
Parlarne lascerà il tempo che trova. Farlo significhera’ dimostrare di avere le chiavi del “potere” e rinvigorirà il consenso come all’epoca della reazione alla tragedia dell’Aquila.
Tutto sommato, non occorrerà aspettare molto.
I knew I was asking for a miracle even bigger than catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, still for a few short hours my optimist side took over and kept waiting for any signal that Policy Lass would “get it”.
“It” being the rather obvious fact that by antagonizing anybody that doesn’t adhere to their particular aspect of climate faith, by focusing on exclusivity nobody will ever be able to see approved and then implemented any policy, climate or otherwise. That applies to democracy, but also to pretty much all dictatorships apart from Burma and North Korea perhaps.
Now, considering also the fact that 19 years of international climate efforts have been even less effective than 40 years of international illegal drugs efforts, one starts to wonder
does Susan/Policy Lass/Shewonk actually care about the environment, climate change and the planet, to the point of being willing to participate to the building of effective, practical, realistic, implementable environment and climate change policies…or is she just interested to participate to a good fight?
The end result of my probing? Susan “Shewonk” didn’t get it, actually launched into a tirade of extreme pessimism regarding policy of any kind. That still doesn’t explain what she would find worthwhile in berating people that don’t totally agree with her. Also somebody (Friedman?) said pessimists are right, but it’s the optimists that can change the world. So Susan can’t change the world, and doesn’t even want to.
Another commenter “sharper00″ went a step further, and appeared to justify the aforementioned berating by the desire to tell people when their attitudes and decisions are not based on science, where “science” is whatever “sharper00″ means it is. It’s the famous strip, why don’t you come to sleep, wait, somebody’s wrong on the internet. This doesn’t strike as a particularly effective way of saving the planet either.
In a few short hours things degenerated, as usual, with the all-too-predictable actions of a pair of bullies, the aforementioned sharper00 and the notorious Dhogaza, transformed in the Climate Torquemadas, spending their Saturday by reading my contributions to Steven Goddard’s blog in the insane attempt of finding a mistake for me to admit. I’m feeling honored already.
What they found, was instead a collection of sarcastic remarks. Alas, they didn’t get that either. How many people really equate sarcasm to “joke”, I wonder. Apart from climate believers that is.
Anyway…what I find ridiculous in the extreme, beyond sarcasm even, is that those that scour the web in search of a “denier” to bully, are the same people that claim the world is going to experience a series of disasters unless something’s done pretty quickly.
It makes absolutely no sense.
Reposting anyhere my complete blog presence since January 2003 will do nothing, nothing, nothing at all wrt preventing the AGW disasters they fill their mouths and keyboard with. So why would anybody do that?
Why do they do that?
There has to be somebody out there capable of explaining themselves.
Averages can only tell you so much, and that’s quite little. As “global warming” is based on worldwide averages, it should be then always looked at judiciously and with a good deal of curiosity to figure out what is happening above and beyond the simple figure that is an average temperature.
Say, one lives in Placeville, a town where it’s -20C in January, +20C in July. Average is zero C (32F).
Imagine now, winters warm by 10C, summers cool by 5C. So it’s -10C in January, +15C in July. Average is 2.5C (36.5F).
Headline news: “Placeville heavily hit by global warming, average temperatures up by 2.5C“. When the real-life news is, it’s much cooler than before: still very cold in January, and now not even warm in July.
This is such a simple concept, I am always amazed how many people don’t get it. But then few grasp the most elemental aspects of statistics. And I wish three people in the world understood what “global warming” might be about.
Time will tell. Here’s a couple of comments I have just left at Shewonk. One never knows what happens with one’s comments, nowadays…
The underlying question of course is: does Susan/Policy Lass/Shewonk actually care about the environment, climate change and the planet, to the point of being willing to participate to the building of effective, practical, realistic, implementable environment and climate change policies…or is she just interested to participate to a good fight?
#5. Perish the thought that we are all losing because of war-like attitudes such as yours? I mean, it’s been almost 20 years from Rio, and “climate change policy” is always at square one (or counter-effective, such as the ETS transferring money from the taxpayers to the big utility companies). How many times does one need to bang one’s head against the same wall before deciding to open the door?
If not now, when will it be the time to reconsider the whole approach?
#7. I could just ask you the same question. What “realism” in continuing along a path that has failed repeatedly? Which bit of “climate change policy is always at square one, or counter-effective” don’t you get? And after two decades of attempts?
Unless of course you’re in denial, and believe anything practical regarding climate change has been achieved by anybody anywhere (I live in the UK, and the “greenest government” is going from one set of climate shambles to another).
The answer cannot be, “the enemy outsmarted us”. Because if the enemy keeps outstmarting you, and you keep trying the same thing over and over again, the problem is not your enemy, is it.
Simply put, there are many other ways to get things done in politics than demonizing one’s opponents and go on the warpath. It’s also difficult, especially in a democracy, to see anything become law if there’s no effort at inclusiveness.
I would say, even under most tyrants it’s impossible to see anything become law if all efforts are in the direction of identifying whoever doesn’t follow one’s orthodoxy, with the aim of isolating them. Of course you’ll end up “isolating” the whole world, isolating yourself that is.
This situation keeps reminding me of that insane “Islamist” group in Algeria (the GIA, I believe) that decided at one point the whole population was made up of apostates. Of course, support rapidly evaporated.
As microblogged live on my (other) Twitter account, @mmorabito67 on May 25, 2011:
- At the BIS British Interplanetary Society in London for Alan Lawrie’s SaturnV presentation. live microblogging 6pm GMT
- Title is “Saturn V Manufacturing and testing” – room packed
- Special anniversary of Kennedy’s announcement of the Moon attempt in 1961
- Lawrie has 30 years of space technology experience
- Kennedy spoke at around 1.09pm EDT – Also 45th of first full rocket
- Mastermind was Von Braun – developed in record time, new materials invented
- Huntsville Al. was a small city when Von Braun went there in the 1950s -
- Picture of Von Braun team member meeting Korolev’s daughter -
- Saturn was a military concept for testing rockets at the start -
- Pictures of Marshall Spaceflight Center test facilities -
- RL10 h2 / o2 rocket test facility. Neosho rocket production facility in Missouri near Joplin -
- Details of rocket. First stage S-1C by Boeing and MSF.
- Welded tanks but bolted intertanks. Manufacturing details. Fairings around external engines blown after separation
- Pictures of retrorockets firing – heroicrelics.org
- S-1C firing test at MSF. Walt Disney visiting Huntsville
- Picture of Saturn V in test stand
- People measuring rocket’s vibrational modes by pushing it – same happened for Ares -
- Stage built vertically but engines inserted horizontally -
- First stage of Apollo 16 caught fire during tests. Engineers forced to look at the failed parts.
- S-II second stage by NAA in California. Not kerosene but hydrogen. One tank with one bulkhead within
- Testing at same Mississippi facility still used
- Story of mistaken loading to explosion due to incorrect procedures
- First stage o2 not insulated but second h2 had to be. Several attempts up to Apollo 13.
- Third stage S-IV B similar to second stage but one engine.
- Tanks hemispherical in 3rd ellipsoidal in 1st and 2nd
- 2nd stage external insulation strong metal inside. 3rd stage insulation inside by tiles that didn’t fall off.
- Picture of Skylab being built out of 3rd stage
- Explosion in Jan 1967 of S-IVB-503 3rd stage one week before Apollo 1.- problem with Helium tanks
- Problem with welding of He tanks.
- Pictures comparing sites in 1967 and 2006 -
- F-1 rocket engines – tested at Edwards
- J-2 tested near Hollywood
- Overview of Saturn V flights. Second flight not so well (Apollo 6) with 2 lost engines then Apollo 8
- Apollo 8 – a major structural failuree in California a day earlier but launched anyway
- Pictures of test firings of Apollo 11. Lightning striking Apollo 12. Apollo 17 3rd stage never test fired.
- How did they make it so perfect? Leadership, mindset. Von Braun and other German managers
- Many things worked by dodging bullets
- Personally I would not be surprised the programme was stopped before a major accident would kill it and spaceflight
The lecture followed the publication of “Saturn” by Alan Lawrie with Robert Godwin.
One of the least known works by Jules Verne, “Sand dessus dessous” (“Upside down”, “Topsy-turvy“, published as “The Purchase of the North Pole“) making an eery example of the trouble with geoengineering. From Wikipedia:
the Baltimore Gun Club from From the Earth to the Moon attempt to purchase the North Pole to access large deposits of coal beneath it. [...] Barbicane, Nicholl, and J.T. Maston plan on tilting the Earth’s axis, making it similar to Jupiter’s. There would be no more seasons (warm all year round), the North Pole would be brought farther south (about 67 degrees north), and many countries (mostly in Asia) would be overcome by floods. The United States would also gain much more land. They plan on creating a huge explosion in the Kilimanjaros using Nicholl’s new invention, the powerful explosive, micro-meteorite. The members of the Gun Club soon get ready to create the explosion. The world is in panic. When the explosion does go, huge damage is made in the area. But the axis does not change. [...]
- Venice is sinking (the city in Italy, that is)
- It is apparently sinking due to human activities (buildings, gas and water extraction, etc)
- However, were Venice not be where it is, it would not be sinking
- Venice is where it is because it was founded by escaping populations around 421AD
- The populations were escaping from invading Germans and Huns
- Germans and Huns were invading due to climate change
QED: Venice is sinking…due to climate change.
- Venice is not sinking
- It is not sinking because storm surges are expected to happen less often
- Such expectations are due to climate change.
QED: Venice is not sinking…due to climate change.
Next: why it is legal for the UK Government to collect VAT on fuel duties; how President Obama has started decreasing the Afghanistan war effort by sending in more troops; why banks too big to fail must be encouraged to get even bigger.
See: the world starts making some sense!
I have a climate-related peer-reviewed “comment” approved by both peers for publication on “Nature”. It didn’t see the light of the day because the Editors overruled the reviewers.
I also have a climate-related letter to the Editors approved by one Editor for publication on “Nature” (paper edition, not just website). It didn’t see the light of the day because a more senior Editor overruled the previous one.
I think that’s enough experience with dishonest editing at that political rag, a waste of space formerly known as a prestigious scientific journal.
Come mi sento bene al pensiero che io non abbia mai seguito “Annozero”. Se questo e’ il livello, siamo al puro intrattenimento. Meglio “Land of the Lost”, allora.
I hereby declare that anybody that can come up with a mitigation plan different than “a shot in the dark ruining us and the children for sure and with a slight chance of getting the grandchildren marginally better” will get my unconditional support.
I don’t think such a plan exist, otherwise black carbon would already be a thing of the past.
It’s because those e-mails will make them look and sound petty and manipulative, with all those white and not-so-white lies peppered around, the fence-sitting dominating their writings, the brown-nosing, the bullying, the cult of their personality, the disdain of outsiders.
And so FOI requests can destroy a lot of the veneer of hypocritical respectability, professionalism, “cool” image of the fearless purveyor of what reality is about.
Sad isn’t it…and still, it shouldn’t take a PhD to understand that you should consider anything you write on the internet as something that could be put up tomorrow as first-page news. Or should it?
No, I am not talking about this Fish. Or that Phish. I am talking about fish of the swimming variety, recently in the news as under multiple lines of attack by (you guessed it right) increased CO2 in the atmosphere.
In the meanwhile, though, there are some indications that, at least for now, great white sharks are into AC/DC. That could be useful news (if under threat of attack, just convince a fellow diver to burst into a watery version of “Back in Black” and you’ll be fine. You, that is, not the fellow diver).
Why stop there, though? We can combine all these pieces of evidence to come up with a realistic scenario (as realistic as anything ever written by the likes of David Suzuki or Paul R. Ehrlich, that is): with human-caused CO2 emissions apparently unstoppable, fish the world over will experience irregular heartbeats, and hearing difficulties causing a decline in musical taste.
That is, they will all suffer “Bieber Fever“.
Please help prevent such a tragedy, by reducing your CO2 emissions.
There’s a Donald A. Brown Associate Professor at Penn State happy to demonstrate that professorships should be assigned more carefully, and teaching of “environmental ethics, science, and law” is too much for person to do.
For those not in the know, Prof (Ha!) Brown has used lots of words to argue that “Ethics Requires Acknowledging Links Between Tornadoes and Climate Change Despite Scientific Uncertainty“. Basically, even if science says there’s no link (perhaps, just perhaps, there’s a negative link), Prof (Ha! Ha!) Brown argues that the link must be done because in the face of possible future disasters, it’s ethical (??) to lie now to the public.
Reactions have been predictable, from debunking to horrified to speechless. But (as already suggested at Revkin’s place), personally, I do welcome silly professors saying silly things about climate change (they mean, about AGW). In fact (this is my comment at Lubos’):
By overusing the AGW concept, [they] will cheapen it to oblivion. Furthermore if AGW is a moral cause, then it’s demonstrably non-scientific, as science will only take the third place after ethics and politics. So the IPCC becomes even less important, or meaningful.
Go, go, AGW go…one stupid claim at a time, and AGW will soon be gone!!
Scare story on the BBC on Wednesday morning, about shale gas extraction by “fracking” and agitating Blackpool. What a surprise. There appears to be a concerted effort to kill shale gas, despite (or because) it being so plentiful. What a surprise.
Anyway: the scare is unwarranted. What a surprise. Third time.
We’re so green about the environment, we’re recycling our fears too.
According to the World Health Organization, mobile (cell) phones “may cause cancer”. However, there’s no established link. Still, it could be a possibility. It could also not be.
Therefore a bunch of experts have decided to warn the public with the non-news. Maybe that’s the “ethical” thing to do.
But if that’s true, then we should warn the public about a far more certain risk. You see, it can be easily established that the one thing in common among people that die, is that they were alive in the first place.
Armed with this incredible revelation, the WHO experts will soon recommend us all not to be born at all.
There are two things going for Sarah Palin. Apart from a following among middle-aged men that is (doesn’t look like the typical grandma, does she).
One, “Sarah Palin” has been portrayed such a mindless idiot, she’ll earn points just by reading the time right, out of a talking clock. There is a great advantage in lowering expectations.
Two, she’ll have a very easy time convincing people that it’s the Press that paints her in a negative light. So during a campaign, if there’ll be a campaign, she will describe all of her faux-pas and gaffes as “don’t listen to that, it’s just the evil Press”. Even the real faux-pas and gaffes, that is.
IOW on all fronts she will be able to say or do anything without fear of losing score with anybody in the electorate (unless she’s photographed kicking a puppy or slapping her mom). Every additional day will be a day with more supporters.
It’s developing in the classical shoo-in…