JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Weekend Unthreaded

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 6.4/10 (23 votes cast)
Weekend Unthreaded, 6.4 out of 10 based on 23 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/ctmk2hp

290 comments to Weekend Unthreaded

  • #
    Joe V.

    What’s all the fuss () about atmospheric CO2 touching on 400 ppm ?. It hasn’t even doubled yet since preindustrial times.

    So what if , as they like to claim, it hasn’t been the same in about 3 million years ?

    I bet the US Money Supply hasn’t been either.

    The St. Louis Adjusted Monetary Base (BASE), quietly passed though 3 Trillions of Dollars, about a month ago. It was just 856 Billion, only 5 years ago. 5 years during which the US Dollars in circulation have begun to soar, and continued to soar at unprecedented rates, like some mad crazy market bubble.

    Where has all that value come from ?

    82

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Joe V.
      I had a local eco fool going on about this online last week, they claimed 450 ppm was the “dangerous tipping point” blah blah, so I threw the Vostock ice core data at them with the 800 year lag of Co2 following temperature rise, strangely no reply but I comment locally online for other peoples benefit anyway.
      It would be nice to know what 3 million years ago was like on earth but I can’t find too much info except for the ice core data, any ideas?

      131

      • #
        Joe V.

        3 million years ago, they probably had more important things to worry about. The few hominids that were around, probably in Africa, might have wondered , when is the next great extinction going to occur, because it must be due about now, and they’ve been wondering ever since.

        81

      • #
        Joe V.

        It was probably caused by feral camels

        81

      • #
        handjive

        Quote Yonniestone
        May 12, 2013 at 4:54 am

        “It would be nice to know what 3 million years ago was like on earth but I can’t find too much info except for the ice core data, any ideas?”
        .
        The Age Newspaper and Ben Cubby are on to it:

        “The last time* CO2 reached the symbolic milestone of 400 parts per million in the atmosphere (3m years ago)-
        - in the Pliocene era – temperatures rose by between 3 and 4 degrees and sea levels were between five and 40 metres higher than today.

        But wait! “Global Warming Settled Science” is not “settled.”

        Oct. 9, 2009:
        — “You would have to go back at least 15 million years to find carbon dioxide levels on Earth as high as they are today, a UCLA scientist and colleagues report Oct. 8 in the online edition of the journal Science.

        “The last time* carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,” said the paper’s lead author.”

        Any logical, modern, reasonable person capable of thinking for themselves who “look out their window,” these scenarios DO NOT resemble any thing like the world we live in today.

        3 million years or 15 million years?
        The logical conclusion is that carbon dioxide (CO2) is NOT the cause. *Graphs.(See black line).
        .
        And, the global warming frauds are moving the goal posts again after another fail “tipping point” at 400ppm.
        From the Age link above:

        “The 450 ppm level is considered to be the point at which the world has a 50 per cent chance of avoiding dangerous climate change.
        Any higher and the odds of avoiding searing temperature rises of 4 or 5 degrees by the end of the century become prohibitively risky.”

        history-
        350ppm: McKibben learned that scientists at NASA and other respected institutions had reached agreement on a crucial point regarding the health of the world: 350 parts per million of CO2 in the earth’s atmosphere is the safe limit under which humanity can safely exist.

        @380ppm: “Like many people, in the 1990s I believed 550 was the target needed to avoid climate catastrophe” – J.Romm

        Now 450ppm is the next tipping point.
        Like a “ice free arctic,” …

        81

        • #
          Yonniestone

          Thanks for the replies,
          handjive, it’s kind of like Gaddafi’s “line of death” if you cross here you die, no here you die, no here you die and so on ;)
          Something to think about the next great extinction though, ice age anyone?

          41

        • #
          Safetyguy66

          I read a report this morning that said it was the highest levels in 800k years. So basically… pick a date anywhere between 800k and 15mil years ago for your answer

          00

      • #

        The 400 ppm “official” number is hokum. Completely arbitrary. We all know that.

        THe more educated are even aware, thanks to the diligence of the late Ernst-Georg Beck, that higher concentrations of CO2 have been measured over the past 200 years. The 280 ppm “pre-industrial constant” promulgated is equally a fiction. It’s simply the choice of outliers that fit the Keeling curve. That’s how climatologists work; fitting data to curves.

        What is really sad is that there are still so many people around who are convinced that CO2 is at all important; and that somehow by altering the anthroprogenic emisssions, that we can control the weather. They are oblivious to the oceans’ buffering of CO2 concentration, responding to the temperature of the oceans. AIr doesn’t heat the oceans. Only the sun (and to a lesser extent, volcanic activity) has any significant effect on ocean temperature.

        Any reductions in anthroprogencis CO2 emissions will probably be offset by the oceans releasing more CO2 to balance the partial pressure of CO2 at the surface, depending on temperature. i.e. All the “sacrifices” are for nought.

        The only people to benefit from the scary stories are those making money and building political power bases for their own benefit.

        172

        • #

          The 280 ppm “pre-industrial constant” promulgated is equally a fiction. It’s simply the choice of outliers that fit the Keeling curve. That’s how climatologists work; fitting data to curves.

          Exactly. I was beginning to think I needed a tin-foil hat as I dug into this stuff. I honestly can’t believe that $billions have been spent on such shaky foundations.

          I’m glad to see someone else understands where the source of this fraud lay.

          40

          • #
            Safetyguy66

            Also there is a global assumption that the pre industrial number (whatever it is) was in some sort of “harmony” when this argument is clearly nothing more than

            https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature

            If it were true then it would have never have changed. How can it be in harmony at 280ppm and also in harmony at 400ppm+ prior to that…. utter nonsense as usual

            21

      • #
        Leo G

        What was the source of all that anthropogenic carbon dioxide 3 million years back, and what’s been the positive feedback?

        31

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      What’s all the fuss about atmospheric CO2 touching on 400 ppm?

      Milestones, like changing from 399 to 400, are excellent excuses to have a glorious angst party, where the vaporous can run around like headless chicken for a while, and then go home feeling thankful that, by the grace of Gaia, they have survived another catastrophe.

      161

      • #
        Rick Bradford

        … as they did in 1830.

        “Thundering along at previously unimaginable speeds [15mph], early steam locomotives were a frightening prospect for their Victorian passengers. Before the opening of the first major railway line, the Liverpool & Manchester in 1830, there were fears it would be impossible to breathe while travelling at such a velocity, or that the passengers’ eyes would be damaged by having to adjust to the motion.”

        http://www.historyextra.com/railway

        70

    • #
      Jaymez

      Sarah Clarke is too ready to uncritically repeat anything the ‘Climate Institute’ prints without doing any decent research. This alarmist Climate Institute, which has a Zero Carbon objective for Australia – which means no fossil fuel usage at all, is hardly a balanced, scientific source.

      Sarah Clarke has shown herself not to be an investigative journalist on climate science matters. Had she done any research she would know that there are many proxy and empirical records which show atmospheric CO2 higher than it is now in the last 3 million years, and that temperatures are poorly correlated with CO2 levels. For example see: http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/home/9195-co2-levels-pre-industrial-revolution

      40

    • #
      cohenite

      This essay is the one of the best analysis of past levels of CO2 dealing with the ice-cores, stomata and chemical analysis by Beck.

      20

      • #
        ian hilliar

        The reason the ice cores seriously underestimate the co2 levels, has everything to do with soluability of co2. The colder the temperature and the higher the pressure , the more rapidly the co2 dissolves into water.As one drills down into the ice, the friction melts a little ice, into which meltwater the co2 is rapidly absorbed from the ice . Read a couple of papers about it years ago, -anybody out there want to refresh my memory as to the author? Polish or Russian

        10

        • #
          crakar24

          So what you are saying is the ice core data is corrupted and cannot be used and the PPM and temp measurements are unusable and the whole temp leads CO2 debate is just getting started?

          00

          • #
            ian hilliar

            No ,not at all. It was actually Dr Zbigniew Jaworowski, who really is THE expert in ice cores, whose 1997 paper-its on the net, read it-shows exactly why co2 levels in ice cores can be compared to other co2 levels in other ice cores ,but not to atmospheric co2. Another simple explanation , like ocean outgassing as the cause for rising atmospheric co2. Too simple ,of course , for climate modellers, who, knowing nothing of history, remain totally unaware of William of Ockham

            10

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        Thanks for the ref.

        Part way through it.

        KK :)

        10

  • #
    Ronald

    Someone sayd that 400 ppm was a trasholde for danger higher up was to dangeres to accept. ITS BULLSCHIT but it dit the trick scarring humanns. The fun part is stil that Co2 getting up and thempreature gose down still more. So there is no relation between CO2 and themprature.

    100

  • #

    Being worried about 400 ppm vs. 395 ppm is a bit like being worried about a “Danger: 100 Meg Ohms!” sign.

    121

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Being worried about 400 ppm vs. 395 ppm is a bit like being worried about a “Danger: 100 Meg Ohms!” sign.

      I don’t know about that, Lionell. That’s a really dangerous impedance between the ears of these warmers. It keeps the truth from sinking in. Better it was down around 50 Ohms for coax or about 1 k Ohms for cat 5/6 cable, depending on their connection. A good impedance match with the Internet would help them a lot. Otherwise the bit bucket fills up too fast, overflows and makes a real mess.

      70

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        Now Roy it’s a bit early here in Australia for technical torque, but isn’t Impedance the Inverse of Resistance?

        This just gave me a great idea that maybe some of our thieving politicians might function better if they were inverted and hung up against a wall.

        KK :)

        90

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Resistance applies to direct current, and refers to the energy lost in pushing electrons along a wire — measured in ohms.

          Impedance applies to any form of alternating current, and refers to the energy lost in maintaining the magnetic field that is generated with alternating current — also measured in ohms.

          It is interesting to note, that with power supply, each electron is pushed up the wire, and is then pulled back again. This happens fifty times a second (60 in the US and Japan). This means that each electron is constantly going back and forth, but never leaves the wire. Think about that. The electricity companies are selling you electrons, and then stealing them back again, only to charge you again, for the same electron. No wonder the politicians are gunning for the power generators, they are consuming coal, that the government could sell to China, and not even producing new electrons as a result.

          Trust me in this, I am an Electronics Engineer.

          120

          • #
            Mark D.

            All right. What is the difference between the Ohmic impedance and Ohmic resistance of a given straight length of copper wire suspended in the air at 50 or 60 Hz, Mr. EE?

            I concur with Roy that 100 Mohms is likely the impedance ear to ear of the typical Greeny (AKA warmist).

            60

            • #
              Joe V.

              In the case of a straight wire there is no difference, bcause it has no Reactance.
              Impedance being the vector sum of Resistance and inductive and capacitive Reactances.

              Now coil the wire around an iron or ferrite core(you’d also have to insulate the wire) , then you’d be adding some inductive reactance, which increases the overall Impedance for AC currents.

              40

            • #
              inedible hyperbowl

              Impedance of a vacuum? Explain further.

              10

              • #
                Joe V.

                As conduction is the movement of electrons you can’t get no conduction of electricity through a vacuum. Therefore, in terms of impedance, it would be extremely high.
                (Electromagnetic radiation would be another matter however)

                21

              • #
                Eddie Sharpe

                Some would have it, that EM radiation isn’t a matter at all.

                10

              • #
                Joe V.

                Matter it may not be, but matter it does, just as much as any more sedate forms of energy.

                10

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            Think about that. The electricity companies are selling you electrons, and then stealing them back again, only to charge you again, for the same electron.

            The ones they pull back are just replaced by electrons coming back in over the other leg of the circuit. So no net gain in electrons at all. I figure that’s an even worse abuse because I’m being charged continually for no net gain in electrons at all, even over half a cycle. Someone call the nearest politician. We need to get this fixed right away.

            50

          • #

            Say, what is it with Joanne’s blog?

            I’ve never seen so many electrical engineers.

            Makes my piddling Associate Diploma in Electrical Engineering look puny. (Well it is really, a nothing in fact, just recognition for 25 years working in, and teaching the Trade)

            Just a short clarification on the electron being sent down the wire and then sucked back. The electron only travels from one atom to the next, and that atom then loses an electron, and so on, all done at the speed of light, 186,000 miles a second, so the current travels 1860 miles in that sine wave’s half cycle, and then back 1860 miles in the second half of the cycle.

            Say, let’s show you some absolute basics of how electrical theory is based around Maths.

            CIVIL

            You electrical engineers know what I’m talking about here.

            Vector diagrams for True Power, Apparent Power etc.

            Work out Capacitive reactance from the Capacitor size, Inductive Reactance from the size of the Inductor, knowing the input frequency, all Maths based calculations.

            Inductive Reactance. Capacitive Reactance, and that, in combination with Resistance then gives you the circuit Impedance. From that we can work out the current flow in the whole circuit, and knowing the input voltage we can then work out current flow through the Resistive, Inductive and Capacitive parts of the circuit, and on and on.

            All done with vector diagrams, Geometry, and Trigonometry. Done originally with log tables from a small booklet of more than a hundred pages, then with slide rules, and now with plastic brains.

            Then there’s series circuits, parallel circuits, tank circuits and combinations of these.

            Hence CIVIL [Capacitive (C), Current (I), Voltage (V), Current(I), and Inductive (L)]

            Work out what is the X axis, (the constant, either Voltage in a parallel circuit or Current in a series circuit) and start your vector diagrams from there.

            Then there’s Power Factor, the relationship between True Power and Apparent Power, again vector diagrams.

            And on and on.

            The toughest part of learning the electrical trade was always the Maths based subjects, and that really sorted people out.

            See now how electricity is more than just the power coming out of the hole in the wall!

            Tony.

            50

            • #

              I thought all the difficult electrical problems were imaginary. ;-)

              70

              • #
                Joe V.

                Aren’t the old ones the best ones ?
                And isn’t it great the way the pioneers reduced these difficult ones into quantities we can work with ?

                30

            • #
              Eddie Sharpe

              Your knowledge and moreover your ability to use and communicate it in no nonsense terms Tony, puts many ‘qualifications’ to shame. That’s not to diminish qualfns. or the achieving of them, but quallies. are like tools. It’s what you do with them that counts and some are adept at achieving results without all the tools. Those guys I admire (as would my finance director, if only he knew how valuable they are).
              Some of us are too busy doing stuff to go around collecting quallies. It might be nice to collect some more when I retire , but maybe I’m just forgetting how hard it was.

              40

            • #
              Geoff Sherrington

              Tony,
              I’ve been trying to get people to understand the ‘quality’ of electricity using terms like quadrature, power factor etc. Years ago I studied a.c. theory, which was then part of regular Physics II or so.
              Seems to me there is a problem of management control on grids with various types of devices feeding back small amounts of generated electricity of unknown vector quality. Also use of trendy devices. One good example was the banishment of tungsten filament lamps and promotion of Compact Fluorescent Lamps. The CFLs had no inbuilt failure mechanism except high temperature in the electronic circuit at the base, often leading to temperatures that would cause fire. But the other problem affected the power factor and got especially bad if you continued to use some wall mounted dimmers that had been used with tungsten lamps.

              Sometimes the price of progress is more complexity and less public understanding. That’s the type of combination that helps fuel the Green Taliban. They do not tell you that windmills and solar panels feeding into the NEM take a lot of management to maintain quality. More management equals more cost. Has anyone ever calculated this added cost, just to keep the supply clean and pure with all that junk attached?

              20

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              Tony,

              Actually the electrons flowing in a circuit don’t move all that fast. They have mass, albeit small and therefore can’t move at the speed of light. What moves down the conductor with the speed of light is any change in voltage from whatever the power source is. So if I have a circuit 186,000 miles long between the switch and the light bulb and I turn on the switch, the light bulb doesn’t see a voltage and can’t start to light up for a whole second.

              The actual speed with which electrons move is quite slow. The current has an effect proportional to the total amount of charge moving past a given point. So 2 electrons passing your reference point every microsecond at 1 MPH and 1 electron moving at 2 MPH will have the same effect.

              In real circuits you’re dealing with millions or billions of electrons moving down the wire but going very slow.

              20

              • #
                Eddie Sharpe

                I like to think of that as it’s the electric field, essentially a wave that travels along the wire at about 186,000 miles a second. All the electrons in the influence of that field then react accordingly. Having graduated in EE almost 30 years ago I still think its magic stuff.

                20

              • #

                I remember lab sessions at uni where we measured “electron mobility” through semiconductors. Electrons move about as quickly as snails; measured in centimetres per second.

                That’s why faster computers require really closely-packed semi-conductor junctions. Billionths of a metre apart … now down to a few tens of nanometres in consumer goods.

                10

              • #
                Joe V.

                Would that be the good old ‘migration’of ‘holes’ Bernd?

                00

              • #

                Holes? I remember them… But without digging through my archives from the 1970′s, I can’t say if it was in terms of holes or electrons.

                10

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              Tony,

              There’s no substitute for your practical experience. Never belittle your Associate Degree because where you start doesn’t matter. What counts is where you’re going.

              20

            • #
              What the!

              TonyfromOz,
              I am so glad you explained that so clearly for me.
              Just one question, does that mean that I put the salt and sugar in before the yeast? I have always put the yeast in first.
              I really have learned something here today…
              Thanks for that.

              11

              • #

                Not really important the order but it is not good to add the ingredients in a way that exposes the yeast to high salt eg if you mixed the salt and yeast (even if dry) and then add water.

                20

          • #
            KinkyKeith

            RW

            All that tech torque about Impedance takes me back to ’67 and EE1Z so it is none too fresh, but I am very familiar with another term that relates to politicians mainly.

            Reluctance: is a direct measure of the resistance offered by politicians when faced with the option of doing something useful for the community of defaulting to self interest.

            Politicians as a species have a high Reluctance to doing anything positive or beneficial and this can only be reduced by extreme levels of threat or coercion arising from voters.

            KK :)

            40

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          KK,

          If I remember right, the inverse of impedance is called conductance or at least the real part of it is. The unit of measurement is the Mho (Ohm spelled backward). The imaginary part of the inverse is called admittance. We need to clarify whether we’re talking about AC or DC because if it’s AC then we need to take care of the imaginary component as well as the real one. It it’s DC then there is no imaginary component.

          I suspect that the average warmist has only DC capability because their general electrical capabilities are somewhat primitive.

          So now that I’ve thoroughly confused everyone, including myself, the problem remains how to get real information into the heads of warmists who have far to much impedance to it’s passage into their centers of critical thinking.

          Oh oh! Here come the men in the white coats again. Can’t wait around — gotta run…

          ;-)

          60

          • #
            KinkyKeith

            White’s OK.

            It’s the Green ones you need to worry about.

            KK :)

            40

          • #

            The units for the inverse of resistance was changed from mho to siemens (S) while I were at uni.

            10

            • #
              TonyfromOz

              Majoring in English!

              Nyul nyuk nyuk!

              Sorry Bernd, I couldn’t help myself.

              Tony.

              00

              • #

                Say, this whole Thread has been uncommonly humourous.

                Not many of the usual suspects, though, so I’m, umm, sort of tempted to believe that a belief in CAGW has another little side effect. It seems to cause their funny bone to go on strike!

                Tony.

                21

              • #

                :-) I cudnt evun spel injunear. now i is one.

                oll mi misteaks ah de liberat

                00

            • #
              KinkyKeith

              Youngster

              10

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              The units for the inverse of resistance was changed from mho to siemens (S) while I were at uni.

              Nuts! It all changes faster than climate science. How does a poor old software engineer ever keep up? ;-)

              But I can tell you one thing — I bet you don’t eat those green bananas. :-)

              10

            • #
              Joe V.

              Well you learn something new every day. According to that source everyone quotes but no-one trusts,Wiki Bernd, that was in 1881

              The mho was officially renamed to the siemens, replacing the old meaning of the “siemens unit”, at a conference in 1881.[4]

              They never mentioned it when I was at Uni. a century later though.

              10

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                We always knew it as the “Mho”.

                KK :)

                00

              • #

                The mho was still widely used, even in the literature but pressure was “suddenly” applied to stamp out its use; especially as the symbol for the unit was sometimes written as ℧ (upside-down capital omega). Which was difficult to type(set).

                The 1881 reference appears to be wrt the siemens mercury unit being replaced by conductance as the inverse of resistance.

                The wonky reference also states:

                The 14th General Conference on Weights and Measures approved the addition of the siemens as a derived unit in 1971.

                i.e. it wasn’t “official” until 1971. So round about 1978 for adoption by EE at UWA seems pretty quick. Even if the unit was “invented” 97 years earlier.

                10

      • #

        Hmmmm. I was thinking that fearing the trace increase in a trace amount of CO2 is similar to fearing the proposed sign. I did not consider that it could be a warning about the impedance between the real world and the mind of a warmest.

        I doubt that there is much of a power mismatch at that impedance considering the minds we are discussing. The signal that gets through would be almost all noise and the warmest can see whatever he wants in it. The thing to fear would be the actions taken based upon that noise.

        121

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Lionel.

      Maybe you better explain the joke.

      Not sure everyone got the idea that mega Ohms are as dangerous as , perhaps even greater than, the threat of CO2 induced Global Warming.

      KK :)

      20

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        KK,

        Ohm’s law (E = IR) is the key here.

        If E (volts) = I (current in amps) X R (resistance in Ohms), then you can solve E = IR for R and get R = E/I.

        Now as you can see, if you have 1 Meg Ohm (1,000,000 Ohms) on the left then according to Ohm’s Law you must have either a low current or a high voltage on the right because E/I must = 1,000,000.

        Warmists are very energetic, implying a high current. So there must also be a high voltage. And high voltage, as we all know, is quite dangerous. So I think Lionell was not joking when he said

        Being worried about 400 ppm vs. 395 ppm is a bit like being worried about a “Danger: 100 Meg Ohms!” sign.

        He was stating the danger of CO2 in electrical engineering terms for all to see.

        ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)

        And no, I won’t promise to behave myself. This is too much fun, at least if I can stay ahead of the men with the big net.

        10

        • #
          KinkyKeith

          Yes Roy

          I understood the E=IR part but assumed that a Meg Ohm resistance is just resistance and does not imply any current or voltage which both have the potential for danger.

          Meg Ohms are not intrinsically dangerous and I thought that he was implying danger as a joke on warmers who are commonly not very well qualified in science.

          E can kill

          I can kill

          but R is just a passive factor.

          Did I misunderstand?

          KK :)

          00

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            I understood the E=IR part but assumed that a Meg Ohm resistance is just resistance and does not imply any current or voltage which both have the potential for danger.

            KK,

            Did you misunderstand? Well that depends on your appreciation for a little hanky-panky with algebra. :-)

            10

            • #
              crakar24

              Well its not that simple, you need to have a good understanding of resistance WRT to Earth etc when working on electrical systems.

              To simply say the resisteive component is passive is a big understatement/mistake.

              Here are some examples

              1, If i hang off a 10KV power line (suspended in air) why dont i get electrocuted

              2, Why do people who get hit by lightning (many KVolts) most of the time not die?

              3, Why do i need to take very short steps when i walk through a HV sub station with high humidity?

              4, What is the difference between series and parallel resistive circuits?

              5, What is teh difference between chassis earth and a ground?

              etc etc etc

              00

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                3, Why do i need to take very short steps when i walk through a HV sub station with high humidity?

                There is always an alternative Crackar.

                Stand on one leg and HOP.

                KK :)

                00

              • #
                crakar24

                Let me think about that for a moment……………i suppose it could work

                10

              • #
                Mark D.

                Here are some examples

                1, If i hang off a 10KV power line (suspended in air) why dont i get electrocuted

                Depends on how you got there hanging!

                2, Why do people who get hit by lightning (many KVolts) most of the time not die?

                Tissue behaves in interesting ways when subject to high energy high rise-time potentials. Never the less lighting is high on the list of occupational cause of death.

                3, Why do i need to take very short steps when i walk through a HV sub station with high humidity?

                Well, because you like to tap dance in strange places?

                4, What is the difference between series and parallel resistive circuits?

                Addition or division?

                5, What is teh difference between chassis earth and a ground?

                Is the chassis buried? :)

                20

              • #
                crakar24

                1, You were lynched by your irrate constituents

                2, Lee Travino once defied the Golfing officials and continued to play whilst everyone around him scurried for cover during an electrical storm. He walked around with a one iron over his head. When asked why he replied “Not even God can hit a one iron”

                3, Tapping would work as you take small steps

                4, Hopping or walking?

                5, No otherwise there would be no difference and the question moot

                20

              • #

                A golf joke and a lightning joke all in one here.

                Golfer Lee Trevino was known for his humour. He was actually struck by lightning in a Tournament once, and some say he was hit three times during his career, but we know of one for certain.

                Once asked about his wariness of lightning, he mentioned that was why he always carried a One Iron in his bag, even though he rarely, if ever used it, as do many golfers.

                He said in the event of an electrical storm, he would just hold the One Iron over his head, and when asked why he replied that not even God can hit a One Iron!

                Tony.

                10

              • #

                Ah crakar, ya beat me to it. Should have read further down before hitting the reply button.

                Tony.

                20

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                When walking near downed power lines or potentially electrified surface it’s good to take small steps or hop on one leg.

                If you legs are too far apart there may be a potential difference between the two areas of contact.

                PD can be reduced by playing like a stork.

                IF you do happen to create a PD between your feet in a storm just imagine the path of travel.

                KK :)

                00

              • #
                Joe V.

                Rumour has if thats why cows are vulnerable to lightning kill, because of the distance between their legs, but the farmer that told me that had his cows insured for lightning, so I’m not so sure.

                10

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Hi Joe.

                Big cows.

                If lightning strikes there is presumably a lot of localised current with a big push behind it.

                The big push, Voltage, will diminish as you get way from the point of impact of the lightning.

                The change in voltage over the ground sets up a potential difference which current loves.

                If the PD happens to be from one end of the cow to another then current may take the path of least resistance though the cow. Most life forms generally don’t feel comfortable when this happens.

                That’s the theory.

                Whether it happens in practice I don’t know.

                KK :)

                10

          • #
            Mark D.

            Yes you mis-understood.

            Only I can kill.

            I is enabled by resistance and voltage.

            20

            • #
              KinkyKeith

              True Mark

              Only I can kill.

              But high voltage like the leads om my old 1959 VW can sure give a wake-up call.

              The misunderstanding thing was mainly related to the idea of Meg Ohms being dangerous. I wasn’t sure if some would get the joke.

              KK :)

              10

              • #
                crakar24

                6 or 12 volt?

                00

              • #
                Mark D.

                Not sure where this is all at. You keep bringing up some girl named Meg and Roy wants Alge’s bra. Crakar24 fancies tap dance in a thunderstorm and I kills.

                Good thing this is unthreaded eh?

                30

              • #
                crakar24

                Mark,

                I knew a girl named Meg once but did not hang around long enough to find out if she was dangerous. In an attempt to bring us back to the topc of the weather and climate change i give you a true story.

                I once worked in Darwin and as you may know it is one of the most lightning prone places on Earth. We had some communications and RADAR equipment in a building and to protect it from lightning surges we had a big arrestor tower out side.

                The tower had the well known golden ball on top with a coaxial cable the size of your forearm running down the centre of the tower which went into the ground and connected to a very large earthing mat.

                One night we got a big storm and the golden ball did its job and attracted the lightning but as the surge ran down the coax towards the underground mats it decided to do its own thing and jumped onto the tower itself destroying the coax in the process.

                From there it ran down the tower and into the ground where it jumped at least ten feet onto the main power cable for the buildig and blew the crap out of everything.

                Some say the flaw in our design was to have the power cables too close to the tower but i have always maintain our design flaw was to have the audacity to think that we could control nature.

                70

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Mark

                You have no Resistance from me with that comment.

                I am reluctant to disagree with any one in this very confused thread.

                KK :)

                20

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                Crackar

                That was long time ago but the engine was running.

                It was 36 hp and could do exactly the rated top speed.

                KK :)

                00

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                The misunderstanding thing was mainly related to the idea of Meg Ohms being dangerous. I wasn’t sure if some would get the joke.

                KK and the rest,

                Who said it was a joke? If you get Meg Ohms high she’s very dangerous. You may think she’s the life of the party. But slowly your resistance is lowered to about nothing and then… …I shudder to think of it. ;-)

                All them there Ohms is dangerous folks like I said. :-)

                10

              • #
                Mark D.

                Crakar24,

                in reply to your lightning story, most people (quite frankly many with EE degrees) have a hard time understanding the effects of lightning strikes. This IMHO is because they don’t grasp that the current waveform is the equivalent of a very high frequency AC flow. This even though the charge potential makes the source essentially DC. When the current rises very fast, things suddenly get strange. Inductors flash over, capacitors become conductors, LC circuits and transformers designed for 50/60 Hz look like a very high impedance and bent or coiled conductors work more like insulators. Parallel conductors act like high frequency transformers and for all the above insulation fails in microseconds. Matters get worse when the lightning current finally gets to the earth. The earth is not just a big hole to fill up with electrons. The soil conditions vary greatly, even moist soil in an area will not have uniform impedance characteristics. The currents have to flow away from the point of entry and frequently find, in their path, tree roots, well casings (with copper wire headed back into a nearby building), earthing rods for electrical systems, and the occasional service utility pipes (gas and water). All these are potential electrical pathways that are unintended and excellent for causing damage and mayhem. Oddly, even massive surge protection can become a backwards path back INTO the part of a system they were designed to protect if things are not built right.

                I’d like to hear more about the strike that turned a braided cable that large into a fuse. Was it actually the lightning to earth conductor or part of an antenna feed? What kind of soil and geology were present where the tower was built?

                10

              • #
                crakar24

                Mark,

                I’d like to hear more about the strike that turned a braided cable that large into a fuse. Was it actually the lightning to earth conductor or part of an antenna feed? What kind of soil and geology were present where the tower was built?

                The tower was about 100 meters from the coast.

                Darwin gets up to or more than 2 meters of rain each year, this rain mainly comes in a period of about 3 months (wet season) so you could say it is well drained soil as it never floods.

                Most of the lightning storms occur during the build up when the soil would be at its driest.

                The tower was to arrest lightning strikes not a RF tower, the cable was a coaxial cable not a braid. The centre conductor was electrically isolated from the tower structure.

                The lighting surge jumped from the centre conductor onto the tower frame and destroyed about 6 inches of coax in the process.

                Not far down the road there was a HF/UHF reciever station with a very large antenna farm, the equipment there was constantly being destroyed do to strikes. They tried every trick in the book to stop the damage but there was nothing they could do. They put in surge arrestors, they would blow but they were too slow there was too much power and acted as nothing more than a speed bumb to the lighting surge.

                00

              • #
                Joe V.

                Surely Meg Ohms can’t be more deadly than Killer Ohms.

                00

              • #
                Joe V.

                I used to work building roads through the hills for servicing Hydro installations (they only got serviced every 20 years or so , so it wasn’t worth maintaining roads in the meantime).
                Anyway, the JCB driver always kept a radio on in his cab, so he could hear the crackle from lightning in the distance and be off down the hill like a shot before it arrived.
                I never could convince him that , theoretically he should be safer inside his metal cab than out on the bare hillside.

                00

            • #
              Rereke Whakaaro

              It’s the Volts that jolts,
              But it’s the mils that kills.

              (“mils” being short for milliamps for the uninitiated)

              10

              • #

                How do you read a Resistor?

                Tony.

                10

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                I’ll bite. ??

                10

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Tony,

                You mean a resistor can write something? Amazing, those Ohms, truly accomplished in all things.

                So then I suppose you’d pick up whatever it wrote and just read it.

                00

              • #
                crakar24

                Black Boys Root Our Young Girls But Virgins Go West, thats how you read them.

                10

              • #
              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Careful there, KK! I hear your Australian censors are a bit touchy. Or was is sensors? It’s getting hard to tell which end is up around here.

                40

              • #

                Now how did I know it would be crakar who would get it right.

                Ours was a little more polite than that back in the 60′s.

                The first part was, umm, similar, but the ending made it a little easier to remember…… beneath violet grey’s wall.

                Now then, what do those colours indicate, and really the longest colour sequence I ever saw was 5 or possibly 6 colours, and most just had four colours.

                The colour sequence is numbered from 0 to 9. Black, brown, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, violet grey, white.

                Each colour represents a number.

                The first three colours are actual numbers. The fourth colour represents the number of zero’s, and (not too sure here, because it was so long back now) the fifth colour represents a percentage factor for tolerance, plus or minus a percentage of that resistance. Can’t remember what the next stripe indicated, temperature co-efficient, I think.

                So a Resistor with 4 stripes yellow, violet, black, orange, and you read it from the end where the coloured stripes are closest to is 4, 7, 0, and 3, so 4, 7, 0, and then three zeros, hence 470K, 470 Kilohms.

                Some capacitors were also colour coded as well, but they usually just had coloured dots I think, because some were so small.

                So, while resistors went UP in powers of ten, kilo, mega, and Giga, capacitors (measured in Farads) went DOWN in powers of ten, milli, micro, nano, and pico.

                Dead boring eh!

                What amazes me is that I can actually recall all this from almost 46 years back now, so I suppose stuff really does get in.

                Tony.

                20

      • #

        In defense, I was not joking. I was referring to the SIGN and only the SIGN to make the point of worrying about a 5 ppm delta in 400 ppm CO2 was absurd.

        On the other hand, this is an open thread so just about anything is fair game. Even taking my comment out of context and stretching it beyond the breaking point. We work hard to defeat the alarmists with serious science. Sometimes one simply has to be silly to gain some relief. It is interesting though, even the silliness here has a good bit of serious science and engineering in it.

        20

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Lionell,

          I haven’t had as much fun in a long time. We get too serious about this sometimes. Life’s too short not to laugh. So thanks for the opportunity to be a smartass. :-)

          20

  • #
    Herr Majuscule

    “THE CONTOURS OF A NEW WORLD ORDER ARE EMERGING BUT NOT YET APPARENT”
    Julia Gillard Aust PM

    http://www.dfat.gov.au/un/message_pm.html

    A message from Prime Minister Julia Gillard

    Commitment to the United Nations is one of the three pillars of Australia’s foreign policy.
    I am proud of Australia’s record at the United Nations. We are a founding member of the organisation. For Australia, a country with a long democratic tradition, the values of the United Nations Charter are central to how we conduct ourselves on the world stage and we strongly support the rules-based international order which the Charter underpins.

    In the complex, inter-connected world in which we all live, countries cannot address the major challenges of today on their own. Australia seeks to be part of the solution to these challenges. We believe in the power of working together across national boundaries to forge creative solutions to common challenges. We respect good international citizenship. We value the United Nations as the forum that brings nations together to discuss and find ways to address peacefully the globe’s most pressing challenges.

    The importance of the Security Council to the maintenance of international peace and security is as great now as it ever has been. Not since the founding of the United Nations have we faced such uncertain times, when the contours of a new world order are emerging but not yet apparent.

    The Council needs members who are not only willing to support it with words, but also through deeds. Australia is a long-standing, reliable and consistent contributor to the UN’s work on preventive diplomacy, peacekeeping and peacebuilding. We have participated in more than 50 UN and other multilateral missions across the globe. We have led missions in our own region, in Timor-Leste, Solomon Islands and Bougainville, Papua New Guinea. We are the largest non-NATO contributor to the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.

    The Council also needs members who can work effectively and cooperatively at the United Nations. Australia is a strong democracy built on a diversity of peoples from across the world. We are home to ancient, Indigenous cultures. We have embraced millions of migrants and refugees. We are a country of the Asia-Pacific region, an island continent bridging the Indian and Pacific Oceans. Our history and geography combine to give Australians a unique perspective: a perspective of both the North and the South. We would bring that unique perspective to the Council.

    Our close partnerships with our neighbours, most of whom are developing countries give Australians a deep understanding of the vital importance of development to human dignity and to stability. Australia is rapidly increasing its aid budget to meet today’s development challenges: our aid program has doubled in the past five years and will double again by 2015. We are building partnerships to create development opportunities for the world’s poorest. We are intensifying our efforts in the global fight to eradicate extreme poverty and achieve the Millennium Development Goals.

    Australia is at the forefront of efforts to address todays pressing global challenges. We are assisting small island developing states and others most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, taking a lead role in advancing disarmament and non-proliferation efforts and continuing our long-standing efforts to promote respect for international law.

    I believe in our campaign for a seat on the United Nations Security Council in 2013-14 because I know that Australia has the capacity, energy and experience to make a strong, positive contribution to the Councils vital work. I seek your support in this endeavour.

    Julia Gillard
    Prime Minister of Australia
    —–
    http://www.ipa.org.au/news/2891/free-rein-proposal-by-canberra-should-be-hobbled-before-the-pass

    “…………….Don’t listen to what Canberra says. The local government referendum has nothing to do with local communities or anything like that. It’s a power play – part of a long-running campaign by the Commonwealth to free its spending decisions from parliamentary scrutiny and undermine the states.

    To understand the significance of the September referendum, we have to go back to an obscure bill passed by Parliament last June: the Financial Framework Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) 2012. This bill received almost no press attention. It was supported by all sides of Parliament. The Coalition half-heartedly put up an amendment, but once that was rejected, it backed the bill anyway. The bill was made law in three hours.

    Yet it was one of the most undemocratic and scandalous pieces of legislation passed in recent years. Forget the carbon tax. This is what Australia should be most angry about.

    The bill authorises the government to spend money on 415 areas of public policy without having to ask Parliament for permission ever again.

    It was quickly written in the wake of the successful High Court challenge to the school chaplains program. The court found that if the government wanted to spend money on a program, it was required to pass a valid law through Parliament – which it had not done in the case of school chaplains. This is not a trivial requirement. Parliamentary scrutiny is the essence of representative democracy.

    The government’s solution was smart-alecky, brazen and obnoxious. The Financial Framework Legislation Amendment simply authorised spending on everything at one fell swoop – everything from United Nations contributions, to ”diversity and social cohesion” grants, to industry subsidies. Local government is in there, too. Now the government can do anything it wants. The bill even says the government can spend what it likes on ”political party secretariat training……………………………………….”.
    —-
    [SNIP repeat information posted here]

    00

  • #
    Yonniestone

    This referendum on local government thrown at us last minute has me concerned, mostly because Gillard suggested it.
    Is it just a financial benefit as touted or another attack on basic rights?
    I hope the good people here can shed some “skeptical” light on it.

    50

    • #

      @Yonniestone:
      After 24 out of 43 years working for local government :-)
      It could be helpful if LG is recognised. There’s an issue with direct funding perhaps not being lawful. On the other hand, there’s the recognition that Australia might have one tier of government too many, and its risky if the funding has no oversight.
      People who put their hands up for local government elections seem to fall into three or perhaps four categories:
      1. People who care about their local community and are keen to advance its progress.
      2. People known by others to have the capacity of the above, and are persuaded to put their hands up. (So maybe 1 & 2 are the same or indistinguishable.)
      3. People who see local government as a training ground/start point prior to moving up the hierarchy.
      4. People who are motivated, have a particular axe to grind, but know little about what is involved.
      I have worked for councils that range from conservative to (old time) communist. (In the latter case, one where they sang The Red Flag before opening proceedings, and referred to each other as “comrade”.) Interesting that (apart from the “comrade” bit) those in category 1-2 in either case would have been difficult to tell apart, as politics doesn’t really play a big role.
      Recognition of local government in the constitution could be helpful to the 1-2 category, but a can of worms if you have category 3-4 types.
      We already have the creeping influence of the ICLEI initiatives.
      On balance, I’m leaning towards voting no.

      100

      • #
        DavidH

        It’s unclear to me that things are so broken that we need a constitutional amendment. I’m aware there was some High Court ruling on federal funding of local government. Is the fix just to give the money to the states, who do then have the power to fund councils? They already have oversight – bad councils get dismissed and replaced by administrators. That would sort out the 3&4 cases you mention. The feds should stick to dealing with country-wide issues and leave local issues to local government.

        In any event, the referendum has been proposed by Julia – given her level of trust with voters, it’s sure not to be approved.

        70

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Martin, very interesting can of worms as you point out, ICLEI sprung to mind straight away too.

        30

      • #
        Geoff Sherrington

        Martin,
        “We already have the creeping influence of the ICLEI initiatives.”

        I think this is the main point, though of course nobody in Govt wants to explain it.
        Could you pls enlighten readers here about some of its dangers?

        10

        • #

          @ Geoff:

          Could you pls enlighten readers here about some of its dangers?

          That might take some time …
          My local Council (Townsville) is a signatory, but ICLEI doesn’t figure prominently in their flim-flam. I think/hope that they are creatively cherry-picking.
          I support some of the work being done by TCC’s “Integrated Sustainability Services”, especially in the context of “sustainability for the rest of us” eg how to fix up horrible old “hot box” houses, and ground-breaking work on climate-related datalogging. Not so keen on the “this car is driven by sun” stuff. Saw one recently (not owned by TCC) that had gone “a bridge too far” and had to be loaded on a truck :-)

          Maybe ICLEI involvement in Australia needs to be the subject of a “crowd sourcing” exercise.

          00

    • #
      Andrew

      Here’s my problem with it (other than the trivially obvious – that its a Gillard idea):

      Recognition means the Feds can fund directly – remember Ros Kelly’s whiteboard? Now imagine that the whiteboard is enshrined in the Constitution. Perhaps in flood / fire / cyclone cases direct funding rather than thru state Dept of Local Govt does make some sense. What it worries me anyhow.

      50

      • #
        Geoff Sherrington

        Hay Andrew,
        I’ve drawn on Ros Kelly’s whiteboard, but my figures related to the real world.
        When you got to know her, you realised she knew very little about anything except dreamin’.

        20

        • #
          Andrew

          How much did she actually waste? It was about a milliswan wasn’t it (1Sw is the metric unit of waste, =$A42bn)? I’d happily bring her back as Finance Minister replacing Wong with that track record.

          10

          • #
            Sceptical Sam

            For goodness sake Andrew. She was a dill and so is Wong. Kelly funded, aided and abetted some of the silliest anti-development policies and people of the 80s and 90s. The green bureaucrats in her Department (DASETT) were the precursors of the madness that followed with Rudd/Gillard.

            She was the queen of the CFCs; ESD (and some 130 pieces of legislation that flowed from it): Agenda 21; Rio; ratification of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change; its bastard child Kyoto; and, “think global, act local” (unfortunately thinking was an alien experience for most of them – and her). In effect, the whole catastrophe.

            Fortunately she got herself tangled up with the “sports rorts” and had to resign. Who says there’s no such thing as justice?

            Did she have a redeeming feature?

            Ummm…No.

            20

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      This article by Chris Berg of the IPA pretty well lays out the argument against.
      Just follow the money. “It’s a power play – part of a long-running campaign by the Commonwealth to free its spending decisions from parliamentary scrutiny and undermine the states.”

      90

    • #
      cohenite

      For those who are interested professor Anne Twomey explains why constitutional recognition of local government is bad:

      First of all I will just talk about some of the points that I think are peripheral—to get rid of them—and then move to the core issues. The peripheral points concern other reasons why you might want constitutional recognition of local government in the Constitution. One of the reasons that is sometimes stated is that local government is a third level of government in Australia and it should be recognised in the Constitution. This, I think, is a bit of a misleading argument. Technically, local government is not a third independent level of government in Australia; it is a sublevel of government of state government.
      Our Constitution is a dualist system. It has two levels of government—a federal government and a state government. If you were to introduce local government as a separate, independent third level of government you would have to change a whole lot of other provisions in the Constitution. First of all, you would have to have powers of local government to make laws. You would have to have rules about how those laws conflict with the laws of the Commonwealth and the laws of the state and how it all fits together. You would have to change other provisions of the Constitution, like section 114; where local government comes under a state for the purposes of local government property not being able to be taxed by the Commonwealth; you would have to change your implications, like the Melbourne Corporation implication that protects state governments from Commonwealth government action. You would have to have a similar principle in relation to states and local government, and it would be very complicated and I do not think anyone is proposing to do that.
      Although many of us, probably including me, have often described local government as a third level of government, I think that for these purposes that is not what we are trying to do. If we could avoid that sort of loose discussion to avoid those sorts of issues, that would probably be helpful.
      The second area where people want recognition of local government is in trying to protect its democratic standing in order to prevent, for example, states from sacking local governments and appointing administrators. That is an issue that is often raised. That was raised and discussed in the Spigelman committee but apparently it is not really what we are trying to do today. Again there is a good reason for that, because the difficulty with local government is being small government in very small areas and localised, and particularly where there are strong financial interests involved in the classification of property, for example, and property development and therefore very high risks of corruption because of the financial benefits of that. There are very strong reasons why you may want to retain a system where a council can be dismissed if there are problems with corruption and for it to be replaced in circumstances where you do not immediately elect a new council, because of the problems of it being a small area and taking a longer time to get new candidates and people up who are not involved in the initial corruption.
      The other political reason for not going down that route is because it would take powers away from the states and cause problems with the states. Again, that is not the proposal that is before the committee. The proposal for constitutional recognition of local government is largely in relation to the financial issues, which I will come to now. The financial issues arise because, under the Commonwealth Constitution, the Commonwealth can fund local government through grants under section 96 of the Constitution to the states. They put conditions on those grants that say that all the money goes to local government and that is how local government, since the 1920s, has received money from the Commonwealth. For a short period under the Whitlam government, and then revived by the Howard government and continued from then, there have also been some direct grants given to local government from the Commonwealth. There were doubts during the Whitlam period as to whether this was constitutionally valid. The Whitlam government sought a referendum to make it constitutionally valid. The referendum was defeated, the Fraser government went to a different way, back to section 96 grants, in funding the local government and also giving them part of income tax. More recently, in the Pape case and the Williams case, there has been significant doubt as to the constitutional validity of that direct funding of local government.
      My own point of view, as a constitutional lawyer—particularly looking at the Roads to Recovery program—is that it is more likely than not that it is constitutionally invalid. That leads to an issue where people say, ‘Then we want to change the Constitution to allow direct funding of local government. That then leads to the question of, ‘If you change the Constitution to allow direct funding, you could do that, but why do you need to make such a change if you can already give exactly the same amount of money to the local government through the states under section 96 grants?’ All you are doing is achieving a second way of achieving the same thing that you can already validly do under the Constitution. What is the difference? What is the benefit? Why go to a referendum and spend $50 million, $80 million or whatever it is to do that when it actually does not achieve a different outcome? The same amount of money goes from one spot to another.
      There are a number of arguments that I think are misleading. There is the argument of: local government will get more money if you take out the middle man.
      There is no evidence to support that at all as best I can see. The costs of distributing money within the states through local government commissions, grants commissions, are actually borne by the state and not borne by local government, so the money that is granted by the Commonwealth goes in its complete entirety from the Commonwealth to local government without any extra money coming out for administration. In fact, the likely prospects are the reverse. If the Commonwealth had to take all the costs of administering the distribution of the money to local government, the most likely thing is that the Commonwealth would deduct its administration costs in doing so, resulting in less money going to local government. You can see that because that is exactly what the Commonwealth does in relation to the GST and its distribution to the states: it takes the money out for administrative costs before that money goes to the states. So the big risk if you move from funding through the states to direct funding by the Commonwealth is that the administrative costs of doing so will be deducted. So I think that argument does not really work in relation to the arguments about why you need direct funding. There is another argument there that the states take their cut from the grants. Again it is not true. The Auditor-General has to sign off that all the money has gone through. It is a bit of a misnomer.
      The third argument, and this is an argument that may well have some basis to it but it is a very hard one for the Commonwealth to argue, is that the Commonwealth is only likely to fund local government appropriately if it can use the money in such a way that it is more likely to buy votes. The argument here is that the Commonwealth is disreputable, that it will not fund local government appropriately unless it can do so by direct funding with lots of signs and advertising for itself saying, ‘Gee, aren’t we wonderful,’ and therefore buy votes from it, and that therefore you get more funding for local government through direct funding than you get through funding through the states because then the Commonwealth does not get the kudos and cannot buy as many votes. The difficulty with that argument is that I do not know that would you get many Commonwealth ministers prepared to run it and therefore it has to be run sotto voce, just saying it is more likely that local government will get more funding from the Commonwealth if they can fund directly with that being the underlying argument that people are supposed to guess but you are not supposed to say. From my point of view I do not find that an acceptable argument. I do not see why you should change the Constitution in order to facilitate bad behaviour; it does not seem to be an appropriate thing to do.
      Ultimately if you see all the arguments about why local government should be funded directly by the Commonwealth it is all about local government getting more money. But it does not seem to me that there is any clear evidence or reasoning as to why local government gets more money from direct funding than it gets through funding through section 96 of the states, unless you come down to the argument of the Commonwealth wanting to only spend its money to buy votes, and I do not think that is an acceptable argument.
      To me that seems to be the range of arguments that we get into. I will let my colleagues vociferously dispute that.

      41

  • #
    D McNeil

    A step in the right direction?

    From an article in the Independent published in the UK on May 11th, 2013

    Quotes
    “The Government is facing an exodus of senior energy and climate change advisers amid growing concerns that decisive action to tackle global warming is falling victim to Treasury intransigence.” ….

    “At the same time as proponents of renewable energy are leaving, Mr Cameron appears to be surrounding himself with climate change sceptics who are warning him that Britain cannot afford the cost of new renewables.” …

    “Mr Cameron has also appointed the former Tory minister Peter Lilley to his advisory board. Writing in The Spectator this week, Mr Lilley warned that the “green lobby” was “in control of the Department for Energy” and suggested that the case for global warming was far from clear-cut.
    “Global temperatures have failed to rise for 16 years,” he wrote. “Recent measures of how much global temperature rises as carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases are far lower than is built into climate models.”

    End of quotes

    So a member of the (UK) Prime Minister’s Parliamentary Advisory Board has been quoted in the press as saying “the case for global warming was far from clear-cut.” Even more surprisingly, “global temperature … are far lower than is built into climate models.” Not “predicted by climate models” but “built into climate models”. Surely this subtle but very important difference shows that doubts on the efficacy of climate models are at last being voiced in UK political circles.

    Is this the precursor to a major shift in UK climate change politics?

    References
    Independent

    Spectator

    140

    • #
      Joe V.

      Cameron is all over the place, having to placate the more independent thinkers on his back benches. They may have kept quiet up till now, but fear losing their seat more than losing the party whip, esp. now after UKIPs showing in last weeks local elections. So Cameron is just manoeuvring to retain their approval.

      40

  • #

    Uh-oh.
    Slayers/Principia v GHE debate is up again – see WUWT and Roy Spencer.
    I hope civility will prevail.
    I suspect part of the problem is semantic as much as thermodynamics.
    In temperate climates a greenhouse allows you to grow plants outside the normal growing period. In the tropics/sub-tropics, a greenhouse can really only be used to cook things.

    30

    • #
      Joe V.

      Yeah but, how can it cook things without a hotspot ?

      40

    • #
      Peter C

      In Relation to the Green House Gas Effect, Anthony Watts says:

      My view has always been that it exists. and has been effectively modeled as well as observed/measured (up to a point, so far I don’t know of a full scale measurement being done for the entire vertical column of the atmosphere),

      I agree that the Theory has been modelled and it requires about 250 watts/M2 of downwelling IR radiation from a clear night sky (no clouds).

      Anthony does not give referrences for his observations and measurements. I have asked this question before, but does anyone know of the observations and measurements. Do they match the theory/model?

      00

      • #

        @ Peter: “GHE – night-time downwelling IR …”

        No measurements I am aware of – just observations. Loss of surface heat after sunset is slower when there is cloud, but it’s still all gone by sunrise. I don’t wander about much at night these days, but I recall the delay is maybe 2 hours max. Down-welling IR radiation (although not defined as such) does figure in the standard texts on climate-response design in the tropics, but 250w/m2? That would surely need to be factored in, but it hasn’t been.
        Cattle still tend to camp on unfenced bitumen roads after sunset, whether there is cloud or not. The species is not noted for its level of intelligence, but I suspect it exceeds that of some climate scientists.

        00

        • #
          Peter C

          Interesting, but are those observations actually relevant?

          I have heard the argument that cloud cover reduces surface cooling before. But cloud is not gas. It is liquid water. No problem with radiation from the surface of liquid water, and it could warm the surface of the earth if it is warmer than the surface.

          I have also noted that bitumen roads get warm in the sun and stay warmer than the surrounding areas for a while after sunset.

          Like John Daly, I am “Still waiting for Greenhouse”.

          00

  • #
    pat

    funny how Maher doesn’t include a comment from the Coalition!

    10 May: Australian: Sid Maher: Canberra resists calls for early carbon float
    THE Gillard government is resisting pressure to move to an early float of the carbon price that is being championed by business and key independents…
    However, a spokesman for Climate Change Minister Greg Combet yesterday moved to quash that speculation.
    He said an early float of the carbon price would not be in Tuesday’s budget and the government had no plans to curtail the fixed-price period…
    Independent MP Rob Oakeshott yesterday repeated his calls for the carbon price to be floated earlier than scheduled in 2015.
    “The sooner we establish a market the better,” Mr Oakeshott said, adding that the government would get his full support to do it.
    “It is the whole point of the scheme, to establish a market-based response.”…
    Moving to a early floating price would have political attractions for the government in that the carbon price would fall dramatically, sparking a fall of between 5 and 10 per cent in electricity prices.
    It would also likely win business backing, as the AiGroup and the Business Council of Australia have been calling for the price to be lowered in their submissions to the government.
    The downside would be the cost to the budget’s bottom line…
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/canberra-resists-calls-for-early-carbon-float/story-fn59niix-1226639705699

    reminder:

    10 May: Reuters Point Carbon: Australia to hold first CO2 permit sales by mid-2014
    Australia will hold two auctions of carbon permits under the nation’s proposed Emissions Trading Scheme by July 1 2014, a full year before the market starts, according to the scheme’s auctioning regulations that became law Friday…
    http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2342248?&ref=searchlist

    20

    • #
      Kevin Lohse

      Reading the comments on this blog, and speaking to my family in Oz, I’m far from certain that your Coalition can differentiate between their arse and their elbow. I’ve an awful feeling that Abbot will make the same mistakes as Cameron, and suffer a fatal fall between 2 stools.

      90

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    For those in the U.S., here’s the right take on gun control.

    Pay attention when she, a prosecutor and judge for 30 years says she knows of no New Town type massacre ever done by a legal gun owner. Pay attention when she talks about Chicago, the president’s home town and base of operations, which has the dual distinctions of having the most restrictive gun ownership laws in, and also being the murder capital of, the entire United States of America.

    120

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      PS:

      If anyone has a good counter argument I would be glad to see it. I promise I’ll respond politely and address your points in a civil manner.

      Roy

      70

      • #
        Kevin Lohse

        Anyone else ever read, “The Weapon Shops Of Isher” by Van Vogt? As good an argument for the freedom to bear arms as you are likely to meet.

        70

        • #

          Sure have. Free people own weapons. Slaves don’t was the message IIRC.

          If you are worried about the trends to ever more intrusive regulation in our society impinging on both our freedoms and responsibilities just consider that we are effectively being “domesticated”. Nice trouble free sheep obediently eating grass, being looked after by shepherds and sheepdogs and being shorn or eaten by the shepherds’ employers at will.

          Heaven forbid that the sheep should fend off the wolves on their own. Why, then they might find that they don’t need the shepherds or sheepdogs or their employers.

          For a fascinatingly ghastly take on the theme read S.M Stirling’s Draka trilogy and the prequel/sequel(it gets difficult with parallel universe stories,Drakon.The last would make a brilliant sf, detective story, techno thriller movie BTW.

          60

        • #
          jorgekafkazar

          Yes, read it. But the resolution is very much deus ex. The Weapon Shops rescue people from tyranny in the book, but in reality, there are no Weapon Shops. If we’re to remain free, we have to do whatever is necessary to prevent tyrants from taking control in the first place. After that, it’s far too late.

          20

      • #

        An additional supporting argument is that our fearless government insists that it has no duty to protect any given private individual. Then at the same time, it strives to take away any and all individual means of self protection. When completed, only the government and criminals will be armed. Unfortunately, it is getting progressively more difficult to tell the difference between the two special interest groups.

        140

      • #
        Truthseeker

        Roy,

        My take is that gun ownership should have at least similar responsibilities of car ownership. That means licensing, registration, skill and safety training and regular audited maintenance. I do not think that any rational person would be comfortable with anyone being allowed to drive a car that has not gone through those basic requirements, so why should gun ownership be any different? Guns, like cars, represent power. Power means responsibility. The more powerful the gun, the greater the responsibility. Show responsibility and as far as I am concerned you can own all the guns you want.

        All of which speaks to the “well regulated militia” part of the US Constitution, a phrase that precedes the “right to bear arms” part but is usually conveniently forgotten in this debate.

        32

        • #

          I’ve never seen how those things make any difference when I see what goes on on the roads. Or in aviation where at least the idiots are likely to kill only themselves or their passengers silly enough to fly with them (Here’s a good rule of aviation “never fly in the same cockpit as someone braver than you are”).

          So you want men with guns to tell us under what conditions we can have guns?
          By your logic all the guns should be taken away from governments everywhere. That would in fact be a good idea a governments have caused far more deaths than private people have. Then we would all ignore the bastards.
          Or haven’t you figured out that the only reason we take any notice of them is because they control men with guns. aka shepherds and sheepdogs.

          I’m glad you called them “guns” not “weapons” though. A gun is technological device capable of expelling a small piece of lead at high velocity. A “weapon” is anything used as such by a human mind and body with intent. A gun can be a weapon. A weapon isn’t necessarily a gun.

          50

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Truthseeker,

          You are, of course, quite right. With the right to own a gun comes the responsibility to know and do several things and I have no quarrel with requiring them.

          1. training in safe, effective use, maintenance and storage

          2. training in the law regarding when you can and cannot shoot someone

          3. store it safely so it cannot be easily stolen or fall into the hands of someone who should not get a hold of it, like a child, for instance

          4. and yes, maintain it in good working order so it ca be relied on if you need it

          5. regular practice with it

          Now come the problems because I have difficulty agreeing with registering firearms in order to “enforce” the above. When government knows where all the guns are they can come and get them far too easily. It’s not a problem to find good instruction and a place to practice. The NRA is one such place. I also have difficulty with background checks because this always will put the purchaser of any firearm into some government database.

          If legal gun dealers had to see a certificate attesting to completion of the first 2 items I think it would go a long way toward satisfying the complaint you outlined. And remember something — the thug does not go through legal channels to obtain a gun.

          In the end there are two kinds of armed citizens, the law abiding millions who want legitimate defense of their homes or who hunt or do competition shooting and the few thousands who are criminals. It is the latter who cause the problem. Strict prosecution of them the first time would be a very good start. Add to that an armed and trained citizenry and the thug has to stop and think twice. Add to that a government that doesn’t do stupid things like declare gun free zones or stunts like Fast and Furious and you’re a long way toward a better situation.

          I might add one other thing — stop glorifying violence as a means of solving problems in our popular entertainment. Today’s child growing up sees an ungodly number of examples of everything from fists to guns solving problems that should be solved by better means, a well functioning police force and courts that actually hold everyone accountable for failure to follow the law.

          50

          • #

            “a well functioning police force and courts that actually hold everyone accountable for failure to follow the law.”

            Who will police the police and the courts? History explains quite clearly that they can’t be trusted to do it themselves. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have the sorry spectacle of the rise and fall of nations and civilizations interspersed with chaos and dark ages.

            Do I have an answer? No but I am beginning to understand the question a bit better.

            90

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              Who will police the police and the courts? History explains quite clearly that they can’t be trusted to do it themselves. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have the sorry spectacle of the rise and fall of nations and civilizations interspersed with chaos and dark ages.

              I have no perfect solution either, Lionell. But it does work better when the people pay attention to how well or poorly things are doing. Politicians, prosecutors and most judges are elected and where prosecutors and judges are not elected, those who appoint them are. So it all depends on how much attention is given to the workings of society. And right now it isn’t working very well, is it?

              70

              • #

                Sadly, it isn’t working very well at all. I agree that paying attention is part of the solution but I seriously doubt that alone is enough to make much of a difference. I strongly suspect what you are paying attention to and why you are doing it can make a huge difference.

                It is the old problem of having both the necessary and sufficient to make progress. Much of what we have is not necessary and we are far short of sufficient. However, I do know we have to start where we are at, work with what we have, and make the best of it. Every other generation had to do the same. Mankind made it from the stone age to the space age that way. Maybe we can make it to the stars the same way if we don’t do something really stupid.

                20

        • #
          jorgekafkazar

          Licensing means the government knows who has guns. By November 8, 1938, Berlin police had used gun registration lists to confiscate all guns owned by local Jews. On November 9 & 10, Nazi SA thugs carried out the rest of the plan, attacking Jewish businesses and temples all across Germany in The Night of Broken Glass.

          50

        • #
          Mark D.

          Truthseeker, the comparison Of auto drivers and gun owners falls far short. First off, licensing is, was and always will be a way to track, force conformity and tax people. Drivers licenses are in fact a method of identification conveniently excused by the notion that it has something to do with driving competency. It does not. License plates as found on vehicles is also for identification and taxation. Any notion that one can license people into decent and civil behavior is severely misguided. You are right when you mention power, however, and it is that power that brings some equality when one demands decent and civil behavior.

          These easily prove the point that any desire by political groups to make driving a comparison to owing a gun IS in fact an attempt to register, identify and tax gun owners. ALL those are “infringements” period.

          As for your comment on “well regulated milita” you are so far off the mark I’ll just tell you to study harder on the history of the terms used, the definitions as were understood in the late 1700′s, and please “conveniently” read the US Supreme Court interpretations at least four separate times since the Second Amendment was ratified. You really don’t know what you are talking about with regard to that phrase. As someone that attempts to be truth seeking, I hope you stop pretending you “know it” in this case.

          The Second Amendment was and IS CLEARLY the right of the people to protect THEMSELVES from ANYONE attempting to harm life, limb and the pursuit of happiness, as well as protecting the Republic from tyranny. This right shall not be infringed upon!

          Licensing of gun owners and registration of guns reduces the value of the Second Amendment to zero and is completely contrary to what the Founding Fathers intended.

          80

        • #
          Mark Hladik

          Knowing only the historical context of the Second Amendment (a method for the people to preserve their freedom from an overly-oppressive government), I think the phrase ” … well regulated militia … ” should be understood to mean something along the lines of ‘ competently organized, sufficiently trained, and fully-equipped ‘. Are not most military organizations organized, trained, and equipped to carry out their assigned missions?

          The Militia Act of 1791 defines the Militia to be: ” … every able-bodied man between the ages of 17 and 45 NOT in the Federal Service … ” (emphasis mine). Members of the Militia were expected to report for drill/duty with their own equipment, and ready to go into action if the situation called for it.

          There is an amusing anecdote about Abraham Lincoln; while a resident of Illinois, he was in command of his Militia group during a drill. As they approached a fenceline, Lincoln was unable to recall the command to have his troops cross the fence. He called a halt to his group’s march, and advised them that a five-minute rest was in effect. Upon completion of their rest, they were to be on the OTHER side of the fence, and continue their march/drill.

          Not sure if it is true or not, but it would appear that in pre-Civil War America, the Militia Act was being enforced and practiced.

          Notice that only some are in favor of removing firearms from the citizenry … … …

          My regards to all, and Happy Mom’s Day (almost over on your side of the pond) Jo,

          Mark H.

          10

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            Mark,

            You cannot directly connect one part of the sentence with the other in the way you appear to want when they are separated by a semicolon.

            I think Mark D’s point is a good one so let’s extend it a bit.

            The Constitution does not guarantee a right to own any particular thing, much less something as potentially dangerous as an automobile, much less the right to drive it. The history of the automobile shows very clearly why we must limit the driving privilege to only those who demonstrate a minimum level of competence.

            However, The Constitution does very explicitly guarantee the right to own firearms. One may debate whether a gun in the hands of any particular individual was a good thing or a bad thing. But the mere fact that you have a gun cannot automatically be a problem, even in spite of those who want to argue otherwise.

            20

            • #
              Joe V.

              Everyone knows that the ‘right to bare arms’ was merely to protect Americans freedom to worship the Sun. Those were puritanical times and bare arms are still not tolerated in many less ‘enlightened’ parts of the World to this day.

              00

            • #
              Mark Hladik

              Hi Roy,

              Thank you for your comment.

              I will apologize in advance for some confusion on your statement:

              “You cannot directly connect one part of the sentence with the other part in the way you appear to want when they are separated by a semicolon.”

              I fear I have lost the context of the location of the semicolon you refer to. I would appreciate some clarification on your part so that I may understand and consider your thoughts more fully.

              Thanks in advance for helping me to understand,

              Mark H.

              00

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Mark,

                The full sentence reads as follows:

                A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state; the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

                In some translations the semicolon is not there. So perhaps there is some room for debate. I have copies of it both ways. The original English version of the whole Constitution and The Bill of Rights used to be on the Supreme Court web site but they have turned that job over to the National Archives which has mucked everything up as is usual with the executive branch. So I try to remember how it was punctuated in the original text and I believe it was a semicolon between the words “state” and “the”.

                In any case, The Supreme Court has upheld the right of citizens to be armed as basically unequivocal with no necessary connection to a Militia (which function is now done by the National Guard in each state).

                10

              • #
                Mark Hladik

                Interesting!

                I went through three separate sources, and no semicolon appears in any of them:

                a 1990′s Encyclopedia Britannica;

                my own personal pocket Constitution (yes, I do keep one with me at all times; the battle against ignorance never ceases); this one happens to be the tenth or eleventh copy (I lose track as the brain cells age) which I have used;

                and a website called http://www.constitutionus.com;

                so my only question would be the source you used. I do not believe the semicolon is correct.

                A number of years ago, several of the original copies of the Bill of Rights were making the rounds of the nation. One was able to view sealed cases with the originals, and extensive photo-images and analyses of the hand-written copies. I picked up a supply of Constitutions (above) for use, and do not recall the punctuation you cite anywhere.

                Rest assured, we are on the same team. I am in agreement with you that an individual choosing to own a firearm should seek training; I do not agree that it should be mandatory. If one wishes to make oneself a candidate for the Darwin Awards, so much the better. My own experience should be the norm: upon deciding to purchase a firearm, I first learned all I could about them, in order to purchase the “right” kind. Having done that, I sought someone who would show me how to handle said object safely. In my case, a retired law enforcement officer took me under his wing, and made me into the safe firearm owner I am today.

                Years later, I taught my daughter, starting at age 8, the proper and safe handling of firearms, and as we speak, am now engaged in beginning the training of her children. Our first lesson: The Ten Commandments of Safe Firearms Handling (along with those “other” Ten).

                I would check that source you are using. That was the cause of the confusion, which lead to this discussion. I appreciate your getting back to me, and for and engaging and enlightening discussion.

                My best regards to you and yours,

                Mark H.

                00

              • #
                Mark D.

                Gentlemen, you can view and read the original here: http://www.montpelier.org/constitution/bill-of-rights

                If you click on the image it opens to a viewing page with a very high resolution. I see only commas in the writing:

                A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

                Interestingly State and Arms are capitalized.

                20

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Then mea culpa! What I have is incorrectly done and I shall rely on the pocket booklet that has commas (I carry one around these days myself, just in case).

                I still argue that The Supreme Court has it right and the third phrase is not bound by the second one.

                As for strange things, the first comma, according to good usage as I remember it from my mid 20th Century education, is not necessary or useful as far as I can see. “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state,” would mean the same thing. But who am I to judge the past? I just think it interesting how punctuation has simplified as U.S. English diverged from that of England.

                10

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Mark,

                Here’s an interesting anecdote concerning being armed. One of my brothers-in-law is a retired veteran of the LA PD with 30 years under his belt. He hunted regularly for years and still does competition skeet shooting — judging by his display case full of trophies he must be pretty good too. So I know he has various firearms in the house, possibly including his service revolver, which in many departments the officer has some options about and must buy whatever it is he wants.

                Several years ago I asked him what he would want for a weapon if he awoke in the middle of the night and found there was an intruder in the house. His answer floored me completely. He said, “A baseball bat.”

                I have to believe he was serious because he stuck to that answer no matter how I tried to coax a different reply from him.

                Mostly people seem to choose a semiautomatic, 9 mm being common. But when I asked what would be the best pistol for home defense he unhesitatingly said a revolver because of the greater reliability.

                So there are many opinions on what to do. I hope he never has to put his baseball bat theory to use. And I hope no one ever has to defend their home against an intruder. But reality is what it is.

                We are on the same team.

                10

              • #
                Mark Hladik

                Hi Roy,

                Equally interesting. Perhaps you or your relative can help me out.

                I am in agreement with him on the weapon of choice. I have something like what you were, ” … trying to coax … ” out of him, but also recognize the value of the alternative. Multiple inquiries to multiple individuals has turned up no definitive answer: is is legal for a civilian to own a police-style “nightstick” or sometimes called a ‘baton’?

                If so, where do I get one? I think it would be much more effective should I (God forbid) need to use it in the middle of the night. When I state a nightstick, I am talking about the kind which has a right-angle hand-hold, dividing the shaft into approximately 1/3 and 2/3 portions. If you need to see it explicitly, the only reference I can give is in the second (Schwarzennegger) Terminator movie, when Sarah Conner is attempting to break out of the institution she is “housed” in, and acquires one of the orderly’s night-sticks.

                IF, it is legal, where/how do I obtain one? Who retails? Can a civilian purchase one from these providers? Do I needt to make friends with a member of the local constabulary, to have him/her purchase one for me?

                Would appreciate any help/answers you or anyone else might be able to supply.

                Should we ask Jo or the Mod’s if we should move this thread to another location? They have my e-mail address; I do not have yours. If Jo or the Mod’s want to supply mine to Roy, I give authorization to do so.

                Thanks for anything you help out with, even if your answer is that you are unable to find out anything or help in any way. We are fellow travelers, and thank your relative for his long years of service. I’ll tell you about how our local law enforcement went above and beyond the call of duty here at my place of work, on 30 November 2012. It was quite a situation, and my deep respect became much deeper very early in the day.

                Mark H. (not D. — – he’s the OTHER decent fellow on this thread!)

                00

              • #
                Mark D.

                Thanks Mr. H,

                I think I recall you’re in the U.S., check your state and local laws but I can’t imagine a “stick” (even painted black) being illegal. (there are special weighted spring sticks that are prohibited in some locales) That said, I’d strongly advise against having one for self defense unless you get some specialized training. I spent some time sparring with a friend of mine with one of those, only he’d had professional law enforcement training. It didn’t go so well for me :) If you lose control of the situation and your opponent knows what to do, you’ll get hurt in a hurry. I’m still in pretty good shape but I wouldn’t want to go hand to hand with any seriously bad person with a stick or even a bat. If you have the strength to operate a stick or bat then by all means have them. If you have your doubts, chose a high power hand held electric “stun gun” instead. Look up “self defense weapons in Google and you can find all kinds of options.

                Gun defense “experts” will argue all day long about what single gun would be most useful for home defense. If cost isn’t a problem then more than one gun is probably the best solution.

                For the first, I favor a pump 12ga. shotgun with regular #6 shot cartridges and a shorter barrel. The reasons are that the shot will not travel to your neighbors house, the noise of chambering a round is almost universally recognized by a bad person and that sound alone will likely change their thinking, the shotgun itself is easier to point (aim) and hold on to (important), makes a good “stick” if still needed once empty.

                Second choice is a 4 inch barrel revolver chambered for .357 caliber because they have awesome power but you can use lighter and slightly less expensive .38 Special rounds too. Revolvers are inherently easy to use, shoot reliably and simple.

                Lastly, would be to add a semi-auto hand gun in at least 9mm or .40caliber, .45 caliber maybe better. If you have a lady in the house or older capable children then consider a .380 because they are smaller and less jarring to shoot. These handguns can be fussy with mis-feeding ammo but they hold more shots than a revolver. Doubtful that you’d need more than a few shots in a home defense situation but if you DID…..

                All the above assumes following laws, practicing and getting training help if you feel better doing so.

                10

              • #
                Mark Hladik

                Thanks, Mr. D:

                Agreed, but one never knows about laws and such. If it is not against the law, it should be ridiculously easy to find and purchase one. Either I am the lowest-intelligence life form on the planet, or there is something about owning/purchasing one that I am missing!

                FULLY AGREE, and could not agree more! Training is essential, and I will get some if and when I obtain said defense mechanism.

                Already in possession of the alternative. Praise the Lord I have never even been confronted with the situation where it becomes necessary to use it (i.e., unholster it), but it is ready. I am in agreement with Roy and his family member who prefers a dead tree — – it can disable without causing undue harm, and is a lot quieter.

                Wonderful advice; thanks much. You are a true gentleman. And yes, I am on the wrong side of the big pond from the beautiful and gracious Jo and her exceptional team of Mods.

                Best regards, and thanks again,

                Mark H.

                10

              • #

                Home defense weapon: Marble rolling pin.

                (Does require a stealthy approach)

                30

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                is is [it] legal for a civilian to own a police-style “nightstick” or sometimes called a ‘baton’?

                I don’t know for sure but I believe it may not be legal. On the other hand, there are lots of things suitable for use as a club that you can legally have around.

                I think Mark D. is talking good sense at #8.1.3.5.7 (just above).

                For myself I prefer not to give such advice (I’m not an expert). And I also don’t let anyone know what I’m armed with because I don’t think it wise to give the bad guy advance notice of what he’d meet if he tries anything here.

                30

              • #
                Mark Hladik

                Such a superb discussion! Sheri, not sure if a “marble” rolling pin wouldn’t leave a large dent in the side of whatever it hit. I would prefer to see the perp squirm in court (maybe with a limb in some type of medical restraint, or wrapped up in bandages … ). Fine with me if the perp ends up living at the expense of the taxpayers, in our fine, accommodating State “residential” facility, for say, 15 -20.

                Well, in any case, I am gradually realizing that it must be something the civilian population is prohibited from owning, so I will explore some other dead tree alternatives. Never liked the bat per se; couldn’t hit anything with it, and the momentum thing-yy made trying to stop it in mid-flight difficult.

                Hence the desire to have the baton/nightstick; lightweight, easily maneuvered, and effective!

                Mark H.

                00

              • #

                Mark–I suspect this is a “girl” thing. If I feel threatened enough to necessitate actual physical confrontation, especially in my home, and I have no firearm available, whatever I choose will indeed leave a large dent in whatever it hits. My experience is women tend to hold back–try to reason with or don’t want to hurt the intruder. If I am to the point I feel my safety is in jeopardy, I want a dent left. I want to hit them with everything I have. Women tend to be smaller than most men and lack the physical strength of a man. I think men count on this, which is why the belief that if I am confronting someone dangerous, I want a dent and cuts and bleeding and whatever. Never hold back. If the police can show up and nab the intruder, I don’t object to him being jailed.

                10

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Fine with me if the perp ends up living at the expense of the taxpayers, in our fine, accommodating State “residential” facility, for say, 15 -20.

                Mark H.,

                If you confront an intruder inside your house and the fact that you’re armed will control him or send him running away, that’s the best outcome. If it won’t control him and he advances on you or in any other way continues to be a threat, especially if he tries to shoot you, then you must shoot back and do it first. If you fire the gun the objective is a dead intruder and you and your family whole and unhurt. You start firing and you don’t quit until your target is down. You cannot count on overpowering someone with a club at close range and you can’t count on just wounding your enemy to disable him, various scenarios you see on TV notwithstanding.

                This, in a nutshell is the advice I see from all the places I’ve looked for advice. Even my brother-in-law, when he was talking about shooting at a suspect while on duty, said the same thing. Thankfully he never had to draw on anyone!!! But once there is a real threat you don’t do a halfhearted defense.

                This is why I was so skeptical of his preference for a baseball bat as a defensive weapon.

                I’m told that drawing a gun on someone is a life changing experience (information from the U.S. Concealed Carry organization). Shooting someone is probably worse. So know the law in your state, practice regularly and pray that you never need all that preparation.

                10

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Sheri,

                See my comment at #8.1.3.5.13. Your size and weight disadvantage is not going to be compensated for by a marble rolling pin.

                Your chance of ever needing to defend yourself is pretty small. But if you’re serious about it then get good advice from an expert in the filed of personal and home defense.

                We don’t want to wake up some morning and find that one of our most sensible contributors is no longer with us. :-)

                10

              • #

                Roy–trust me, I am not relying on a marble rolling pin. It’s way down on the list. It’s there if other options fail me.

                A good concealed carry class will address the after effects of pulling and/or using a gun in self-defense. The class I attended had a former law enforcement officer who had shot and killed a woman who was threatening his life (in the line of duty). It’s quite enlightening. Part of the after effects are due to society itself teaching everyone that it is wrong to exercise self-defense. We covered the initial feelings, the response of others, etc. I should note that you will get the “PTSD” symptoms that are NOT a disease at all but rather a normal response. Nightmares, heightened awareness, etc. This is normal. Thank goodness there were no psychologists among cavemen or we’d be an extinct species. You have to work it through.

                Also, my first question to anyone who wants to carry a gun or have one in the house is: Are you willing to kill another person? If the answer is no, DO NOT get a gun. They are not to “scare him away” or whatever. And work it through in your head repeatedly what you would do if someone did break in–that was part of the class, too. How could you escape the house? Where’s the most cover if it turns out the intruder is armed? What if your children are home? This is even if you are using a baton or whatever. Don’t wait until it happens. Yes, it’s unpleasant, but if you think it through first, your reactions are already “planned” so to speak and the outcome is often better than suddenly pulling the gun out, hoping it fires and not planning for anything. (People have already mentioned practice with the gun.)

                10

              • #
                Rod Stuart

                Mark for what it’s worth, I was in a situation about 25 years ago when the intrusion alarm at the office in the middle of the night would necessitate the “on-call” manager to go and investigate. Occasionally these alarms weren’t false. I wondered what we would do if we DID catch someone in the act. (Usually the siren and the flashing lights would drive them off before we arrived).
                My solution was to turn some mini baseball batts from oak on the wood lathe. I made them about 2/3 the length of a bat, but with the diameter at the end opposite the handle cylindrical about the same diameter as a softball bat. Then I bored a hole in the large end about 150 mm deep and 20 mm in diameter and pressed in a piece of solid lead. None of those on call ever had to use one, but it certainly provides some confidence to have something in your hand just in case. If you make one, cut back on the weight. They were a bit heavy to wield. Polished up and oiled with Swedish oil, they were quite attractive. Believe me, if you connected, it would leave a dent.

                10

              • #
                Mark Hladik

                Compliments to Jo and her mods, and all contributors to this discussion. Whew!

                Hi Sheri!

                Just to let you know, I am fairly certain that I will never intrude into your abode. Dents, I have found, are hazardous to my health.

                Unless you impact my cranial area, in which case, the adage, ‘no brain, no pain’ applies.

                Kidding! It is my sincere hope, that none of us are ever confronted with the choice that the criminal element seems intent upon forcing some of us to make. I agree with all that one must make the choices one does, and must be prepared, physically and psychologically, to accept those choices.

                I guess I have failed to make the point that while I have my weapon of choice ready and available, the purpose of something in the dead tree variety was to allow some measure of a choice of defense. We all know that ‘the best defense is a good offense’, and not every situation will require the same measure of violence or threat of violence, to resolve. If an attacker has carnage and mayhem on his/her mind, then of course deadly force might be the first option. If, however, we are dealing with a simple burglar, and a ‘dead tree’ with his/her name on it is poised to make a dent somewhere, then so be it. Even though our local laws and constabulary are predisposed to side with the resident, the fewer questions which need to be asked and answered, the better.

                After the events which occurred at my place of work on 30 November 2012, our local law enforcement and our duly constituted Security Team provided all employees with a voluntary seminar on self-defense, which covered both the home, and at the workplace.

                It was very sobering, to say the least. Our Chief of Security himself had been on the receiving end of an attack (at the Holocaust Museum no less) and related the experience.

                I would never wish that on anyone, especially you, my friends at JoNova. I know we’ve never met, and wouldn’t know each other from Adam/Eve (in Sheri’s case) if we crossed on the streets, but even so, we are kindred spirits, and your advice, comfort, and concern are heartfelt and appreciated.

                This is the first time I’ve ever jumped in to an “Unthreaded Weekend”. This has been an experience ! I thank everyone for their comments and knowledge, and the willingness to share it with us, your ‘family’.

                My best regards to all, and wishes for peace and happiness,

                Mark H.

                20

              • #
                Joe V.

                It is the last comma that confuses the meaning.

                A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

                Without that last comma,

                the right of the people to keep and bear Arm shall not be infringed

                would be unequivocal and capable of standing on its own.
                The

                A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,

                would be explanatory but merely incidental to the meaning.

                As it is though, it could mean anything, or was the drafter just short of breath ?
                There’s a lot to be said for avoiding the use of confusing commas altogether.

                20

  • #
    The Black Adder

    Happy Mothers Day Jo!

    And to all mothers out there in Sceptic World.

    Have a great Mother’s Day all, even PM Juliar!

    Oh, I forgot she’s barren!

    47

  • #

    Climate Change. CO2 up to 400ppm from 240ppm since c.1750?
    I understood that our world ( as is) could accommodate CO2 to 800 ppm. IF Co2 increases at the same rate as over the past 260 years, it’ll be the year 2650. I wonder what will happen between now and then?

    30

  • #

    Interesting story in Queensland a couple of days ago. Bloke waiting for a train had a medical issue of some sort and fell on the tracks. Female student nurse saw this, figured he needed help and knowing the next train was 6 minutes away(in fact it was 3) got on the tracks and with some help from people on the the platform got him to safety. Nice story. You go, girl. here’s the link: http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/brave-nurse-a-rail-hero-after-track-fall/story-e6freoof-1226638912760

    Now the news had the story plus the railway authorities mouthing the obligatory “don’t do this”, instead, press the emergency button and wait for help from the authorities.

    Right. As always, when seconds count the authorities are minutes (or even hours) away if they turn up at all, as it might not be in the job description of the minion taking the call.

    Thank you, Kay Seymour, for being a human being first. (Trader’s Prime rule – be a human being first, Charles Sheffield, Trader’s World)

    90

    • #
      Joe V.

      You can’t have authorities advising to take calculated risks, because many people would mis- calculate and the naive could unwittingly be lured into danger. Humanity sometimes depends on individuals, rising over the soporific effects of authority though and thinking for themselves.
      In France there is an obligation on bystanders to help, in Britain she would now be facing charges for trespassing.
      As long as she calculated that someone else would notice and raise the alarm she acted well based on her training and experience.

      An employee on the other hand would more possibly have thought twice & held back.

      20

  • #
    Rick Bradford

    It is said that to get funding, you only need to tack on a reference to global warming in the proposal. So ……

    Researchers in Boston University’s Department of Earth and Environment recently looked into whether the effects of climate change can be found in the winning times of Boston Marathon runners. The study, titled “Effects of Warming Temperatures on Winning Times in the Boston Marathon,” was published last year ……

    …..However, their models indicate that if race starting times had not changed and average race day temperatures continue to warm by 0.058°C/yr, a high-end estimate, they would expect a 95 percent chance of detecting a consistent slowing of winning marathon times by 2100.”

    No doubt taxpayers are being forced to fund equally ridiculous studies in Australia.

    50

    • #
      Ian Hill

      How absurd! This is the first time I’ve seen global warming connected to a sporting event. I thought studies would be confined to effects on nature. Whoever approved it should be hauled in front of an investigation.

      Out of interest, here’s a list of all Boston Marathon winning times:

      http://www.arrs.net/HP_BosMa.htm

      The slowest male winning time since 1970 was 2:20:19 in 1976 by Jack Fultz.

      To quote from page 192 of “The Boston Marathon”, by Joe Falls:

      “It was a scorching day – 91 degrees in the shade and 116 in the sun. The runners literally ran through a rainbow of garden hoses from Hopkinton to Boston. In fact they called this race the “Run for the Hoses.” It was the hottest marathon in history and more than 40 percent of the 1,898 starters failed to finish.

      Jack Fultz, a Georgetown student, won this race of attrition despite a cramp in his leg. A pigtailed blonde named Kim Merritt, twenty, from Wisconsin, lead (sic) the women in 2h, 47m 10s – and was immediately taken to hospital suffering from exhaustion.”

      Falls’ claim of it being the “hottest marathon in history” is not strictly true. On 16 February 1952 Robert Prentice won the Australian Marathon Championship in a very slow 3:19:52, being the only finisher, when it was 36C. He had to run it in the heat of the day. He was selected for the Helsinki Olympics on the basis of other, much faster times.

      10

  • #
    MadJak

    Just some suggestions onconstitutional ammendments:

    “Nominations of politicians for the role of treasurer or finance minister must be able to demonstrate to the people a proven track record of fiscal responsibility within the private and public sector which ensures they have the necessary expertise and experience to handle other peoples money.”

    and

    “Citizens who are a member of a Trade Union are only allowed half of a vote in the general elections due to the fact that their union exerts a large degree of influence on their behalf”.

    and one more

    “Any politician who was actively involved in the support of the Guilleard/swann coup and subsequent unmandated government is hereby prohibited from holding any public sector job above that of floor cleaner – and even then only if there are vacancies that cannot be filled with a 457 visa.”

    I reckon that sounds fair. Might be pushing it with the last one.

    60

  • #
    Ace

    Im thinking of creating an alternate persona hereto argue with when all you Ozzies are in bed asleep. What shall I call him?

    How about Ahasomorhanasaurus?

    Or Johannasannamcfarb?

    or maybe Mihallavinabrailhaind (the) IIIrd.

    00

    • #
      Yonniestone

      How about Dragon or Nighthawk? It worked for these guys http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ6kb5MisRo :)

      00

      • #
        Ace

        Darn it Yonniestone I cannot afford to watch online video (thats not a mysterious joke, Its a fact, I pay per megabytes downloaded and few videos shoots me well over budget.

        What about Donaldo O’Juan Mc Ahab?

        00

        • #
          Yonniestone

          Ace this is a travesty!
          If you are doing your bit in this battle you need the time out for pointless self indulgent browsing.
          The clip was from “Stepbrothers” and if you say you’ve never seen it I’ll cry and pray for this basic right for you to browse any rubbish online for your own selfish pursuit.
          “It is a very sad thing that nowadays there is so little useless information” Oscar Wilde.

          00

          • #
            Ace

            Man…the porn I have to deny myself is tragic…but living under UK conditions and without owning a Green subsidised company, thats your fate.

            00

  • #
    Backslider

    Yet another bout of disgustingly dishonest and irresponsible alarmism:

    Climate change ‘will make hundreds of millions homeless’

    10

  • #
  • #
    David

    Change of subject folks. While enjoying the calm of raking up the leaves from my very beautiful but evil non-indigenous trees I was pondering the evils of carbon like matter in the atmosphere and came to the conclusion that as a ?th generation Anglo-Celtic-Jew I should ignore the possible catastrophic effects of the fire and smoke and be allowed to set fire to them in the gutter as has been the wonted custom of my tribe since time out of mind. When the local council or EPA turned up I could claim that what I was doing was a deep cultural ritual essential to the well being of my psyche. It’s as good an argument as appeasing some rainbow coloured giant reptile in my book. My real question is “How many carbon credits would I need to get away with it”? Kol tuv

    50

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Now we’re talkin.

      Fire.

      I love fire.

      KK :)

      30

      • #
        David

        And smoke KK. Gotta have smoke. No burning pile of Autumn leaves is complete without clouds of it rising in a majestic [even if small] column into the atmosphere to appease the relevant local God. The bonus is that it will annoy the tripe out of the Gaiians and similar like minded wankers.

        50

        • #
          Backslider

          Guarantee that in fact they all like to go out camping and to sit around a fire singing Kumbayah…. hypocrites.

          20

          • #
            MadJak

            It looks to me like anyone trying to stop you would be infringing on your human rights.

            20

            • #
              David

              Didn’t think of that MJ. I was stuck in the cultural argument. Now I have two valid reasons to burn those leaves.

              20

              • #
                KinkyKeith

                I said, don’t get me started on fires!
                In the last ten years we have had far too many fires in the town and surrounding bush areas.

                Really scary stuff.

                In one case a fire pushed by a Westerly, push a huge fire along the rail line into town .

                It was eventually stopped on a rise and thankfully, couldn’t get down the other side to our place.

                Last summer the residents of an old people’s home had the crap scared out of them when a sudden fire took hold near their home. Just one of too many.

                All due to Global Warming, of course.

                Or possibly a management failure to carry out those nasty ” pre-emptive” burns?

                KK :)

                40

              • #
                David

                Not too keen on big fires either KK. Been in three large bush fires the last being Ash Wednesday and didn’t like the very possible prospect of being barbecued one little bit. I just miss the perfume of burning autumn leaves in a suburban gutter. Another of life’s little pleasures removed by Big Brother and Nanny.

                30

    • #

      Could you not do it in the gutter? Ash is not a nice addition to public waterways.

      01

  • #
    pat

    i found this article in Murdoch’s New York Post deliciously ironic. crony capitalists, one & all:

    10 May: EXCLUSIVE: Goldman Sachs employees concerned Bloomberg news reporters are using terminals to snoop
    By MARK DeCAMBRE
    The ability to spy on Bloomberg terminal users came to light recently when Goldman officials learned that at least one reporter at the news service had access to a wide array of information about customer usage, sources said….
    The matter raised serious concerns for the firm about how secure information exchanged through the terminals within the firm actually was — and if the privacy of their business strategy had been compromised.
    “You can basically see how many times someone has looked up news stories or if they used their messaging functions,” said one Goldman insider.
    “It made us think, ‘Well, what else does [Bloomberg] have access to?’ ”
    Bloomberg’s terminals have become the lifeblood of Wall Street trading shops, particularly those that mine the terminals’ reams of data to help make daily trading decisions.
    Wall Street firms pay about $20,000 a year to rent each terminal — allowing the company founded by Mayor Michael Bloomberg to ring up annual revenue of more than $6 billion…
    In recent weeks, top executives from Goldman have met face to face with Bloomberg brass over the potentially explosive issue.
    Some Goldman traders are still skittish about how much of their terminal usage can be gleaned from Bloomberg terminals — despite assurances from the news and data service that within 24 hours of being alerted by Goldman it had pulled the plug on the function that allowed its reporters to snoop.
    A Goldman spokesman confirmed that Bloomberg was addressing the issue.
    Bloomberg journalists are prohibited from discussing non-public Bloomberg documents and proprietary information about the company and its clients in their reporting.
    No reporters have lost their jobs as a result of the snooping issues…
    The data trolling issue is somewhat ironic for the bank given that some on the Street often accuse Goldman of tapping key information better than rivals…
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/terminally_nosy_p5pSzsDkZzWJ2H7SqpFAPO?utm_source=SFnewyorkpost&utm_medium=SFnewyorkpost

    10

  • #
    Tim

    Here’s an article for your consideration and comment. This dude is a heavy-duty VIP and needs to be taken seriously. His CV titles him as a skeptic.

    Republican introduces bill to require political approval of scientific papers

    http://refreshingnews99.blogspot.in/2013/05/republican-introduces-bill-to-require.html

    10

    • #
      Joe V.

      The draft Bill, if this is it in its entirety:- “High Quality Reasearch Act”, is nothing like the linked article claims.
      .
      It is rather, about the approval of allocation of funding.
      .
      Obviously if its for handing out public money there should be someone with public accountability scrutinising it.
      .
      It makes you wonder why there isn’t something like this in place already.
      .
      Clearly it might be abused in the wrong hands, but at the moment public finds seem to be getting wasted indulging fashionable leftoid trivia, in the name of Science.

      20

    • #
      Joe V.

      The Draft is reproduced more clearly here with slightly more informed comment. Not Safe for Funding
      The confusion of such funding decisions with the hallowed ‘peer review’ may be intentional obfuscation.
      If such funding decisions are left to solely academic peer review then is it any wonder climate science is in the state it is ?

      10

  • #
    Ace

    IF..the vetting was by scientists to precisely and only establish whether the outcome of the research was a valid reflection of the investigation, then actually that sounds like a good idea.

    Lewandowsky’s survey guff would never have been approved on those grounds. Anything solidly empirical such as engineering, chemistry or physics would almost always b approved. I say that as someone with both legs up to the knees in the practice of psychology.The bulk of it is an embarrassment to the rest of it.

    Yes, I think ….purely in relation to government funded research…why is such a system not already in place?

    20

    • #

      Ace… what system do you think is in place?

      01

      • #
        Ace

        Well, not the one proposed or it wouldnt need anew law.

        Correct me if Im wrong but the only thing governing publication of research papers in Western academia, irrespective of the source of funding of the institutions employing the authors, is the pernicious “peer review”. Vetting by mates.

        10

        • #

          I’ve published heaps and not one of them was likely reviewed by a mate.

          Funding bodies place demands and require accountability for their money. There are rules and contracts about intellectual property and financial outcomes and sharing of data.

          There are many ways to publish that does not involve peer review including freely accessible reports and books. Research institutions have academic boards, ethics committees, financial accountability checks etc etc.

          Research is carried out in a highly regulated environment. Regulation and accountability does not make science or scientists better though. Is your gripe really that there are scientists doing research that you don’t like?

          02

          • #
            Ace

            What you have just said is that there are no constraints whatsoever. I could just say “~I rest my case”.

            However, it remains the case that unless ~”your mates” (the coterie which gallery you strum your banjo for~) agree they wont be publishing you. Obviously, anyone can publish anything somewhere or themselves, like er…”psychic” researchers, et al, papers on ~Roswell aliens by the zillion.. It doesnt make any difference to anyone how much buckets of crap you may have published, unless its “peer reviewed” (approved by “science mates”) it a) counts for squat and b)is only an issue if paid for by the state.

            No, what I object to is that public money can subsidise researchers whose research does not conform to standards, whose papers do not reflect the research and whose conclusions are non-sequiters. The recent instance of Lewandowsky’s withdrawn pseudo-social psychology paper is an example.

            Lewandowsky is not even qualified as a social psychologist. Hes now professor of cognitive psychology and his history is in computer-modelling of cognitive processes. Its` exactly like an automobile designer deciding to design an aeroplane for a change because he fancies it. Theres no way this could obtain funding but as a result of his popularity and brown nose within the teeny coterie he is a member of.

            11

            • #

              I’ll remind you of the irony in your last paragraph next time you comment on climate.

              It would be fun to deconstruct your straw man in the first few paragraphs but it would also require educating you as to how the system(s) work(s) as you either don’t know or you are being willfully disingenuous. I say this as no fan of Lew’s work and I am also a critic of the nature of the academy and public funded research, but at least as a critic I know what I am critisising.

              11

  • #

    Ace: “why is such a system not already in place?”

    Reality has been held as optional for so long, very few know what it is or how to find out anything about it.

    When their results don’t have to match reality, the research is so much easier to do. All they have to do is run a simulation and publish the output as data.

    When their conclusions don’t have to follow logically from the methods, results, and discussion, the papers almost write themselves. It’s publish or perish so it’s publish … publish … publish….

    If their results match what the government wants to see, government research grants are much easier to get. The grants are necessary because they don’t want to have to get a real job and actually earn their keep.

    If the rabble (we mere mortals) discover that reality is real and that they have been lied to for almost a century, there would be hell to pay and then they would have to do some serious paying. As it is, only the rabble have to pay.

    30

    • #

      Third paragraph amended:

      When their conclusions don’t have to follow logically from the methods, results, and discussion, the papers almost write themselves. It’s publish or perish so it’s publish … publish … publish even if it’s rubbish.

      Last paragraph amended:

      If the rabble (we mere mortals) discover that reality is real and that they have been lied to for almost a century, there would be hell to pay and then the alarmists would have to do some serious paying. As it is, only we rabble have to pay.

      10

  • #
    Manfred

    Morning all. Lovely start to the day on the BBC World Service news, who true to form ran a news item from the warmist heartland of the University of East Anglia. It seems Dr Rachel Warren and associated entrail gazers consider, ‘that if no significant efforts were made to limit greenhouse gas emissions, 2100 global temperatures would be 4C above pre-industrial levels’.

    ‘In this model, some 34% of animal species and 57% of plants would lose more than half of their current habitat ranges’

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22500673

    And this placed in perfect conjunction with: ‘A new report has laid bare the UK’s pretensions to have cut greenhouse gas emissions over recent years’…because… ‘The (Climate Change) committee said although production of CO2 is down 20% in the past two decades, the overall trend is up 10% because the cuts in production emissions have been outweighed by CO2 in the form of imported goods’.

    Some may recall that the Green agenda in their own words (Quadrant) desires among many other things, a ‘lock down’ country – no travel, no import/export. The BBC itself states: “BBC News has been highlighting this issue for some time and MPs asked the committee to examine it last year.”

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22267231

    The BBC, it would appear, sees itself as far more than a news and reporting media, it is a self-declared statist Green policy advocate, a privilege for which the proletariat pay by taxation.

    20

    • #
      Joe V.

      While the BBC World Service is indeed paid for directly by the Tax Payer, funded through the Government’s Foreign Office , the BBC in general is lavishly funded by a Tax on all users of TV broadcast receiving equipment through a License Fee, whether the user ever tunes into the BBC ‘s transmissions or not.
      The BBC raises £ 3.6 Billion anually by this “most regressive and most ruthlessly collected of all government imposts”, of £145 per household per year, accounting for a whopping 70% of its total turnover.

      30

      • #
        Ace

        Such figures are hard to grasp. you need a comparison to something one has a senseof the enormousness of. Put it this way, the BBC licence feeis MORE THAN ONE THIRD THAT OF NASA!

        Thats a fact. Check it if you doubt it.

        Moreover, the BBCs total budget is almost TWO THIRDS THAT OF NASA!

        Now work that out per head of population. The BBC licence costs the British per person (of total population) roughly TWICE AS MUCH AS NASA costs each US citizen!

        Astronomical indeed!

        Now ask yourself what the US citizen gets for half the cost of the BBC in NASA: The ISS, global communications research, weather research, climate research, advanced air transport research, missions to almost every planet and Mars beamed to your sitting room, the Hubble space telescope, the James Webb space telescope, orbiting solar observatories, entertaining disasters and cock-ups, until recently James Hansen, the list is endless….a never ending cavalcade of stunts and circus side shows.

        Now what do the British get with the BBC at TWICE the per capita price: some live soccer, a couple of orchestras and a few re-runs of Dads Army.

        Its an unbelieveable joke!

        I havent watched and cannot watch TV on my old equipment since the UK went digital. So no licence for me to pay. Now Ive even stopped listening to their shite on the radio. Even their music presenters are unctious sanctimonious arrogant irritations. And what they pass as”music” defies belief. Real example, several minutes of sounds recorded on the London underground. oh yeah. I aint making it up.

        20

  • #
    • #
      Joe V.

      So it’s warmer than it was in 1984, therefore ice continues to melt, even now 23 years after Global average temperature has stabilised, but it won’t go on forever.
      Columbia Glacier retreat expected to stop in 2020

      What’s more that isn’t straightforward melting, but calving for which this glacier is notorious

      30

      • #
        James X Leftie

        Thanks for the reply.

        PS The link is a copy and paste from the forum I was debating in.. nothing malicious about it.

        10

    • #
      Ace

      Nice try but you aint wasting my time clicking your poxy link, troll boy.

      10

      • #
        Joe V.

        Oh ace, you skeptic you. I was completely taken in by troll boy’s appeal.
        D’you reckon a bit more abuse would have been in order ?

        10

    • #

      Yes, the glacier is calving and possibly retreating. Ask the warmists to name a time in history when glaciers did calve and melt. Glaciers aren’t permanent structures and treating them as such is foolish. Shows a complete lack of understanding of the real world.

      20

    • #

      Leftie: I notice the link is to Google maps/earth. I found it interesting that satellite images (which I am not sure include Google) actually have to be calibrated for melt detection. There is an algorithm that does this. I found the information here: http://nsidc.org/greenland-today/

      It seems that much of climate science has be constantly “adjusted” for the instrumentation, outliers, missing data, etc. How much this affects data I cannot say. However, it does point out that the science is far less empirical and far more theoretical than people are lead to believe. Satellite images sound very definitive. It’s what is used to calculate the terrain under the ocean when figuring volume of the oceans.

      It’s not a case of measuring temperature or volume straight up–as well as melting glaciers and arctic ice. There are adjustments and adjustments. It’s fascinating that in something so important as climate science these adjustments are everywhere. It’s like building a house with measuring tools that have to have an inch added or subtracted because the scales on the tape measures don’t match. It’s like drawing a line on a level to indicate where the bubble should be for level because the mark it came with was off level. It’s just a very strange way of dealing with something so serious.

      20

  • #
    crakar24

    Climate change in action now stop denying and start believing

    http://kstp.com/article/stories/S3030105.shtml?cat=7

    30

    • #
      Ace

      Crakar are you playing Troll Boy at his own game?

      10

      • #
        crakar24

        It has long been hypothesised that the Troll/believer hybrid does not get irony nor sarcasm this was an attempt to validate the theory and judging by the lack of response i think the test can be considered a success. The hybrid now thinks i am one of them.

        Time to release the white ants.

        10

  • #
    Manfred

    The imminent finish of the retreat, or recession of the front of the glacier, has surprised scientists and highlights the difficulties of trying to estimate future rates of sea level rise

    http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2012/11/26/alaska%E2%80%99s-iconic-columbia-glacier-expected-stop-retreating-2020-says-cu

    Meanwhile…..’Still waiting for spring in Minnesota
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/05/11/still-waiting-for-spring-in-minnesota/

    00

  • #
    crakar24

    In an attempt to inject a bit of humour

    I cant see this site

    http://api.kinja.com/api/sso/getSession?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fgizmodo.com%2Fsetsession%3Fr%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fgizmodo.com%252F5890507%252Fpolice-drone-crashes-into-police

    But apparently the police got a nice new shiny toy so they organised a photo op and when all was set promptly crashed it into themselves

    http://www.newsforage.com/2013/05/fbi-surrounds-house-of-saudi-student.html

    He had a pressure cooker dammit how were we supposed know he was using it to cook rice?

    Shades of Nazi Germany here i think, booga booga booga, booga booga booga what a farce.

    20

    • #
      Yonniestone

      crakar24, that drone story had shades of “Robocop” in it, “You have 10 seconds to comply” Ha ha, but seriously when I first saw Terminator it scared me to think of trying to fight something not human, a machine, and now I can see how stupid we are to let it happen.
      I wonder if Microsoft is working on something called Skynet?

      00

      • #
        crakar24

        They developed a smart bomb that was launched from a Howitzer, you had to tell it where it was and where you wanted it to go. After launch it would head towards the place you wanted it to go but it then developed a nasty habit of wanting to go back to where it started from LOL.

        00

        • #
          Yonniestone

          That sounds a bit inconvenient!
          I used to drive an old bomb that I told where to go on a daily basis.

          00

          • #
            Ace

            I often want to tell particular people “where to go”!

            00

            • #
              Ace

              …but seriously, in Uk there are CCTV systems that bark out orders i`n public places….like your robocop. “Pick up that litter you just dropped!!!” is the kind of thing. Never heard this but seen it on video.

              How utterly pathetic. Just about captures the essence of life in modern Britain. A thouroughly, utterly, horrible place where the state invest billions and the security apparatus of North Korea to enforce pathetic trivia.

              00

      • #
        crakar24

        Yep its called Win8

        00

  • #
  • #
    crakar24

    Bolt has this story up

    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/with_obama_re_elected_the_left_concede_his_white_house_lied_on_benghazi/

    They talk about how the cover up etc but here is what i think happened actually pinched it from http://www.whatreallyhappened.com

    As we watch the Congressional Hearings on the attack on the Benghazi consulate, we see the usual signs of yet another official attempt to generate a highly fictitious official version of events. We see the blame shifting and the pointed fingers as everyone dances the “Potomac Two-Step” to the beat of nervous pulse rates.
    What Really Happened?
    We may never know, but after some consideration and application of Occam’s Razor, this is what I think may have been going on.
    The official story is that on the night of 9/11/12, coinciding with the anniversary of the false-flag attacks in New York City, “Al Qaeda”, enraged over a trailer for a non-existent Mohammed-bashing movie, attacked the Consulate, killing the Ambassador. Bad Muslims, no cookie!
    But there are some interesting facts to consider.
    There is ample evidence that the US Government knew something was going to happen days, maybe as much as a week, ahead of time. Yet they did not increase security at the Consulate or remove the Ambassador.
    There were CIA and SEALS nearby who heard the gunfire but were ordered to stand down. Just where that order came from appears to be the White House, despite an early effort to pin the blame on CIA, which was denied by Patraeus, leading to exposure of a sex scandal and his forced retirement on November 9th.
    There are reports that a Predator drone was overhead, “real timing” the video of the attack back to the White House situation room. Given that the Predator only has a top speed of 137 miles per hour, the drone had to be enroute to the Consulate long before the violence started.
    So here is what I think was going on.
    Polls in September showed the Presidential race neck and neck. Many media outlets were openly predicting a Romney victory. Obama had failed to garner public approval over the killing of a man claimed (but never proven) to be Osama bin Laden, mostly because of the manner in which the body was disposed of and the obvious faked photos leaked onto the internet.
    Obama needed a publicity stunt.
    A small team of “Al Qaeda” terrorists, or someone playing at being Al Qaeda terrorists, were supposed to enter the Consulate and take the Ambassador and his staff hostage. Obama would let the drama build for a few days, allowing the media to hype the story, then send in the SEAL teams to “rescue” the hostages, then campaign on how he did not let the situation turn into a repeat of the Iranian hostage crisis, which would have dovetailed with the Iran bashing (and Argo).
    But the best laid plans of mice and men (and Candidates) gang aft agley, as they say. We know that the CIA operatives at the annex could hear the gunfire from the Consulate. Looking at the consulate through Google Earth, one sees heavily populated residential areas less than half a mile to the east and southwest, who no doubt heard the gunfire coming from the consulate as well. Given how quickly sympathetic protests erupted across the Middle East during this incident, it is clear that the region is an anti-American powder keg awaiting a spark, which Obama inadvertently provided with his staged terror attack.
    The initial “Al Qaeda” (or reasonable facsimile thereof) was a small group, but were quickly joined by Libyans pouring in from adjoining neighborhoods. What was a planned and rehearsed operation to “kidnap” the Ambassador triggered a spontaneous riot with at least 200 participants on the ground, and spun out of control, leading to the deaths of the Ambassador and others.
    Obama’s carefully prepped operation to make himself look like a hero instantly turned in an epic fail.
    Then the “cleanup” began, first with the assassination of one of the main “terrorists” in Cairo on October 25th, an explosion at the Benghazi Police Station on November 4th, and the assassination of the Benghazi police chief on November 20th. Facebook even went as far as to censor the Navy SEALs to prevent anyone there on the ground from speaking out to the net. And the man who made the YouTube trailer for the non-existent film on which the riots were blamed was sent to prison!
    This seems the simplest explanation that fits all the available facts.

    10

    • #
      Ace

      The trouble with all these flying URLs and quotes is they are liable to be misunderstood.
      “9/11/12, coinciding with the anniversary of the false-flag attacks in New York City, ”

      Is that representative of YOUR beliefs or someone you are alluding to or someone you are citing?

      00

      • #
        crakar24

        The trouble with all these flying URLs and quotes is they are liable to be misunderstood.
        “9/11/12, coinciding with the anniversary of the false-flag attacks in New York City, ”

        Is that representative of YOUR beliefs or someone you are alluding to or someone you are citing?

        I dont believe the official story but i dont have a plausible alternate reality to replace it with as yet. My main sticking point is WTC 1,2 and 7 …..especially 7.

        But apart from that the guys story is not a bad one Obama trying to look like the hero to garner votes, it has been tried before by others even Little Johnny Howard lied through his teeth to get votes (Tampa fiasco)

        Cheers

        10

        • #
          Ace

          I was quoting YOU you wally…didnt you notice what you had written?

          The following is not aimed at you but more generally:

          So does Khaled Sheikh Mohammad exist and who mind controlled him?

          Who was “behind” the 1992 bombing?

          Who was Ayotollah Khomeini REALLY working for?

          Were the Roswell aliens involved?

          Was the prophet Muhammad a secret employee of Haliburton?

          00

          • #
            crakar24

            ACE,

            The opening line was written by me


            They talk about how the cover up [started]etc but here is what i think happened actually pinched it from http://www.whatreallyhappened.com

            Therefore everything that follows was actually pinched from WRH, this includes the bit you quoted.

            In my response i assumed you knew i did not right it (my mistake) so i simply said i am not sure if i agree with what the WRH guy has said however…….i cannot understand how 3 buildings could collapse the way they did etc etc in response to you.

            Sorry but i cannot answer answer any of your questions.

            00

            • #
              Ace

              But there you have it….my opening issue illustrated.WHY did you not put the vast quote in QUOTE MARKS?????????

              00

    • #
  • #

    There’s enough of you here now who have an idea what I’m talking about when I mention that Renewables fail to deliver, wind especially, and I like to add links, mainly because if any of you get into debate, then I have a resource that you can readily show these people how poorly these methods of power delivery fail to deliver when they are needed the most.

    So, that being the case, I will add 2 links here with an explanation.

    The first is the AEMO, the Australian Regulator.

    AEMO Average Daily Price Table

    You’ll read in the media how Peak Power is just for a very few days of the year, usually from a journalist mainly, who has no real understanding when he’s writing his article. I’ve been trying to impress upon you all that Peak Power is a daily occurrence, as evidenced by the load curve for actual power consumption. Those Peak power periods are for 6 to 8.30AM and for 4.30PM until around 11PM/Midnight, when everyone comes home from work, and Residential consumption goes up. I’m often scoffed at for saying this, not from those here, but they dispute the fact.

    So now, look at this chart.

    Note how in NSW, VIC, QLD and TAS, the difference between RRP and Peak RRP (note here this is on a daily basis) is relatively small.

    Now note SA. Note first how power is more expensive there, even the base RRP price, but note the difference between that and the Peak RRP, swinging wildly, and by a larger percentage than the other States. SA has the largest amount of Wind Power than any other State, and they proudly wear this mantle, so the Renewable supporters say, but note how expensive power is there.

    Now, why is that Peak power so expensive?

    Because, when the wind fails and the turbines stop delivering, they have to purchase power from other (traditional) sources, and also from VIC.

    Now, I can say that, and people will always still scoff at me, telling me I’m just making that up to support my point of view that these things do not deliver.

    So now, that leads me to the second of the links, which backs up what I am saying.

    Note on that AEMO chart the prices for 8th May, when RRP was pretty high, at $117.30/MWH a cost well more than double the next most expensive State.

    Now note the Peak RRP cost, which spiked to $161.19, three to four times more expensive than other States.

    So now, knowing this, go to this second link here, Wind Plant Performance for that same day, and here I want you to follow a few simple tasks.

    Wind Plant Performance

    When the page loads go to the legend under the top 2 graphs. Now, untick all the plants for NSW, VIC,and TAS. Then unclick the button that says ALL on the right.

    So, now, what you have showing on that second graph is the total delivery from all wind plants in SA, the black line.

    Now, scroll down the page until you see the next graph. Unclick all except SA, and now you are left with a red line, and this indicates the total actual power consumption in SA for that day, 8th May.

    Look now at the one back up the page that shows the total power delivery from Wind. Note how it is at its lowest just as the total SA power Peaks at its highest consumption, just as the daily Peak Power comes in.

    THAT is why SA pays so much for its reliance on Renewable power, not for the already expensive Wind Power, but for the exorbitantly expensive power needed when Wind is not supplying.

    This is the inconvenient truth that Renewable supporters do not accept.

    When you get asked by smug people who tout Renewable power, show them why it is so damned expensive.

    So now, keep in mind the introduction of Smart Meters and how those who also support these tell us that Power providers (the retailers) should have the ability to charge people a higher rate for Peak Power consumption. You’re actually locked into those Peak Power time periods, unless you significantly alter your daily life. If you want to save money, then there’s no cooking the evening meal at that time, no doing the household chores at that time, staying in the dark, and on it goes. Smart Meters will know your exact power consumption for each hour of the day, and will charge you accordingly.

    It has nothing to do with reducing CO2 emissions, and reducing their Climate Change, which they just use as the excuse. It’s all about just one thing.

    Making money out of it, and using Climate Change as their excuse.

    Tony.

    30

  • #
    Robert

    Hey Tony,

    Elsewhere in internet land we had an individual claiming to be in “Energy Systems Engineering” who said something along the lines of how he’d make more money with coal power as the plants require maintenance, analysis, etc. whereas with renewable systems you just “build and forget.”

    I suspect he didn’t realize just how much he’d given away with that statement in that the trend seems to be build the POS grab the money and run. What’s left then is forgotten and there are plenty of photos of the rusting or overgrown remains of those forgotten sites.

    I suspect that if you don’t factor in the maintenance and upkeep it probably is cheap, for the builders anyway.

    40

    • #

      Yeah, maintenance on a coal fired plant is a real killer! (/sarc)

      2 to 4 units at a coal fired pant, all at ground level.

      Maintenance at a Wind Plant.

      The nacelle is up on top of a 340 foot pole, and there’s anything up to a hundred or more of them, all spread over square miles.

      The workings of the system inside that nacelle are all crammed into as tiny a space as is possible, as that weight on top of that huge pole is critical.

      I’ve seen images of some wind nacelles with the maintenance worker lowered down from a helicopter.

      Don’t try and tell me the cost factor for working in those conditions is cheaper than for ground level work.

      Tony.

      51

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Tony,
        it has been claimed in the UK that maintenance costs make up 10% of the gross income from wind turbines. Unfortunately I didn’t save that link, but I see no reason to disbelieve it.

        You only have to look at the time that turbines sit idle until they can be repaired. Of course they might just be waiting for a No.12 helicopter to turn up.

        30

      • #

        Huge costs when wind power is offshore. IIRC Germany’s E.On published an analysis that stated the limited number of available floating cranes (costing “only” a few hundred million Euros each) with reach and capacity suitable for construction and maintenance of megawatt-scale wind turbines, could only operate in sea and wind conditions that prevail for less than 4 months of the year in e.g. the North Sea. If one unit goes offline at the end of summer, it’s unlikely to be fixed before the end of the subsequent spring… i.e. downtimes in the order of 8 months.

        Of course, not much gets generated by offshore during the middle of winter anyway. it’s mostly in autumn/spring that winds are consistently high; but they can also be excessive, resulting in deliberate shutdowns.

        20

        • #

          This Comment from Bernd immediately makes me think of something else that was constructed in the North Sea, off the Coast of Scotland, The Bell Rock Lighthouse.

          It seems nothing has changed over the Centuries.

          The Bell Rock Light was constructed over three years. It was turned on in 1811, and is still operational, and still standing to this day.

          For Comparison, Cape Wind in Nantucket Sound, has been more than 15 years and longer in the planning and is still not constructed, and has a perceived life span at best of 25 years.

          For this stirring story on the Bell Rock Light, I have a Post of mine at my home site.

          The Bell Rock Light

          Tony.

          10

    • #
      Joe V.

      After caving into his luxury Golf Course Development on the Aberdeenshire coast did the Scottish Government just pick the wrong windsource to power its latest offshore wind development ?
      Trump Disputes WindFarm Eyesore

      20

  • #
    Dave

    No washing up after wind mills installed? WRONG

    HeliTechnics clean the monsters to keep the capacity factor up?

    Notice the windmills without blades in the background, wonder if they charged for these also?

    10

    • #
      Joe V.

      No washing up after wind mills installed?

      Washing up will become a luxury, to be done only once a week, or otherwise in cold water & in the dark.

      00

  • #
    Dave

    And windmills are so bird friendly. NOT.

    These things are Adam Brandts responsibility, yet he does nothing about the eagle decline in Tasmania, and figures soon to be released will even astound these dumb green greedy bird killing party members while they scream “Stop CO2 emissions and kill all the birds, humans, goats, camels, whales etc etc etc ”

    Windmills numbers UP : Bird numbers DOWN

    These BIRD Killers (both types) have to be stopped. This video is sickening. Imagine the outcry if it was BIG OIL.

    Basterd Greens.

    20

  • #
    pat

    new article on a matter already posted to comments last week, which is worth posting for the “sharks” comment:

    14 May: News Ltd: Tuck Thompson: Chinese solar panels allegedly labelled Australian made as ACC investigates
    The ACCC investigation followed complaints by competitors of Australian Solar Panel and Euro Solar. Gold Coast firm Aussie Made Solar managing director Gino Fiocco said he was among them.
    “There are more sharks in this industry than there are in the ocean,” he said.
    http://www.news.com.au/business/companies/chinese-solar-panels-allegedly-labelled-australian-made-as-acc-investigates/story-fnda1bsz-1226641524933

    10

  • #
    Speedy

    I am Woman.

    Music by Helen Reddy, Lyrics by Julia Gillard.)

    I am Woman, please ignore,
    How I’ve made this country poor,
    And it keeps on getting poorer day by day – ay.
    Though I’ve made some people poor,
    Then there surely must be more,
    But there’s some who don’t believe a word I say..

    Chorus:

    I’ve done no wrong,
    Just some things I can’t explain,
    And the evidence is strong,
    To those with half a brain.
    If you ask me,
    I’ll tell you anything…
    ‘Cos I’m wrong (wrong)
    I am convictable (convictable)
    But I’m woman…

    I am woman, and I send
    Kindest greetings to my friend
    Whatever type of creep he seems to be-ee.
    Perverts, cheats and liars tend,
    To be less fussy, and they bend;
    In Parliament, they always vote for me…

    Chorus:

    I’ve done no wrong,
    Just some things I can’t explain,
    And the evidence is strong,
    To those with half a brain.
    If you ask me,
    I’ll tell you anything…
    ‘Cos I’m wrong (wrong)
    I am unprincipled (unprincipled)
    But I’m woman…

    I am woman, and I’ve made,
    It so the “refugees” invade,
    On anything that they can cross the sea-ee.
    Sure they’re pretty well low-grade,
    But at least you know they’ve paid -
    People smuggling, it’s a growing industry…

    Chorus:

    I’ve done no wrong,
    Just some things I can’t explain,
    And the evidence is strong,
    To those with half a brain.
    If you ask me,
    I’ll tell you anything…
    ‘Cos I’m wrong (wrong)
    I am unprincipled (unprincipled)
    But I’m woman…

    110

  • #
    mwhite

    “180 Years accurate CO2 – Gasanalysis of Air by Chemical Methods (Short version)”

    http://www.anenglishmanscastle.com/180_years_accurate_Co2_Chemical_Methods.pdf

    There’s so much here, but

    “There is no constant exponential rising CO2-concentration since preindustrial times but a variing CO2-content of air following the climate. E.G. around 1940 there was a maximum of CO2 of at least 420 ppm, before 1875 there was also a maximum.”

    Who knows it may start to fall despite mans efforts?

    40

  • #
    pat

    followup, potentially more widespread.
    ***shouldn’t this be “also looking”:

    13 May: AP: Bloomberg editor apologizes on information access
    The editor-in-chief of Bloomberg News apologized Monday for the financial news service’s practice of accessing private data on clients through the company’s information service…
    ***The Federal Reserve is looking into whether Bloomberg journalists tracked data about terminal usage by top Fed officials. In a brief statement Monday, the European Central Bank said it “takes the protection of confidentiality very seriously and our experts are in close contact with Bloomberg.”
    Bloomberg journalists are renowned for aggressive techniques in a competitive field. Bloomberg News is owned by Bloomberg LP, a private company controlled by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg LP’s main business is selling terminals to clients in the financial industry, and it employs more than 2,400 journalists…
    Bloomberg cut journalists off from this type of access last month, after the Goldman complaint. In the posting Monday, Winkler drew a distinction between this type of data and “important” customer data, which he said has not been compromised.
    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BLOOMBERG_NEWS_JOURNALIST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-05-13-11-23-59

    more than 2,400 journalists! wow.

    00

  • #
    pat

    AP feeling the heat too!

    14 May: Yahoo/Reuters: Associated Press says U.S. government seized journalists’ phone records
    The Associated Press on Monday said the U.S. government seized records from phone lines assigned to AP offices and its reporters over a period of two months in 2012, which the news service described as a “massive and unprecedented intrusion.”
    AP Chief Executive Gary Pruitt, in a letter posted on the agency’s website, said the AP was informed last Friday that the Justice Department gathered records for more than 20 lines assigned to the agency and its reporters.
    Phone lines at AP bureaus in New York, Hartford and Washington were among those affected by the records seizure, as well as an AP phone at the U.S. House of Representatives, the AP said.
    “There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters,” Pruitt said in the letter, which was addressed to Attorney General Eric Holder…
    http://news.yahoo.com/associated-press-says-u-government-seized-journalists-phone-211333825.html

    10

  • #
    Manfred

    Another bright morning dawns. BBC World Service regaled us with the incipient disappearance of New York under the waves, whilst being hammered by anthro induced mega storms. This was followed by the UN urging the West to ‘get over yourselves’ and to turn to eating insects to help the World ‘food shortage’.

    In the background we have US President Barack Obama saying that the UK should try to “fix” its relationship with the EU before “breaking it off” (BBC World Service news).

    Indeed, the last thing Pres. BO wants is for an independent UK to regain its economic and energy senses, free from the bureaucratic Green manacles of Brussels and in possession of a mind set surprisingly suspicious of the good intentions of the insect eaters at the UN. /sarc

    50

  • #
    Manfred

    Another morning of scrambled noodles! Are they all Lost in Space?

    30

  • #
    crakar24

    HHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA…………….oh shit why am i laughing its my money too.

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/05/13/samsung-testing-5g-wireless-technology-that-can-download-entire-movies-in-seconds

    Where do you find the most expensive glass in the world? Well right here in the land of Oz of course, where off to see the Gizzard the wonderful Gizzard of Oz.

    20

    • #

      http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/japan-blitzes-australias-nbn-fibre-speeds/story-e6frgakx-1226622152248

      Launched by Sony chief Kazuo Hirai in Tokyo on Monday, the ‘Nuro’ service claims to be the world’s fastest fibre optic home network, offering download speeds of 2 gigabits per second and upload speeds of 1 Gbps.

      In contrast, Labor’s top-notch 100 megabit per second business plan under the NBN offers 1/20 the speed, while the Coalition’s cited 25 Mbps speed is 1/80 of Nuro’s speeds quoted on its website.

      The service costs about $50 per month with a steep installation fee quoted at around $540.

      Oops! Crakar wrong again.

      02

      • #
        crakar24

        Ah another maggot from the green bush attempts to debunk me on communication networks, just for the record maggot i have worked in 3 countries integrating, testing and maintaining this sort of stuff but yet you know more than me?

        Well lets put your knowledge to the test shall we.

        My link talks about a South Korean company called Samsung developing 5G wireless technology whilst your link used to debunk me talks about a Japanese company called Sony using fibre (Glass) cables.

        Do you know the difference between wireless and fibre you festering little maggot?

        10

        • #
          Robert

          Isn’t that an interesting avatar she has? The crossed tape over the mouth. I mean it is as if even the computer is trying to tell her something…

          20

        • #

          Not the first time that Margot has misunderstood the data he/she is promulgating. Margot, I am still waiting for the evidence that your unemployment comparison graph is little more than a political spin tool.

          Anyway, this is a more sensible discussion. I mean you would have known that for Samsung to achieve a data density like that, they would have used a bandwidth that could not be replicated for multiple users in the real world.

          http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/blogs/gadgets-on-the-go/samsungs-5g-will-complement-nbn-not-replace-it-20130514-2jjlw.html

          10

          • #
            crakar24

            GA,

            Thats a good story thanks, 5G is a near future advancement on the wireless technology at the moment we have 4G which in itself is a good replacement of the NBN.

            What amazes me is that all you hear is a lack of capacity of wireless technologies and yes that can be a problem however NBN type networks are prone to exactly the same thing.

            The bottom line is that you need a fibre back bone no matter what system, the bit that matters is the link from the user to the back bone.

            Fibre to the home is a very expensive way to do things wireless is much more cost effective, hell even the coalition plan is better but i suspect not too many people understand the technicalities between the two plans on offer.

            They dont understand the difference between speed and bandwidth so they just get bombarded by the spin a bit like that wannabe from the climate institute telling me adding more CO2 is like putting on another jumper sorry adding another blanket to trap more heat. Total crap but the masses fall for it.

            cheers

            10

  • #
    pat

    extraordinary two page article:

    13 May: SpiegelOnline: Shadows from the Past: Pedophile Links Haunt Green Party
    By Jan Fleischhauer, Ann-Katrin Müller and René Pfister
    In the 1980s, some members of Germany’s Green Party advocated the legalization of sex with minors. Now the party wants to come to terms with this dark chapter via an independent review of internal documents — some of which show that the influence of pedophiles on the young party was much stronger than previously thought…
    It’s embarrassing for the Greens. No other party depends as heavily on the claim of being on the right side of morality. The Greens also played a leading role from the start — as prosecutors — in the debate over abuse within the Catholic Church, emphatically demanding answers to allegations of sexual abuse of children…

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/past-pedophile-links-haunt-german-green-party-a-899544.html

    00

  • #
    crakar24

    Did you know that every Saudi national is employed?

    The smart ones get to be the doctors and the dumb ones get to be the cops, apparently they have the same system in the USA.

    http://www.ingeniouspress.com/2013/05/13/math-fail-cop-threatens-charges-after-student-blows-018-says-its-double-limit-of-08/

    00

  • #
    Robert

    Nothing surprising there, we have college students here in the US that were born, raised, and completely educated here who will spell “lose” like “did you lose your keys” as “loose”. Don’t even get me started on “they’re”, “there”, and “their”.

    An occasional lapse I can understand, but when people consistently screw up their native language on term papers and essays one has to wonder.

    I suppose, seeing as I’m going to be 49 this summer, that I went through my earlier education when it wasn’t completely hosed up. What really amazes me is that being young and wild I dropped out of high school before eventually getting my diploma. Got fed up with being forced to sit in a classroom where there were always one or two jackasses who wanted to ruin things for everyone else because they didn’t like being there. Yet I must have done something right, when I did my technical schooling about 20 years later I managed a 3.9 for my overall GPA and in my current coursework have been staying above 3.0 even with the crazy hours we had at work (58 hours a week last summer/fall).

    I would edit your comment as such:

    “The educated ones get to be the doctors, and the…”

    Because from what I’ve seen over the years educated and smart are not necessarily one and the same. Though we do have plenty of “educated” people who seem to think smart ass behavior is a sign of intelligence… Personally I see it as an indicator that mom and dad let the television baby sit junior too often.

    10

    • #
      Manfred

      The extremely well funded climate modeling scientists – very street smart, in a viciously urbane kind of way. They have largely ‘controlled’ the debate, gained the collusion of the political classes irrespective of spectrum, and quite successfully won hearts and minds of the MSM and the gifted masses.

      21

    • #
      gai

      The hot debate in my home state is over whether or not schools should teach cursive writing and the multiplication tables because now we have computers…..

      [North Carolina] Senate committee passes cursive bill

      RALEIGH — A bill requiring North Carolina elementary school students to learn cursive handwriting and to memorize multiplication table continued to steamroll its way through the General Assembly on Wednesday with no opposition.

      The state Senate Education Committee unanimously passed the “Back to Basics” bill, which would once again make cursive handwriting a part of the curriculum for the state’s public elementary schools. The State Board of Education would be expected to make sure that public schools provide instruction so that students create readable documents in cursive by the end of fifth grade and have memorized multiplication tables….

      10

      • #

        The cursive writing is not a big deal. I know several adults who print everything, some even print their signature. (Mine is half-printed. :) )

        The multiplication tables–yes, they need to be taught and memorized. As I told my niece when she complained about learning math when we have calculators, someone has to program the calculators. Machines are not self-programming. And you can avoid a panic attack if your cell phone is dead and you have to wing it figuring out a math problem!

        10

  • #
    KR

    Something that I assume will soon be under discussion here, Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature, discussed in some detail on Skeptical Science.

    Something like 12,000 abstracts mentioning global warming were examined, and of the ~4,000 peer-reviewed non-opinion papers attributing a cause, 97% say it’s anthropogenic (AGW). Cross-checking with the authors gives the same result, if not more so (98.4% consensus among authors).

    I’m not going to opine on the results, just pointing the paper out for folks. I would, however, suggest reading the (open access) paper before commenting, so that you have context.

    00

    • #

      This came out yesterday on Junk Science and WattsUpWithThat. The article was not available, just the press release.

      Yes, read the entire paper. It may not say what one thinks or interpreted it to mean, especially the press releases and headlines. (This is true of all papers–and here you can read the entire paper, not just the abstract as was done in the “study”)

      00

    • #
      Bite Back

      Something like 12,000 abstracts mentioning global warming were examined, and of the ~4,000 peer-reviewed non-opinion papers attributing a cause, 97% say it’s anthropogenic (AGW).

      Didn’t anyone notice that KR says “non-opinion” papers offer the “opinion” that it’s anthropogenic?

      KR, you really have a problem if you can’t understand that attributing something to some cause is, in fact, an opinion. Nice job!

      And I won’t even say anything about your use of Skeptical Science to justify your position.

      You might want to keep your day job though. I don’t believe you can make it as a climate scientist.

      BB

      00

  • #
    Bloke down the pub

    Jo, have you seen this version before? Don’t know how popular it was in Oz
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NLV24qTnlg

    00