It's not hard to find. It's basically links to whatever news is hot, and to a list of popular web sites and commentators, domestic and foreign. No popups or tricks or other annoying nonsense.
I guess you won't look at anything that you fear is right-wing. I look at everything that I can see, left and right. The Atlantic and Salon and Daily Kos are sometimes amusing.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Sure, but Galveston Bay touches the edge of Houston. New Orleans is far enough from the Gulf coast that it doesn't get the full winds of a hurricane; they are slowing down a bit before they hit NOLA. Lake Pontchartrain is fairly isolated from the Gulf. Of course, it was rain from the stalled storm that flooded Houston, and would have flooded New Orleans. It's tricky, building big cities in swamps on the Gulf Coast.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc picosecond timing precision measurement jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
The creativity of excuses never ceases to amaze me. We're living in a cult ure where everyone knows everything, regardless of what experts say. I see doctors and accountants because they know more about that stuff than me. I listen to the weather forecast because I can't do any better.
But WOW, when it comes to climate change, every possible path of disqualifi cation is fair game.
No, it's the progressive thing to do. Progressives have often embraced ideas they once denounced.
And the flood control regulation in Texas were still inadequate.
The Democrats - or rather the people who advocate regulations - don't think that they know more about the areas regulated than people working in those areas.
They think that some of the people spending money in those areas can't be t rusted to be prudent about anticipating low-frequency events, and that you can find regulators who can be both disinterested enough to act to protect the public, and expert enough to insist on sensible precautions.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
There is nothing extreme to a progressive, except the normal.
g
an
And got taken out again pretty rapidly, with Andrew Wakefield eventually di sbarred for publishing mendacious nonsense.
Of course they do. What you disdain are rather cautious predictions based o n remarkably comprehensive understanding (which you show no sign of sharing ).
Part of that understanding is based on the iteration of a whole range of cl imate models in a large number of different computers. If you knew enough t o make any claim to know what you are talking about, you'd be aware that th e different climate models make somewhat different predictions, but the pre dictions are close enough to make it clear that we ought to do something to mitigate anthropogenic global warming while we still can.
The Koch brothers will lose money if we do, so the Tea Party doesn't like t he idea.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Do name one. I could probably do it, but I've got less confidence in your grasp of historical reality.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Point of order.
Hundreds of computer models ALL showed extensive "climate change" which is to say "global warming" and all 100 models were totally wrong. Lots of money to create fake science. Lots of interest in a trillion dollar a year energy tax. Everyone agrees (and should include you) that weather is not climate. Yet the propaganda never stops. Every time there is a storm or warm day, it's all due to "climate change" which is a new code word for "anthropogenic global warming" since the warming trend stopped. This way when you say "climate change" the public will think "global warming" but if cornered you get to point out that you are correct no matter which way it is going.
And as for storms, they are caused by heat differentials. This DOES NOT occur from a flat climate. But everyone knows these and warming records in certain areas are due to the effects of el nino. That is never mentioned. Shhhh. It's a denier secret, don't you know.
This is SO dishonest. But hey dishonest is justified when a trillion dollars a year is at stake. Globalist Democrat tax and Spend. Who cares if real problems get solved?
:
t's not if, it's when"
f s ePerhaps, but hurricane frequency doesn't seem to have gone down
The Galveston hurricane was category 4, like Harvey, but it pushed a 15- to 20-foot storm surge across Galveston Island, killing some 12,000 people - if they'd had modern early warning and evacuation in 1900, it might not hav e killed as many people.
ler tried to tell me adding an Ethernet amplifier between my modem and rout er would boost speeds. I suggested maybe he means the cable side? No, he insisted the Ethernet side. No such thing exists (that's what network swit ches are for), and it's rated for full speed up to 100m, maybe a little mor e as-is.
laim is demonstrably false. But he was sure he was right.
te experts.
non-experts are idiots. Forget all this "well they could be wrong" or "I' ve looked at the data" or "widely held theories have been wrong in the past ".
the experts are less correct than the non-experts.
Probably not.
ave fortune tellers and the like. Economists and sociologists have a hard job. These are fundamentally complex things to study, like climate. But s ince you have it all figured out, maybe you need to tell them it's time to go home. You've figured it all out.
Psychiatry does allow experimental testing and falsification. Freudian psyc hoanalysis fell out of favour when it was demonstrated that it's clinical o utcomes showed that it wasn't doing anything useful for the patients.
Economics does make testable predictions, but the rich people who like what monetarism tells them are happy to ignore the fact that it doesn't generat e good predictions. Sociology is equally testable, but does seem to lend it self to data faking
It may be a while before the data-base gets purged completely. Stapel got f ound out when his graduate students got suspicious about the data he claime d to getting for them, which does suggest that the field is salvagable.
Keynes was. He was also Busar for Kings College Camebridge.
"During the inter-war years, Keynes amassed a considerable personal fortune from the financial markets and, as bursar of King's College, greatly impro ved the college's financial position."
They can make themselves happy - and some of them do - by ingesting prescri ption drugs, but the side-effects can be inconvenient.
sentiment and criticism.
Science is a systematic system of informed criticism. John Larkins opinion aren't exactly well-informed - most of what he posts on climate change come s from denialist well-sites, which makes him a gullible sucker rather than any kind of useful critic.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Einstein was under exactly that pressure. His response didn't exactly suppo rt the prevailing orthodoxy. Max Plank was clever enough to see that his un orthodox propositions were well worth publication and reputedly published h is four famous 1907 papers without bothering to send them out to referees.
Scientists are under pressure to impress, rather than conform. If you can u pset a prevailing orthodoxy, you will do much better than you will by merel y confirming it. Sadly, these opportunities don't come up often.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
I inherited an old copy of this book from Mo's dad, along with a lot of old weird drill bits.
Good read, the book.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
This is fun:
San Francisco is a city of microclimates, and the official weather station has been moved 15 times. Steps 13 to 15 all moved into warmer places.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
rote:
:te:
'It's not if, it's when"
ng
uff
ehis
the
aller tried to tell me adding an Ethernet amplifier between my modem and ro uter would boost speeds. I suggested maybe he means the cable side? No, h e insisted the Ethernet side. No such thing exists (that's what network sw itches are for), and it's rated for full speed up to 100m, maybe a little m ore as-is.
claim is demonstrably false. But he was sure he was right.
mate experts.
he non-experts are idiots. Forget all this "well they could be wrong" or " I've looked at the data" or "widely held theories have been wrong in the pa st".
ly the experts are less correct than the non-experts.
hkes are made and we figure things out.
late 1800s, and rather than moving away from this idea, it is being increas ingly embraced. The only people who are actually scientists that are fight ing against it are largely funded by companies who stand to lose something.
blem.
Anthony Watts and Steve McIntyre, both subsidised by the Heartlands Institu te
Back when he was being unkind to Michael Mann about the hockey stick curve, McIntyre claimed to be disinterested, but he eventually came out of the cl oset.
Anthropogenic global warming makes it likely that San Francisco is a warmer place these days. Anthony Watts does have an obsession about traditional w eather stations and Stevenson boxes, and the denialist propaganda machine i s happy to exploit him.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Er... no,such spending isn't on 'compliance with regulations', it's on public safety (and pollution control). It looks like spending on regulations only if one is ignorant of cause-and-effect.
Regulations are how a bureaucracy handles feedback; there are economic necessities, that are NOT handled by any 'market', driving those imperatives. So, the needs (clean water to support oystering in the Chesapeake is a good example) give rise to monitoring of agricultural runoff, and some kinds of soil treatments are discouraged. Then the oysters get healthy. The farmers didn't CARE how the runoff was killing the oysters downstream until science determined the cause, and regulation was imposed.
Far better that an oyster should die on the half-shell, with some horseradish, than to strangle as a sprat. Regulations, and horseradish, are the bomb!
Apparently so is anyone who devises an exciting concept that can't be tested by experiment. Like economists and fiction writers and Al Gore.
But the causalities of climate might never be verified, certainly not in as short as a thousand years. All we have is simulations.
-- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
Nonsense. Belief isn't an issue in science, because it's all tested, and never completely trusted.
Nonsense, again; that only is the response if someone drags out an ancient controversy, because science is interesting to scientists, but history-of-science is mainly only interesting to historians. Controversy is only interesting to debaters and dramatists.
So, we have congresscritters who like drama and debate, who'll talk about anything EXCEPT knowledge. And, John Larkin does the same thing. It's about climate, not belief. It's about climate, not 'nonlinear' or 'chaotic' or 'better' models. And climate is being affected by pollution.
Well, that more or less blows your chance to 'refute'; "anyone who devises' identifies no person 'an exciting concept' identifies no concept 'can't be tested by experiment' is why this comment has no value; such vague arm-waving can not be made to match any specific.
'Like economists' - getting far away from concepts of climate 'and fiction writers' - still far away from concepts of climate 'and Al Gore' - finally, you've NAMED something. But it isn't climate, it's just another guy you're talking about.
Nowhere do you refute global warming concepts, or deny its human causation.
It's one dollar out of eight. 1 out of 8. You call it by a different name - literally just that - as if that's supposed to make a difference, but it's still 1 dollar out of 8.
New Yorkers move the car to the opposite side of the street each day to allow street cleaning. Maybe you think it would be reasonable if they used 1/8th of their fuel doing that.
Combined with the >40% of GDP that is taxed, more than half the GDP is controlled by the government, so we're more socialist than capitalist.
Forgot to mention that using one kind of fertilizer or another should not account for 1/8th of the farmer's operating costs.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.