We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Monday, February 27. 2023
The 10 tell-tale signs of 'toxic positivity' and why people who insist on forever looking on the bright side can be the WORST office colleagues
Former Reuters Editor Says He Was Misled on Climate Change
US Teens Feel Down, But the Adults Aren’t All Right Either. America's mental health crisis can’t simply be blamed on social media and Covid-19.
Yet another government agency acknowledges COVID was from lab
Social-Justice Shrinks: How Identity Politics Infected Therapy
Ian Fleming’s James Bond novels to be revised to erase material deemed offensive
What Happened to Liberalism?
Minnesota looks to ban all gas hookups
Any of These Supreme Courts Cases Could Crush the Internet. The Court’s decisions in Gonzalez and subsequent cases could lead to impossible, incompatible consequences.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
A headline today: "SAG Awards 2023: ‘Everything Everywhere All at Once’ Dominates"
I didn't know what SAG was but when I looked at the story "The Screen Actors Guild sounded familiar. I never heard of Everything, everywhere, all at once. Still don't know what it is. Some kind of TV show, maybe? But then it appears from the story that Netflix puts it on. Does Netflix have a TV station or Cable station??? Wasn't Netflix a DVD "lender: or something? I wonder if I have Netflix on my TV cable. Probably not since my cable is free where I live now.
I did watch a movie last night "The News of the World" Good movie.
"I didn't know what SAG was..."
My first thought was: Surface Action Group? Huh?
Overtrained I guess, after some 35 years in the Canadian military.
Everything, Everywhere, All At Once is an independent movie with a brilliant concept. It's theme is a Chinese family with a struggling laundromat. The viewer has to pay attention to what's going on, because the plot shifts are wild. It's not a Marvel comics action-hero movie, the kind that goes in one eye and out the other. The praise is well-deserved, for once - in my opinion. I thought it was a very fun movie.
My second job after graduating from the U was doing PR for the Natural Gas Council of Minnesota and Blue Flame Gas Association. Back in the mid-70s clean burning natural gas was right next to Godliness.
My old bosses at those gas utilities must be turning over in their graves (or keeling over in their nursing homes).
I worked in the industry for the next 25 years and I'M keeling over now. This is mind-blowingly stupid.
Follow the Bemjamins.
>This is mind-blowingly stupid.
Particularly in Minnesota. Heat pumps aren't a good option up there.
Ditto wrt to continuous hot water systems; the input water tends to be too cold for them to maintain the required (by code) flow rate.
Having lived in Minnesota for 40 years I saw a few install ground water heat pumps but the whole project is quite expensive. The main reason I want nothing to do with electric heat or hot water is that the power can go out in a winter storm and it would require a whole house size generator to back up that system which adds more cost to the all electric system. With the new smart meters you are at the mercy of the utility to not shut your power down. I no longer have that kind of faith in humankind much less politicians. I now live in mid Missouri and can heat the house with propane (one fill per year) or by burning wood. As society keeps spiraling down the crapper, I continue to look for ways around all the fragile systems.
As society keeps spiraling down the crapper, I continue to look for ways around all the fragile systems.
I am doing the same, Indy. I am not a "survivalist", but I am thinking, what if the supply chain breaks down or our money is inflated to the point of being worthless. What then?
I don't like those prospects and fervently hope they don't come to pass. Life would become exponentially harder and I don't want that.
Life would become harder. I'm not really a survivalist as much as a prepper and what drives preppers is simply observing the social and political surroundings. The surroundings remind me of those times BEFORE the American revolution and leading up to the Civil War and the Depression. I'm not really a pessimist as much as I am a realist and crap is looking insane while still be seeking the bottom of the gutter. Take care.
What caused the crash of 2008?
... Crush the Internet....Somehow this just doesn't give me any heartburn.
Former Reuters Editor Says He Was Misled on Climate Change . . . To my amazement, none of these would say categorically that the link between CO2 and global warming, now known as climate change, was a proven scientific fact.
Virtually every major scientific organization has released a statement on anthropogenic global warming.
National Academy of Sciences: "Scientists have known for some time, from multiple lines of evidence, that humans are changing Earth’s climate, primarily through greenhouse gas emissions."
The consensus of scientists in the relevant fields could certainly be wrong, but claiming such scientists don't exist is just nonsense.
Any agency (NASA) that alters fundamental observed (temperature) data should be completely discounted and ignored.
Any agency (NASA) that alters fundamental observed (temperature) data... ignored...
Then the Quibble-DickZ will have nothing to quibble about.
mudbug: Any agency (NASA) that alters fundamental observed (temperature) data should be completely discounted and ignored.
That would be just about all observational science. A simple example is false color photography.
Historical ground station data is typically homogenized to remove artifacts, such as due to changes in instrumentation and location. However, independent statistical analysis not requiring homogenization shows the same warming trend. See Rohde et al., Berkeley Earth Temperature Averaging Process, Geoinformatics & Geostatistics, 2013. Satellites don't directly observe temperature, but radiation. Radiation measurements have to be adjusted for a wide variety of factors, such as orbital decay and drift. Satellite results show the same warming trend.
So, you have two different datasets, collected by different methods, by different scientists, yielding the same result. These independent results are consistent with the predictions from the physics of the greenhouse effect. Along with many other lines of evidence, this gives confidence to the conclusion that the Earth is warming due to changes in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.
None of this salvages Neil Winton's claim that he couldn't find any scientists who "would say categorically that the link between CO2 and global warming, now known as climate change, was a proven scientific fact." It's as proven as most any scientific fact, meaning strongly supported by the scientific evidence. (Global warming is not "now known as climate change." They refer to different, though related phenomenon.)
When NASA says changes the temperature data so that the late 20s and early 30s go from some of the warmest years on record to some of the coolest, they are lying.
mudbug: When NASA says changes the temperature data so that the late 20s and early 30s go from some of the warmest years on record to some of the coolest, they are lying.
Actually, NOAA shows 1934 as one of the warmest on record for the contiguous United States until the 1998 El Niño. Furthermore, the contiguous United States is only 2% of the Earth's surface. However, if you look at the global temperature anomaly for 1934, the heat wave is more local.
Notably, you ignored that analysis of the raw data without homogenization shows the same warming trend. See Rohde et al.
And virtually every major scientific organization that addresses AGW is on the grift for taxpayer dollars in the form of direct funding or from government grants. Government buys the results that it wants from those willing to sell those results and does not fund those who do not provide the correct results. Those "scientific organizations and scientists" function no differently than prostitutes. With government it is ALWAYS about money, control, and power. It is what government has always been about.
A republic if you can keep it....
indyjonesouthere: And virtually every major scientific organization that addresses AGW is on the grift for taxpayer dollars in the form of direct funding or from government grants.
You're claiming a conspiracy that involves different countries, with different political systems, different cultures, different scientific organizations, in different fields of study, nearly every scientific organization, and most every scientist.
Regardless, independent analysis of the historical ground station data confirms the same warming trend as found by previous researchers. See Rohde et al., Berkeley Earth Temperature Averaging Process, Geoinformatics & Geostatistics, 2013.
You can repeat the analysis of the observations, if you want. You can calculate the greenhouse effect from first principles. Find the flaws in the work of your predecessors. Or you can propose a new theory that explains the observations and that makes novel predictions. Then publish your results. Or you can continue to wave your hands.
Ground station data in the US has little accuracy as the data is corrupted by poor placement and adjusted as the prostitutes see fit.
Evidently East Anglia and Michael Mann don't ring a bell. The East Anglia emails speak for themselves and Mann is still hiding out in Canada and refuses to provide his data to the courts there. Ask Mark Steyn about it.
All the different political entities you mention all practice the same political arts ... money, power and control. You need only observe their puppet pontifications through the Covid fiasco.
Someone should ask Quibble-DickZ:
Who's the "denier "now?
indyjonesouthere: Ground station data in the US has little accuracy as the data is corrupted by poor placement and adjusted
The data is hardly ideal. However, the trend can still be confirmed. The standard practice is homogenization. However, independent analysis of the raw data that doesn't utilize homogenization confirms the warming trend. Satellite observations also confirm the warming trend. You need to propose a plausible reason why these two completely datasets show the same warming trend.
The Earth is warming consistent with predictions from basic physical principles about the greenhouse effect, as has been known for over a century. See Arrhenius, On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground, London, Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 1896.
The earth warms and warms and warms until it doesn't and we enter another stage of the Milankovitch cycle. The CO2 is great for growing grass for those of us vegans who love grass fed cows. And even greenhouse vegetable growers ADD CO2 into greenhouses to more efficiently grow veggies. Nature knows the way but prog socialists get stuck in the weeds. The NWO/BBB/WEF are like the communists in that they keep bleating about the four olds. Old ideas, old customs, old culture, and old habits. We've been here thousands of years and even through glaciation periods. Cold kills civilizations, warm supports civilizations. The NWO/BBB/WEF are just trying to "thin" the population. No thanks ... I want more warm. If you want more cold then visit Minnesota. The progs are in control ...you'll love it.
indyjonesouthere: The earth warms and warms and warms until it doesn't
indyjonesouthere: and we enter another stage of the Milankovitch cycle.
Milankovitch cycles are too slow to account for the current warming trend and actually imply a slight cooling trend.
That's a tautology to you but every Milankovitch shows warming and warming and warming ... until it gets colder and colder and colder. And I get a kick out of the idea that you think you can find sensitive data in multiple Milankovitch cycles hundreds of thousands of years ago that support your warming trend and slight cooling trend created by perpetually faulty climate models. Again ... its all about the money(spread liberally) the desired control and gaining more power. We all saw the feds pull the same money, power and control stunt with Covid.
indyjonesouthere: That's a tautology to you but every Milankovitch shows warming and warming and warming ... until it gets colder and colder and colder.
Linking the Milankovitch cycles to warming and cooling is not a tautology.
indyjonesouthere: And I get a kick out of the idea that you think you can find sensitive data in multiple Milankovitch cycles hundreds of thousands of years ago that support your warming trend and slight cooling trend created by perpetually faulty climate models.
Huh? You brought up Milankovitch cycles. It has nothing to do with climate models. Milankovitch cycles show a slight cooling, but the Earth is warming. Looking at the bottom graph, the mean insolation is declining. The graph shows from -30,000 years to +1,000 years from today, with present day near the right side of the graph.
The climate critters are only guessing on where we are in this Milankovitch cycle. Look at the other cycles and you can see several stairsteps in the cycle and the cycles end at higher temperatures than we currently have. The Milankovitch cycle is a climate cycle and watching the current crop of AGW scientists trying to fit their numerous pet theories into this is rather hilarious. It has become obvious to more people that climate science is grifter science.
indyjonesouthere: 0The climate critters are only guessing on where we are in this Milankovitch cycle.
Milankovitch cycles are the changes in Earth’s orbital configuration resulting in changes to insolation. This is calculated from Newtonian Mechanics. How did you think it worked?
It is much more than just orbit. Take a refresher course.
indyjonesouthere: It is much more than just orbit.
Milankovitch cycles include three components: eccentricity, obliquity, and precession; as seen here. In any case, this is where you might impart your knowledge of Milankovitch cycles.
indyjonesouthere: Take a refresher course.
Okay. Why Milankovitch (Orbital) Cycles Can't Explain Earth's Current Warming
You're quoting a converged search engine. For the past, at least, three years they have censored anything that does not fit the progressive propaganda narrative. It is the reward they gave to all non-believers in the Covid narrative and it spread to everything else under the progressive banner. But at least you got past the "orbital" narrative and embraced Obliquity and Precession. They make a big difference. And yeh, I notice that there is no peer review on the "orbital" portion and no mention of the other components of the cycle. The promoters had to minimize the Milinkovich cycle in order to push their multitude of climate change model narratives. And no one seems to want to put their name to any of the modern AGW computer models. Maybe they should go by the name "Gore Grifting Cycle".
indyjonesouthere: You're quoting a converged search engine.
Hmm. In any case, we didn't quote a search engine.
indyjonesouthere: For the past, at least, three years they have censored anything that does not fit the progressive propaganda narrative.
The calculations of the Milankovitch cycles were done more than a decade ago.
indyjonesouthere: But at least you got past the "orbital" narrative and embraced Obliquity and Precession.
Eccentricity, obliquity, and precession were all included in the original link to the Milankovitch Orbital Data Viewer.
indyjonesouthere: And yeh, I notice that there is no peer review on the "orbital" portion and no mention of the other components of the cycle.
As was linked in the Milankovitch Orbital Data Viewer, the peer reviewed calculations were published in the journal Astronomy & Physics.
NASA is as converged as the search engine. Didn't they institute a Muslim "outreach" during the Obama era. They have become little more than a funder of actual space exploration companies. That is better know as a middle man dispensing favors.
Now read the abstract to you supposed "peer review".
We present here a new solution for the astronomical computation of the orbital motion of the earth spanning from 0 to-250Myr. The main improvement with respect to our previous numerical solution .....
That is not a peer review. Once again you have substituted a bullshit narrative and fake peer review for your "science".
indyjonesouthere: That is not a peer review.
Yes, it was peer reviewed for publication in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics. Jacques Laskar, from the Observatoire de Paris, is a recognized expert on orbital mechanics, having published extensively on the subject over several decades. If you believe the paper is in error, then please be specific. Where is the error in the calculations? What are the current slopes of the Milankovitch cycles? How did you calculate them?
In fact, the Milankovitch cycles show a slight decrease in northern hemispheric insolation.
He is peer reviewing his own work and refining his previous work with the group. You don't peer review your own work unless you are the East Anglia fake climate change group.
indyjonesouthere: He is peer reviewing his own work and refining his previous work with the group.
No, he didn’t peer review his own work. They submitted a new paper that refined and extended their previous work. You’re not even making any sense.
Being peer reviewed and published doesn’t guarantee the findings are correct. However, the near-term calculations (thousands of years) have been calculated by many astronomers with the same result. Waving your hands doesn’t challenge those findings.
Where is the error in the calculations? What are the current slopes of the Milankovitch cycles? How did you calculate them?
Even Arrhenius later admitted that his calculations for CO2 were wrong. Way wrong.
This has been explained to Quibble-DickZ before with citations.
Why the denial? Or are y'all just dishonest?
Z- “The consensus of scientists in the relevant fields could certainly be wrong, but claiming such scientists don't exist is just nonsense.“
Agree completely, of course, except in the case of the Barrington scientists!
Louis Miller: except in the case of the Barrington scientists!
How many are named Steve?
The authors didn't verify the signatures, which have included such luminaries as Mr Banana Rama and Prof Cominic Dummings. Consequently, there is no telling how many are actual scientists, scientists working within relevant fields, or scientists who have published in the field.
How many times did you sign it? What neato handle did you use?
Nifty idea by the way. It gives the ignorant, the gullible, and the intentionally misleading a way to deflect from all the highly qualified and credentialed people who did sign it.
Another clever dirty trick from the folks who brought you Russiagate and "Wuhan Lab? What Wuhan Lab? It was a naughty bat at the wet market!"
SK: How many times did you sign it?
Not at all. Our name isn't Steve.
SK: What neato handle did you use?
We never post under any other handle than Zachriel.
The fact that they don't verify signatures means the number of signatures is of little relevance. That doesn't mean there aren't legitimate scientists who have signed.
And we have 51 former intelligence officials that even signed a letter that the Hunter Biden laptop info was "disinformation".
indyjonesouthere: And we have 51 former intelligence officials that even signed a letter that the Hunter Biden laptop info was "disinformation".
Quick! Change the subject! Maybe no one will notice.
Coming from you that's adorable.
Of course he's pointing at your hypocrisy, lack of credibility, and inconsistency, which are all subjects worthy of discussion whenever you post.
But you knew that was what he was doing...so stop changing the subject.
These are all nothing but prog socialists grifting off the taxpayer and adding their signatures to petitions to try to emotionally sway the public with their pathetic bureaucratic theatre. But they do make fine hand puppets on the alphabet TV shows. They can probably get a gig on Netflix for even more attention.
" US Teens Feel Down, But the Adults Aren’t All Right Either. America's mental health crisis can’t simply be blamed on social media and Covid-19." Everything in our culture has been turned upside down in a very short amount of time. All the things holding us in place have now been deemed evil and unacceptable. Family, religion, normalcy and all the other rock solid foundations of the west's culture have been chipped away or blown up and we are being forced to believe what we know to be wrong. The twisted ideals of a perverted sex life being shoved down kids throats and nothing of moral goodness are taking it's toll. It makes me sad to see what has happened in just a few shot years.
LOL. There's a pill for your condition. I have a bottle on order.
How Livestock Farming Benefits The Planet
The link takes you to a 22 minute youtube video. There is no text.
My belief is that section 230 should be amended to replace the blanket immunity with a rebuttable presumption of good faith. As things stand now, it's just too easy for a hosting provider to boost one side of a controversial topic and shut down the other.
Once you go down the road of being able to boost all of Candidate Don's positive messaging while suppressing all of candidate Ron's, a service has gone beyond simply hosting and crossed into electioneering.
Another guy named Dan: As things stand now, it's just too easy for a hosting provider to boost one side of a controversial topic and shut down the other.
That's protected by the First Amendment.
The controversy concerns if someone claims damages. In Gonzalez vs. Google, the plaintiffs claim that Google recommended or promoted Islamic State (IS) terrorist content. The legal question being considered by the Supreme Court is whether algorithmic recommendations are protected under section 230, and whether the company "knowingly" aided and abetted terrorists.
The problem is that social media is limited in how and what they can monitor and still allow people latitude to post. And whether the courts are best suited to regulate the sphere rather than Congress.
"Alyssa Farah Griffin told her co-hosts Monday on ABC’s “The View” that if former President Donald Trump is not the Republican nominee for president in 2024, he would “burn the entirety of the GOP to the ground.”
It's is hard to know if they are just too stupid to understand or they are lying. The truth is that Neocons and Rinos will burn the GOP to the ground to prevent Donald Trump from being the candidate. The exact opposite of what the view claims.
Your previous statement, after I challenged it for peer review, was that the peer review calculations were published in the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics, which they were not as you now admit. You are practicing your usual deception dance and finally admit that there was no peer review and even peer review doesn't guarantee his paper to be correct. I stand by the Milankovitch Cycle as the most accurate climate model available and that it's results were not purchased like the current models of which no one will add their name.
indyjonesouthere: Your previous statement, after I challenged it for peer review, was that the peer review calculations were published in the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics, which they were not as you now admit.
Huh? Laskar 2011 was published in the peer reviewed scientific journal, Astronomy & Astrophysics. How the calculations were done is included in the paper. You can also download the orbital data.
indyjonesouthere: even peer review doesn't guarantee his paper to be correct.
Of course it doesn't. But you've given no reason to believe that the calculations are incorrect, and the calculations over shorter timescales (thouands of years) have been verified many times.
indyjonesouthere: I stand by the Milankovitch Cycle as the most accurate climate model
Milankovitch cycles show a slight cooling trend.