schlimmAre you an expert in climate science? I am not, obviously, so I tend to respect the work of researchers in that field, as I would do in any field.
I am not a nominal expert in 'climate science' (and make no pretension to be) but I have considerable experience over the years in climate dynamics, model generation and testing, and nondeterministic logic (and its implementations on finite-state-machine systems). That ... in my opinion, of course ... qualifies me to investigate, assess, and where necessary criticize the counterparts of things in my experience that are being used, or abused, by people purporting to develop theories of climate dynamics. I may well not be correct in my own theories, but I can certainly determine the poverty of mistaken ones. And also, in my opinion, it does not take distinctive competence in general systems theory to figure out when mistakes or manipulation takes place in parts of systems; the issue then becomes determining whether error in one part of an analysis taints either the validity or the effective fair reproduceability of the results.
Yes, the comments I made represent hyperbole, but it is not "an example of the hyperbole I ... take issue with" -- although I agree that were I not to divulge that those comments are opinion, and the result in large part of personal bias from 'other data', it might well be perceived by others in that way. What I am disparaging is not the science behind anthropogenic change, it's the forms of distortion, collusion, and other things that have typified so much "research" and soi-disant "settled" science in these areas, and by extension the kinds of people and motivations that would engage in such behavior.
I would like to respect the work of researchers in any field, and of course I tend to do so 'until proven otherwise' in most cases, even in areas like linguistic psychology where I tend to have to fight down very strong initial biases and some otherwise common-sense BS detector reflexes to do so. Believe me when I say that it has taken a very long time, across a very wide range of events, for me to have arrived at the positions I hold today, and the opinions I express today. However, I do remain open to arguments even from sources I no longer particularly trust, as even partial truths can come out of almost any research if you care to look with proper care.
I dunno...saw that Global Swarming flick...those Sharks look pretty real to me. Ski slopes in Switzerland, Buckingham Palace, Australian cities, it doesn't matter ...the effects of Global Swarming are everywhere. Best get a helmet.
RMEIn good conventional science, ALL the data, ALL the methodology, and ALL the assumptions are supposed to be fully documented, and the results fully reproduceable given the assumptions (and therefore intercomparable when different assumptions are made.) A traditional 'red flag' for crap science has been the technique of belittling opponents; another has been using 'consensus' arguments to stifle legitimate paradigm change.
Yes.
RME Any 'theory' that purports to demonstrate AGW with hotter weather is unscientific or worse, unless the models have become both much more sophisticated and properly nondeterministic -- neither of which have characterized most of the European crap science that has driven the push to carbon caps, cap-and-trade, and the other feelgood approaches that make money for folks behind the curtain.
I am not sure of your background or current area of work/research, but is that not an example of the hyperbole you rightly take issue with? I am relieved to see that you broadly agree with the concept of AGW, but am mystified by your contempt for so much research by the specialists. Are you an expert in climate science? I am not, obviously, so I tend to respect the work of researchers in that field, as I would do in any field.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Shadow the Cats ownerAugust 11th and this morning I had to run my heater in my minivan on my way to work as it was 49 degrees this morning
Really? The NWS official site at Pontiac Muni Airport shows the lowest temperature there was 66 overnight, currently 71. So either you live in a cold cave in Livingstone county, your thermometer is miscalibrated or this example is similar to your whopper on here a year or so ago on underground storage.
To inject a brief note here: the chief weather effect of AGW will be in weather patterns or increased storm formation or intensity, NOT in any perceptible "change" in climatic temperature that means anything scientifically. Any 'theory' that purports to demonstrate AGW with hotter weather is unscientific or worse, unless the models have become both much more sophisticated and properly nondeterministic -- neither of which have characterized most of the European crap science that has driven the push to carbon caps, cap-and-trade, and the other feelgood approaches that make money for folks behind the curtain.
That doesn't change any of the other science that examines other issues of concern with increased anthropogenic contributions to the environment, most notably (with respect to CO2) oceanic effects including effective acidification, and metastability of things like Arctic ice formations. Those alone are reasonably 'establishable' as reasons to control CO2 levels -- but to control them actively and effectively (see some of the Intellectual Ventures work on the subject, for example) rather than the ridiculous political activity we have seen so far.
In good conventional science, ALL the data, ALL the methodology, and ALL the assumptions are supposed to be fully documented, and the results fully reproduceable given the assumptions (and therefore intercomparable when different assumptions are made.) A traditional 'red flag' for crap science has been the technique of belittling opponents; another has been using 'consensus' arguments to stifle legitimate paradigm change. We can get into outright fabrication and lying, either for academic or greater credit, but no theory of science actively condones these things, at least outside the Science and Society world.
However, the point to remember is that just because a bunch of people are conniving and fibbing, it doesn't mean anthropogenic carbon-dioxide release or even AGW aren't real -- I happen to think, and have thought for nearly 50 years now, that both are. It is as easy to cherry-pick a few relatively worthless examples from 'climate scientists' and then try to dismiss the whole theory as it is to cherry-pick things like exaggerated hockey-stick extrapolations of obsolescent data and claim massive intervention ... by economies dumb enough to cripple themselves while others better at political manipulation go right ahead and keep the problem 'in being' ... is necessary starting yesterday.
It may not be easy to untangle the science, and the true effects and appropriate models, from the web of fabrication and wishful thinking of manipulators on various 'sides' of the issue, but I think each of us should at least try to do it. And then vote accordingly when the time comes.
Pontiac also has to deal with Chicago and Cook county's other largest state export convicted felons with the prison there. Schlimm it is August 11th and this morning I had to run my heater in my minivan on my way to work as it was 49 degrees this morning. 49 freaking degrees in the middle of August even my MIL can't remember it being this cold in August or anyone of her friends at her retirement home. Also remember this about Global warming the scientists that all swear by it all of them refuse to release any of the data they are using what models they are using and how they are coming to their conclusions. Sorry if my 8th grade son ran his science project he has to do this year like they did he would flunk science. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/5/climate-change-whistleblower-alleges-noaa-manipula/
When the head guy and record keeper at NOAA says they are not following a sound scientific method then someone is screwing up.
Shadow the Cats owner The county where I live in at in IL Livingston county has a Landfill in it that is 4 square miles in size. Guess which city is the largest customer for it. If you say Chicago your right. On a normal day they get close to 500 tons a day from Chicago of garbage that needs to be dumped. For that we get lower taxes on our property in my county. I pay half of what I would just 1/2 of a mile north of here for the same property value.
The county where I live in at in IL Livingston county has a Landfill in it that is 4 square miles in size. Guess which city is the largest customer for it. If you say Chicago your right. On a normal day they get close to 500 tons a day from Chicago of garbage that needs to be dumped. For that we get lower taxes on our property in my county. I pay half of what I would just 1/2 of a mile north of here for the same property value.
In fact 5000 tons of Chicago's garbage is dumped there daily, but fortunately for you (even though you think global warming is a hoax) it is in a landfill developed under the EPA's methane program. All methane and most CO2 is captured and the former is used to generate enough energy for 10,000 homes.
Property taxes are based on assessed value which is influenced by market value. Thanks and enjoy, Nancy Benton.
Miningman How on earth a mineral and resource rich province like Ontario can turn their back on their own heritage and write off the North as unsustainable is beyond the beyond. Their own published nonsense identifies only Sudbury and Thunder Bay as viable.
How on earth a mineral and resource rich province like Ontario can turn their back on their own heritage and write off the North as unsustainable is beyond the beyond. Their own published nonsense identifies only Sudbury and Thunder Bay as viable.
It sounds like that he feels that the natural resources of sub-arctic Ontario should be extracted at any cost. He should look at Butte, Montana to see what gets left behind when the mines play out.
Trucking garbage to anywhere is a very poor use of scarce resources. The highways are already overcrowded... drivers who are willing to run shorthop loads cross border are in desperate short supply..and the tax dollars to pay for it all.. don't even get me started on that. Like SD70 stated, the problem has been mitigated to some degree through increased recycling.. and I believe Edmonton has indeed lead the way on that, a tip of the hat to our western Canadian brothers and sisters. And to the politicians: a pox on all your houses!! No wonder we have the highest property taxes in the land.
Michigan DEQ landfill regulators tried to limit where refuse could be hauled from, but the landfill operators got them overruled for restraint of trade.
Ulrich and all- regarding the Ontario Northland Railway and what I wrote and also including SD70M-2 Dudes comment.. it all goes to a (deliberate) total lack of vision and pyramid of extortion making big big bucks for politicians and their chosen few buddies at the expense of the base people. There is no nation building or a long term view but it is passed of as such.
There are not enough folks in the North to fight this stupidity, greed and nonsense. It's a tragedy.
Ulrich BaltACD Ulrich We truck our garbage to Michigan! Thereby compounding the pollution problem while also contributing to highway congestion.. and the folks at the border don't like those stinky trucks either.Our neighbors in Michigan are also less than thrilled about being the recipients of our garbage (can't say I blame them). I wonder what failed economics major came up with that idea. Who in Guelph has a suitable location and finances to handle the local garbage situation. The transport of 'local garbage' to distant locations has been created by the lack of suitable solutions closer to home. Still.. trucking it to Michigan doesn't sound like the best possible solution. I was asked to bid on that about 10 years ago.. but I will not haul garbage or livestock.. two things I won't do. Funny they wouldn't at least put it on the rail. Oh well, I'm doing my part by sorting my garbage.. every bit helps!
BaltACD Ulrich We truck our garbage to Michigan! Thereby compounding the pollution problem while also contributing to highway congestion.. and the folks at the border don't like those stinky trucks either.Our neighbors in Michigan are also less than thrilled about being the recipients of our garbage (can't say I blame them). I wonder what failed economics major came up with that idea. Who in Guelph has a suitable location and finances to handle the local garbage situation. The transport of 'local garbage' to distant locations has been created by the lack of suitable solutions closer to home.
Ulrich We truck our garbage to Michigan! Thereby compounding the pollution problem while also contributing to highway congestion.. and the folks at the border don't like those stinky trucks either.Our neighbors in Michigan are also less than thrilled about being the recipients of our garbage (can't say I blame them). I wonder what failed economics major came up with that idea.
Who in Guelph has a suitable location and finances to handle the local garbage situation. The transport of 'local garbage' to distant locations has been created by the lack of suitable solutions closer to home.
Still.. trucking it to Michigan doesn't sound like the best possible solution. I was asked to bid on that about 10 years ago.. but I will not haul garbage or livestock.. two things I won't do. Funny they wouldn't at least put it on the rail. Oh well, I'm doing my part by sorting my garbage.. every bit helps!
I always have found it odd that Toronto continues to truck garbage and that the Adams mine/Railcycle North plan failed, although some arguments against it were well-played and entertaining (a certain city councillor played a Simpsons episode to the others at city hall).
But recycling is a viable option. Would you believe that Edmonton, the centre of Alberta's industrial heartland (and its associated emissions) has led North America in waste management for many years? The recycling program started in the late 1980s (an industrial-sized composter was added later), not as a purely green initiative but because of a different harsh reality: the landfill was filling up and every time the city tried to find a new site the NIMBYs rose up and killed it (not that I blame them, I wouldn't want a dump opening up next door either). The recycling and composting programs extended that landfill's life by 20 years, and it finally closed in 2009.
Today Edmonton diverts nearly 90% of its municipal garbage from landfills, the remainder is hauled to a small rural site east of the city, which has many years of life remaining. The old landfill has also been drilled for methane, which fuels a small nearby power plant.
Toronto has a recycling program now, but it took quite a while for them to follow Edmonton's lead. At one time Toronto's mayor (Mel Lastman I think) said that recycling would be too expensive, and would never work in a city of Toronto's size.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Thanks Miningman, wasn't aware of that. That's big news and sad too. Hopefully someone like maybe G&W expresses an interest.
The Wynne Government in Ontario has made it abundantly clear that it wants out of the Ontario Northland ownership. They have publicly stated they will continue to support Cochrane to Moosonee but that's it.
CN and CP have their own routes in place and need not interchange freight with the ONR. The Railroad is for sale with no takers.
I believe they are down to one interchange freight a day in each direction and on line traffic has diminished greatly especially in the mining, smelting and forestry sectors.
Another major blow was the forestalling of The Ring of Fire one trillion dollar Chromite deposit, with an excellent plan in place by the ONR that was quickly shot down after the government hired endless line of consultants provided to them exactly what they wanted to hear.
Sorry I am travelling on an extended trip thru the USA but you can find many links via Google, try Financial Post et al.
Miningman The Ontario Northland Railway had a magnificient plan in place to haul the garbage to Kirkland Lake at the old Adams Mine open pit site. It was all worked out and ready to go with everyone on board with the plan except of course the few loud anti everything folks who got it kiboshed. Stupid. By the way the ONR is now on it's deathbed.
The Ontario Northland Railway had a magnificient plan in place to haul the garbage to Kirkland Lake at the old Adams Mine open pit site.
It was all worked out and ready to go with everyone on board with the plan except of course the few loud anti everything folks who got it kiboshed. Stupid.
By the way the ONR is now on it's deathbed.
The ONR is on its deathbed? Please elaborate..
Norm48327 schlimm There you go again. Just stating facts about the background of the Heartland Foundation and the credentials of Lieberman, the author of the article. He is not an economist as the word is defined. But you seem compelled to make it personal. I stated no facts about the article. I simply posted a link to it so others could read it. It is well known on this forum that the opinion of others, no matter their qualifications, are never in alignment with your far left leanings hence in your mind the only opinion you agree with is your own. And, of course those uf us without a PHD are deemed of far lesser native intelligence than you. You used to advocate 'civil discourse' but you seem to have forsaken that option in favor of demeaning anyone who disagrees with you.
schlimm There you go again. Just stating facts about the background of the Heartland Foundation and the credentials of Lieberman, the author of the article. He is not an economist as the word is defined. But you seem compelled to make it personal.
I stated no facts about the article. I simply posted a link to it so others could read it.
It is well known on this forum that the opinion of others, no matter their qualifications, are never in alignment with your far left leanings hence in your mind the only opinion you agree with is your own. And, of course those uf us without a PHD are deemed of far lesser native intelligence than you.
You used to advocate 'civil discourse' but you seem to have forsaken that option in favor of demeaning anyone who disagrees with you.
I stated facts. Care to dispute them?
You stated: "While it is an oinion piece I believe it was written by an economist who is in the know."
As usual, you are compelled to resort to irrelevant personal attacks for reasons that are not germane here. And no remarks I have made 'demean' you.
schlimmThere you go again. Just stating facts about the background of the Heartland Foundation and the credentials of Lieberman, the author of the article. He is not an economist as the word is defined. But you seem compelled to make it personal.
Norm
Norm48327 Ulrich We truck our garbage to Michigan! Thereby compounding the pollution problem while also contributing to highway congestion.. and the folks at the border don't like those stinky trucks either.Our neighbors in Michigan are also less than thrilled about being the recipients of our garbage (can't say I blame them). I wonder what failed economics major came up with that idea. Which begs the question of why,Ontario having so much more [unoccupied] land area tha Michigan, why aren't you building landfills in the boonies and taking care of your own garbage? We sure as hell don't need it.
We truck our garbage to Michigan! Thereby compounding the pollution problem while also contributing to highway congestion.. and the folks at the border don't like those stinky trucks either.Our neighbors in Michigan are also less than thrilled about being the recipients of our garbage (can't say I blame them). I wonder what failed economics major came up with that idea.
Which begs the question of why,Ontario having so much more [unoccupied] land area tha Michigan, why aren't you building landfills in the boonies and taking care of your own garbage? We sure as hell don't need it.
We're trying to keep our province clean..
I've shared the road with those monsters more than a few times enroute through Ontario to Michigan.
The creation of a regional landfill in our county raised all sorts of opposition, especially in the township in which it's now located.
On the plus side, they've harnessed that methane to generate electricity (which involved opposition/footdragging by the local utility). Another landfill which has done the same thing has also harnessed the waste heat from the generators to heat and cool greenhouses. Supposedly a fifth of the tomatoes used in NYS come from that very hothouse.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Norm48327 schlimm The Heartland Foundation' conferences were a major source of the writer's information. Members should know that the Heartland Foundation was the major source of efforts to discredit the connection between cigarette smoking and cancers. It also was the recipient of continued funding by the Koch Bros. to discredit climate change research. His graduate degree is law. He is neither a scientist nor an economist. Can you find anyone other than the Koch Brothers to blame for all your problems? They, and anyone else whose thinking differs from yours is fair game for you to pan.
schlimm The Heartland Foundation' conferences were a major source of the writer's information. Members should know that the Heartland Foundation was the major source of efforts to discredit the connection between cigarette smoking and cancers. It also was the recipient of continued funding by the Koch Bros. to discredit climate change research. His graduate degree is law. He is neither a scientist nor an economist.
The Heartland Foundation' conferences were a major source of the writer's information. Members should know that the Heartland Foundation was the major source of efforts to discredit the connection between cigarette smoking and cancers. It also was the recipient of continued funding by the Koch Bros. to discredit climate change research. His graduate degree is law. He is neither a scientist nor an economist.
Can you find anyone other than the Koch Brothers to blame for all your problems? They, and anyone else whose thinking differs from yours is fair game for you to pan.
There you go again. Just stating facts about the background of the Heartland Foundation and the credentials of Lieberman, the author of the article. He is not an economist as the word is defined. But you seem compelled to make it personal.
Ulrich Forget science and economics.. sometimes commonsense will do. Let's say I start dumping my trash in the living room every week instead of taking it out to the curb. In a few weeks my entire home will become uninhabitable. And you know what's amazing? I didn't need Steven Hawking to tell me that... figured it out with my own brainlet. And so it is with the entire planet.. multiply my living room a few million times and the trash that goes in it doesn't magically disappear..
Forget science and economics.. sometimes commonsense will do. Let's say I start dumping my trash in the living room every week instead of taking it out to the curb. In a few weeks my entire home will become uninhabitable. And you know what's amazing? I didn't need Steven Hawking to tell me that... figured it out with my own brainlet. And so it is with the entire planet.. multiply my living room a few million times and the trash that goes in it doesn't magically disappear..
Amen, Brother Ulrich!
All this argument about exact numbers and absolute proof gives some of us something to entertain ourselves with, but with earth's population continuing to bloom, we destroy more greenery for places to live, we use more water to irrigate crops (hugh aquafers in the west are nearing depletion), and we introduce more toxic by-products onto the planet. Extrapolate! Being a bit long in the tooth, it won't be a problem for me, but it will for somebody.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
UlrichWe truck our garbage to Michigan! Thereby compounding the pollution problem while also contributing to highway congestion.. and the folks at the border don't like those stinky trucks either.Our neighbors in Michigan are also less than thrilled about being the recipients of our garbage (can't say I blame them). I wonder what failed economics major came up with that idea.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Ulrichmultiply my living room a few million times and the trash that goes in it doesn't magically disappear..
Wait - It doesn't?!?!?
I mean, I put it in the container and put the container at the curb each week, and voila! it's gone!
The same can be said about food - people have no idea where most of their food comes from. Apparently the food fairy stocks the shelves at their local supermarket...
As for that trash, I can't count the number of trash trains I've seen go by when I've been trackside in Utica...
Norm48327 Euclid I would not call it a hoax because I think that downplays the issue. Hoax is like conspiracy in terms of smallness. This MMGW demand for action is gigantic. Trump called it a hoax, and I think that was a very poor way to characterize it. Also, I am not convinced that doing nothing is a greater risk than taking the action that is being demanded. Let's conduct research for another ten years before taking drastic action that is being called for now. Patience is a virtue. While it is an oinion piece I believe it was written by an economist who is in the know. http://www.heritage.org/environment/report/the-economics-global-warming-policy
Euclid I would not call it a hoax because I think that downplays the issue. Hoax is like conspiracy in terms of smallness. This MMGW demand for action is gigantic. Trump called it a hoax, and I think that was a very poor way to characterize it. Also, I am not convinced that doing nothing is a greater risk than taking the action that is being demanded. Let's conduct research for another ten years before taking drastic action that is being called for now. Patience is a virtue.
While it is an oinion piece I believe it was written by an economist who is in the know.
http://www.heritage.org/environment/report/the-economics-global-warming-policy
That is an excellent article. There is something that I have always felt is not so apparent to most people. While it is apparent that the green movement wants renewable energy, what they ultimately want is less energy used. In the broadest sense, they want less consumption. Too much consumption is their ultimate complaint about western civilization. That is why they hold up the underdeveloped nations as being the most virtuous in living a more “authentic” lifestyle. The green movement wants “sustainability” which means consuming less so the natural replenishment can keep up. So all extractive industry such as mining are in the bullseye because they imply extraction until the supply is used up.
Some people wonder whether renewable energy will keep up with demand. Renewable energy won’t have to keep up because the higher price caused by its limited supply will reduce demand. That is how it will keep up with demand. It will keep up with demand by reducing demand. And right along those same lines is this from the article:
“Cap and trade has to raise energy prices high enough so that we are forced to use less in order to meet the emissions reduction targets. Inflicting economic pain is not some unintended consequence: It is how any system works that is designed to reduce carbon emissions. President Obama said it best in 2008, before he latched onto the postage stamp rhetoric as a sales pitch, when he declared that under his plan energy prices would necessarily skyrocket. Cap and trade is just a convoluted energy tax, and, again, it has to be a painfully high tax in order to reduce emissions.”
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.