<< A SENSE OF NORMALITY ~ MAIN ~ TREES! IT WAS TREES ALL ALONG >>
YEAR OF THE STOMP
Read this tortured slab of eco-fantasy from The Age’s Tim Colebatch, and then marvel at the fact that Colebatch is that newspaper’s economics editor. Which explains rather a lot. In other crucial Gaia news, here’s Mark Steyn:
Climate change. We’ve got to stop it, or change it back before it destroys the planet. And, if it doesn’t destroy the planet, circa 2011 the Kyotocrats will be citing lack of climate change as evidence of climate change. They are, literally, a church, and under the Holy Book of Kyoto their bishops demand that the great industrial nations of the world tithe their incomes to them ...
One day, the world will marvel at the environmental hysteria of our time, and the deeply damaging corruption of science in the cause of an alarmist cult.
Until then, gaze with horror upon my puny ecological footprint. Man, even Douglas Bader had a more substantial footly impact. I can do better; we all can. Let’s vow to make 2006 the year of Great Stomping.
(Colebatch link via Jay Santos)
Well, I only hit 7.1 earths. I live in a rural area with no public transportation and I have to commute 15 miles to work (I live as close as possible). I looked at all of the ways to reduce my footprint to a single earth and decided the easiest was to kill 6 other people.
I read that Italy would miss their Kyoto targets. Given their fertility rate of 1.1, they could reduce emissions to about 1% of 1990 levels by 2090 if they just stopped all immigration. For the most part, immigration is the movement of people from low CO2 countries to high CO2 ones. Anyone who supports immigration hates the earthand by extension hates children
The Greatest Threat in History
“History offers no example of a parallel threat on a global, national or even local scale. To “wait and see” invites disaster. Only the long-term threats of global warming, oxygen loss, exhaustion of other basic resources in the oceans and continents as well as the eventual possibility of an earth-asteroid collision demand worldwide action on a similar scale…A worldwide strategic mobilization…similar to the effort required by World War II must be developed in the weeks ahead.” -UN Working Group on Information.
What were they talking about? Y2K.
Posted by Mystery Meat on 2006 01 11 at 12:44 PM • permalinkCould the falling birthrate in Italy be related to reduced emissions?
Posted by Mystery Meat on 2006 01 11 at 12:46 PM • permalinkOnly 4.4 footprint, but then I’m a grateful beneficiary of highly subsidized (and well-operated) mass transit (the latter part being a somewhat unknown concept in the US, from my experiences), which probably lowers my result a bit. Incidentally, the numbers seem to be screwed up…the site says that the “available” per-capita footprint on Earth is 2.2 (i.e. exactly half my result), yet somehow I still rated 2.4 planets.
Well, maybe I’m actually 1.2 people, who knows.
“Doc, isn’t this telling you something?” Hanrahan gasped as he dropped the Esky. “That high tide is probably swollen by those Antarctic ice shelves that collapsed last year thanks to global warming. If we don’t do something about it, in 20 years there will be no beach at all!”
Someone “Doc, isn’t this telling you something?” Hanrahan gasped as he dropped the Esky. “That high tide is probably swollen by those Antarctic ice shelves that collapsed last year thanks to global warming. If we don’t do something about it, in 20 years there will be no beach at all!”
Frothing moonbats is right! That unsusal high tide could be a result of unusual lunar influences and/or weather. If that much ice had melted in Antarctica, the average ocean rise would accelerated sharply from the 2MM per year some boffin recently announced as a 100% increase…..and he attributed that increase to global warming. These Mother Gaia™ types need to coordinate their rants better.
The rest of the article is on a similar line. I found this line telling:
Dr Pangloss looked uncomfortable. I sensed he privately agreed, but knew the Government did not. So he changed the topic.
Er, couldn’t that “sensing” be more like “wishful thinking”? The good doctor was at a picnic, fer crying out loud! Good manners dictate that telling a buddy at a party that he’s a blithering idiot is in poor taste. Although I’ve been known to do that, I’m sure that the steak and beer on the beach was more appealing than arguing with someone who is stuck on stupid.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 11 at 01:11 PM • permalinkdeadman: I came to nearly the same conclusion using a different - actually scientific - method.
One average, each human exhales about one metric ton of C02/year. The non-breathing C02 emissions of the U.S./year = 7.1 billion metric tons. The World population is possibly as much as 8 billion. Voila! If we kill off 7/8 of it we will neutralize the non-breathing CO2 output of the U.S., and probably that of Australia also - as backward as it is.
There can be no doubt as to what we must do. But let’s start with the JOOOOOOS, as they are the richest of all and therefore account for a disproportionate amount of the non-breathing CO2 emissions as well.
Wow! I need 8.7 Earths. That damned suburban US living, I guess.
Good thing the world population is shrinking fast. You know, everyone has two parents, and four grandparents and 8 great-grandparents and so on, so a few hundred years ago the population must have been in the upper double digits of billions just to accommodate all those great-great-etc grandparents.
(Hey, that math makes as much sense as the stuff coming out of the Kyoto Kamp.)
Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 01 11 at 01:17 PM • permalinkWhat were they talking about? Y2K.
Ah, yes, Y2K, the impending doom that never came to be.
Personally, I had considerable doubts leading up to 1 January 2000 about that fiasco. But I used the scenario to push some much needed operational changes through my office. So I was a shameless manipulator of people in gaining certain goals. Looking back on this particular episode in my past, I realized that I just borrowed a page from the Book Of the Lefties™. Or perhaps Mother Gaia™ worshippers. Shame on me! ;-)
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 11 at 01:18 PM • permalinkAnd, of course, the hard core Earth sustainablility types really do seem to believe that the total human population of the Earth *should* be around 6,000,000. They don’t really get around to explaining who they should be and how we should get to that number. (I’m thinking Dr. Strangelove, but who knows.)
Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 01 11 at 01:20 PM • permalinkSize 5 footprint? What? Well that’s not indicative of my potential footprint, only my present footprint. I mean to say, I get paid peanuts since in a major miscarriage of justice I have not been made a full fledged member of the Evil Death Cult Known as Neoconservatism. Not yet at least. I suspect a conspiracy of major proportions, probably involving the Trilateral Commission, aliens, and public broadcasting.
When I ascend and I start getting the big fat bi-weekly paychecks and the gasoline allowance and a company paid Hummer, baby my footprint will go past 15.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 01 11 at 01:20 PM • permalinkFor some unfathomable reason I have a size 14, and it would take only 3.4 planets to sustain me. And I thought I was really a good planetary-stomping type, too. The quiz is so superficial. What about all my barbecuing? What about my cat’s monumental craps? What about my singing in the shower? Watching 12 hours of television a day? Consuming porn, smoking cigarettes, burning toxic waste in my fireplace etc. What about all that, huh? Doesn’t that count for something?
Surface area of a sphere = 4 x 22/7 x r x r. Surface area of Earth = 88/7 x 16 million square miles = 200 million sq. miles = 128 billion acres.
Assuming pop. of Earth = 8 billion, each person ‘requires” 128/8 acres = 16 acres/person. But as I require 64 acres, I must personally kill 3 people right now, in order to assure my just portion, as confirmed by my lifestyle calculation at earthday.net/footprint.
But I already own 20 acres, so maybe I can get away with only killing 2 people, if I keep everyone else off my property.
Makes about as much sense as any Environmentalist Whacko does, eh what? My “models” are as good as theirs. And I think the results are the same = destruction of much of the human race.
TOTAL FOOTPRINT 33
IF EVERYONE LIVED LIKE YOU, WE WOULD NEED 7.4 PLANETS.Yes!
{does the I-Stomped-Tim dance}
I answered truthfuly, too.
Posted by Mr. Bingley on 2006 01 11 at 02:14 PM • permalink52! Eat my CO2! 11.7 planets!
(Where am I going to find 0.7 planets?)
I think it’s the big house and all the flying I do.
On a slightly more serious note, this shows how much the Left is the heir to the Puritan movement. The quiz is designed to make you feel guilty. To “succeed” at the quiz, you have to live a miserable life.
That’s what puritanism is all about: feelings of virtue driven by feelings of guilt about enjoying life. And, the determination that we are not in this world to find happiness, but to behave in the correct and proper way.
Tied in with that is the missionary spirit - the determination that others will learn and practice the “proper way of life” as well.
Rompin and stompin it here from Chicago. 11.9 planets for me. The quiz didn’t ask whether I recycled my soda cans, drove a Prius or kept the temperature in my apartment low—I suppose it doesn’t matter, since I live in Amerikkka and am eco-damned whatever I do.
Cheers!
Posted by stuartfullerton on 2006 01 11 at 02:17 PM • permalinkFinally took the test….my footprint is a size 40, or 9.1 earths! And I gave straight answers. WOO HOO!
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 11 at 02:17 PM • permalinkre #22: Joe, if you set up a defensive perimeter on your 20 acres, I’ll bet you can bag at least 2 persons a week. Especially if you hang out a raw steak as bait.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 11 at 02:20 PM • permalinkSize 18 and only 3.9 planets here. Bah. I’m underachieving.
Posted by Randal Robinson on 2006 01 11 at 02:31 PM • permalink30! ::STOMP:: And my commute is across the hall. (Yes, I often work in my pajamas!)
Too bad I have to drive a great deal for my job and my car only gets 20-22 mpg.
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 01 11 at 02:34 PM • permalinkI managed to achieve a 1.0 planets if I imagined myself a pre-Columbian Indian living in a crowded hovel.
The good news is, you can still achieve 1.0 planets if you treat yourself to indoor plumbing or electricity. So, it’s not like they expect us to be totally miserable.
Then I took the quiz as if I was an eco-conscious Hollywood celebrity. I was very generous about how seriously my hypothetical celeb took that, also. I came up with 8.3 planets. Tsk, tsk, Mr. Planet Raping Actor!
My actual score for myself was a puny 4.2 planets. Hey, I know that’s shockingly low for a RWDB, but before you cast me out, let me explain - by using energy-efficient light bulbs, keeping the thermostat down, and driving a 38-mpg Scion xA, I’m able to hold on to more of my precious, precious money. Fuck Gaia, I’m in it for the cash.
Now, I need to construct a fleet of ships, design some cyborgs and develop some sort of fusion engine and particle beam to conquer the additional 3 planets required. - JohnO #1
Ya got a requisition order for the Dominator® dreadnaughts JohnO?
I can get em out of stock if you like.
Ummm…How many death droids was that?
Hmmm.
I’m a 7.2! Weep for me friends. I’m going to go outside and burn all the leaves I can to raise my rating.
Even if I don’t have any leaves and my neighbors do. They’ll understand…. :)
Posted by memomachine on 2006 01 11 at 02:47 PM • permalinkThe good news is, you can still achieve 1.0 planets if you treat yourself to indoor plumbing or electricity. So, it’s not like they expect us to be totally miserable.
Just to be clear, it’s either/or. If your crowded pre-Columbian hovel has electricity and plumbing, you’ll need 1.3 planets. Which, by definition, is unsustainable.
Remember that next time some ecofreak like Ender tells you how puny the cost of environmentalism is.
Hmmm.
#22. Surface area of a sphere = 4 x 22/7 x r x r.
Ummm. You forgot one thing. It’s rather hard to plant a fence on the ocean. Since the Earth is 3/4 covered in water you’ll have to reduce the available surface area by quite a bit.
That’s ok. More people to bag!
Posted by memomachine on 2006 01 11 at 02:49 PM • permalinked, we could always pave over the oceans.
Or we could tap the untold potentials of genetic engineering, and put gills on people. We can substitute buoys for fences in the water
Then Michael Moore can really look like a whale.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 11 at 02:55 PM • permalinkHmmm.
Or we could tap the untold potentials of genetic engineering, and put gills on people.
Frankly if we’re going to tap the untold potentials of genetic engineering then I can think of a number of things more important than gills. Something in the way of DD’s.
Posted by memomachine on 2006 01 11 at 03:10 PM • permalink#24
Someone wrote a thesis on the religious nature of the environmental movement about ten years ago. They drew parallels to the Puritans, as you have, and noted a lot of “beliefs” held by the cult faithful such as their creation myth, their gods, and their End Times, all of it. Very interesting. I don’t recall who wrote it or where it was published, but it was very sound in its analysis.
Thank god for ed. I’m a 9. A mere 2 earths.
But I can still make fun of ed.
Hippie!
Posted by tim maguire on 2006 01 11 at 03:22 PM • permalinkTim B. likes the humor stuff but isn’t too good recently about saying whether global warming is happening. He used to call it a scam, though.
Tim, you could really generate laughs if you took the money away from me on a bet over whether global warming is happening. How about it? Other folks in the comments have made it clear they’re not putting their money where their mouths are, but you’ve been quiet.
Posted by schmidtb98 on 2006 01 11 at 03:27 PM • permalinkI’m only a 14, but the whole thing is whack. I’m a US soccer mom - well, really Irish dance mom. I’m merrily grinding my stiletto heel into Mother Gaia’s instep by driving hundreds of miles a week to multiple dance classes across town.
Yet, apparently much of that negative impact was offset because I actually had my children in the car with me!
Obviously, it’s all right to drive to the mailbox three or four times a day, just so long as I’m carpooling.
ekw,
The Kyoto Protocol is unerring Holy Scripture and calling it a “scam” is vile blasphemy!
/swampy
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 01 11 at 03:54 PM • permalink19 WhineRight
I get paid peanuts since in a major miscarriage of justice I have not been made a full fledged member of the Evil Death Cult Known as Neoconservatism. Not yet at least. I suspect a conspiracy of major proportions, probably involving the Trilateral Commission, aliens, and public broadcasting.
Well don’t look at me. I turned in my laboriously-crafted and hardly-embellished-at-all report chit, and pretty soon I was standing at attention across the green table from Mr Rove. He reviewed the document carefully, very carefully, even reading parts aloud, with only a few, well-placed questons, “This weasely demeanor of Mr Wronwright, lad, how weasely was it?” and “Are you sure this is how ‘martinet’ is spelled?”
Finally he stood and summarized “Well well well, underling Stoopy, it seems this Ensign Wronwright is an evil, evil character indeed, untrustworthy, avaricious, malicious, and yes, callow ...” Then he laughed his BIG AND EVIL laugh of his, while he wadded my report chit into a tiny little ball, balanced it on his thumb, and flicked it to bounce PING! off my glasses. It stung! “I guess that makes him My Kinda Guy! HAW HAW HAW! Now go change your trousers and get back to work!”
So if you’ve got a conspiracy dogging you, well, it’s gotta be some OTHER conspiracy, is alls I can say.Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 01 11 at 03:59 PM • permalinkWell thank goodness for that hyperspace engine that they are talking about, then! We might actually be able to pull off that 23 planet requirement! Of course, these people will say we can’t settle on another planet so we are still screwed.
Posted by MikeTheLibrarian on 2006 01 11 at 04:22 PM • permalinkBader probably wouldn’t be allowed more than one prosthesis now. Too much endangered pine would have been used for the second leg.
Posted by Pat Patterson on 2006 01 11 at 04:33 PM • permalink#50
Paco,
I guess they figure that old people rip bigger, nastier farts than young people, right? Therefore, they get a higher score automatically.
Posted by David Crawford on 2006 01 11 at 05:25 PM • permalinkekw, Tim’s post linked to a site that questioned global warming and called it a scientific scandal, not a reference to Kyoto or other attempts to mitigate for warming. Tim B. could always try and give some additional info on his position, I suppose.
Posted by schmidtb98 on 2006 01 11 at 05:32 PM • permalink38/8.6 I could add some questions for energy usage.
Can you see the exhaust coming out of your SUV?
Do you speed up or slow down when small animals/children dart in front of you?
Do you think filling up your gas tank when it is half empty, but twice more often, saving energy?
Which sound system uses less energy in your SUV? Bose or JBL.Tim Colebatch, the economics editor, is really showing his colours. I’m trying to work them out - red, green, pink - oh I’m not sure but I reckon he must be a fundamentalist literal economist or something like that. Perhaps Alice In Wonderland Style along the lines “Because someone says Something, It must be true”. Anyway I do like his use of Hanrahan as a main character in his story because he seems to have taken Hanrahan’s pronouncements as true! What crap and what drivel!
Of course Hanrahan was the eternal pessimist eulogised in John O’Brien’s poem ‘Said Hanrahan’ which was published in 1921. [John O’Brien was the nom de plume of Patrick Joseph Hartigan (1878-1952), born in Yass, New South Wales. He was a Roman Catholic priest in the Goulburn diocese and later parish priest at Narrandera—also rural towns in New South Wales.] The lyrics are as true today as they were then. Have a read and decide for yourself.
Now I wonder if Colebatch has a sense of humour or perspective. Never mind, this business of living especially on this planet is real serious stuff you know!
Hey I came in at 17.7 ha footprint (43.7 acres) for 9.8 planets whereas my female counterpart only uses 14.1 hectares (34.8 acres) for 7.8 planets.
And Schmitty #41 – for you
Schmitty: care to lay down the terms of your bet?
Posted by tim maguire on 2006 01 11 at 06:46 PM • permalinkRichard Mcenroe,
I’m concerned over the results of the quiz. According to it, I need 11.7 planets, and I don’t know how I’m going to find 70% of a planet.
Could I borrow wronwright for a couple of days?
I’d like him to use the hyperspace drive to scout around nearby solar systems. Then, when he finds a suitable planet, use the Right Wing Death (Beast) Ray to carve away 30% of it.
How does his schedule look? Does he have any free time to get this done?
Thanks for your help.
OK, so I took the quiz again as if I was a vegan ecofreak living in a tiny, energy-efficient commune with six other freaks and using public transportation. Score? 1.0 planets.
So, an energy-efficient home with electricity and water is actually more eco-friendly than a house with either no water or no electricity (that gets you an unsustainable 1.1 planets.) It’s, like, 110% efficient or something! Same with public transport!
Either that, or the test was rigged to reward electricity- and-plumbing-enjoying ecofreaks. Naaaahh….
Whoa! Mine was 14.9 @ 8.3 planets. All I can say is thank goodness for the anti capitalist leftwingers in the UN and elsewhere and the dictators around the world that are keeping people poor and living in squalor. Otherwise I’d have start eating eating tofu.
Posted by Hank Reardon on 2006 01 11 at 07:04 PM • permalinkByrd, general terms are here, more detailed terms for one of the bets would closely match these terms, and other bets would need additional discussion of specific terms off-line (to make Dave S. happy).
Posted by schmidtb98 on 2006 01 11 at 07:17 PM • permalinkThe Age is running a whole swathe of moonbats, apart from Colebatch. Just try making sense of Natasha Cica (“Communications consultant”) and her column on Cronulla on p13 today. I don’t mind a Leftist argument: it’s the incoherence that annoys me. Then we have The Age’s environmental writer Melissa Fyfe - headed “Analysis”, p7 - where she writes: “While delegates (to Clean Development summit) met in hotel conference rooms cooled with air conditioning, protesters sweltered outside on a sweaty summer day.”
If The Age offices are also air-conditioned, and if Sydney summer is normally sweaty, what point is she trying to make?Schmidt, I’ll bet with you. On these terms.
Well?
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 11 at 07:25 PM • permalinkSome forests emit greenhouse gas methane, a report says, potentially confusing the climate change debate
BBC is confused
deary me!Time for a deadline. Swampies have been Hanrahaning about manmade global warming and the awaiting catastrophe for 20 years. Nothing extraordinary, apart from a couple of years when it may or may not have been hotter than any year in the previous 150, has occurred that can be blamed on manmade global warming. No sinking pacific islands, no continuously melting polar caps, no mass migration from coastal communities, no desertification in the developed world of previously viable agricultural lands. They have had two decades for at least some of their doom-saying to come true. Ain’t happened. So how much longer should we wait? They’ve already dropped “global warming’’ for “climate change” so are we circling back to the 70s when the new ice age was the threat du jour?
So, an energy-efficient home with electricity and water is actually more eco-friendly than a house with either no water or no electricity (that gets you an unsustainable 1.1 planets.) It’s, like, 110% efficient or something!
Whoops. I booted that a little. Should be water AND electricity. Still assumes an impossible zero-cost and 100% efficiency for the eco-friendly home and public transport.
They’ve already dropped “global warming’’ for “climate change” so are we circling back to the 70s when the new ice age was the threat du jour?
Good luck pinning them down on that, slatts. I even made it multiple-choice on Quiggen’s site from the benign to the apocalyptic, and got no answers. Just more irrelevant data-diarrhea from Ender.
Slatts, here’s what I posted on a previous thread after watching a documentary on the Little Age Age on the History Channel:
Well, just reached the end of the doco. It told how the Little Ice Age ended abruptly over the course of ten years. The experts all disagreed why - restoration of the Atlantic Conveyor thingy, sunspots, industrialization (for only that ten-year period?!?), etc. Then the obligatory Scary Threat of Global Warming, followed by the expert’s differing predictions - heat/drought, or maybe another Ice Age, or just a very pleasant warm period like the MWP (ironically, the belief of a guy identified as a Climate Modeller - are you listening, Ender?)
So, there was no agreement why the globe warmed in the 1800’s, and no agreement what’s going to happen next (good, bad or indifferent). That, in enviroreligionist circles, is known as “consensus.”
No doubt PETA have been really taking the good fight on behalf of animals right up to all those engaged in cutting four-legged friends throats in the streets of various towns and cities throughout the middle east during the festival of eid… oh, and in Paris, where, like all bloodthirsty sports, it is making its way onto television.
Or is it just commercial blackmail against farmers and retailers that they are good at?#57
I followed those links. I read ‘em. I still do not see where there was a denial of the fact that global warming is occuring. That was never the issue. At issue is whether or not global warming is a problem or that man is the culprit if it is. And further, the people beating that drum are the ones running this scam. Or scandal, if you will. It’s about money and power, as everything is. That is where the scam part comes in. The game is rigged. That’s a much different question. You’re creating a strawman. You’re attempting to liken Tim, and by proxy, I suppose, the rest of us, to some “global warming deny-ers” cult of the Neanderthal or whatever; I’m not sure what it is you’re after, frankly. But whatever it is, you haven’t made a case for anything so far.
Dave S., I’ve not claimed to be any better than anyone else here on environmental behavior. I just have a different assessment of the probability of a future event than Tim B (apparently) and others here, and which should mean that both sides would be willing to bet.
Anyway, I’m willing to answer your question if you tell me what’s wrong with my math, here. Despite your protests, you seem to care very much about the subject, so maybe you can enlighten me.
Posted by schmidtb98 on 2006 01 11 at 08:30 PM • permalinkMy global footprint is Three Mile Island. Got a problem with that?
schmidt98—unless you’re pedalling the computer you’re posting here with, yer just striking a pose, son.
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 01 11 at 08:35 PM • permalinkFurthermore, schmitty or whoever, there are several people on this thread willing to bet with you (that doesn’t include me. I’m using my betting money for the playoffs). It is quite possible to set up a legitimate bet online. There is even a site to do that. It’s called Long Bets. Arguments are made from both sides, terms are set (what circumstances prove the bet one way or the other), and an agreed-upon length of time the bet lasts is set also. So if you are so anxious to bet, why not do it? You seem to feel that you are on safe ground.
Slatts, here’s what I posted on a previous thread after watching a documentary on the Little Age Age on the History Channel:
The Little Age Age? You mean Fairfax’s circuation has decreased in the past?
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 01 11 at 08:36 PM • permalinkGradgrind’s got his shit together, the rest of them are fuckwits. Worst prose I’ve ever read since we had to mark each other’s holiday assignments in grade ten in Rockhampton, and I scored one written by a part mongoloid. Twenty three and a half planets, losers- I think the Caddy and the V-Max helped, along with the total aversion to exercise and 24 hour airconditioning for the dog.
re #76: Dave, it’s possible that the Columbian era hovel modeled by this “survey” assumes that you actually do need energy for heat and cooking. Lacking electricity, that means an open fire (burning wood, coal, dried dung, or maybe back copies of the Ralph Nader Monthly Journal For the Environmentally Sensitive Person).
Which means, in a back handed, indirect fashion, some greenies do appreciate electricity as being more efficient. No doubt they probably mean electricity generated from “renewable” sources….although that includes other sources as well, in reality. Which implies that this is a vague endorsement of nuclear power by Mother Gaia™ worshippers.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 11 at 08:50 PM • permalinkDave, it’s possible that the Columbian era hovel modeled by this “survey” assumes that you actually do need energy for heat and cooking. Lacking electricity, that means an open fire (burning wood, coal, dried dung, or maybe back copies of the Ralph Nader Monthly Journal For the Environmentally Sensitive Person).
OK, I’ll buy that.
ekw, I’ve got two global warming bet offers posted at longbets.org. Someone challenged me on one of the bets, I emailed him twice with some details, and never heard back.
Dave S., I’m not doing enough personally to reduce my own impact on climate change/environment. To the extent that I think the warming will be disastrous (which I do think is the case, although I’ve not challenged anybody here on that issue), then I’m a hypocrite. But it doesn’t make the betting issue less valid. The fact that the few scientists who outright deny global warming of any kind (Lindzen and Gray, and some others) aren’t willing to put their money where their mouths are should mean something to the rest of us as to who is trustworthy.
Posted by schmidtb98 on 2006 01 11 at 09:20 PM • permalinkSchmitty
The fact that the few scientists who outright deny global warming of any kind (Lindzen and Gray, and some others) aren’t willing to put their money where their mouths are should mean something to the rest of us as to who is trustworthy.
You have a really screwed up idea of what science is about. Since when is it a belief system with mandatory betting to support a scientist’s beliefs? [Rhetorical question BTW]
You need help.
I love the latest dilemma faced by the corrupt ABC news. The way they have to walk a tightrope between their predictable savaging of the global warming conference currently underway in Sydney and the scores of dead from record low temperatures across Asia, including places like China, Japan and even India! Lakes in New Delhi that haven’t frozen over in decades are now frozen solid.
Take that ABC! That’s the kind of sticky situation you can end up in when mindless mantra and dogma are subsituted for common sense and balance. Credibility is a high price to pay for your silly, fashionable agenda!#65 “Could I borrow wronwright for a couple of days? I’d like him to use the hyperspace drive to scout around nearby solar systems. Then, when he finds a suitable planet, use the Right Wing Death (Beast) Ray to carve away 30% of it.”
JayC, does this look like Rent-A-Fascist to you? I am WAY TOO BUSY to do any space exploration for you. I’m up for full ascension and I’m busy washing and waxing Karl’s and Cheney’s black helicopters.
Anyway, just between you and me, I’m not real comfortable with that space ship thingy. Um, I had an mishap a few years back which ultimately ended up with a comet hitting Jupiter. The Jupiterians got all huffy puffy over it and Richard McEnroe had to bail out my posterior. Only time I can remember him turning a hand to save me. Well, besides that Trogg invasion, but I figure we bailed each other out that time, so we’re even.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 01 11 at 09:47 PM • permalink“Doc, isn’t this telling you something?” Hanrahan gasped as he dropped the Esky. “That high tide is probably swollen by those Antarctic ice shelves that collapsed last year thanks to global warming. If we don’t do something about it, in 20 years there will be no beach at all!”
Sea-ice melting would make no difference to ocean levels as ice displaces less than its own volume of water.
Posted by Susan Norton on 2006 01 11 at 09:58 PM • permalinkWand, Richard Lindzen came up with the idea of betting. James Annan challenged him, but Lindzen said he’d bet only if given 50:1 odds in his favor, suggesting that he gave a 98% chance that temperatures would rise, not the 50-50 odds he stated in a magazine interview.
Bill Gray said in US Senate testimony that he would “take on” any scientist over Gray’s assertion that temperatures will start dropping in 5-8 years from 2005.
Posted by schmidtb98 on 2006 01 11 at 10:00 PM • permalinkNow I’m depressed.
I did the test as me circa 10 years ago and got a footprint of 7.1 (3.9 planets). Not looking good.
It gets worse, though.
The way I live today, I have a footprint of 4 requiring 2.2 planets. Some bloody RWDB I am.
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 01 11 at 10:08 PM • permalink#50,55. Regarding farting…
Since the Godmother moved in just after Christmas, our methane production levels have gone through the roof.
I’ve always preferred to keep it quiet, but she’s a long way from shy.
Hehe. I now have a rugrat who calls herself a farty girl while the grown ups fall about laughing. And the little farty girl can let some serious ones rip.
I guess I’ll have to teach her to light them next.
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 01 11 at 10:14 PM • permalinkThen schmittb98, you have your answer. You still have not pointed to where Tim said global warming was not occuring.
Wand is right. Science does not depend upon belief. Science tries to get as far away from belief - including one’s own - as it can.
Refusing a bet is hardly admitting one is not trustworthy. What an odd presumption! The only trustworthiness required in science is in the rigor of the methodology, the stringency in preparing and carrying out experiments, and in the militant keeping of proper notes. That’s why the Korean cloning cheat got busted. That is what is not trustworthy, not the refusal to make a bet. I don’t know whether Barry Marshall (Aussie medical hero) made bets - except with his own body - about the existence of H. pylori in the human gut, in order to show trustworthiness (though I doubt it). He didn’t need to. He proved it. Betting on things which may come to pass - or not - twenty years hence is not impressive to me. Rigor in the search for those answers is.
Schmitty,
You answer a rhetorical question. Still I suppose you just can’t move away from the compulsive betting that seems to be part of your pysche.
Whether any scientist of anyone else for that matter is prepared to bet on anything proves absolutely nothing, not that you are prepared to believe it. Read what EKW #106 says.
You need help.
ekw, it’s not hard to find conservatives who’ll talk about the Julian Simon-Paul Ehrlich 10 year bet. Conservatives think it was instructive, and I agree. I’m trying to imitate it.
Regarding Tim B., it looks to me like he called global warming a scam. Let’s see him put his money where his mouth is, or at least see him intersperse his constant “Look! It’s cold in this particular spot on this particular day!” posts with a statement as to what he thinks will happen.
Posted by schmidtb98 on 2006 01 11 at 10:58 PM • permalinkAlso, Germans get points for about 30 million persons worth of population reduction.
Dave, that’s not particularly fair to Germany. That might be a silly nanny state with delusions of socialism, but they paid for their sins long ago. If I’m out of line, PW, feel free to slap me down.
OTOH, you can give points to any hardcore commie or socialist, for the 100 million or so population reduction *that* ideology has given us, an ideology which unfortunately is still alive and kicking. There are even more bonus points if you are a current resident of North Korea, Cuba, or China, and support that government.
Zimbabwe and similar nations are still negotiating for their own bonus.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 11 at 11:05 PM • permalinkPlease don’t feed the trolls. Especially ones that want to make stupid bets that can’t be proven out. If you want to debate, then debate, but let’s leave the attention-seeking crap out of it.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 01 11 at 11:09 PM • permalinkMy total footprint is 14.9, I think I need a bigger car.
I’ve had a quick look online for Colebatch’s academic qualifications but couldn’t find anything. It’s probably safe to say that given his columns over the past few years and the Age’s hiring policies, that he knows nothing about economics.
btw schmitty, I offered you two bets previously.
1. Whether all scientists agree on the issue of global warming (ie, consensus).
2. Whether the apocalypse will occur within the next 20 years due to global warming.
The first you ignored (as you do with all reasonable and rational arguments made here against global warming) and you didn’t appear to understand the second (I’d say because of a lack of a sense of humour and/or written comprehension skills).
Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 01 11 at 11:27 PM • permalink#111, sorry wron! I’ll wax and polish a helicopter as atonement.
Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 01 11 at 11:28 PM • permalinkDave, that’s not particularly fair to Germany. That might be a silly nanny state with delusions of socialism, but they paid for their sins long ago.
Sorry, Jeff, but I don’t trust ‘em. I thought Naziism was something exceptional, but reading Hew Strachan’s book, they were doing the same stuff in WWI, just on a smaller scale (hostages, forced labor, murder of civilians, etc.) I’ll just have to take your word that we finally slapped the Hun out of ‘em.
But I’m still gonna keep an eye on ‘em…
Art, consensus does not mean unanimous consensus, but if you’re suggesting that the argument in favor of global warming is weak, then I suggest that you bet me over whether global warming will happen. The 2:1 odds should look good if that’s your perception of the state of the science.
Your second bet lacks rigor. Sorry if I’m missing the humor.
Posted by schmidtb98 on 2006 01 11 at 11:54 PM • permalink114 Dave, you’ll probably enjoy today’s essay and stoush on JihadWatch.
Hugh Fitzgerald has a few unkind words to say about Germany releasing a terrorist for a hostage.
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 01 11 at 11:56 PM • permalinkBut I’m still gonna keep an eye on ‘em…
Not quite what I meant…..as in, not all Germans are Huns. Just as not all Americans are leftie idiots.
But, yeah, I don’t trust the German government much myself, when you get down to matters. The same holds for most of the Euroweenie governments.
Which book are you talking about?
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 12 at 12:13 AM • permalinkSorry if I’m missing the humor.
Funny thing is, Schmidt, you’ve missed the joke all along. And you likely will continue to do so.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 12 at 12:14 AM • permalinkWhich book are you talking about?
The First World War. It’s been made into an absolutely superb multi-part documentary that’s been showing on History Channel International. DVD available.
Also shows how much of the current jihad we owe to WWI. Thanks, Gavrilo.
(Yeah, I know, both prolly would have happened eventually anyway.)
My memory is that Erlich has been wrong on virtually every dire warning he has ever given. I don’t remember that bet so I can’t speak to it.
Beyond that, why should Tim address the issue at all, other than the way he is already doing it? He is under no compunction to satisfy whatever need it is you seem to have to get him to bet on something. That’s weird, schmit98. You have also changed the original position you took on Tim. Now, instead of saying that Tim disbelieved in golbal warming, you are saying that he called it a scam. That’s right, and it is. Kyoto is the biggest environmental scam I’ve heard of.
Here’s a scam, so Tim needn’t bother himself. Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund, and Earth First! found a lucrative way to make dough: suing the EPA! One of those recent lawsuits charged the EPA with not doing enough to prevent global warming by not making automobile emissions tight enough. Works beautifully. The EPA already funds a number of organizations connected with the environmental movement, so the lawsuits were welcomed by the EPA which would simply pay the fine, usually millions of dollars, and then a portion of that money would be automatically kicked back to the NGOs as they had been the plaintiffs plus they get money from the government for their good “environmental work” anyway. (Of course, all the legal work was done pro bono as the lawyers knew they’d make money from the suit just like they did with the tobacco companies). It is a win-win situation, because the green NGOs get rich, and the EPA - which now has lost a lawsuit and goes, wringing its collective hands, to the government saying they need more power - gets a broader and broader mandate with regards to what it can legitimately consider its sphere of responsibility. There is a real scam for you, schmitty98.
Tim, you can rest easy, in case you weren’t already.
ekw, the EPA fought that lawsuit and won. They should have lost, but they won. Plaintiffs collected nothing.
Tim B. called global warming a scam in a post that referenced the science, not mitigation efforts. He should stand by that statement or clarify it.
Posted by schmidtb98 on 2006 01 12 at 12:35 AM • permalinkThanks, Dave! I’ll have to look it up.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 12 at 12:44 AM • permalink#118 Funny thing is, Schmidt, you’ve missed the joke all along.
JeffS, do you think this statement displays evidence of a sense of humour?
Your second bet lacks rigor.
It’s either that or a complete lack of comprehension…
Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 01 12 at 12:48 AM • permalinkWell, Art, I have been accused of having a warped sense of humor, but never in lacking one. In fact, some people wish I was a humorless bastard….. ;-P
But if you mean evidence of Schmidt having a sense of humor…...if he does, it is well hidden indeed.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 12 at 12:58 AM • permalinkBTW, Dave S., Paco… when did we become a trilateral commission?
Don’t tell wronwright…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 01 12 at 01:02 AM • permalinkschmitt, that lawsuit was an example of the EPA being sued for global warming which is what you were talking about. It’s the only reason I mentioned it, for C**st sake. It does not matter whether they lost or won that particular suit. The NGOs make out either way. However, the EPA also loses a number of these suits, and that is how the scam works. And even when they win, the NGOs still get plenty of money because of the EPA grants. The whole relationship is way too cozy. When farmers groups or ranchers get too chummy with a government entity you can bet your ass it gets uncovered fast…by these same environmental groups who get their money that way. It’s not only a scam, it’s a scandal, and it’s immoral. Or is that embarrassing for me to say, that bit about morality and all?
I don’t know anything about the science of global warming except that it’s usually faulty and relies on computer models that can’t predict the present. As to your fascination with Tim, I suggest you take it up with a psychiatrist before it becomes any more obsessive.
#125, sorry for the confusion JeffS, it was definitely the latter!
Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 01 12 at 01:12 AM • permalink#116: Having read the Jihadwatch article and skimmed the comment thread, I’m mostly left scratching my head. The guy repeatedly claims he doesn’t have any axes to grind, but that’s exactly what it read like. If this was about America and Vietnam and appeared in the MSM, all I could say is, “geez, congrats for being so loquacious, but aren’t you refighting the wrong war?” The way that he’s weakly trying to tie Nazi horrors into latter-day German (non-)treatment of captured terrorists doesn’t wash either. (And I’m sharing his opinion on the latter part…but the “overarching history” thrust of argument is still crap.)
As far as the oft-repeated “Germans as a whole are really Nazis-by-default” sentiment goes…eh, I certainly understand where it’s coming from, but unless you’re looking to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, I find its constant invocation somewhat less than helpful.
bugger global warming - there’s a real environmental problem developing in melbourne. you know those huge cockroaches heretofore only seen in the kitchens of filthy share houses in brisbane & sydney? well they are moving south - saw one nearly the size of a cicada today. anybody out there who can recommend a really strong bug poison to nuke ‘em before they get a proper foothold?
#134: I feel for you, buddy. When I lived in Miami they had something called a “Palmetto Bug”, which is really just a big cokroach that flies (boy, was I surprised the first time I crept up on one with a can of Raid; the damned thing flew in my face, and I’m embarrassed to say that I withdrew in disorder).
The best thing I’ve ever used is boric acid. It’s a powder having no scent (that way the cockroaches can’t take evasive measures). Once they step in the stuff, they try to clean it off their limbs and it causes death by dehydration. The active incredient is the same stuff that they put in eyewash. I don’t know what the effect on cats would be.
Screw the bofors, I want a track mounted Vulcan. 20mm ammo at 3000 rounds per minute, and mobile to boot! Not only is it effective against flies and cockroaches, you need never worry about someone having a case of “road rage” against you again. Add in the tracers, and this baby is really cool in the dark!
As a bonus, the hull burns diesel at a terrific rate…..it’ll really help
reduceadd tohave some impact on global warming.Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 01 12 at 04:44 PM • permalinkekw, it’s not hard to find conservatives who’ll talk about the Julian Simon-Paul Ehrlich 10 year bet. Conservatives think it was instructive, and I agree. I’m trying to imitate it.
Ok Schmidt for brains I’ll try to explain this slowly. The Simon/Ehrlich bet was about market forces, at least for Simon it was. The reason no one here is in the least bit interested in your offers is that you are trying to take bets on the weather. I wouldn’t place a bet on what the weather will do tomorrow much less years and decades into the future.
The point that you seem to miss is that the scepticism you can see here is mainly the result of two matters. The first, which you seem determined to pretend isn’t true, is that we have heard all this chicken little crap before. The second is that if there is a global increase in average temperatures occuring, there is little to no evidence as opposed to hypotheses and speculation that it is being caused by human action.
I for one will be in favour of having you banned as a pointless troll if you keep popping up and bleating about your bets every time a thread touches on the weather.
Posted by Just Another Bloody Lawyer on 2006 01 12 at 04:50 PM • permalinkYeah he’s tiresome, but nowhere as abusive as, say Emily P. And he’s pretty easy to ignore. For me, anyway. My opinion: he ain’t worth banning.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 01 12 at 05:06 PM • permalink#143 I don’t think boric acid is healthy for your pets (isn’t that the stuff in cocky feeder/traps?) any kind of insecticide is not good for pets. I had a job a few years ago checking pesticide labels for PESTKEM, which produced a CD with information on ALL agricultural chemicals, non veterinary pesticides & herbicides, available in Australia, their registered uses etc. Some of them were pretty icky.
I remember when I moved from Sydney to Brisbane in about 1986 we lived in a house at Mt Gravatt East. One night I got up and went to the kitchen and I stepped on a cockroach, it carried me a few feet before I was able to jump off!
They are big bastards.
Yeah he’s tiresome, but nowhere as abusive as, say Emily P. And he’s pretty easy to ignore. For me, anyway. My opinion: he ain’t worth banning.
See, I’m just the opoosite. The abusive ones make themselves look horrible and provide good sport. Guys like schmitty and Ender are just frustrating and booooooooooorrrrrring. It’s like talking to Rain Man.
The Real JeffS—Ah, yes, the M901… for when you really, really want that parking space… or you could go old-school with an M-40 Duster.
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 01 12 at 08:52 PM • permalink10.8 planets, boys!
In Atlanta that makes me a freaking soy swilling, tree hugging, hemp wearing, new age crystal worshiping environmentalist.
We have the longest average commute by car of any city in the world.
Now excuse me while I go outside and fire-up my 8,000lb 1948 Dodge Power Wagon 4x4 with flathead engine.
Posted by joe bagadonuts on 2006 01 12 at 10:05 PM • permalinkWhy not convert to coal? Environazis hate coal more than any other fuel, and what’s more if any of the filthy feral fuckers try to impede your progress down the highway you can bean them with the shovel- a handy burial tool as well.
For long trips, you can tag along one of these, just the ticket for any slow-moving wildlife that’s dumb enough to cross your path.
Roadkill du jour al fresco- yum!
155 Dave S, the other one
Guys like schmitty and Ender are just frustrating and booooooooooorrrrrring. It’s like talking to Rain Man.
For me it’s more like walking past Rain Man in search of more interesting things. Like beer. Y’think Wronwright’s got any more Butweipers by this time? I made a key to his basement while I was down there.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 01 13 at 01:34 PM • permalinkPlus which, RebeccaH has sent him off to Cambodia to wrangle up some glue-sniffing gangster monkeys, so he should be pretty busy for quite some time. Hey! She lives in the same town as he does; let’s invite her over for some of his beers too. It’s only fair, eh?
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 01 13 at 02:49 PM • permalinkTut tut, Monkey-boy, aren’t you supposed to be en route to Cambodia?
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 01 13 at 03:42 PM • permalinkOoopsie! It turns out it wasn’t RebeccaH that sent ol’ Ensign Wrongway to Cambo ... It was Adjutant Achillea! Hee hee hee, this is very excellent news indeed; he won’t DARE sneak back early to check up on his basement. She’d kick his ass, and we all know she can do it! And that’s not to slight Ms RebeccaH, no no. Way I see it, she’s still entitled to some of his beers. You comin’?
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 01 13 at 04:43 PM • permalinkStooped Over Sick on Beer,
Please check the next string for my response to Achillea’s delegating only the most recent of a long list of tasks.
By the way, I’ve instructed my killer dachsund, Yippie, to attack with malice and no remorse if any of you should be found in my basement.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 01 13 at 09:26 PM • permalinkStevo — Twin 40mm Bofors cannon on a medium-tank chassis…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 01 14 at 03:08 PM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
HA!! My global footprint is 18. Take that, Tim! Now, I need to construct a fleet of ships, design some cyborgs and develop some sort of fusion engine and particle beam to conquer the additional 3 planets required. And to get some decent food. I never consume anything grown around here.