Breakthough. The Economist has been strong for Global Warming for years. They like cap and trade, carbon taxes, alternate energy, CAFE and all that politically correct stuff. In this week's issue they finally admit that global temperatures have been flat since 1998. Seas ain't gonna rise, we will have snow for skiing and enough cold weather to make the sap rise so we can make maple syrup. They show some graphs of world temperatures with a flat top for the last 15 years.
They have no idea why this is happening. All the computer models predict warming. Measured atmospheric CO2 is up, reflective aerosols are down. But the decline cannot be hidden any longer.
The global warming skeptics have been soap boxing about the lack of warming for some time now. To have a pro warmist magazine like the Economist pick up on it means the data is fairly convincing.
However, we must not let our guard down says the Economist. That nasty warming might come back. We need to keep inflicting economic pain upon ourselves just is case.
Friday, March 29, 2013
Thursday, March 28, 2013
How secure is secure?
The TV is full of talk about "securing the border" before doing an immigration bill. Sounds good, but what do we mean by "secure". No matter what we do, the occasional lucky alien will get across now and then. And, those that do, won't tell anyone that they made it. So there is no way to actually measure the security of the border, in terms of how many aliens got thru or didn't get thru.
More reasonable is to talk about a level of effort. How much effort should be expended on border security? For me, I'd settle for a good chain link fence running all the way from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico, paralleled with a road to permit jeep borne patrols all along the border. And enough Border Patrolmen to run a patrol about once an hour. Do this much, and I'd call the border secure even if a few illegal aliens did slip across from time to time.
Others might call for more or less security.
If "a secure border" is necessary to more forward on an immigration bill, then we need to agree on just how secure is secure enough. That is, if we honestly want to negotiate an immigration bill.
We have plenty of dishonest politicians who talk the talk but actually won't walk the walk.
More reasonable is to talk about a level of effort. How much effort should be expended on border security? For me, I'd settle for a good chain link fence running all the way from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico, paralleled with a road to permit jeep borne patrols all along the border. And enough Border Patrolmen to run a patrol about once an hour. Do this much, and I'd call the border secure even if a few illegal aliens did slip across from time to time.
Others might call for more or less security.
If "a secure border" is necessary to more forward on an immigration bill, then we need to agree on just how secure is secure enough. That is, if we honestly want to negotiate an immigration bill.
We have plenty of dishonest politicians who talk the talk but actually won't walk the walk.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
We don't oppose it 'cause it's malarkey
Instead we oppose it 'cause it is vaguely associated with religion. An Arizona high school was teaching from materials supplied by United Scholastic. United Scholastic is associated in some way with the Church of Scientology. They didn't say just what the association was (ownership? historical? shared board of directors?). And they went on at length complaining that using United Scholastics stuff was a violation of the first amendment (establishment of religion)
They didn't say anything about whether the United Scholastics material was any good or not. That apparently doesn't matter.
L Ron Hubbard started writing science fiction back in the 1950's. He was only middling good as a writer but he did get some stories published in Astounding Science Fiction (Later Analog Science Fiction) the premier SF mag. His paperbacks stayed in print into the 1980's. In the later 1950's he invented the "science" of Dianetics. From there he went on to found the Church of Scientology, a cult which has been in and out of trouble with the law, here and overseas, for many many years.
With that background, I would be intensely suspicious of anything associated with the Church of Scientology. Because everything else L Ron Hubbard had a hand in was pure malarkey.
However our crusaders from NPR cannot be troubled with evaluating the worth of the United Scholastic material. It's far more important to trash it for being "religion".
They didn't say anything about whether the United Scholastics material was any good or not. That apparently doesn't matter.
L Ron Hubbard started writing science fiction back in the 1950's. He was only middling good as a writer but he did get some stories published in Astounding Science Fiction (Later Analog Science Fiction) the premier SF mag. His paperbacks stayed in print into the 1980's. In the later 1950's he invented the "science" of Dianetics. From there he went on to found the Church of Scientology, a cult which has been in and out of trouble with the law, here and overseas, for many many years.
With that background, I would be intensely suspicious of anything associated with the Church of Scientology. Because everything else L Ron Hubbard had a hand in was pure malarkey.
However our crusaders from NPR cannot be troubled with evaluating the worth of the United Scholastic material. It's far more important to trash it for being "religion".
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Background check or blacklist?
The gun control folks are calling for yet more background checks. Like background checks for sales between family members, friends, and private individuals. So someone picks up the phone, calls a magic phone number and asks if it is OK to sell a gun to so and so. At the far end of the phone, some bureaucrat checks the name against a list. If the name isn't on the list he says "OK sell it to him".
In short we have the government running a blacklist. Once your name goes on the list, you cannot purchase firearms. Since this list is so damaging, ethical doctors are reluctant to mess up their patient's lives by calling the government and saying " I was just treating so an so and I think he is a danger to society and you ought to put him on the gun blacklist."
If the government is going to run a gun blacklist, there ought to be clear rules about how much evidence is needed to blacklist a citizen, rules for getting off the black list, and strict rules keeping the black list secret. Amid all the happy talk about more background checks I haven't heard any talk about fair and just procedures for operating the black list.
In short we have the government running a blacklist. Once your name goes on the list, you cannot purchase firearms. Since this list is so damaging, ethical doctors are reluctant to mess up their patient's lives by calling the government and saying " I was just treating so an so and I think he is a danger to society and you ought to put him on the gun blacklist."
If the government is going to run a gun blacklist, there ought to be clear rules about how much evidence is needed to blacklist a citizen, rules for getting off the black list, and strict rules keeping the black list secret. Amid all the happy talk about more background checks I haven't heard any talk about fair and just procedures for operating the black list.
Ford's admen ride again
A week or so ago I twitted Ford over their ineffectual TV ad for an SUV. This morning comes word via NPR that Ford India had done worse. They chartered the JWT agency to do some ads. JWT came up with an ad to show how big the trunk was. The ad showed three women, bound and gagged, being loaded into the trunk. Apparently Ford never actually ran this ad, but copies of it leaked out to the public and caused a furor. It got so bad that Ford is publicly apologizing for the ad.
Great thinking Ford. Sell cars by showing them used for crime. Even though V8 Fords were Bonnie and Clyde's favorite getaway cars, Ford never mentioned this in ads. Let's be charitable and put this down to Indian Ford executives who presumable are less sensitive to public values than American ones.
Mulally ought to schedule all his execs for remedial ad creation 101.
Great thinking Ford. Sell cars by showing them used for crime. Even though V8 Fords were Bonnie and Clyde's favorite getaway cars, Ford never mentioned this in ads. Let's be charitable and put this down to Indian Ford executives who presumable are less sensitive to public values than American ones.
Mulally ought to schedule all his execs for remedial ad creation 101.
Monday, March 25, 2013
Pricey Corporate Jet
The new version of the Gulfstream bizjet retails for a mere $64.5 million. Nice plane and all, but how do I explain to my stockholders why I blew $64 million on a bizjet instead of paying it out as dividends? Especially as IRS will make me capitalize it so I cannot even deduct the cost from earnings.
Vikings on History Channel
I think I am going to stop watching this one. Too much looting and murdering and general crime. Too many bad looking guys with strange haircuts and shaggy beards. Everyone is a bad guy, no good guys. Terrible lighting, every indoor scene is too damn dark. Color is poor. Too many actors mumble their lines.
Too bad. The title was attractive.
Too bad. The title was attractive.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)