Climate, Oil, War, and Money

[Apologies for server problems today.  We've migrated to its own dedicated server to better handle traffic.  It should be running properly now, 3pm Monday.]


     Against a greater welter and flow of incoherence jerking the nation this way and that way en route to collapse comes "ClimateGate," the latest excuse for screaming knuckleheads to defend what has already been lost. It is also yet another distraction from the emergency agenda that the United States faces - namely the urgent re-scaling, re-localizing, and de-globalizing of our daily activities.
     What seems to be at stake for the knuckleheads is their identity, their idea of what it means to be an American, which boils down to being an organism so specially blessed and entitled that it is excused from paying attention to reality. There were no doubt plenty of counterparts among the Mayans when the weather changed and their crops failed, and certainly the Romans had their share of identity psychotics who doubted reality even when Alaric the Visigoth was hoisting off their household treasure.
      Reality doesn't care if we are on-board with its mandates or not. The human race has to get with whatever program reality is serving up at a particular time. Are we shocked to learn that scientists fight among themselves and cheat as much as congressmen?  Does that really change the relationships we understand about parts-per-million of carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere and the weather?
     What the people of the world can do or will do about a change in climate is something else. My guess is that the undertow of entropy is now too great to provoke any meaningful unified change in behavior.  The collapse of the US economy is too close to the horizon, and the so-called developing nations will have problems equally severe.  In the meantime, it is unlikely that any of the major players will burn less coal and oil, or not cheat on each other even if they pledge to burn less.  People who are not knuckleheads will make the practical arrangements that they can. These will, by definition, be localized, small-scale, and non-global communities, doing what they would have to do anyway.
     A parallel identity mania afflicts those who have decided that the Bakken shale oil deposits and the Marcellus gas play will allow the USA to cancel any modifications to our living arrangements. This cohort of knuckleheads wants to believe the public relations of the oil and gas industry, and in particular the bankers who are arranging the financing for these ventures. The facts are irrelevant to their identity-claims (that the USA has limitless energy resources). In fact, the Bakken shale formation is unlikely to produce more than a few hundred thousand barrels of oil a day in a nation used to burning about twenty million.  A few hundred thousand might mean a lot if were only used to light kerosene lamps, but it is unlikely to keep the faithful motoring off to WalMart and Walt Disney World - which is the exact expectation of the knuckleheads.
      Shale gas is a similar story. It will be too expensive to get out of the tight rock at a flow that will allow business as usual to continue.  It certainly won't be produced at under $10 a unit, and the nation's comprehensive bankruptcy accelerates every day, making it less likely that the public can pay premium prices within the framework of our current living arrangements.


      Who the hell really knows what we're up to in Afghanistan.  President Obama tried to present a coherent explanation last week but, frankly, it all just seemed an exercise in futility - and reminded me of those countless wealth-sapping expeditions the Roman army made to the frontiers of their own empire during the period of collapse.  Paul Craig Roberts, the former Reagan treasury official turned fierce critic of bail-out economics, said on a podcast last week, that he thought our adventure there was about protecting a Unocal oil company pipeline from Turkmenistan.  Sorry, Paul.  I can't buy that.  Like, we're going to post soldiers every two hundred yards across some of the most forbidding terrain in the world?  And keep them posted there, and provisioned... forever?   I don't think so.
      One pet theory of mine about the Af-stan adventure is that we wanted to make a baloney sandwich out of Iran by posting armies on both sides of them, with Iraq and Af-stan as the Wonder Bread. All I can say about that is that it doesn't seem to have affected Iran much during the past six years, or modified or influenced their behavior favorably. Or perhaps it just allows us to stand close by to Pakistan, in case the Islamic maniacs get their mitts on central power there - and by extension, on a bagful of nukes. It's a lot less easy to believe that we have any prospects for really domesticating and/or democratizing Af-stan itself. And even if we do manage to suppress the Taliban for a few years, are we prepared to continue the mission... forever?  As soon as we're out of there, the Afghanis are back to tribal business-as-usual.  So why not just bail while the bailing is good?  Make like the Russians and the Brits before them and cut our losses?  Is our prestige at stake? And by extension our identity as world-savers?
      I suppose this leads to larger questions of a.) the stability of Islamic Central Asia in general, and b.) the capabilities and intentions of the maniacs within it who would like to inflict punishment on us Western crusader types.  One popular theory, of course, is that they only feel that way because of our intrusions in the Islamic Ummah; that they would back off and mind their own business if we would just quit sending our knights over there. I have no idea if this is true, though one would suppose there is a certain inertia in play that would keep their animosities at work for a long time to come, not to mention the millions of under-employed young men who seek to work off their testosterone by blowing things up.
     One thing you can state pretty categorically about the Af-stan war: it sure is a good way to blow an additional one trillion dollars worth of capital - that is, money we lend to ourselves, which leads to the next link-in-the-chain: the destiny of our national finances. If a clerk at H and R Block sat down for an hour with Uncle Sam, he'd surely be reaching for the Pepto-Bismol after five minutes. We've been able to play games with ourselves for a whole year about the true state of our capital resources.  It is a mighty big system, kept chugging along on little more than inertia, as things will when they are headed downhill and gravity exerts its influence.  But it begins to seem now like a great reeking freight train of toxic waste out-of-control on the downgrade and headed for a very nasty smash-up.  The Green Shoots crowd - a sub-category of identity maniacs, who think the USA is immune to the laws of history and physics - has made common cause with the oil and climate knuckleheads to proclaim that we are returning to normal, back to the "consumer" orgy, the suburban sprawl nexus of McHousing and miracle mortgages, and new frontiers of corporate profit-raking. 
      They are tragically wrong.  Instead, we're headed into the wildest king-hell debt workout that the world has ever seen, which will propel a lot of people used to working in air-conditioned cubicles into a world made by hand.  We march day by day into the great holiday season with mortgages going unpaid and the credit cards getting cancelled and money disappearing and the fears and grievances mounting.  Pretty soon, the folks doing "God's work" at Goldman Sachs (and their tribal kin on Wall Street) will announce their annual bonuses (because they are publicly-held companies, which have to do so).  Won't that be a galvanizing moment for us all?


Peak Everything.

Thanks for this. It'll help me focus on navigating through a whole pile of crap today.

I uploaded some video on High Frequency trading.....

Thanks again.

There are knuckleheads on all sides of the Climate Change issue. Belief in man-caused climate change has turned into an industry and a Faith, disconnected from the science.

The Algore-ites will ruin the world by ruining the economy and by displacing capital into hare-brained schemes to keep everyone driving, just as much as the right-wing deniers will get us there by other means.

The really inconvenient truth is that cutting carbon output isn't going to effect climate change. If you want to do anything, prepare for change.

Took me a while to get in- server issues, too many people pounding at the gates trying to get in?

You make some good points about Afghanistan. It is definitely becoming a black hole, sucking every dollar that we have into it's inescapable gravity well of corruption. However, even if America is no longer the world's police force, we do have an obligation to the Afghan people. It's the old Pottery Barn metaphor, we broke it, we bought it. We have to at least make an effort towards setting things aright, before we abandon ship.

“Why do we stay?” Really is the question of the day now isn't it? I found an article written by Henry Kissinger in 1975... it appeared in Harpers, and the NYT. Whenever questions of foreign policy arise it helps to review it. Http://
Kissinger me once... Kissinger me twice... and Kissinger me once again... it's been a long, long time!

James, I'm happy to hear you using the word knuckleheads, rather than morons. ClimateGate is a phenomenon not of the cognitively deficient, but of the short-sighted and self-interested. Denial is an emotional state available to a whole range of smart people. Krugman, for example is a pretty smart guy and his column today reflects exactly the knuckleheadedness you describe. He's crowing that Obama is going to swoop in at the end of Copenhagen and save the day by instituting a system that will allow business even better than usual – green jobs, blah, blah, blah.

James Hansen is saying, "dealing with climate change allows no room for the compromises that rule the world of elected politics. 'This is analagous to the issue of slavery faced by Abraham Lincoln or the issue of Nazism faced by Winston Churchill,' he said. 'On those kind of issues you cannot compromise. You can't say let's reduce slavery, let's find a compromise and reduce it 50% or reduce it 40%.'

Alex Evans ( "writing as someone who’s also done a stint in officialdom working on emissions trading (though only of a few months rather than Williams and Zabel’s few decades between them)" thinks "they are totally right about the disastrous train crash that is allowing ‘offset’ permits in to cap-and-trade schemes."

And now there's fresh data from the scientists drilling ice cores in northern Greenland. They found a spot where the temperature rose 20 degrees within a two year period. Now that's real news. (Some choose to interpret any science that shows abrupt change in the geological past as proving humans didn't cause this episode. But the difference with our current instance is that the preconditions arose so quickly – 200 years. That didn't happen in the past.)

Just chugging along here trying to stir people to scale back their eating, if not to halt climate change, then at least to prepare ourselves for a tough time to come.

Lynn Shwadchuck
Diet for a small footprint and a small grocery bill.

Hahahahahahaha! Too funny Lynn! I like the "reduction in slavery" analogy.

the Clusterfuck is sort of a clusterfuck today! (lots of traffic) and it is hard to post commentary.

The link in my last comment didn't take


I liked Gregory Cochran's comment a few months ago.

Richard Steven Hack Says:
September 3rd, 2009 at 11:04 pm

None of this is even remotely relevant to dealing with Al Qaeda.
The whole “safe haven” thing is a pure myth. If the US can attack Al Qaeda in Pakistan with impunity, I see no reason why the US can’t attack Al Qaeda in Afghanistan with impunity, regardless of who’s running the country. What is the Taliban in Afghanistan going to do? Shoot down our Predator drones? With what?
This whole thing is pure nonsense. The sole reasons the US is in Afghanistan are:
1) Pipelines for oil.
2) Heroin for the CIA.
3) Money for the defense industry.
4) Promotions for US military officers.
Everything is pure, unadulterated ruminant evacuation.
If Obama tells you anything different, he’s as big a liar as George Bush.

gcochran Says:
September 4th, 2009 at 2:48 am

Hack is of course wrong. There’s no reason at all.

Comcast wants to take over NBC Universal. Comcast wants to move the few remaining "broadcast" viewers to (paid) cable.

I think people will continue to pay those crazy cable bills until they can't. They might cut back on food before they cut their cable. It would be interesting to know how many foreclosed "homeowners" were paying their cable even after they quit paying the mortgage.

I hate cable, and I hate every aspect of the criminal housing Ponzi scheme that is raging through our country like that monster in the movie Cloverfield.

That Cloverfield monster was unstoppable.

Our political and economic institutions are like the Cloverfield monster.

We are screwed.

I would never have guessed that the total collapse of industrial human society could have been mitigated and postponed for as long as it has.

Can there be another bubble beyond the global money-printing bubble? The central banks apparently are taking on the debt generation duty - surely the strategy of last resort.?.

It appears that all of the available energy is being consumed and consequently, that as many as possible of the motors of commerce and consumption are being kept running while currencies are being kept in motion. It has been a slow collapse so far. How long can "they" do it?

Speaking of the tag line about Goldman Sachs, here is something from Bloomberg about them.

Arming Goldman With Pistols Against Public: Alice Schroeder

Looks like they've been reading your columns.

"Are we shocked to learn that scientists fight among themselves and cheat as much as congressmen?"

Speaking of not dealing with reality, try as they might, scientists have clearly been unable to convince you, and just about everyone else, of the truth about the denial-sphere dog-and-pony show of "climategate".

1) the fighting was about the denial-sphere and all that entails (Who woulda thunk it? Scientists frustrated-and-mad as hell that stupidity captures the "imagination" of morons more than intelligence. This increasingly dumber-than-rocks reality boils my blood--and offends and terrifies me--as well); and

2) there was no--zero, zip, nada--"cheating" whatsoever: period, end of story

For those not so easily ensorcelled, I proffer the following:



peruse the recent history of the first two above referenced sites to find abundant logical posts about "climategate"

and read the,, "SWIFTBOATING THE CLIMATE SCIENTISTS" post (currently the most recent post)

there are also many rational articles about it but this one is as good as any:

and to plumb the depths of evidence and data:


Thanks JHK, for perpetuating the myth and meme that "cheating" occurred when it did not.

Nice work.

Good job.

I still think--not that you care--that you deserve special recognition within the Peak Community, such as it is, for your logic, courage and dignity in consistently being the only high-profile-person to speak out against nine-eleven-was-an-inside-job conspiradroid-moonbats (the same kind of moonbats which the Peak Community gives refuge to: Michael Ruppert, Richard Heinberg, Carolyn Baker, Jan Lundberg, Alex Smith, et al.).

But I would hope you could apply the same logic, courage and dignity with regard to Global Heating, Climate Change and Peer Reviewed Science (not to mention the myths of Free Markets and The Invisible Hand versus the realities of Lemon Socialism and The Iron Fist).

To put peer-reviewed science in the same category as the mafia-style criminality that is the US Government-and-Economy is as wrong and counterproductive as it is silly and inaccurate.

I hasten to add that Paul Craig Roberts is also a nine-eleven-was-an-inside-job conspiradroid-moonbat.

As far as Comcast taking over everything, let's see if Obama does any anti trust action. I don't watch TV at all it's garbage for the most part. I killed my cable TV years ago, I only have Comcast for high speed internet, I'm too far away from the telephone central office to get DSL, otherwise I would.

The fabrication involved in ClimateGate is that there is a ClimateGate.

This was about the process of deciding what papers would be included in the IPCC report, and on what grounds they might not be. Some were marked for non-inclusion because they would be taken out of context by the deny-o-sphere to damage the IPCC report as a whole. The papers were eventually included anyway but that there was ever a discussion on the topic is illustrative.

Climate scientists have been badly burned by the professional deny-o-sphere and the corporate and government demagogues they serve. Climate scientists are now gun-shy. They see their work and their reputations dragged over broken glass for the profit of a few. It happened with the tobacco "debate" and it's happening again with climate research, and we all know how this movie ends and nobody likes it.

Climate scientists would need to be insane to *happily* continue to leave themselves open to random and baseless attacks simply because their observations and recommendations run contrary to the will of the majority. They continue to do so only because they are compelled. That compulsion ought to count for something, but clearly it does not, and they will continue to be slaughtered in the press for simply saying what is true within the context of climate research and their growing understanding of how the universe operates.

On honest reflection it might be that science is even dead, killed at the altar of corporate profits and mindless BAU, and has been for a long time. If so, then so be it. I say this as a scientist myself. If my practice is destroyed, I can do other things. Actually I can survive just fine as I have many fine skills outside investigations and data analysis. The goal of science always was to inform the interactions between humankind and the universe, but if that is no longer valued and is seen even as suspect or fraudulent... then we can probably do without it. Perhaps we have learned all we will ever know about the universe and anything more is too much information. The world used to be simpler and people lived and died (and suffered) without knowing why things were the way they were. Maybe that was a good thing. When troubles mount the people can turn to religion and mob violence -- as always they did before -- and over time reduce to a period reminiscent of the Middle Ages.

This is probably fine, and in any case may be inevitable. I don't think I can allow myself to have a problem with that if that is how the majority of the people want it to be.

Oh, but destroying climate science won't automagically restore gasoline supplies at $.17 a gallog. Everyone needs to understand that going back means having less, or even having nothing. But in fairness most won't know where the oil disappeared to, why the climate is changing, why they have less security this year than least year (every single year) or why much of anything else is happening.

But they'll be happier for not knowing. I think.

Though I don't pretend to understand that.


Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is a faith-based issue on both sides.

We CLEARLY do not understand much about this and anybody who has done substantive research into the topic, as I have mostly by reading real publications like Science, quickly determines that the issue is full of BS everywhere.

Listen...the champion for AGW is Al Gore? This is who you trust? Besides, the ACTUAL emissions responsible for AGW if it exists, are NOT CO2! Water vapor is a significantly higher AGW emission than CO2 by many orders of magnitude.

When you cannot frame the debate on valid scientific grounds, why should anybody listen to your position? The ClimateGate scientists DID fudge data and their models are immature. In fact, again, if you read Science you'd have found that atmospheric albedo in certain regions (Indian Subcontinent et. al.) actually produce a net COOLING effect.

"Climate change" is not the same as global warming and "climate change" includes atmospheric pollution due to aerosol contaminants, which tend to change rainfall cycles as opposed to merely correlating at 1.0 to mean surface temperature. However, these are conveniently left out of the discussion which revolves around freaking carbon credits!

Additionally, there is the matter of falling pan evaporation rates (over half a century, decreasing by 30%) suggesting LESS solar intensity reaching the earth. After 9/11, during the grounding of civilian air travel, there was a significant noted decrease in mean surface temperatures overnight, as reradiative cooling was enhanced by the lack of aircraft contrails (water vapor)!

If you do not know these terms I am speaking of or are unaware of this data...well, how to put this bluntly - you are not qualified to have or state an OPINION on AGW. PERIOD.

Algore demonstrated a *correlation* between CO2 and apparent rising mean surface temperatures over the last century, but the most inconvenient truth is that a correlation is NOT causation. Supposing aircraft contrails are a significant co-factor, then the correlation is explicable as that CO2 emissions have risen with temperature as passenger airmiles have risen, i.e., coincidentally. We do not KNOW.

Peak oil will solve the emissions problems anyhow, so why in the hell would we create yet another derivatives casino for the banksters? Why, so the BankerManchurian Candidate can posture in Copenhagen and score another Nobel?

If we kill ourselves, TRUST ME, the earth won't miss us. We didn't cause the ice ages nor the 10 degree rise in the precambrian extinction that killed 90% of life on earth. They want to sequester carbon? Plant things. Stop ripping down mature forests to build exurban planned communities, etc.

I'm glad JHK mentioned the shale gas. I was thinking, what if it did work? What if they could get the gas out? What if it were virtually unlimited (whatever that would mean)? It always, for me, comes back to JHK's comment: Recovery to what?

I watch German TV news and their reports from around the world and every place on earth is the same now (if it's not in dire poverty): Some 8-lane, 10-lane road full of cars, lined with high-rises. Is that economic success? Is that life? Would we take our shale gas riches and keep on going? How? What would we produce, what would we do, what world not-made-by-hand would we build?

In this context the climate debate is a moot point: we've already wrecked the place and our number one priority is an economic and life structure to keep on wrecking it. Even if the world temperature stays about the same for the next 100 years or so, do you want to be here to see the end result of our current economy activities?

This was posted earlier and no longer shows. Don't know if it was removed.

Either, "they", know something we don't, or, "they", have missed the memo and are putting a lot of money at risk. This just in from Yahoo news:

IMO, even if we weren't near or past peak oil production, this whole space playground for the super-wealthy is just absurd. I've never read any convincing counter-arguments to the peak-oil prognosis by people like Simmons, Kunstler, Heinberg ... ... In fact all of the counter arguments I've encountered have amounted to admissions that we are only going to consume existing reserves more quickly with better technology. None have addressed much less disputed or refuted the facts about reserve declines.

Then I come across this, and have to ask myself, "Why are these guys spending huge sums of money on space tourism in the face of peak oil?" You would think their business plans would include comprehensive forward looking analysis of one of the primary inputs/necessities of their business - abundant, inexpensive fuel with supplies lasting long enough to make the enterprise profitable assuming proper execution in all other areas of the business strategy.

Then there is the market research that must point to the fact that there will be enough global wealth to patronize their business. Is their market analysis like the derivatives fiascos, where the models only looked at history, and even then only a very small tranch of historical data where the markets only went up? What the hell is going on here?

You don't start up a business that requires billions in capital, (and have multiple competitors risking capital in a fledgling market), without a solid forward looking plan. Or do you?

Are we this stupid to believe peak oil while Bransford knows something we don't, or are he and his space tourism brethren the next set of people in line for subsidies and bailouts in a few more years? (Assuming they aren't already getting government subsidies for R&D, fuel ... ...)

I would love to see their business plans. I'll dig around and see what can be found. This is a bizarre disconnect. JHK? Anyone? What gives?

Honestly Jim, I'd really like to get your take on this or a pointer to someone who could give us an assessment. My question is, given the disconnect between peak-oil outlooks and ventures like Virgin Galactic, someone's logic and/or assumptions must be deeply flawed. So, whose would that be?

[Apologies for server problems today. We've migrated to its own dedicated server to better handle traffic. It should be running properly now, 3pm Monday.]

Dedicated server seems to be working now.

I don't think either you or I can be a credible critic or proponent of GW. Your source Professor "Bob" however, doesn't seem to have clean hands or empty pockets in this argument either. Also, his credentials as a climate scientist seem a little short.

From Wikipedia: "he is on the research committee of the Institute of Public Affairs, a right-wing group that has received funding from corporate interests including oil and tobacco companies.[14]"

Sui Generis once again. If you can't belief one group who you think is taking money to make a point then why would anyone believe another which clearly has the same problem.

Professor Bob is a little too tainted for my taste.

Practical Globalization - I like sardines. Notice that the next time you buy a can of sardines, 90% of the time it will be a product of Thailand (wherever Europe, N. or even S. America). About a year ago I was in some village in Malaysia 20 miles from the Thai border and about 100ft from the Gulf of Thailand. I walked into the shop and bought a can of sardines and noticed that they were "Product of Norway". That was the day that I realized that something one day just has to give! I do agree that things will have to become more localized.

On another note: I run my own small oil and gas company. I produce shale gas. According to Jim we can produce only at $10. Hmm. The next time I do anything I better consult Jim on what and what not is possible. Jim discussing about what we can and can't do based on God knows what sources or experience is like me discussing opinions on surgical procedures, because it interests me and I read a lot about it.

What exactly is the problem? The model of a future he presents is like about 30 no-name sci-fi novels I remember reading as a kid presenting the future as some post apocalypse agricultural neoworld. Nothing creative about that. Growing food in your own yard and raising animals? Nothing new there - head to eastern europe and people have been doing that for years after economic collapses. And not living half badly mind you.

One of the problems with "predictions", especially those of imminent major change, is the ease with which one can shoot holes through such speculation. I for one am neither a believer in some sort of "V" shaped recovery or the current stock market rally, in fact I am quite skeptical of both, but it is easy to make a well reasoned argument that both are "real", or are at least possible.

Bear in mind that compared to the combination of the world economy, PO, Global Population Growth, Gw etc., the stock market is a rather simple problem, and yet the evidence cannot be regarded as conclusive about any particular direction or outcome.

An excellent example of this ability to argue both sides well is demonstrated nicely here:

Seriously, if it were so easy, why aren't the doomers all rich, since predicting the stock market (or RE market, or the market of your choice) should be "duck soup" for them, given their confidence in predicting something with far more variables?

Speculation is interesting and fun, but don't ever get the idea that guys like JHK are any more likely to get it right than you.....or a roulette wheel.

FeFe said: "yeah, yeah, yeah, his work is peer-reviewed"

You are trying to slip one past us, aren't you, FeFe Fail?

Professor Bob Carter does have a lot of peer-reviewed articles. Unfortunately, they are not related to climate science. His only work related to climate science are opinion pieces refuting evidence, not studies containing evidence.

Carter could well be described as "a prominent research geologist with a personal interest in the issue of climate change"

"In March 2007 the Sydney Morning Herald reported that "Professor Carter told the Herald yesterday [March 14th 2007] the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had uncovered no evidence the warming of the planet was caused by human activity. He said the role of peer review in scientific literature was overstressed, and whether or not a scientist had been funded by the fossil fuel industry was irrelevant to the validity of research. 'I don't think it is the point whether or not you are paid by the coal or petroleum industry,' said Professor Carter. 'I will address the evidence.'"
Carter is a member of the right-wing think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, and a founding member of the Australian Environment Foundation, a front group set up by the Institute of Public Affairs.

"Jim discussing about what we can and can't do based on God knows what sources or experience is like me discussing opinions on surgical procedures, because it interests me and I read a lot about it."
============================================'s interesting what a little fame and fortune will do for one's self confidence, right away it seems to make someone an expert about everything. My wife (a doc) and I love to watch Bill Maher and laugh about his crackpot ideas about diet and healthcare etc. Funny guy, and insightful at times about politics and current events.....but he doesn't know shit about medicine or diet, and he has the gall to try and argue with experts about it, like he is one himself! hysterical.

Mr. Kunstler's comments about Iraq and Afghanistan "sandwiching" Iran are very perceptive. Oil! Oil! Oil! The United States uses about one quarter of the worlds oil. Iraq + Iran produce about one quarter of the worlds oil. As long as international oil trading is conducted in dollars, the dollar is de facto backed in oil.
Now that the euro, ruble, yen and yuan are all emerging as competitors to the dollar, the dollar's value is sliding. The American ruling elite is panicked. Between bail outs, bad mortgages, bad consumer debt, deficit spending on wars -- we are teetering on hyperinflation. (indeed it is only the fact that the Saudis and Chines have trillions of dollar denomninated assets has prevented that from happening. Our biggest creditors need to have a "soft landing" to the dollar which allows them to convert their holdings to something else before they disinvest in the US.

Having the oil needs of the United States met by a defacto colony that is compelled to sell oil to the United States for fiat dollars preserves the value of our currency. It also gives the American consumer economy 20 to 30 more years of life. During which our ruling elite hopes to solve the problem by discovering some abundant "free" source of energy like cold fusion of antimatter which they hope will allow the status quo to continue indefinately.

I posted this near the end of last weeks blog:

The latest on Climategate is interesting, albeit perhaps only a setback. That being said, climate change is something humans and some other life forms can live with.

What we and countless life forms in the oceans (that we depend on) cannot live with is continuing increases in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that inevitably dissolves into sea water, acidifying the oceans.

As the oceans become more acidic, life forms with shells are in considerable peril. Many of these are close to the bottom of the food chain. Coral reefs will also suffer - does this matter? Coral reefs are the nurseries for many species of marine animals.

While there were some cheers (premature I think) from the anti-climate change crowd, I fear that the last noise from humanity won't be a cheer when many of us run out of food from the oceans.

What, me worry?
The tacos were great at Foster's freeze in Inglewood back in the
70s. Like Lion's dragstrip and Orange county raceway, all gone.

we have gone from morons to knuckleheads but I'm thinking JK's clueless is the most appropriate moniker of all.

I'm one of the old time faithful who would be proud to wear a 'peaker' T-shirt but I would seriously think twice about taking the effort to put one on.

Nobody cares because there is no benefit in accepting reality. People believe what they want to and in what benefits them. They don't care about what is really true.

Caring about truth and caring about others outside ones own tribe are acquired skills. It really is too much to expect clueless knucklehead morons to accept reality unless it feels good to them or something else is in it for them. To expect more from uneducated cheese-puff munching masses and their cheerleaders is irrational and ignores human nature.

Talk about the sky falling all we wish, it won't matter to a knucklehead until he/she gets hit on the head with a big chunk of blue.

The truth is out there and has been for years now. History is proving that people won't look for or accept inconvenient truths until they have suffered personal negative consequences. This is a truth that playing out right now.

Climate change is an inconvenient truth but it pales next to the inconvenient truth of resource depletion and it's inevitable consequences.

But knuckleheads won't accept reality until a die-off is well under way. But it won't matter then if climate change is true or not. All a good knucklehead will be caring about are selfish needs and survival.

Sorry to be so inconvenient but its not a matter of clarification explanation or persuasion. You can lead a knucklehead to the waters of knowledge but you can't make him think.

I wish it were not so.

What if the US left Afghanistan and the flow of heroin stopped?

What if a addict knew that the heroin was almost gone and he was going to have to quit sooner or later, but there was a neighbor with a stash of heroin who had no means of self defense.

Would the addict do the responsible thing and quit? Say even taper off, so the withdrawal wouldn't be as painful?

Or would he attack the neighbor and worry about peak heroin later?

If I recollect correctly Paul Allen first teamed up with Burt Rutan in the late 1990's or very early 2000's with Branson signing on in 2003 or early 2004. Rutan had been designing the so called Space Ship One in all likelihood for some years before Allen and Branson came up with the funding to build it. This is not a new program nor is it in any way comparable to NASA's space missions.

The Space Ship One program won a $10 million prize for a manned ballistic flight 60 miles AGL. The cost to design and build the One exceeded $30 Million. Space Ship Two is the follow on to One which will ostensibly take sight seers up for about a 2 1/2 hour flight with a whopping 5 minutes of weightlessness as the craft approaches reaches and exits it's apogee. Branson claims he will build his initial fleet of 5 Two's for about $400 million; less than half the cost of a single launch and recovery of the Shuttle.

I find Branson's claim that he will exceed NASA's man in space program specious. Putting men and women in low Earth orbit and sending them to the Moon and back as NASA has done appears to me to somewhat exceed the toe in the water 5 minutes of exceeding the arbitrarily established edge of space 60 miles above the Earth. I also found his contention that he will implement a 100% safe spaceship amusing. Damn he must be good!

The raceway is dead, but the Orange County Speedway lives on.

JHK:"Who the hell really knows what we're up to in Afghanistan."

Come on now, THINK ABOUT IT Mr Kunstler. We are in Iraq to secure the oil supply of the USA, the UK, Israel, and some other nations for the next few decades (by invading Iraq we totally bypassed OPEC), and we are in Afghanistan to control not oil but rather OPIUM, which is a necessity of the medical sector of all nations nowadays; seeing as we now 'control' Afghanistan we thus have our hands on the lever of the world's macrosupply of opium which is of course worth hundreds of billions per year (at least) on the international market.

The British Empire used to have a monopoly on the opium trade for a very long time, but that long-term monopoly largely fell apart during the 20th Century for various reasons.

Now the USA, the UK, Israel, and some other nations are back in Afghanistan and again in the control of the world’s macro-supply of opium, and seeing as every single country in the world needs and uses opium and its various derivatives for critical medical purposes they now have to go through the newly established world opium monopoly (the USA, the UK, Israel, etc) to get the constantly needed opium for their growing medical sectors.

I hope this post doesn't get erased just because I mentioned Israel in it.

Snafu- Remember Sir Richard's "Bio fuel flight?"
Like all things Branson it was a high publicity stunt. He will be in space vacation business until a starship full of oober millionaires become one with the ozone upon re-entry.
And Agri, nothing runs on heroin in our little suburban empire, even heroin addicts don't run very well. Our big pharma is strongly discouraged by DEA to distribute opiates (sp?) at all.
Besides, Codeine, and Morphine are cheap. And the government is about to go after Oxycodone like they did crystal meth.... starting in Florida.
Not saying the CIA doesn't fund their adventures with coca leaves and poppies.... but we don't send the army (and Halliburton) unless there is oil nearby. (Iran)
Asking Henry (Kissinger); today @ Suburban Empire

JHK:"There were no doubt plenty of counterparts among the Mayans when the weather changed and their crops failed..."

The best research/theories available today places the main reason for the Mayan demise as being the massive deforestation they carried out, not 'climate change.' However, cutting down most of the trees in a region or area can actually causes a local/regional climate to change/shift because massive deforestation eventually leads to droughts in the long term: believe it or not, the trees and other natural vegetation of a region or area actually ‘interacts’ with the local/regional atmosphere to produce needed rain, humidity, and other beneficial weather patterns.

However, when the short-sighted Mayans slashed/burned a bunch of the lush forests surrounding them for agriculture to feed their growing population, initially the heavy tropical rains of that region didn't disappear immediately of course -- thus whenever it rained heavily as it tends to do in tropical regions, a whole lot of this newly exposed topsoil was simply washed away due to the lack of trees and other vegetation, the roots of which once served to hold that precious topsoil in place. Also, over time incessant winds (which were once mostly blocked by trees or other vegetation) also served to loosen or blow away the vital topsoil, which then additionally became increasingly dried out from the tropical sunlight beating down on it constantly due to the lack of a forest canopy to protect it from getting sun-baked on a daily basis. It is a quadruple more trees or other plants to hold crucial topsoil in place, thus: lots of topsoil washed away from heavy rains ---> lots of topsoil also blown away from wind ---> remaining topsoil or subsoil then sunbaked due to lack of tree canopy and thus made very hard to till or work ---> eventual reduction in agricultural output from the soil, degraded soil soon rendered near useless, time to slash/burn some more, rinse/repeat.

This same process is currently happening down in Brazil and some other places where they are slashing/burning ancient forests for vast fields of (temporary) monocrops and/or livestock grazing. And to make matters worse, the topsoil of most tropical regions on Earth are already very thin and fragile to begin with, which only expedites the process of wholesale topsoil wastage in these areas.

In the long-term though, widespread deforestation causes droughts. When you cut down most of the trees in an area and clear the land for houses, parking lots, shopping centers, skyscrapers, factories, etc, (or for crops/livestock like the Mayans, modern Brazilians, etc) the land will eventually become a desert or semi-desert if trees are not eventually re-established in to the habitat. The Mayans met their demise and Mother Nature slowly reforested the place because there was no one around the keep clearing away all of the new vegetation which was becoming re-established.

Did you know that much of Italy, Spain, and a lot of North Africa used to be heavily forested back a few thousand years ago in part of the ancient Greek/Roman times and of course long before that? Now though widespread desertification or semi-desertification has occurred in many areas of those countries since the ancient inhabitants of those areas (who were nomadic slash/burn farmers and/or livestock ranchers) often cleared the land of trees to make room for farmland, pastureland, and towns/cities and thus a lot of the precipitation eventually left those areas as a result of the loss of regional vegetation.


I am now obliged to mention that I am a life-long 'corn-pone White American Male Southerner' with roots in my specific Southern region stretching back to the Colonial period.

So maybe now y'all Yankees might realize just this once that not all of us are NASCAR lovin' dummies down here.

And I'm only 27 years young. How about them corn-cobs?!

As an engineer of JHK's age who attended the original Earth Day, helped start a city-wide recycling program and later a public transit system, I have grown increasingly concerned about the political nature of the global warming movement and its potential to divert attention from peak oil, restoration of passenger rail, traditional neighborhood development, and everything else that is essential to sustainability.

Frankly, global warming has never passed the "smell test" for many technically-oriented people. As those old lines of Fortran get broken down by bloggers, expect to see some impressive analyses from some elite "knuckleheads" who just happen to know something about science, math, and statistics.

Now here we are, with "movers and shakers" jetting into Denmark burning more carbon than entire countries and dismissing reasonable questioners as "deniers" and, even worse, "non-elites." If global warming as advanced by this particular group proves to be a fraud, we can forget any rational discussion of our energy future, alternative modes of transportation, and a stop to urban sprawl until the gas fuel hits "empty" in front of the bone-dry fuel pump.

Our "hope and change" administration put more money, $50 billion, into the GM death star, than the sum total of over 250 applications submitted to the USDOT for high speed rail. And here we are, coming up on the first anniversary of this administration, and Amtrak has yet to place orders even for replacement cars in its fleet. Oh, and that federal transportation funding bill that expired on October 1st. They'll get around to it in 18 months or so.

Our infrastructure that will be needed to support intra and intercity bus routes as well as essential services is crumbling, from roadways to bridges to water treatment and wastewater treatment facilities. Our energy distribution system is ancient, our natural gas pipelines are graying, cities and states are facing bankruptcy, and DC is clueness.

When I read the first of the three JHK books on my bookshelf I remember hoping he was not a prophet. Hope is running low.

trav777, you have my sympathies. You really do. You seem approximately smart and display a lot of interest in the topic but you've been tooled, and that is really sad. It's sad because nobody has time to undo the damage, so there you remain at the end of the day -- damaged. No way out for you, is there?

About half the time I come to this site and read the comments and come away appalled and unnerved. JHK has it right; we're a nation of yeast people and morons. Didn't have to be that way, doesn't need to stay that way, but by my lights I cannot see how to change it.

I guess trav is right in the end; the earth won't miss us.

But _I'll_ miss us. I really will. By God I will.


JHK:"Pretty soon, the folks doing "God's work" at Goldman Sachs (and their tribal kin on Wall Street)..."

Careful there Mr Kunstler, as some might seek to construe that there as an 'anti-Semitic' statement.

The last think you need is Grand Rabbi Foxman breathing down your neck, believe you me.

"How long can "they" do it?"

The 64 quadrillion "dollar" question.

DFT: "global warming has never passed the "smell test" for many technically-oriented people."

Look up "Dunning-Kruger Effect" at wikipedia. Here, I'll give you the URL:

Read that and know that you are blown. Toasted. Pwned. Real common actually with all the self-proclaimed technical types running around with their hair on fire. Just get another hobby and you'll be fine.

The rest of your post was pretty much right on.

But on AGW, you are blown. Get over it.


Agriburbia: You are behind on your reading. Goldman themselves proclaimed that they were literally going God's work. The financial blogs have been using that in any and all Goldman commentary for weeks.

See, you just can't make this stuff up anymore.


It doesn't even really matter if 'global warming' or 'climate change' is occurring EXACTLY as the official climate scientists say it is because ALL people with plain common sense can agree that the constant spewing of massive and unknown amounts of unnatural and toxic fumes in to our air every year, every month, every week, every day, every hour, every minute, every second, and every millisecond is not a good thing for our Earth's environment in any way, shape, or form.

That fact being established, we must now begin to take the necessary steps ASAP to reduce these obviously harmful mass-emissions caused by the wanton burning of huge amounts of fossil fuels.

cougar - I know all about the "doing God's work" absurdity which was proclaimed by GS CEO Blankfein; I read about it when it happened.

You are the one who missed the allusions in my comment.

"When you cannot frame the debate on valid scientific grounds, why should anybody listen to your position?"

Agreed; AGW is like observing an automobile moving down the highway and noticing that there are gases coming out of the tailpipe, taking measurments of their volume, pressure and tempurature and then building a model that purports to demonstrate this is what is moving the vehicle down the highway.

The main reason why the US is in Afghanistan is because the US is the world's biggest importer of heroin, and Afghanistan was the world's biggest exporter of heroin, until the Taliban got in and closed the whole thing down in 2001. So the Taliban had to go, and the industry started up again, and is now producing more heroin than ever.

New York Times: Is Afghanistan a narco-state?

The hoopla is now on the email scandal to take away focus on what the elites jetting into Copenhagen plan to do.

As James Hansen points out, cap and trade will not solve any climate problems. But that is what they are planning.

The plan is to reinvigorate the financial markets by introducing a new item to gamble on.

Europe has had cap and trade for a while, and carbon emissions have gone up, not down.

This is a farce and a travesty.

On Af-stan:

Maybe the best way to look at all these seeming non-connected things is as moves in an end-game.

The way I see it, technical civilization as we know it is cooked. Stick a fork in it. This because we grew like Topsy on 100 years of free energy (free because it came with no strings attached) and that energy source is about tapped out.

And just as we near the end of massive growth ... oops we need to turn on a dime and then massively grow in a sustainable way. But me-oh-my we're tapped out! what to do what to do...

I tell you what you do. You take over the entire world.

Who ever owns the world gets all the cookies. Fewer cookies than a score years ago, sure. But still a lot of cookie if you have all of them. With all the cookies in the world you turn your little corner of the world around and pull a little rabbit out of the hat. And those other losers and go back to pounding rocks together.

And you don't have to kill a bunch of people to take over the world. Certainly not if you are the world's last superpower. You just sort of take what you want quietly and with a lot of hand-waving and apologies. But you take it all the same.

Now, it's an end-game, see. You don't have to keep the occupations going for very long ... just until the end. After that your problems take care of themselves. And after-the-end looks a lot like just-before-the-end except that the overall acceptance of your end-game strategy just went parabolic upwards. That is to say, which ever superpower leader was at the helm when they took over the world is set forever. No chance of anyone saying "hey wait a sec you just took over the entire world you Fascist donkey!" because -- hey -- we'll be too busy enjoying it ... and those other losers will be back to pounding rocks together.

That's the lesson of history, people. The winners write the history books and it is ALWAYS a good thing, in the end.

I'm not advocating it, I'm justing calling it. I'm part Comanche and the Comanche nation and others got hit with it hard. You could say the American experience was the start of the end-game strategy.


JHK notes that a turning point may occur when Goldman Sachs and their Wall Street cohorts announce their 2009 bonuses. I say, let's get JHK's warning on the radar screen. It's only a few weeks from now so we won't have to wait long. I think it's likely a foregone conclusion that GS and associates will continue to reward themselves richly for all their heavy lifting. The big question is, what will the American public say, or do? What will Obama say? My guess? The public will say nothing and do nothing. Why? Because doing anything else is tacit recognition that the honeymoon is over. The great SUV, McMansion and Disney World reverie is over. They simply will not want to bring themselves to that. JHK speaks of the allure of prior investment, where people keep pouring treasure into futile projects because they can't accept that their prior investment was wasted. This is certainly true and can be seen every day. But it is also true for psychic investment too. People have invested in a mindset that has no future. But by accepting that truth they will effectively deconstruct themselves. The organism simply cannot take that level of catharsis. So they reject reality and stick with their reverie until reality swamps them.

So let's watch and see how Goldman Sachs plays this. It will tell us all a whole lot, methinks.

"When you cannot frame the debate on valid scientific grounds, why should anybody listen to your position?"

Um ... IPCC report? um ... Four of them?

Oh yeah sorry -- what's wrong with me -- that wasn't a debate. It was a massive compendium of scientific fucking findings for fuck sake. But no findings for you, no sirrah! Just debates! No, better still shouting! I LIKE TO SHOUT!! Bring the shouting Sparky cuz we're all wasted crackheads and cannot be bothered with dry scientific fucking findings for fucks sake. No that would require five hours of reading for comprehension. Comprehension is for geeks.

Debates!!1! I am a MaN! DEBATES ME Y0u fagot scitist know-everything fagots. you Frenhc.



I wouldn't discount the value of opium.

What you lose in price per unit, you can make up in volume.

I do agree that the US is not in Afghanistan just for the opium.

The pipeline is a BIG deal. Anyone who understands peak oil should know that the control of the remaining supply is something that they will kill millions over.

And the ability to have military bases in Russia's back yard?


On Af-stan, I'm surprised of all the theories based on oil, Israel, Iran, Iraq, etc.

Could be simpler than that: Obama wants to be re-elected and needs swing voters in places like Tennessee who have too much testosterone and now might vote because we are in the middle of a war, Obama is out-Bushing Bush in going after Al-Qaeda, and those Tennessee militarists, who are politically centrists, wouldn't want to change horses in the middle of the stream when the war is going well.

Obama is proving his commander-in-chief credibility. He has already sent more troops to Af-stan in one year than Bush did in six years, and Af-stan is where Al-Qaeda was training, not Iraq. And Obama always has Pakistan in reserve if he wants to widen the conflict and take control of the nukes there.

When the stakes are high, and the incumbent is sufficiently militarist, patriot swing voter independents in middle America won't vote for a change of commander-in-chief in 2012.

In other words, Obama is sending kids to Af-stan for domestic political purposes... and it will work.

I have to wonder how morons such as FeFe (which, by the way, means urine in Korean), can "rah rah" his/her/its dog in this GW/AGW fight without seeming to have the slightest understanding of what it would mean if he/she/it were right? I.E.: a global conspiracy of the science community to enslave the rest of the world. Do you get that Fefe? The world would have turned out to be Goldman-Sacks-like corrupt times 100! As it is, the world is about to fall under the theivery perpetrated by a few brain-damaged egomaniacs that walk through the doors at 85 Broad each day. We're really fucked if you turn out to right; there's no use in spending your time arguing, cause there will be little time left in a free world. Have a drink and go get laid while you still can.

"Last week's Archdruid post, Hagbard's Law, was especially good. Greer starts with the law, observed by Robert Anton Wilson, that "information can only be communicated between equals, since in a hierarchy, those in inferior positions face very strong incentives to tell their superiors what the superiors want to hear." Then he moves on to climate change, where "well funded groups on both sides are using dubious science to advance their own agendas and push the debate further toward the extremes." And both ideologies, for different reasons, are ignoring paleoclimatology, which shows that Earth's climate is extremely unstable. Finally, he wonders why peak oil is so much less popular than climate change, and guesses that it's because climate change is about human power, and peak oil is about human weakness."

This sounds a lot like what you {both} are saying.

The real problem is over population. Too many people for too few resources. There were about 1 billion people on earth in 1860 when oil became a useable energy resource. By 1900 it was still about that same number.
Now we have 6.7 billion people. When "cheap" oil goes away those extra 5.2 billion people wont live. But it will take 50 or 60 years for the die off. By then the Boomers will be dead anyway and the cultures will have changed to "Made by Hand".

Those billions are the same people who are depopulating the forests and spewing carbon into the air. I dont agree with the GW algore knuckleheads, but I do think over population is the problem. Read about the Kalibab plateau in Arizona and the deer population to see what is ahead.

I see where Goldman Sachs executives are arming themselves in fear of a prolitarian mob. And I always thought they lived in gated communities with guards who had guns. These guys cant be too smart if they think a hand gun will stop a mob. Seriously, JHK, you need to send them the book by the Argentine guy. Great book, I learned so much just reading the excerps I am trying to find a copy!

I read that essay and was quite surprised to find out Greer is so willing to make those statements. A bunch of his regulars corrected him, saving me the trouble. I wouldn't be quoting him as an expert on climate change. Skeptical Science presents a very nuanced catalog of refutations (with bibliographies of peer-reviewed pubs) of denialist hogwash.

Diet for a small footprint and a small grocery bill.

Cowabunga!!! JHK comes across once again.
Years ago, when involved in a revitalization organization in San Diego County, "The Geography of Nowhere" & "Home From Nowhere" were must read books for our membership.
JHK just gets better with the years.

The Earth has been cooling for at least a decade. These people are just doing the bidding of their evil Masters-dogs currying for favors and treats. The Masters want to contract the economy drasticaly-probably because they know what JHK knows-that the situation is unsustainable. But they also have an agenda-staying on top while it contracts. And to do that, fast is good, catastrophic is better. According to the Standing Stones they put up (Georgia Guidestones), they want the world population at no more than 500 million. And knowing their agenda and capacity for ruthlessness, I advise people to get real paranoid. Only the paranoid are going to make it in the coming world.

RAW thought that naked women were god. I don't agree, but I know what he means. The Universe is hierarchically strucutred, and true cultures are built on this model. In its denial of this most fundamental fact, Liberalism becomes the sum of all errors.

Hill and BO are looking to sign us onto the the UN small arms treaty. An end run around the Constitution. Get ready to bury em. There's better ways to go than dying in bed. Maybe you'll get your own statue someday. The pigeons will remember you then even if no one else does.

james, great post. I agree with much of what you said. This is what I believe. We have 3 economies: 1) the financial-investment banking economy, which has been backstopped with $13T of Fed and Treasury cash supplied by the taxpayers; 2) the War Profiteers and HLS economy, which has been supplied by the taxpayer via 1/3 of the US budget. These war profiteers cannot make their profits in the private sector marketplace. They have to earn it in the government-socialistic-system making products that go puff in the night; 3) the real manufacturing-service economy, which has been neglected purposefully in favor of the other two economic pieces of our economy,

I’m astonished that JHK is indifferent to scientists spinning research results so they can push a political, rather than an empirical, agenda. That scientists would willingly burry strong evidence that contradicts a group think POV is disturbing and not science. Furthermore, for JHK to write that this behavior has no bearing on our ‘understanding’ of what carbon dioxide does in the atmosphere is amazingly short sighted, if not plain stupid.

Yes Jimbo – real facts produced by honest researchers matters. It impacts our understanding of how the world works. This is especially true when you’re researching a system as complex as the Earth’s climate and atmosphere. Our understanding, based on real facts, is proportionate to our ability to predict outcomes.

*Just like our understanding geologic science tells us that there is a finite amount of light sweet crude oil in the ground. This scientific reality, matched with our understanding of the importance of petrochemical inputs to the functioning of modern industrial societies, is what enables us to roughly predict the net effects of a shrinking oil production profile.

What is more comical still is that many doomers tend to assume that global warming is occurring in tandem with peak oil, without much of a grounding in climatology (*aside from owning a copy of An Inconvenient Truth on DVD).

Shouldn’t a rapidly decreasing oil production profile dramatically reduce carbon emissions at the same time? I’ve read the repeated rant on this blog that the motor utopia is heading for an abrupt end in the very near future. Won’t that address our co2 emission problem?

It’s sad that you doomers can’t get past the end of the world scenarios – always there is no hope and no one in power is paying attention. Anything the press focuses on aside from the coming peak oil collapse of society is a stupid diversion.

I hate to contradict such a clean position – but if there is anyone out there that does not adhere to the notion that we are on the eve of the apocalypse (*I suspect that a few of your don’t want to live in a world that looks a lot like Cormac McCarthy’s The Road) – I encourage your to check out the work Matt Simmons has done on liquid ammonia.

A little background on liquid ammonia:

Cars can run on it with minor modification, it can be produced by windmills in the Ocean from sea water (*sea water is pretty much limitless), and the production of liquid ammonia can generate electricity and clean water as byproducts. The state of Maine has a couple of test production windmills placed offshore RIGHT NOW.

Take a look and let me know if you think maybe, just maybe, we might actually engineer ourselves out of this Peak Oil mess. Here’s an interview with Matt that you can download on the subject. ( or check out this series of articles on the work being done to ramp up liquid ammonia production in Maine:

Btw, Simmons has been calling the alarm on Peak oil for years, so he’s no pollyanna on energy. His book Twilight in the Desert is an excellent piece of investigative journalism on Peak Oil and how Saudi Arabia’s peaking of oil production is synonymous with global Peak Oil.

Liquid ammonia may be bad news to all you doomers out there, but fear not. No one stopped the Unabomber from setting up a self-sustaining community of 1 in the Montana wilds (sans running water or electricity of course). So there is nothing stopping you doomers from setting out for a nice piece of land in the middle of nowhere so you can be free of the oil economy. However, you’ll have to give up your Internet connection and will have to restrict your end of the world scenarios to your immediate family. Sorry….

Ammonia is very attractive as an energy carrier for its high energy density and potential of being a ‘zero-carbon'' fuel.

Hello, Nudge, "high energy density"... ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.

Liquid ammonia is toxic, and because of the very high vapor pressure of liquid ammonia (∼8 bar at room temperature), there are safety concerns about storing liquid ammonia for end-user applications.

Amminex has developed a method to store ammonia safely as solid metal ammines. The Amminex product, Hydrammine™, is a non-pressurized storage material, and has an energy density similar to that of liquid ammonia (∼110 kg H2/m3).

Hydrammine™ enables safe use of ammonia as an energy carrier for end-user applications. Amminex has been active in integrating the solid ammonia storage technology with PEMFC and SOFC stacks.

Instead of liquid ammonia, focus on the potential of ‘solid'' ammonia as a carbon-free energy carrier for mobile and transport applications, system integration (PEMFC and SOFC), and future opportunities.

Tituspullo8780, I don't want to leave the impression that liquid ammonia is useless!

On-board hydrogen storage and production via ammonia electrolysis could result from an ammonia electrolytic cell (AEC) and a breathable proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC).

Hydrogen-dense liquid ammonia stored at ambient temperature and pressure is an excellent source for hydrogen storage. This hydrogen is released from ammonia through electrolysis, which theoretically consumes 95% less energy than water electrolysis; 1.55Whg−1 H2 is required for ammonia electrolysis and 33Whg−1 H2 for water electrolysis.

An ammonia electrolytic cell (AEC), comprised of carbon fiber paper (CFP) electrodes supported by Ti foil and deposited with Pt–Ir, could electrolyze an alkaline ammonia solution.

In terms of electric energy, when hydrogen from the cathode compartment of the AEC is fed to a polymer exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) input to the AEC is less than the output from the PEMFC, yielding net electrical energies as high as 9.7±1.1Whg−1 H2 while maintaining H2 production equivalent to consumption.

And Greer is deeeply psychologically invested in his long descent.
He throws people off of his website if they: mention climate tipping points and abrupt, non-linear changes in global climate (as has happened) and who mention the fact that our situation today is unprecedented and simply plays his "youve-got-an-apocalyptic-personality" card like the one trick pony that he is, a card he beats people over the head with on a regular basis.

He gets very upset if you mention the ideas that James Lovelock has been voicing over the past 4 years - because he, Greer, knows more about climate than Lovelock, and I guess, by extension, James Hansen.

Greer has an ego the size of a locomotive and one big axe to grind. He has a mean streak and his devotees are so obsquious that they begin all their posts with hymns and genuflections to their master, something Greer demands of any and all devotees.

Funny he is quoting from Illuminatus! Robert Anton Wilson loathed Bush, while Greer throws off of his website anyone who tells the truth about Bush and the elite he fronts for.

for once a REAL post!
see ' seeds of terror' [book] and

and econ 101,,,even servants /armed guards must be fed and get home..what happens in collapse ..well history will repeat itself!

welcome to the world of 'green bigots' southna

' would never have guessed that the total collapse of industrial society could have been m postponed for as long as it has.'

Clearly theres $ to be made in it? right?
even the soviet union lasted 70 years!

and the comments someone made about sardines are hysterical..once i read a JohnBirch report in the 80s that said fidel had 2 things to give the soldiers and sardines..hehhahahhahah

and HAPPY PEARL HARBOR DAY to all...the reports from denmark are:
the danes are the most garbage heavy civilization and the most way more meat than even americans
and for the cynics AM radio reprorts 'lots of limos and hookers descending on copenhagen'

'has no bearing on our ‘understanding’ of what carbon dioxide does in the atmosphere is amazingly short sighted, if not plain stupid.'

welcome to green bigotry

Sorry to interject in the midst of what appears to be a technical conversation about alternative fuels, but has anyone ever heard of a guy named Michael Ruppert? I just came across a trailer on a documentary about him slated for release soon.

The documentary is called Collapse. It looks interesting.

Another interesting clip on hydrocarbon inputs for food production/transportation from Collapse.

Hey, f-f-feefee. You're on your 5th account, now, after getting banned from this site four times. This is a subtle clue that you should f-f-fuck off, you f-f-fucking f-f-fucktard.

Michael Ruppert used to run the From The Wilderness website, which carried a lot of good Peak Oil material back before this was a very popular topic. The best article I read on there was about the dependence of agriculture on fossil fuels. He also wrote a 9-11 book, which I read but wasn't completely taken by. He thinks Dick Cheney did it by manipulating all the war games taking place that day. A bit far-fetched.

Ruppert has also written a lot of material on the powers that be and has a great presentation about the revolving door between Wall Street and government, specifically the CIA. Maybe you can find it on youtube.

One blade of grass could power a whole city for years if we just knew how to access its power. Just think what mushrooms could do. Or pine cones. What makes grass green or anything for that "matter".

Anyway, just three more years to go till the End. This civilization sucks so bad it will be welcome. The End will provide meaning as in Jim Morrison's song, This is the End, beautiful friend...12/22/12. 4 twos and 2 ones. 8, the number of bits in a byte. 2, the basic binary of the bit. Ask 8 yes/no questions and you can find out anything if you ask the right ones.

The sky will roll up like a scroll. There will a thunderous clap of thunder and a great boom of laughter. The TV's will go blank and the electric lights will fade rapidly away. The sheep look up. A new kind of light is coming down. Everyone is becoming transparent, inside out. Everyone can see what everone is thinking and feeling. Not too comfortable is it? A difficult phase for sure. Almost like hell. Better get clean now. No one ever said that the End was going to be all fun and games. Meaning never is.

JHK is generally spot on regarding his reportage; but in the end it is a chronicle, day by day, month by month, and finally, year by year of our decent into hell. It has been clear for some time now that things are not going to change; so, I'll just stay where I am and do what I do, content (happy) with my few possessions and a carbon foot print of just a wee bit more than zero. No heating in winter, no cooling in summer and a wonderful bicycle that gets me around day by day.

Yeah, people in North Dakota seem to think that the Bakken Formation is going to bring us to perpetual prosperity. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the generated wealth leaves the state, what little remains provides mostly grimy oilfield jobs, most of which provided by ex-convicts or losers who couldn't get better work in a warmer climate. Almost all the oil leaves the state (there is only one small refinery in Mandan), and we have chronic diesel fuel shortages every year during harvest. So, the Bakken does us little good.

cougar...dude, you're not qualified to patronize me.

If you want to make a SUBSTANTIVE refutation of anything that I have said, please feel free to do so, otherwise STFU and let the adults speak.

I was not "tooled" by reading Science. Do you even know what that publication is? There are a variety of peer-reviewed climate studies research papers in that publication on a regular basis, examing solar intensity variance, surface albedo changes WRT aerosol contamination, and a variety of other significant factors.

I agree with you on one point, YOU are a nation of idiots. When you graduate beyond press releases from politically interested committees funded by a fat hasbeen oligarch politician, please get back to me.

You are bound by the same faiths as you accuse others of. I cannot even get my head around how stupid everybody is these days, how dissent on either side gets met with derision. Why? Because you and they are IGNORANT. You accept whatever data fits your selection bias in order to feed your hidden pet fetishes.

Nobody is amenable to rethinking their positions based upon FACT anymore. It's all opinion and spin and picking a team. We are fucking doomed not because of what the AGW deniers "think," but because of the phenomenon evinced by the PRO-AGW crowd. No dissent is tolerated, everything is personal. Everyone has an angle, an agenda, some kind of personal or pecuniary skin in the game.

There are huge business interests set up to MASSIVELY profit off of climate trading; Lakshmi Mittal just netted $1B off of his company's carbon credits. And neo-Luddites like JHK are willing to overlook the inconsistencies, ignore the evidence, play 3 monkeys with the money changing hands all because it is the ENDS that matter and the means are irrelevant.

THIS is what is wrong. The ENDS do NOT JUSTIFY THE MEANS. Truth is truth and fact is fact. If the data does not fit what you would like it to, you DO NOT FUDGE THE FREAKING DATA in order to DIRECT a conclusion! You leave your hypothesis open and ask for others to try to help in the analysis.

Gresham's Law is in full operation, here and elsewhere. Your opinions are counterfeit, your thoughts are ersatz, your beliefs are phony, but you cling to them like a life ring.

Peak oil and the end of Growth is a scary thought; but LIFE GOES ON. There is more to life than growth or worry or the not-so-hidden derision that JHK has for mouthbreathing cretins who get to enjoy high consumption rates that HE doesn't believe they "deserve."

This place really is Planet of the Apes...

Thanks Asoka. The larger point I was making with Liquid Ammonia research and the project in Maine as an example, is that there are mitigation options and alternatives on the table now. We need to support them where we can, and we need to try and wake up our respective governments into positive action (*this is a global problem if there ever was one).

To paraphrase Kenneth Deffeyes, I’m not worried about where society will end up in 15 years – it’s the next 5 years that terrify me.

I agree with that sentiment.

I also believe that we likely have already passed peak and much of the economic dislocation that we are seeing in the headlines is an indirect result. Getting alternatives online as quickly as possible is critical – not because I love Walmart, but because those alternatives are key to the continued functioning of modern civilization.

For those of us aware of Peak Oil - our collective time would be better spent supporting whatever mitigation option or alternative energy we believe might help us out of this mess rather than ranting about the end of the world. Or at least try to get your family somewhere that will whether the impact of Peak better than the US.

As a side note – it’s pretty obvious that big swaths of the investment community have come around to believing that there is a serious supply issue in light sweet crude and are betting accordingly. Richard Rainwater has openly talked about Peak Oil to the press, not to mention T.Boone Pickens. There are numerous hedge fund managers that are looking at this and trying to play the primary, secondary and tertiary effects for all they are worth. I myself have been investing with Peak Oil top of mind and have made pretty decent money. I can also see that these trades are getting pretty crowded again.

Lastly, if the investment guys know what’s up with Peak Oil, then it’s a good bet that every pol from the President down through the congress is well aware of the problem. Likely, they see no political juice in trying to address it.

So again, if you so hate industrial society that you get some emotional gratification from fantasizing about the apocalypse, then by all means, piss off and move to the jungle. There is still some left in South America and Africa. Otherwise, try doing something constructive with your time.

Keith sez:
"Talk about the sky falling all we wish, it won't matter to a knucklehead until he/she gets hit on the head with a big chunk of blue.

The truth is out there and has been for years now. History is proving that people won't look for or accept inconvenient truths until they have suffered personal negative consequences. This is a truth that playing out right now.

Climate change is an inconvenient truth but it pales next to the inconvenient truth of resource depletion and it's inevitable consequences. "

Thanks for this Keith. I feel that [unfortunately], you're absolutely correct. Now it seems we're mostly the home of delusional chicken-hearted fools.
To add another "little" horrid truth, just look at what we've wrought with our petro-chemical wizardry. "Millions in US drink dirty water" (NYT) Now, I'm not talkin' yer plain ol' bacterial infestation (solely); plenty of cleaning fluid and radioactive isotopes have been "re-introduced" to the tap water from the "treatment" facilities. Ahhhh, the sins of the fathers, and all that. Got any thoughts about the firestorm of cancers going on? Think that's due to just "better and more reporting"?
I won't entertain that much it's-all-good thinking any more. Too many in my very immediate surroundings are being cut down by the BIG C.

So, one can immerse oneself in this climate change non-argument, OR.....

Yes, Gresham's Law has a wide applicability. Bad anything drives out good-if people can't see what's good. And they can't. They're just not smart enough. The average IQ of 100 is scarcely capable of maintaining a technical civilization. It could never have founded one-that comes from smarter people. And now that America's collective IQ is falling due to the new people, there really is little hope.

Given all this, Democracy so called, has no viability. It just becomes first the rule of the mob or planet of the apes, and then the rule of the stronmen or keepers of the apes. Zoo Masters. You are argueing for Aristocracy if you just apply the results of Gresham's Law to political systems. After all, the skill set needed to claw to the top is not the skill set needed to govern. And even if a just man makes it, he will just be toppled by the next climber. No, better to have a stable class who rules, with some social mobility of course for the worthy.

Ned Ludd or King Ludd, was a good man. He tried to save his People, the Weavers, from becoming slaves in the mills of Manchester and Liverpool. The Luddites simply said "Teach us to use the machines. Rent them to us and we will do the work as we always have." Nothing doing. The leaders were executed and the People did become slaves. As Blake said, "Naked in Albion, At the mill with the slaves." Ned Ludd died for his people. Nothing was allowed to get in the way of England conquering the world-for what? Ned Ludd lost but he was right. And Enland conquered the world only to lose its own soul. Get off at Heathrow Airport now and you wont see one White English face. It would have been better to stay home with Ned and Gandhi and spin wool by hand. The Third World invasion may be our karma, but let no one be stupid enough to call it brotherhood. As Enoch Powell said, it will end in blood.

Black Gold or Texas Tea? One get you mellow and you get you high. As the Germans says, he who chooses has trouble. But why choose if we don't have to. Barack Obama should take a tip from Tiger and diversify. Say no to no nukes and yes to know nukes. There may be a uranium shortage but surely we can use something else. And the waste? Just shoot it into the sun to keep it flaming bright. There's been a record deficit in sun spots lately. The sun need us.

This was a very good post this week by JHK.

I think one of the main reasons that nothing reasonable gets done is the same bunch of corrupt bureaucrats run things regardless of which party is in power in Congress or the White House, free traders, globalists, banksters, war mongers. It's the same bunch of political hacks, it doesn't make much difference who gets elected, and they spend most of their time arguing about abortion or gay marriage. These are minor issues compared to the economic and social problems the country faces.

"And now that America's collective IQ is falling due to the new people"

Spoken like a true COJONES GAZER.

Well said. Too much faith instead of science in what is perceived to be a "good cause."

Pro-AGW forces blather on about peer-reviewed science when it's becoming apparent that core portions are peer-manipulated.

Here's hoping we get good at smaller and less. Some of our woes are simple immaturity, and maybe there's time to grow into the new system. Our overuse of the planet has a parallel in learning to play music in a band. At first, you're satisfied with just hitting the notes. Then you get better, and most people overplay everything and the band sounds like crap. Then you figure out that restraint makes better music. This matters if anyone's still around to hear it.

I have two questions. If climatologists know how Earth's climate works then they should be able to answer this: Earth has had periods of glaciation and glacial recession over the past two million years. What is the next expected onset of glaciation?

The next question is this: If man made climate change is as big a force as a lot of people say it is then how will global warming affect the next expected glaciation? Will it slow the onset? Will it stop the onset altogether?

The reason I'm asking is that the ice ages and their end were the big kahunas of climate change. If climatologists know their stuff they should be able to answer these basic questions about climate change. Is there anyone out there that knows the answers? Thanks.

Those who deny global warming believe that humans cannot affect the planet's climate. It has been proven that we can and do in numerous scientific reports. Of course, there are natural climate cycles, but we are having an obvious and measurable effect on C02 levels and this exacerbates the consequent greenhouse effect. It is a well known and simple effect. What is so hard to understand about this? You want to believe that humans are somehow special and above ecology. As they say, "Mother nature bats last." Just because you deny a problem doesn't mean it goes away.


The effects of global warming could be counter-intuitive, and I don't think anyone knows exactly how the earth's climate works at a high level of detail. The butterfly effect means that small changes can have large effects later, so this is difficult to predict and hard to model.

For instance, if the "conveyor belt" pushing warm water past Great Britain was shutdown, this area would become a lot colder. This could happen if the global temperature was raised significantly.

Global warming just means a rise in average temperature. It doesn't necessarily mean that everyplace gets warmer.

A simplified explanation of the arguments for and against CO2 warming. More science and less sarcasm than "Professor Bob".

Anyone ever read "Overshoot" by Catton? Fantastic and (IMHO) terrifying book.

Overshoot and die off is what other species do by default when in a constrained ecosystem. Humans are no different, and with overpopulation and the proliferation of technology, we have made this eventual fate even more likely.

No one is to blame. It is just how living things operate.


The science seems clear to me. Visible light can pass through the atmosphere. When it is reflected back into space, it is emitted as ultraviolet. These rays are then absorbed by greenhouse gases such as C02, thus adding to the heat energy of the atmosphere and raising the temperature. Of course, there are a lot of other things that effect the climate including the state of the sun and the axial orientation of the earth, but the effect from this particular mechanism is quite clear.

People who deny that global warming is occurring are basically atavistic and believe that the earth is a static system, which it isn't. It is one massive ecology that can be affected negatively by the organisms within it. This goes for global warming as well as other types of pollution.

Ten of the hottest summers on record by average temperature were recorded within the last 20 years. Doesn't this data say something? If it doesn't tell you something, then you're not listening.

"No one is to blame. It is just how living things operate."
Good point, and reinforces a point I've been making here for some time, it's not about morality, The Earth doesn't care about anyone's morality, what happens happens.

This whole argument about CO2 Warming and Manmade impacts also reminds me of the complexity of similar problems (including PO, Overshoot etc.) and why predicting them is so fraught with danger.

I believe in the argument advanced in my earlier post for Man influenced GW, which is the consensus view of science. It would not shock me however, to find out they have made some critical errors, it wouldn't be the first time.

From what I have seen of the data it seems likely that efforts to make meaningful curbs in CO2 emmissions will be extremely difficult and long term. I think it might be more productive to expend more effort on how we will adjust, since much more warming seems to be in the cards no matter what we do.

People who deny that global warming is occurring are basically atavistic and believe that the earth is a static system, which it isn't.
I doubt that deniers give that much thought to science at all. For many in the so-called conservative movement, science is little better than demonology. After all, if you are willing to believe that the earth is 7,000 years old, with so much evidence to the contrary, then disbelieving in GW is not difficult at all.

The other reason for denial is simply selfishness, many people want to keep driving the big cars and ski boats etc., and don't want to feel bad about doing so.

I saw one conservative bumper sticker a while back which was at least honest about this type of selfishness, it said; "No oil for pacifists"

"I believe in the argument advanced in my earlier post for Man influenced GW, which is the consensus view of science."

How would you account for the fact that
co2 levels rose 4% in the past ten years yet temperatures went down?

"People who deny that global warming is occurring are basically atavistic and believe that the earth is a static system, which it isn't."

What a laugh! Stasis would indicate warm or a bit warmer. Those who disagree with man made theory say it gets cold then hot (then cold again). Always has. Always will. BEFORE man, DURING man, and possibly AFTER man. That is as far from stasis as one can get. (MORON.)


To my knowledge, no one has claimed that CO2 level in the atmosphere is perfectly correlated with global average temperature. CO2 levels can strongly influence the temperature trends, but this is one effect among many. Other natural effects influence the climate like natural global climate cycles, the axial orientation of the earth, etc.

To: Vlad Krandz


Hope you used your time in purgatory to do something useful ... like move to Montana.


I couldn't understand your last post. Sorry.

Yeah, not a moron, at least not compared to you.

"Ten of the hottest summers on record by average temperature were recorded within the last 20 years. Doesn't this data say something?"

Are you asking in terms of the geologic record? If so it tells me nothing. Nothing.

What is it with these losers who get banned and keep coming back here on different accounts? It reminds me of a dog that comes back to lick up its own vomit.

You might be interested then in reading Foucault's analysis of knowledge and power interlocked in a grid so fine it looks like microscopic mesh. Each one feeds the other. Each depends on the other for its existence.

Asoka, the world's greatest authority ... even on chemistry. SEB would be impressed. Why don't you take all that knowledge and get a job and stop being a burden on society.

'There are huge business interests set up to MASSIVELY profit off of climate trading; Lakshmi Mittal just netted $1B off of his company's carbon credits. is the ENDS that matter and the means are irrelevant'

Js vladik was banned for his ' racism' but he said ' greens the new red'...or green is the new green..the rich get richer and the poor listen to limbaugh!

yes.. a friend saw it and called me...he predicts TOTAL collapse in 1 to 2 years?

when ya get banned this time reincarnate as....i dunno
green power or ' daisy' or 'freefree'

geo records..what are we phd candidates?
lets talk the next 10 years based on the last 10 that possible?????????????????????

Titus forgot to mention (in the interest of full disclosure) that he owns 40,000 shrs of the only pure play in liquid ammonia.

Recently, anyone driving a Government Motors pickup has become a certified climate scientist, able to easily refute thousands of pages of thorough scientific documents in a single internet post.

'"People who deny that global warming'
are suspicious of the media and the left id guess.

are you shittin me?

That the hottest recorded summer temperatures in specific localities occurred in the last 20 years tells you "absolutely nothing".

Then you're scientifically deaf.

Something tells me that if the coldest winters on record all occurred in the last 10 years, the global warming deniers would be all over it.

Is it possible that TRAV777 could be Johnny Rico reincarnated?


Pass the bong, dude.

' things are not going to change; so, I'll just stay where '

by THINGS YOU MEAN GOVT? and the masses of 'consumers' wondering about tiger? yet unable to pay their bills?

"What is it with these losers who get banned and keep coming back here on different accounts?"

What's with this Nancy-Boy that keeps running to his mommy crying. Billy hit me? It reminds me of a dog that keeps returning to his vomit, licks it up. takes a shit, vomits, licks it up....

Okay which is funnier (or more embarassing)?

Barak Obama going to Oslo after the do nothing climate conference to accept the Nobel Peace Prize or the Nobel Committee giving this guy the same prize awarded to the likes of Albert Schweitzer and Martin Luther King.

If the Nobel commitee had any moxie they would laugh the guy off the stage when he gives his acceptance lecture.

Sigh...nobody has suggeste that man cannot affect the climate.

JFC, did I NOT JUST SAY that if you do not know what aerosol contamination leading to net cooling plus rainfall pattern disruption MEANS, then you are NOT QUALIFIED TO HAVE AN OPINION on this topic?

CO2 is a MINOR greenhouse gas. Just because it "SEEMS" to you of very limited intellect that this mechanism of warming is "easy to understand" DOES NOT MAKE IT SO.

No, you CANNOT take the "last 10 years" and infer ANYTHING. That is a "Texas Sharpshooter" data selection method which INEVITABLY directs a conclusion! Mean solar surface intensity is DECREASING! I was very CLEAR about that. This is why pan evaporation rates have fallen by 30% over 50 years!

JFC, I need to give a remedial statistics course to nearly every one of the AGW cult. Aircraft contrails are a SIGNIFICANT affector of mean surface temperature, especially at night! This has literally ZERO to do with CO2. It may very well be that CO2 emissions are a TINY factor in GW and that other issues such as cow methane, volcanic activity, solar intensity variance, passenger air-miles, etc., SWAMP CO2 by orders of magnitude (they do). JFC, Pinatubo altered the climate FAR MORE substantially than even the WORST "assumptions" the AGW cult passed off as fact!

Fine, join in the mantra behind Al Bore, ignore those vastly more intelligent than you, whatever...screw us all trying to get the fatasses out of their SUVs...make Bore another $100M, Mittal another $1B and Goldman "Climate Exchange" Sachs another fifty kabillion...all for the means to the end. This AGW hysteria is a thin veil to actualize misanthropy, the same as the warhawks with their endless "terrorist threats" and other BS.

I JOIN with anybody who wants to determine the REALITY of manmade climate change, be it pollution or emissions or the fucking DECREASE OF FORESTLAND leading to desertification leading to INCREASED SURFACE ALBEDO (again NOT CO2). But...instead, I am arguing with people who cannot SPELL "albedo" much less understand what it means.

This is why we are doomed. At what point did a nation full of AVERAGE intellects begin believing that they were brilliant???


I couldn't understand your last post. Sorry."

That is because you are a MORON. (Sorry.)


Unfortunately for you, I have better things to do than continue this "conversation". You're going to have to find some other "friends" on here. Bye, now.


Back on what, your seventh account now, stinkEye. You must really like it here.

"Unfortunately for you, I have better things to do.."

Terribly, terribly unfortunate. But when you got to go color, ya got to go color. (Its OK if you stray out of the lines. Don't let your mommy tell you otherwise.)

and one more thing...the Copenhagen proposals to tax developed nations and "give" the money to poor nations is DOOMED.

Poor nations are headed universally by utterly ruthless and corrupt kleptocrats who will funnel the money into their own pockets just as surely as CARE's food shipments ended up sold for weapons by Somali warlords.

The DEVELOPING world is NOT the problem...OUR consumption is. You can google per-capita consumption rates of oil by nation and see the DIRECT connection between GDP and energy, a theme I have expounded upon in many other forums over the past few years.

The problem in most of the world is insufficient intelligence. The stupid of any stripe are easily misled by propaganda, like how advertisers say "nothing is proven better than product X" to try to lead you to INFER that X is the best when they are literally saying that all competing products are of EQUAL efficacy.

I use this on my CHILDREN to get them to understand how lack of sophistication in thought ends up in punitive and disadvantageous outcome. Live in a townhouse community? NO house in this neighborhood is taller than ours is, kids! If you ask them what the advertiser MEANS, they will say that they mean product X is the best. And most people have the mind of a child.

The entire discourse, whether it is "death taxes" or "pro choice" is ENGINEERED by people who have studied NLP to force a particular emotional reaction or inference from you. Bore did precisely that in "Inconvenient Truth" where he followed a graph of CO2 concentration with a graph of mean temperature. Correlation IS NOT causation.

So long as people believe what they WANT to believe instead of what IS TRUE, we are utterly and totally screwed.

"That the hottest recorded summer temperatures in specific localities occurred in the last 20 years tells you "absolutely nothing".

Then you're scientifically dead.

How long have we been "recording" temperatures? 300 years. I'm guessing that is on the high side but for the sake of argument lets say we've been doing it for 1000.

You want to point out the last 20 years, relative to 1000 years of recorded weather temperatures. In terms of global weather patterns consisting of approx. 3 to 5 billion years you want to pick 10 out of the last 20 and state something of significance? Ah, OK. If you really must. It won't amount to any such thing but if you really must...

"So long as people believe what they WANT to believe instead of what IS TRUE, we are utterly and totally screwed.'

I don't believe you. But not because I don't want to.

OZONE - Thanks for feeling me man. My thoughts on cancer, I agree with your thoughts on cancer, the world is getting poisoned there is no doubt about it.

So you would agree that people will believe the universe is driven by an overweight fairy on a green cheese bicycle if it gets them stuff. Worrying about the future is scary and goes against the flow, its unpleasant to talk or think about. Going against the flow does not get one stuff.

Lots of stuff at Walmart you know. Big Screen TV,s and lots of snacks. Not so many books but there are a few with titles screened just for you. No green cheese though. Cheese doodles would probably last a thousand years and would probably turn white. Lots of cheap stuff to keep one from worrying about the end of stuff.

I wish I could use JK slogan of "It's all good" but that's just not true. The end of stuff happens with the end of cheap stuff. It will happen like a thunderclap. No slow transition because everything depends on cheap oil. Without cheap oil there is no cheap stuff and without cheap stuff the service economy falls on it's face.

'JK' has been ranting about how we need to fundamentally change our living arrangements for quite a while now. Climate change is just another part of the mix but to quote 'trav777' above. - "So long as people believe what they WANT to believe instead of what IS TRUE, we are utterly and totally screwed."

I'm formerly 'keithishere' I re-registered cus I like k-dog better

Considering the fact that most folks here claim to understand various issues such as climate change, the state of the economy etc., I'm surprised that nobody seems to be capable of dealing with the Trolls here. If you ignore them, do not respond to them, they eventually will go away. So many otherwise intelligent people should be able to deal with such a simple problem. If you can't stop a Troll, don't expect to have the answers to the complex problems we now face. The Trolls cheapen an otherwise fascinating blog. Regards to all

When I read things like your comment I think of Evan Connell's The White Lantern (2 vol)in which he writes of the discovery and exploration of the Northwest Passage. It seems some on a wrecked ship (I am hazy) started their treck carrying silverplate services and other goodies. They trudged on and starved and froze to death. They refused to copy the Inuit mode of traveling in the Arctic. You know, the natives, who didn't know anything about civilization.

We are like those Brits and other explorers. We will carry on our outmoded ways and die on the way.

Well just think like your grandmother and plant poppies in your backyard. They grow here. They can be harvested for opium. Why spend a fortune to get it from the middle east any way we can?

I'm surprised that nobody seems to be capable of dealing with the Trolls here."

Trolls? Are you seeing things Capt? Do you see Martians as well? I saw a leprechaun once. He was on a box of cereal. Does that count?

Foucault said humanity is just a face drawn in the sand.

The Discourse is controlled by dominant interests.The problems can't be talked about in any other way. So we all rail helplessly.

The Discourse must be changed first. How? Not a clue.

I'm a write-in candidate for Senate in Massachusetts, and I have proposed that we use any remaining Stimulus money to reclaim land to make more local farms (especially in Massachusetts), to re-localize and re-scale and de-globalize our food supply.

Our factory-farmed food supply is a major public health hazard (see Food Inc, read Eating Animals), so even if it was sustainable it needs to be shut down as soon as possible and replaced with local farms. We'd better be ready with local farm capacity or people will be hungry. Also, creating and working these farms will create lots of good long term jobs (assuming we pay farmers what they are worth, which might require tax breaks or something).

I wrote a post about it on RedMassGroup (and my antagonist there is a darn good example of a knucklehead!).

The problem with the melting ice is that you can't see it. It is the same problem that the flatearth people had. It doesn't look that way to us. Prove it's round all you want, it doesn't appear that way.I'm still cold this winter, so it isn't warming, is it?

TED had a youtube of cameras planted all over the ice in Greenland and elsewhere set to click on at various time intervals. A week, 24 hours, etc. When you watch the film you can see it sliding into the sear. Ice that has been there for milleniums suddenly sliding into the sea at a rate the cameras catch for you.

Nothing will be done to fix the barn door until the horse gets out. No pun intended.

Yep. Try to explain that to a flat earther.

Well I taught a stat and experimental design course for a University extension in the Ozarks. My students couldn't do 6th grade arithmetic. The text book I was slated to use was one of those really difficult ones but it had a great kickback for the director. So I found a programmed instruction text on the internet that I knew about and xeroxed it.

I gave them all the class time to do it in. Still they complained, wanted to leave erly for a church social, come late because of a child's basketball game, and not come at all because the weather wasn't nice.

It started with 2 + 2 =5 and went all the way to analysis of variance, tests of significance, plotting etc.

Now it is not possible to think these people understand anything having to do with the way science reports its results. It is all just meaningless numbers to them. And would be to me too if I weren't educated.

Piaget theory discourses on levels of cognition. Most people are at a pre-operational level.

I heard a woman at a thrift store ask for Xmas lights saying that they were exdpensive at an auction in Branson. But Wal-Mart didn't have any and the thrift store lady said she didn't have any and couldn't find any. (Me I have loads picked up for 25 cents over the years.

Why no lights? They are all from China. Does China not ship for dollars anymore?

Ideas? Why?

"the mafia-style criminality that is the US Government-and-Economy is as wrong and counterproductive as it is silly and inaccurate."

Lots of muddiers of the waters here posting, mixing supposed "beliefs" whilst absolutely discounting the obvious. There is absolutely no proof "9/11" was planned and conducted by anyone other than the USFedGov. "Al Qaeda" is a creation of the CIA, it does not exist as a "terrorist" organization. "Terrorists" are a myth created to be used as a political tool to instill fear, and thereby fool and control the populace. The only "conspiracy theory" is that of the peculiar myth of the "lone nut".

Trav77 you're one of the few on here who knows what they are talking about re AGW. Most are parroting stuff they heard from Al Gore. You are right that most aren't qualified to have an opinion about climate change.

You should write an essay or blog about climate change.

No proof except the 9/11 Commission Report, which I assume you haven't read. And NIST issued a detailed writeup on how the towers fell. And a number of phone calls were made from passengers on the plain telling how terrorists with box cutters had taken them over. And Bin Laden and Al Qaeda claimed responsibility.

Should I be convinced that it was an "inside job" by poorly or non-sourced reading material like "9/11 Synthetic Terror"?

A bunch of Middle Easterners defeated all of our security measures, because these were focused outwards in a Cold War orientation, not inwards. The immediate response was botched due to simple incompetence.

I don't see how people in the United States government could have plotted 9/11, executed it, and then gotten away with it. At any rate, how would they have known they wouldn't be caught? Would a senior official in the US government have risked this? I'm seriously doubtful.

"The problem in most of the world is insufficient intelligence."

There aren't enough resources on the planet for everyone to live the high-energy 1st world lifestyle, yet people in poorer countries now want this more than anything else. Hell, there aren't enough resources for the 1st world to continue much longer on its current path, because so much of what sustains current systems is non-renewable. That's the problem. It has little to do with intelligence. There are resource constraints that we're bumping up against due to overpopulation. Saying that it is all a matter of everyone thinking harder is fatuous and arrogant. It is like saying the yeast in the wine vat just need more intelligence so that they don't pollute their environment with deadly alcohol. But that's just what yeast do, ya dig? Just like humans make gigantic islands of plastic in the Pacific, cause other species to go extinct, and cause deforestation and desertification. It can't be helped. Everyone is just following their programming like little bits of yeast.

It's been my assumption that we're in Afghanistan to cut Russia off, and to prepare for the invasion of Iran. The U.S. government doesn't really give a rats ass about the Afghans, or the Taliban. Al Qaida is just a good foil, an excuse for pushing policy.
I think every move is motivated by the preparation for Peak Oil. Iran and Iraq sit on most of what's left. We've already got a good grip on the Saudis.
Within two years, we'll be invading Iran.
The Federal Government will spin it as a liberation. That's why Obama and co. didn't throw any support to the student protesters before. They want them to fail and be crushed so that they can paint our invasion as a selfless and heroic liberation of the downtrodden.

There's not a snowballs chance in hell that the U.S. will ever pull out of Iraq, no matter what timetables or conditions they blather about on the evening news.

We'll invade Iran, and we'll stay until the last drop of oil is pumped out of the ground, or the U.S. disintegrates.

Not what I'm in favor of, of course. I'm with Jim on relocalization and such. I make a hobby of predicting likely outcomes, and I see nothing that would persuade me that people will suddenly behave in ways other than they have in the past.

If you remember when we first got into Afghanistan, Bush and co. said we would fight the terrorists in foreign lands instead of our own. I have to believe that, because there is no other option to believe. The CIA is behind the scenes to sell opium or the protecting a an oil pipe. You have to also realize we haven't had an attack on America soil since 9/11, so perhaps it is working. Amongst all the conspiracy theories out there, maybe the Afghanistan war is what is was promised. One we fight to keep them from attacking us. Those young Muslim men are recruited and sent to fight the war in Afghan. The war just might be keeping them busy. Is it winnable is another debate.

abbey said: "Now it is not possible to think these people understand anything having to do with the way science reports its results. It is all just meaningless numbers to them."

I hope these are the people who are joining the armed forces and cannot manage any math having to do with coordinates for bombing or artillery. I hope they fail in their attempts to kill others.

Millions of dollars a day in firing weapons into a desert is money lost forever to our society... money that could have been invested in entitlement programs.

Money spent on entitlements, for example $12,000 a year to an elderly person, is spent in its entirety and reinvested into the American economy to support local businesses and generate employment.

Entitlement spending has an economic multiplier effect. Defense spending is just theft, a complete waste that is weakening our society... money down a desert rat hole.

Bring all the troops home and let them get productive employment at home instead of pissing away taxpayers' dollars killing strangers.

"Why no lights? They are all from China. Does China not ship for dollars anymore?"

Maybe they don't ship for credit anymore...

you should talk, capt. catnip!!!

The DEVELOPING world is NOT the problem ..SAYS YOU! Ever hear of the ' asian brown cloud'?...of course not..those nations had the dreaded Un change its name to...THE ATMOSPHERIC BROWN can be seen from outer space..or so im told.
have you been to Miami lately? 1 in 3 haitians have moved to the usa...noam Chomsky says blame clinton for that..1 in 4 elsalvadoreans/mexicans have move ' elnorte'...sure the times will publicize ' enriques journey' and it gets a pulitzer but wake the f up!

I agree that these idiots could not have pulled it off. However, since the attack on the WTC in the early 90's it was a definite possibility that they would tryit again. Why not.

And so just ignore info that indicated they were planning anything, and get those fear mongers out of our daily sessions. And so the warners were banished.

And when it happened it was a windfall for Bush.

As Toynbee says when the empire disintegrates, the military is far from its borders and employs barbarians, teaching them the new weapons they have made available for them. It seems that we are importing barbarians here. I don't mean a slur on immigrants, but the poor and dispossessed and uneducated are the ones coming in. It will take a few generations for them to become absorbed, educated, etc and we don't have that leisure time anymore, do we?

This is the only reason I want the immigration to stop. It's about cheap labor and is destroying the US labor market, and that means they can't buy anything, and so it goes down down down. If they can get health care then they will absorb that too. There are good reasons why it is difficult to emigrate to Australia and New Zealand. The UK with its open European borders is tanked out too. I have known friends who went to the UK to get medical work done that they couldn't get done here.

And just wait until the doctor monopoly is outsourced. Get your dental work done just over the border in Mexico and your serious surgical replacement work donein Delhi.

Considering the fact that most folks here claim to understand various issues such as climate change, the state of the economy etc., I'm surprised that nobody seems to be capable of dealing with the Trolls here. If you ignore them, do not respond to them, they eventually will go away. So many otherwise intelligent people should be able to deal with such a simple problem. If you can't stop a Troll, don't expect to have the answers to the complex problems we now face. The Trolls cheapen an otherwise fascinating blog. Regards to all

Agreed, Captspaulding. Stuff like that "P.S. Rico delenda est." from a few months ago is exactly what these trolls want. Just ignore them and they will shrivel up and go away.

Capt. Spaulding,

Several times now you have posted (off-topic) comments that qualify you as a troll (by complaining about trolls) but never identifying who you are complaining about, trying to get a reaction by saying things like: "Nice blog except for the trolls"

Definition of a troll:

1. To make inflammatory comments on the internet for the purpose of starting controversy and gauging people's reactions.

Daisy? Ok you want it, you got it. My brother, (not me, God knows not me) told me that Asia is a girl's name in Mexico. He thinks you're a Chica, a Chicano Chick! I defended you saying that not only your messiness, but your obvious pleasure in grammatical disorder, is a sign of quintessential masculinity. As he said, you never mess up the same way twice. Masculine insouciance I said. Sassiness he said. What can I say-he's a smart man, but I'm staying the course with you dude.

Schweitzer was a racist and King a communist. The biggest joke is that anyone takes these fools seriously. After all, they gave him Obama the prize before he did anything-basically just for his color. Shame on them and those who voted for him here in America. It was clear to Conservatives what his policies would be as soon as we saw who his backers were. It's not rocket science or climatology.

There is some evidence that china is limiting the amount of US debt it is acquiring.

For a long discussion of the trade "collapse," see

People all over are sorting out what optimum strategies are to benefit themselves on a local level, but the definition of a local is itself local.

The same is probably true about "climate change." It is is to some extent pure presumption to think we can do anything to reverse 150 years of environmental modification. Just as the forests disappeared from North Africa, the best we can hope for is a new "stasis," that is not too inimical to "us," again defined on a local level. In all of this, there will be winners and losers. Yes the Maldives may disappear under the sea. Upstate NY may recover somewhat after its 100 yr episode of deflation, capital, and industrial flight. However, in all likelihood, the transition will be much nastier than for example the collapse of the Argentinian economy discussed elsewhere.

From what I've read, the next ice age is due any day now. For the last million or so years, the pattern has been a hundred thousand years of ice, an interglacial lasting ten thousand years or so, and then another ice age. We're just a little past ten thousand years now. So anyday now or within another century or two probably (unless we are fucking with things).

Fascinating implications: ice ages are the norm, not the brief interglacials. And so perhaps all this has happened before...a civilization rises slowly from barbarism and to technical glory only to be downed by a new ice age. After all, global warming could be dealt with by dikes and gradual evacuations. Global cooling is much more catastrophic, especially if it comes on fast. A few degrees down will mean crop failure and the death of hundreds of millions. Just for starters.

But there are many caveats: the temperature at the equator doesn't change that much during the "ice ages". Only the temperate zones are much smaller-but still could support human life and even some civilization. And even within an ice age there are many variations. Sometimes the temperatures will rise for a couple of thousand years and the ice will retreat hundreds of miles.

The weather for the last ten thousand years has been great, now back to life as usual. See you all in the next interglacial. I'm transforming into a barbarian. Nietzsche's law of eternal return meets Horbigger's doctrine of eternal ice. Our ancestors grew strong in the ice and snow and so shall we. Yeah, I'm talking to you palefaces.

Sure, some decisions are not as smart as others: such as starting a colony on the shores of Gronland by the Norse, prior to the last LITTLE ICE AGE. I suspect, rape and pillage aside, that North Carolina away from the shore might come out OK.

Instead of wasting so much time talking and talking and talking about climate change, co2, scientists right or wrong, etc. etc. WHY ON EARTH DON'T THEY PROPOSE, AND ONCE AND FOR ALL A HUGE WORLDWIDE MASS, PUBLIC (OR PRIVATE) TRANIST SYSTEM !?!??! I cannot believe how totally idiotic, cluseless, total morons, all of these thousands of scientists, politicians and economists are!! A worldwide serious, and very easily measurable improvement in mass transit, be it buses, trains, high speed trains, and everything in between is very easily measurable and very easy to implement. Every nation increasing their public mass transit by say 100 buses more each day gets further credit. Easy as pie.

Hike up the price of gasoline each month and with that money pay for public - mass transit, force this mass transit on people everywhere worldwide, get serious. This saves billions of dollars in gasoline and really seriously attacks the global warning, since more than 60 % of that co2 is from private cars. JHK TELL THEM ALL THIS, DO SOMETHING!!!!

"The third biggest greenhouse gas, methane, is 23 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide; even though methane emissions are far below those of carbon dioxide, it still accounts for an impressive 4-9% of global warming."

"When fossil fuels are burned to produce energy the carbon stored in them is emitted almost entirely as CO2. The main fossil fuels burned by humans are petroleum (oil), natural gas and coal. CO2 is emitted by the burning of fossil fuels for electricity generation, industrial uses, transportation, as well as in homes and commercial buildings. In 2006, petroleum supplied the largest share of domestic energy demands, accounting for an average of 47 percent of total fossil-fuel-based energy consumption in 2006. Coal and natural gas followed in order of importance, accounting for 27 and 26 percent of total fossil fuel consumption, respectively."

Automotive/truck use is important in its contribution, but the number 60%+ applies only to the transportation sector in the US. Even in countries like Germany where public transportation is massively encouraged, 80% of travel is still by auto/truck/bus. Further, energy usage to mass transport is still a replacement, so the effective possible reduction is a percentage of a percentage of a percentage. One only needs to go to a second/third world country like Argentina or Jamaica to see the clouds of diesel smoke and people hanging on the roofs of autobuses to realize it is not a one for one trade. Yes, some marginal efficiencies can be garnered, but as JHK correctly points out it will take major shifts in attitude, life style, acceptance of alternatives in all modes. AND this will need to happen before the multiple vectors of collapse: war, resource depletion, overpopulation, as well as the climate thing converge to put us in a new reality.

The banks{ters} are preparing to do with carbon what they’ve done before: design and market derivatives contracts that will help client companies hedge their price risk over the long term. They’re also ready to sell carbon-related financial products to outside investors.

[Blythe] Masters says banks must be allowed to lead the way if a mandatory carbon-trading system is going to help save the planet at the lowest possible cost. And derivatives related to carbon must be part of the mix, she says. Derivatives are securities whose value is derived from the value of an underlying commodity -- in this case, CO2 and other greenhouse gases...

Among the credit derivatives that grew from the bank’s early efforts was the credit-default swap.

Some in congress are fighting against carbon derivatives:

“People are going to be cutting up carbon futures, and we’ll be in trouble,” says Maria Cantwell, a Democratic senator from Washington state. “You can’t stay ahead of the next tool they’re going to create.”

Cantwell, 51, proposed in November that U.S. state governments be given the right to ban unregulated financial products. “The derivatives market has done so much damage to our economy and is nothing more than a very-high-stakes casino -- except that casinos have to abide by regulations,” she wrote in a press release...

However, Congress may cave in to industry pressure to let carbon derivatives trade over-the-counter:

The House cap-and-trade bill bans OTC derivatives, requiring that all carbon trading be done on exchanges...The bankers say such a ban would be a mistake...The banks and companies may get their way on carbon derivatives in separate legislation now being worked out in Congress...

Financial experts are also opposed to cap and trade:

Even George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator, says money managers would find ways to manipulate cap-and-trade markets. “The system can be gamed,” Soros, 79, remarked at a London School of Economics seminar in July. “That’s why financial types like me like it -- because there are financial opportunities”...

Hedge fund manager Michael Masters, founder of Masters Capital Management LLC, based in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands [and unrelated to Blythe Masters] says speculators will end up controlling U.S. carbon prices, and their participation could trigger the same type of boom-and-bust cycles that have buffeted other commodities...

The hedge fund manager says that banks will attempt to inflate the carbon market by recruiting investors from hedge funds and pension funds.

“Wall Street is going to sell it as an investment product to people that have nothing to do with carbon,” he says. “Then suddenly investment managers are dominating the asset class, and nothing is related to actual supply and demand. We have seen this movie before.”

Indeed, as I have previously pointed out, many environmentalists are opposed to cap and trade as well. For example:

Michelle Chan, a senior policy analyst in San Francisco for Friends of the Earth, isn’t convinced.

“Should we really create a new $2 trillion market when we haven’t yet finished the job of revamping and testing new financial regulation?” she asks. Chan says that, given their recent history, the banks’ ability to turn climate change into a new commodities market should be curbed...

“What we have just been woken up to in the credit crisis -- to a jarring and shocking degree -- is what happens in the real world,” she says...

Friends of the Earth’s Chan is working hard to prevent the banks from adding carbon to their repertoire. She titled a March FOE report “Subprime Carbon?” In testimony on Capitol Hill, she warned, “Wall Street won’t just be brokering in plain carbon derivatives -- they’ll get creative.”

Yes, they'll get "creative", and we have seen this movie before inadequately-regulated carbon derivatives boom will destabilize the economy and lead to another crash.

"The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.

The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals."

I want to praise cougar above for his defense of the climate scientists! The ones I know have their noses in their algorithms and a dislike of politics. They are adamant about global warming being a reality and wish they knew a way to break through the BS. The best they can do is to restate what they've been telling us. The most recent data they have on hand, according to Prof. Masatoshi Yoshino of Tsukuba University, show June to have been warmer on average worldwide than any month recorded to date. The most recent debate among the scientists is whether or not the observed warming will result in more intense typhoons or not--the formation may be disrupted by stronger winds aloft. Greenland is melting. The climate deniers are just so "the world is flat"! That doesn't mean the powers that be won't find a profitably bogus way to take advantage of this proven reality.
Good on you, Jim, for taking a stand on the side of the scientists! I also just loved your take on Afghanistan: "Who the hell really knows what we're up to in Afghanistan." How true.

"How would you account for the fact that
co2 levels rose 4% in the past ten years yet temperatures went down?"
I'm not qualified to "account" for issues at this level of scientific inquiry, and neither are you, that's the job of scientists.

If you read the simple chart I posted yesterday it responds in short fashion to most the arguments against global warming that have been advanced here in the last few days including those given by "Professor Bob". If you really are interested in "science", instead of ideology, then you should read it's point by point response to the issues raised.

For those who missed it here it is again. I would suggest that centering the arguments around this post should end this nonsense about the inplausibility of GW :

"I'm transforming into a barbarian."
No sweat, you're already there.

The Asian Brown Cloud causes a net cooling effect.

Read that again - it is the truth. It also disrupts rain cycles by attenuating the ability of water to form significantly large droplets to precipitate. You get a persistent haze instead of the typical tropical thunderstorm behavior. This causes droughts in Africa for example.

Climate is NOT as simple as CO2=warmer. That's simply bullshit. CO2 concentration has increased coincident with the rise in mean surface temperature; I stipulated that, but this is not the same as saying that CO2 or industrial emissions CAUSE "global warming."

In many cases, emissions, especially those with high particulate loads, cause cooling by increasing atmospheric albedo. Water vapor in the air is a higher factor in warming than CO2 by orders of magnitude. While I applaud the scientists trying to create a critical mass to get a discussion started about humans' impact on the environment, every single time they cheapen THIS to "CO2" they erode their own credibility and subject themselves to attack. I cannot side with people who let the ends justify the means.

And, why is the developing world doing this brown cloud stuff? They want to consume like the developed world.

The problem IS insufficient intelligence because the intelligent en masse would reject the macroeconomic policies of limitless consumption growth. The mediocre room-temperature IQs out there will vote for "leadership" that slams the throttles full ahead. They are the ones that bitch at "oil companies" for the price of gasoline's rise. They simply aren't qualified to have an opinion nor properly capable of even understanding the problem.

Exponential growth is like this - suppose you have a bottle. At noon, there is one bacterium in it. The population of bacteria doubles every minute and the bottle is full at midnight. At what time is the bottle half full?

Most people cannot answer this question. Even my accountant could not. It is a psychological fact, demonstrated by recent studies, that people attempt to grasp the exponential function through linear interpolation of two relatively close points on the curve, leading to a fatally large underestimate of future scalar values.

There are problems that cannot be solved by infinite numbers of people of average intelligence...this is just fact. Adding more "manpower" to a thought problem does not make solution more likely. Another anecdote...logic problem passed around via email at a jobsite I used to work at. This was a place with professional statisticians, people with masters degrees in mathematics, who did operations research and manpower forecasting via statistical methods. We all started at the same time, I finished in 10 minutes, the next person came back in 45 and another in 1.5 hrs. Nobody else could come up with a solution, they simply gave up and found the problem intractable. Software developers, database professionals, smart, educated people. But the problem was a 2% or 1% threshold question. That is the same as growth, finance, AGW, etc...these are not issues which can be grasped by anybody inside 2 sigmas to mean. So they just swallow whatever makes them happy, buy copies of "The Secret" and drive out anybody who says something that makes them "feel" bad. This is Gresham's Law as it operates on thought.

I told JHK in an em that Gresham's Law is actually a very powerful evolutionary maxim...counterfeit beliefs are far cheaper than real ones and we have an environment that selects for cheap. Everyone would be wise to accept this because what we see transpiring in terms of mass psychology or zeitgeist flows from it.

And it explains in an instant the frustration of JHK and others (inc me) as to why people "don't get it." It's simply cheaper not to.

Again, you have to understand there is a significant percentage of the population that is openly anti-science, since the religion they subscribe to is fighting an uphill battle trying to disprove such widely accepted science as the age of the earth and evolution. So it goes beyond cost and selfishness, it's an anti-science bias.

Arguing against climate science (or anything else which might however vaguely auger against man's dominion over earth) is virtually a religious position for them. Often, they also figure the end is near anyway (an obsession with some Christians) so what difference does it make if we use it up?


TROLL, anyone who disagrees with the absurd views of anyone else (such as, but not limited to, Tester, Capt Spaulding or Abbeysbooks) and expresses that disagreement with gusto.

Dale, please do not introduce red herrings or straw men to the discussion.

It is virtually impossible to have a discussion these days without people resorting to numerous logical fallacies or other emotional debate tactics.

Who freaking CARES about this "them"? Am I one of THEM? You either respond to ME or else take it up with THEM wherever THEY are.

This is the essence of a erected this "them" out there as an artifice to beat down, allowing you to essentially bypass anything that I have said.

Then you resort to argumentum ad populum as a buttress, "widely accepted," as if that is an endorsement of truth.

GFD, is there no hope at all? Every day that passes, I become ever more pessimistic.

Wow, I am beginning to disagree with Jim more and more.

First, yes, oil is running dry and the peak will happen. However, on a per unit basis WalMart style distribution systems are far more efficient than localized systems, oil or no oil. Imagine people driving from store to store to store, and from farmers market to farmers market, all one at a time, vs popping into Walmart. Both systems require energy inputs, but moving massive quantities by rail, sea or even transport truck is far more efficient than moving a 4lb bag of apples in a Toyota Prius.

On the climate change front, I still am not buying the human contribution. I agree the climate is changing, and I agree that it will have significant impacts - but climate change destroyed Mayan civilization too (as Jim points out) but they weren't tooling around in Escalades. I just don't think human beings are that important in the whole ecosystem to have that big of an impact - seems egocentric to me.

What I find worrysome is that people who disagree with the religion of global warming are considered conservative idiots, but blindly following the herd is not considered idiotic.

What would the great scientific minds of the past think if they heard Al Gore say "the science is conclusive and there is no more debate". Sounds more like religion than science to me. Whenever I hear "the debate is closed" I immediately look for fault in the argument, because decrees are not science. He may very well be right, and we may be destroying the only planet we've got, and mother nature may just shake us off like a bad cold. But I don't think the debate on that is "closed".

Remember that "science" taught us the world was flat, the sun revolved around the earth, and humans were made up of 4 humors - blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm. If people accepted that "the debate was over" then.....

Stig, I agree with your two posts above.

I wasn't arguing with you, nor do I care to. I was suggesting that the reasons behind denialism are not purely economic, as you suggested. That is not "introducing strawmen" or whatever, it is just pointing out that a significant part of the population couldn't care less about science as a source of truth.

If you believe yourself smarter than the broad consensus of science, which was the "them" I was referring to with "widely accepted" then so be it, there are a lot of people on this website who think they are smarter than everyone else and freely dispute accepted science, as if they are qualified to do so.


TROLL, a pejorative label applied to persons who hold, and express in no uncertain terms, views in opposition to those who use the Troll label. Use of the Troll label is a defense mechanism and is in some ways similar to an "ad hominem."

"Remember that "science" taught us the world was flat"
Completely untrue, "Perception" led us to believe the world was flat, because that it the way it appears. Science taught us our immediate perceptions are not always true, and in this case was completely false.

The Catholic Church taught us the Earth was the center of the Universe because that validated the notion of the importance of the human species as a divine creation. Once again science put things in the correct perspective.

Science isn't always right and at times it can behave much like a religion, but your attempts to stand the truth on its head and blame science for notions like flat earth etc. is completely rediculous.

fefe wrote:

>James Hansen is saying, dealing with climate change allows no room for the compromises that rule the world of elected politics.

I find this one of the most ludicrus statements of all time.


fefer, good point. The first time I read it, I missed the colossal stupidity on display. The shear insanity of that statement is off the charts.

I'm surprised such a good point would be deleted from this site. Maybe I'll be banned next for reprinting it.

Agreed. Intolerance raises its ugly head. Be careful...very, very careful.

dale, I'm going to assume that you are talking to me.

You aren't reading for comprehension. I said that the basis for advancement of AGW lines pockets. There are pecuniary gains to be made on both sides. A carbon credit derivatives casino is HUGE business for Wall Street and they line pockets of researchers who are on the side of AGW/Kyoto/Copenhagen...just as big tobacco bankrolled scientists to publish research that smoking was harmless.

As for "consensus," there are a legion of scientists on both sides, and it just so happens that those on the side of AGW via CO2 were just busted attempting professional character assassination of opponents/dissenters, as well as fudging their climate data. The Goreian version of AGW has become an official orthodoxy, or dogma.

At some point, this is all a means to an end. I believe that many of these scientists are veiling either class or consumption envy behind a wall of shoddy science. IOW, they have emotionalized it. They don't like those consumptive "rednecks" in their SUVs.

There are many including myself who agree that we cannot continue to consume at this rate or grow consumption, but I will not tolerate people hiding behind bullshit nor using the ends to justify the means.

Vlad, As far as climate change or global warming goes, I'm a non partisan, a non scientist, just a retired accountant so bear with me. So tell me, if we are due for a downturn in global temperature and a new glacial onset, could it be that man-made global warming could ameliorate the effects? The effects of global warming might be no fun at all but maybe a new ice age would be worse, like you say, massive crop failure plus mass migration from northern and temperate zones to the south and mass starvation and misery like none before in history.

From what I've read climate change is the norm. This past ten thousand years has been pretty good climatically.

Anybody else have any ideas on this? Any climatologists?

"Remember that "science" taught us the world was flat"

Exactly why I put it into quotes. It was considered infallible science at the time because it was taught by the church. In other words, a religion. Those who questioned it were considered fools at best, or burned at the stake at worst.

My point was that this seems to happen if you question the validity of the man-made global warming theory. Immediately you are considered "in the pockets of big oil" or "a right wing conservative nutcase". What if I said that by following the notion that man is making the world warmer you are "in the pocket of greenpeace" or a "left wing liberal nutcase"?

I am not a climatologist, I am an engineer (not a petroleum one either - mechanical). I have read some peer reviewed evidence (meaning academic articles) that is convincing about man made global warming, and read other peer reviewed evidence that is equally convincing that questions the theory. I have no idea if man is changing the climate - maybe yes, maybe no. But I refuse to follow the herd and accept it as gospel.

"It was considered infallible science at the time because it was taught by the church."
They didn't consider it "science" my friend, it was theology, which was considered the source of truth in those days. Your anology is absurd. Science wan't part of the equation, you are just liguistically equating "accepted fact" as synonymous with "science", that was not the case in the 15th century.

It is likewise untrue to suggest, as you do, that scientists come down equally on both sides in the AGW debate. Listen, you don't have to lie to yourself or others if you choose to believe something that is outside of mainstream scientific thought and practice. That's your right and I'm not interested in dissuading you, and "Yes" at times science has been wrong or incomplete. Just don't try to bullshit us by twisting phrases or dismissing the consensus view as one of two "legions" one can choose from. That is disingenuous at best and displays your clear bias, contrary to your statements otherwise.

From one retired accountant to another, your question has a bean-counter's logic to it. So, for example, Adding a minus 10 degrees to a plus 4 degrees = only a minus 6 degrees. Of course neither you nor I nor anyone alive today will ever know whether global warming left unchecked would ameliorate the next ice age.

Whatever the truth of the matter turns out to be, I hope the world guesses right before spending $trillions$ to stamp out GW.

I found what seems a reasonable essay on the whole subject. Your very point is addressed in the final section of the link below.

Dmitri Volkogonov's excellent book: "Autoposy For An Empire: The Seven Leaders Who Built The Soviet Regime" ought to be required reading for anybody who wants to understand why the West is in a malaise and why we're not going to get out of it anytime soon. Volkogonov's look at the rise and fall of the U.S.S.R eerily parallel's the history of our own civilization, particularly the way an omnipotent empire was brought down when the official rhetoric coming from the Kremlin was no longer able to paper over or hide the cracks between everyday reality and Party ideology that had grown into huge chasm. Once it was clear to see that Communism could no longer guarantee even a modicum of stability, the whole edifice crashed.

"Kremlin was no longer able to paper over or hide the cracks between everyday reality and Party ideology that had grown into huge chasm."
Yup, once you start lying to yourself, (as our country is doing now) you eventually will have to pay the piper. Thanks for the book recommedation.

Dale, I think your reply to The Stig is unnecessarily harsh and, in fact, that you are guilty of many of the things you accuse Stig of.

First, whatever the Church held to be true trumped everything. The Church was not in the habit of announcing a position as being theological while simultaneously acknowledging that an opposing scientific opinion existed. Stig's explanation why he put "science" in quotes sounds genuine to me.

Second, Stig does not use the word legions. You indicate that he did by using legions in quotes.

Third, Stig did not suggest "that scientists come down equally on both sides in the AGW debate." Rather, he says "I refuse to follow the herd and accept it as gospel." Obviously the herd is the majority and the GW non-believers are the minority.

Lastly, if anyone "is disingenuous at best and displays (your) clear bias" it is you, Dale.

"First, whatever the Church held to be true trumped everything.
That's right, and calling it science, in quotes or not, is still disingenuous. His comment was clearly an attempt to suggest that once the earth being considered the center of the Universe was "science" not good science, but science....and this is simply untrue. This was done to try and equate GW science with this theology, to suggest they could be wrong in a similar manner, for reasons of clear bias.

Science, whether you put it in quotes or not, involves process and method. Deciding the earth was the center of the Universe for religious reasons, is devoid of scientific process or method.

His use of legions (again, in quotes or not) was clearly an attempt to suggest that the opinion on this issue in reputable scientific circles is somewhat balanced, and that is nonsense.

The "herd"?, since when is the consensus of scientific opinion by the best scientists we have, the "herd"? That is so fucking biased even you should see through it.

Listen, I don't really see any good reason for me to dispute consensus scientific opinion, nor am I qualified to defend it. I posted a list here that does a pretty good job of disputing some of the propoganda put on this website in the last couple of days. If you don't believe what it outlines so be it, but that doesn't make you an objective discerning person for doing so, it just means you "choose" to disagree.

I wonder if we took those so-called legions of scientific GW deniers and quizzed them if we would find out they are disproportionally inclinded, relative to other college grads, to also disbelieve the earth is billions of years old or that people evolved from other beasts. I've got a pretty good guess what that outcome would be, and that would indicate the influence of "theology" not "science".

What was it fefe called him, dumber-than-dale?

"since when is the consensus of scientific opinion by the best scientists we have..."

So those not in consensus are not part of the "best we have"?

Hmmm. In Galelio's time the "consensus" was the sun travelled around the earth. Guess they were the "best scientists they had" because they were part of the consensus. (What an irrational idiot!)

"not mommy" has had half a dozen accounts that were banned but keeps coming back to troll. (What an irrational idiot!)

""not mommy" has had half a dozen accounts that were banned"

Hmmm. Yesterday it was 7 but who's fucking counting? Oh, now I remember, Nancy-boy. He be counting. He be de bitch on de cell block.

The earth used to be a lot hotter 500 million years ago and had a much higher CO2 content in the atmosphere. Much of this carbon was sequestered into fossil fuels, and the planet cooled down overall. Humans remove and burn these fuels, which puts the CO2 back into the atmosphere. Thus, the earth heats up to be more like it was when there was a higher CO2 content due to the greenhouse effect.

"The earth used to be a lot hotter 500 million years ago and had a much higher CO2 content in the atmosphere. Much of this carbon was sequestered into fossil fuels, and the planet cooled down overall. "

Then it heated up. Then it cooled down. Then up...

Acting like a tough guy on the internet is about as pathetic as you can get, mommy/zsazsa/OEO or whatever your nick is this week.

Why don't you start your own blog? I'm sure the scientific community would be fascinated by your "heated up....cooled down....then up" theory. Anyone who disagrees you could call Nancy-boy, fucktard, bitch, or idiot (or whatever else you heard the 14 year-olds saying in front of the 7-11) without getting banned like you do here.

"As for 'consensus', there are a legion of scientists on both sides, and it just so happens that those on the side of AGW via CO2 were just busted attempting professional character assassination of opponents/dissenters, as well as fudging their climate data."

Where'd you get that, Sarah Palin's WaPo op-ed piece?

Explain what you mean by "fudging their climate data", please. Be specific. I want quotes from the purloined e-mails, etc. Make a case beyond calling people idiots.

"I believe that many of these scientists are veiling either class or consumption envy behind a wall of shoddy science. IOW, they have emotionalized it. They don't like those consumptive "rednecks" in their SUVs."

Breathtaking in its silliness. I thought you were smarter, Johnny.

"Make a case beyond calling people idiots."

Good luck waiting for that...

"who's fucking counting?"

Sorry if my count of your bannings was off by a few. I lost count awhile ago, because you get banned from this site so fucking much. JHK must be getting pretty sick of such troglodytes.

Jared Diamond wrote a good book about the Collapse of Socities faced with environmental crisis. He's a liberal, but a good one, who has some desire at least for truth. The Viking Colony of Greenland was wiped out by the Little Ice Age during the Middle Ages. He descibes their all too human attempt to stick to what they knew even though it wasn't working anymore. In their case, it was herding and farming. They didn't seem willing or able to learn from the Innuit who were coming down from the North as conditions worsened. In fact, there was violent conflict at some point towards the end.

Another Collapse was at Easter Island. Their population exploded and they ended up cutting down all the trees. When Europeans found them they were just a thousand or so left, down from more than ten thousand. They had no shelter except a few shallow caves-and Easter Island is temperate more than tropical. They were exposed to fifty degree weather with heavy rain and wind during the winter. They couldn't leave-no wood for canoes. The first thing they asked for wood to build huts with.

A few small societies were able to find a balance between population and resources. I read somewhere else than the Himilayan Cultures practiced birth control-as opposed to Hindu India.

Almost inevitably, we will take the wrong road. We are already doing so. So save yourself and your family. Get to some place where the people look like you. Race War is a sure bet. John Rawls is one of the best sites to learn about all this-and there is alot to learn. Don't be dependant on the grid for starters.

As for your question, I don't know. I would tend to think that the Climate is too big for us to inflence too much-even though we can devestate ecosystems and give ouselves all kinds of cancer from toxins and pollutants.

The little ice ages are Dalton's. The big ones are Maunder Minimums. Both are due to cycles within the sun-the master key to climate and life on earth. An 18th century scientist noticed an inverse relationship between sun spots and the price of grain. The more spots, the more solar activity, the more warmth coming to earth, the more grain, and thus a lower price of grain. The Sun has been in an unprecedented sun spot deficit for almost two years now. It could be a precursor for the big one, the Maunder Minimum. We just don't know enough to be sure. But, as I said before, it would fit in with the cycle for the last million years or so. Buy some gloves, galoshes and a good Russian Hat.

"Jared Diamond ... He's a liberal, but a good one"

But he's a Jew, Jaego, didn't you know?

Vlad, it is clearly untrue that humans cannot effect the climate. North Africa and the Middle East both used to be more fertile with better soils, but thousands of years of farming has caused desertification. Thinking that just because the earth is "big" means we can't effect it is faulty logic. Catton in "Overshoot" calls modern man Homo Colossus, and what he means by this is that modern man uses a large amount of energy and can certainly effect the systems of the earth. He also states that 1/8 of the plant biomass on earth is used for farming. So humans can and do have a large effect. Thinking otherwise is subscribing to an atavistic idea that the earth is boundless and static.

The Jared Diamond book provides a lot of good insights, but I disagree with his assertion that societies "choose" to succeed or fail. Human behavior is much more automatic than this. People may not easily give up learned behaviors, even when faced with the possibility of death or severe hardship. The ability of societies to pull out of the tailspin of a collapse-in-progress is almost nil.

Trav777 wrote above:

"It is a psychological fact, demonstrated by recent studies, that people attempt to grasp the exponential function through linear interpolation of two relatively close points on the curve, leading to a fatally large underestimate of future scalar values."

That whole comment was excellent.

"Explain what you mean by "fudging their climate data", please. Be specific. I want quotes from the purloined e-mails, etc. Make a case beyond calling people idiots."
It's a religion with these people. The shortcut I posted earlier explained these "fudging data" issues, if it even needs explaining, but of course they wouldn't read anything which interferes with their established belief.

Instead they accuse me of being biased. The truth is I consider emission reductions of secondary concern, given the fact that GW appears to be something that will continue and escalate for decades to come no matter what we do. If we really want to be rational about it, any effort to reduce emissions should be coupled with much discussion about what we must do to adapt, since adaptation is what we really will face in the foreseeable future.

I would agree that carbon trading etc. seems to be a shell game without clear benefit. I would also agree that, much like PO, Global Economic Decline etc., the science and models are very complicated and difficult, and we almost certainly will find out our projections will change going forward. That is not a reason to dispute the best science we have or create bullshit arguments (like suggesting current science is equivalent to 16th century theology ---what lunacy!) to attack that science. That is just plain stupid.

Qshtik said: "Whatever the truth of the matter turns out to be, I hope the world guesses right before spending $trillions$ to stamp out GW."

Certainly, but the real fly in that ointment is that spending trillions WON'T stamp out GW -- by the alarmists own reckoning it would result in a piddling difference in climate change.

"His use of legions (again, in quotes or not) was clearly an attempt to suggest that the opinion on this issue in reputable scientific circles is somewhat balanced, and that is nonsense."

It was Trav777 that used the word "legion," not Stig.

"It is a psychological fact, demonstrated by recent studies, that people attempt to grasp the exponential function through linear interpolation of two relatively close points on the curve, leading to a fatally large underestimate of future scalar values."
I'm not sure I understand the point here, can you explain?

Specifically, my questions would be, using relatively close data points would seem just as likely to cause values to be skewed one way as much as another, statistically (i.e.- in the case of PO, using such data points produced an underestimation of technological change in oil production, in fact isn't this exactly what happened with projections in the last 50 years)

Empirically, what I feel I have seen much more often is the overuse or over reliance on "exponential effects" in forecasting in many areas. In fact, that might be the biggest problem forecasting in general has faced in the modern era.

I would argue that long term forecasting has not been effective at all in areas similar to oil production, (those involving major changes in technology for example) largely because of it's inherent inability to factor "unknowns".

Dale, your use of "consensus scientific opinion" is quite flawed. You need to check the definition of consensus. It simply means an agreement of opinion. A minority can have a consensus.

Also, science is not decided by a vote.

Dale wrote:

"It is a psychological fact, demonstrated by recent studies, that people attempt to grasp the exponential function through linear interpolation of two relatively close points on the curve, leading to a fatally large underestimate of future scalar values."
I'm not sure I understand the point here, can you explain?

Dale, see the part in his post above from 12/9/09 10:50 where he talks about bacteria & bottles. That's the example that explains the matter.

".... humans cannot effect the climate."

Turkle uses the word "effect" four times in this post. The first three are incorrect. They should be "affect." The fourth usage was correct. It is hard to take someone seriously on a complex issue when they can't get the simple shit right.

Dale, here's the question from Trav777's post: "Exponential growth is like this - suppose you have a bottle. At noon, there is one bacterium in it. The population of bacteria doubles every minute and the bottle is full at midnight. At what time is the bottle half full?"

What's your answer to this question? Let's see if you're smart enough to have an opinion on GW.

A minute before midnight.

I was asking Dale, but you're right. Now we'll never know if Dale is smart enough to have an opinion on GW -- but I bet he'd still not refrain from expressing one.

Qshtik said: "Whatever the truth of the matter turns out to be, I hope the world guesses right before spending $trillions$ to stamp out GW."

And just what if Global Warming IS the correct theory, and we choose to ignore it? IF the science in that direction IS true, we are talking about an extinction event for our civilization, if not for the human race as a whole. We ignore it to our peril. To me the true conservative action would be to act on in in the manner that we would act on say, an asteroid approaching Earth.
Instead we seem to be more concerned that any action at all will negatively impact corporate profits, rather than it could lead to a mass extinction event that would make corporate profits meaningless.

So my guess is that corporate profits will win out, and the human race will lose out in the end.
Good luck to the next bunch of monkeys to try piling one stone on top of another.

As for the eventual outcome if the process continues: I read that once the Arctic ice sheet melts, and enough warm, Gulf steam water circulates in the polar sea to melt the Greenland icecap, the resulting deluge of fresh water will shut off the "conveyor-belt" system that powers the whole Gulf stream. Within just a short span of a decade or so we will have the start of a brand, spanking new ice age that will eventually cover North America & North Europe in just a few hundred years.
And so the cycle begins again, over & over & over forever.
Just without us.

Good luck next bunch of monkeys! Hope you are smarter than this bunch!! You will have to make do in a seriously resource depleted world. Hope the pyramids are still around to arouse a little awe at what we could do if we CO-OPERATED instead of fighting all the time.
Oh well.....

Geez, does that mean I'm smart? Maybe I should've gone into climatology.

qshtik Geez, does that mean I'm smart? Maybe I should've gone into climatology.

Or dermatology. Or how about proctology?

Actually, none of us are really smart, we are just clever. Clever, clever little monkeys.
Gee, look, the gods gave us pen & paper & one of us wrote Shakespear. & Playboy.
Clever little monkeys, but not smart little monkeys.

If we were truly smart, we wouldn't spend so much time & energy & resources trying to kill each other.
We wouldn't be in this mess to begin with, now would we, little monkey.

Bad monkey, you shit in your cage, and used up all your resources. Now what are you going to do?
I guess its time to die, to join the big, supposedly dumb dinos in the tar pits.

Like I said, just hope the pyramids survive long enough to be recognizable by some future, hopefully smarter monkey. But if not, so what?

Dee, your starting to sound a little frustrated and ticked off ....... that you're unable to stir up some sense of urgency in me. (I get that way too in a checkout line when the clerk moves no faster whether there's two people in line or ten.) Calm down ... I guarantee the ice melt won't cover the Statue of Liberty before a nuke is detonated with bad intentions.

The Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs on Earth-as I have often stated. I don't doubt their brains, only their self promoted claims of altruism. I am perfectly willing to read them when they are talking about objective science or distant history like Tang China for example. I don't believe a word they say when it comes to anything that has to do with their interests. History for us is like a science-at our best we try to be as objective as possible. History for them is a good story-good as in puts them in a good light. They may or may not know they are doing it, but they do it consistently.

An example: Solzhenitsen's last book was about the role of Jews in the Russian Revolution. It hasn't been translated yet, except for a few excerps-one of which I read. He states that along with Anti-Jewish pogroms in Pre-Revolutionary Russia, there were massacres of Russians by Jews in Jewish areas. All the Jewish Historians just leave this out-they always have to be completely right and their opponents completely wrong. No other people, not even the Blacks, are so completely lacking in chivalry. If you oppose them in any way, you are just complete scum in their book. But oppose them we must if the West is to survive in even an attenuated form. This incredible intransigence, with which they permeated the Left, now shows its face everwhere in our culture. We are seeing it on this site right now. Certainly your post to me reeked of this mindless hatred.

Well yes, we can change whole ecosystems-to the point of ruination. And cutting down the Amazon Rainforest will probably cause a local change in the climate-drying it out to some extent. But local is not the same as global even though the local is a relatively huge area like the Amzaon.

But you may be right in another sense: just as one huge volcanic eruption caused the year without a summer in the 1800's, what would a full on nuclear war do? I haven't heard about "nuclear winter" in a long time, but has it ever been discredited? And if such an event was possible, could it not precipitate a self reinforcing process that might lead to an actual ice age? I'm not trying to be contrary, I just think this scenario is far more likely than any permanent warming due to nuclear war. Mr Kunstler seemed to have a warming in his post collapse novel. Hardly any snow at all except way up north. I wish! Even warheads exploded at the poles would have a paradoxical effect of increasing the precipitation and thus the snow pack so ultimately more ice would be created.

A story from Peter Kreeft, Catholic Theologian: A couple of very sharp feminists were in his class debating his every point. Finally after weeks of this, one of this came to him after class and admitted their defeat. She said that he had convinced them that there was no difference between partial birth aboriton and infanticide. So now they were in favor of infanticide! The moral: Evil is infinitely flexible but Good is not so. Thus Evil often has an advantage in the great Battle. It can mask itself as Good, but Good cannot mask itself as Evil.

An example: Kreeft says that he hasn't changed any major opinion since his early twenties fourty or more years ago. But in that time he has gone from being a Liberal Democrat to a far right Republican. How? Because he has stood still and the definitions have changed. I predict that he will have to leave the Republican Party soon. They are now nothing more than a faux opposition to the Conquering Worm. Jersey Reds to the Harlem Globetrotters of Liberalism and Multiculturalism. Neo Liberalism is a useful new category. Very little difference between it and Neo Conservatism-just a different marketing strategy to a different target audience. Neo Liberal Barack Obama was financed by Neo Con money men. And tomorrow they'll be something different. All these categories are for our "benefit". They are smarter. They believe none of it. Cui bono? Who gains. And Follow the Money (Latin?) are the way to understand these reptiles.

Buddhists are utterly against abortion too btw. Just ask Dale.

Average temperatures in various locales over time show whether the overall climate is becoming hotter or colder. Over about the last 150 years, since humans began to burn copious amounts of fossil fuels, the average temperature has been steadily increasing. Ten of the hottest summers on record occurred in the last 20 years. This is not only from CO2 but other particulate matter that can block reflected sunlight from exiting the atmosphere.

You can see this warming happening in various places around the earth. The ice in Greenland and Antarctica is melting at an increasing rate because the ocean is getting warmer. The Russian permafrost is melting because the earth is getting warmer. Glaciers around the world are also disappearing. Many of the glaciers that John Muir discovered in the early part of the 20th century no longer exist, because they melted due to the Sierras becoming warmer with milder winters. The ecology of the ocean is changing as the ocean temperature increases.

What's so hard to understand? I don't get why some of you want to make this so difficult. Dark matter and dark energy are bona fide scientific mysterious. The way humans effect the global climate is not.

Trav, name 5 reputable climate experts who do not work in the fossil fuel industry and disagree with the global warming hypothesis. You might be looking for awhile.

Peer review is the crucial process that makes science work. Whoever says that it isn't important is a self-inflated ass.

Puzzler wrote: “I was asking Dale, but you're right. Now we'll never know if Dale is smart enough to have an opinion on GW -- but I bet he'd still not refrain from expressing one.”

The abovementioned bacteria/bottle example is of course from Dr Albert Bartlett's excellent lecture “Arithmetic, Population and Energy”. It can be viewed online from a link on the following page:

Dale's chosen role seems to be somewhere between naysayer and quixotic part-time curmudgeon, though he's not yet plumbed the depths that OEO has. Dale might take the approach of “I'm not a scientist, so you're not a scientist either, so none of us are scientists, so we should STFU and let the real professionals figure it out.” He might follow that one with “See? Even the scientists don't know, so no one knows. So STFU.”

Another of his typical approaches is that of “Changes have happened before, changes will happen again, today was a lot like yesterday, so it's 99%+ certain that tomorrow will be a lot like today. So just ignore anyone who predicts anything because none of us know anything.”

His other role, which he hasn't done much of lately IIRC, is to be the proponent for strange new technologies that initially promise “free energy” where none can be found and that are later shown to be frauds. Better-known examples of Dale's intellectual indiscretions of this type include getting additional megawatt-hours out of fossil-fuel-burning power plants without using any extra fuel and the compressed-air car idea from a year or two ago. Dale's problem with technologies of this type is that he doesn't or can't grep the idea of thermodynamics and the conservation of energy. It's not just a closed book to him, it's a burned and buried book as well. (apologies to the late Douglas Adams)

I've been using what I know of Dale as the basis of a character in a sort of doomer fiction story .. it's based on what happens in the After, but it's not anything so warm & fuzzy as WMBH, which reads like a Disney story aimed at Amish who've been secretly wishing that the “English” would get with the program and live sensibly.

If nothing else, he's good for entertainment.

"Certainly your post to me reeked of this mindless hatred."

You can read every book in the world and quote them here (maybe you have) but you're still a bigot. So not solemn lectures about mindless hate, please.

Qshtik, how's my usage here, every to your liking?

"Better-known examples of Dale's intellectual indiscretions of this type include getting additional megawatt-hours out of fossil-fuel-burning power plants without using any extra fuel"
Actually, on the power plant issue what I posted was a study from NW Pacific Labs detailing that we were only running at something like 70% of actual capacity of electrical generation. This was in response to Noodge's assertion that we were running flat out and the plants were 'ready to fly apart' or some such similar nonsense.

She is right on one point, unlike her I don't pretend to be an expert on technical matters for which I have no training. Having no opinion allows me far greater latitude to actually judge fairly what is presented to me, without the distorted lens of prior conceptions, otherwise known as being open minded on a subject, something Noodge would never be accused of displaying.

On the 'bacteria in the bottle' question, I wouldn't have had the slightest idea, nor do I care. I'm not a scientist and I'm not interested in pretending to be.

While I have an extremely dim view of long term forecasting in general, based on the high percentage of such forecasts which are almost comically wide of the mark, I did follow up JHK's forecast for the year last January with one of my own, just for fun. I tried to get Noodge and the other doomers to offer up their own, but they didn't have the guts.

In a couple of weeks I will repost it. For now, let's just say that it shows I can predict the future with a whole lot more precision than Jimmy can, even if I don't know anything about bacteria in bottles.

The Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs on Earth- Vlad the Inhaler

So, what? The true question is: what do they do with it?
If the highest use of our intellect is merely making more money on an individual level, and not the improvement of the human race as a whole, then we are doomed to join the dino's down in the tar pits.

Right now the choice seems to be between protecting US

The Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs on Earth- Vlad the Inhaler

So, what? The true question is: what do they do with it?
If the highest use of our intellect is merely making more money on an individual level, and not the improvement of the human race as a whole, then we are doomed to join the dino's down in the tar pits.

Right now the choice seems to be between protecting US corporate profits, or saving the planet, and the human race along with it.

It looks like corporate profits will win. So we will all die, but someones vault will be full of little pieces of paper with dead presidents on them. Woo--Hoo...

On point here from today's "Financial Sense" website, written by Chris Puplava;

"Perhaps one of the greatest mistakes an investor can make is to remain entrenched in one’s thinking and subject themselves to “data mining” in which they only read and/or listen to news articles or data that supports their views. What is often in excess supply are opinions, and what always seems to be lacking is humility. Humility is perhaps one of the greatest assets an investor can have as you always have a sense of caution that you may be wrong and it allows you to step back and take an objective look at incoming data."

Just as true for many other topics as it is for investing, and the point I've been trying to make here frequently. The more you "try", then actually review what you have tried objectively, (and this is true in virtually every field) the more of that valuable humility you will learn.

" I'm sure the scientific community would be fascinated by your "heated up....cooled down....then up" theory."

So you are suggesting that over that last 500 million years the earth has not seen periods of both heating and cooling followed by heating and cooling, numerous times? And that this is a "theory"? Yikes!!! You are an imbecile of fucktardian dimensions.

Dale wrote:

"This was in response to Noodge's assertion that we were running flat out and the plants were 'ready to fly apart' or some such similar nonsense."

Actually, no, Dale, I said no such thing. You can even go check if you want. All I said was that getting additional watt-hours of electricity out of fossil-fuel-burning plant XYZ will require additional fuel. You claimed that since they were already spinning at some given speed, getting extra energy out wouldn't require additional fuel.

(I'll be charitable and assume you were forgetful instead of lying)

To repeat this experiment in the privacy of your own car, go find a flat level stretch of uninterrupted road with no traffic or other hindrances. Get your Subaru up to cruising speed. Make sure there's no suddenly-gusting tailwind behind you. Next, without giving the engine any further gas or drafting behind another vehicle, make the car increase its speed by another 40%.

Doesn't work. Why? (besides the divergence of reality and wishful thinking)

No extra gasoline to engine, no extra power from engine. Get it? Hopefully this example is clear enough for you.

Fuck you, Ed....Sarah Paylin?

That's ALL you types can do is start your bullshit rah rah partisan cheerleading and begin with the demagoguery? There is NO hope, not when there are room temperature IQs like you in the room giving your "opinion."

JFC, if ANYBODY did a smidgeon of digging into what was going on between the top climate scientists, you would see that there entire model is SUSPECT at its core. It is intended to prove what the scientists WANTED to prove.

Even Bore bailed on Copenhagen...what a joke.

Look I can dig up a dozen more links pointing to specific anomalies in the code and substantiate everything I have said, but it wouldn't matter.


Now, there really may very well BE a Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but Catholicism is STILL a religion. When people accept a dogma as TRUE irrespective of sanctity of EVIDENCE, it is a religion.

And all the "Sarah Paylin" "Glenn Beck" "Rush Limbag" shit is just like shouting INFIDEL or HERETIC. There are entire threads on forums out there for you to read where people dissect "Climategate," but you'll have to check your religion at the door.

Again, the ends do not justify the means.

As I recall I asked you to 'Explain what you mean by "fudging their climate data", please.' Not thru links, from you. I was even polite, Johnny Ego. But all I get is an F-bomb and another rant. You got nothin'.

Thanks, that's all I needed to know.

Dale if you are not a scientist, and cannot grasp the exponential, then why are you speaking?

At 10 minutes to midnight, the alarmist bacteria is laughed at as a fool.

Exponential effects are seen in population growth, which is ONLY checked by consumption growth, i.e., developed nations have lower birthrates than poorer ones.

Exponential effects are in all of our entitlements ponzis, pensions, our need for "economic growth." Any time you see the word "growth" you are talking about an exponential.

Compound interest obeys exponential behavior, because it is a growth rate, as is debt with capitalization of that interest.

The following exchanges are between Palin and Gore. I'll leave it to the readers to determine which voice represents a reasoned argument.

"Speaking to MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Wednesday, Gore criticized an op-ed Palin wrote for the Washington Post calling on President Barack Obama to boycott the global climate change conference in Copenhagen.

“The deniers are persisting in an era of unreality. The entire North Polar ice cap is disappearing before our eyes,” Gore said. “What do they think is happening?”

“It's a principle in physics,” Gore said of climate change. “It's like gravity, it exists.”

Palin took to her Facebook page late Wednesday to respond to Gore.

“Perhaps he’s right. Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it,” Palin wrote. “However, he’s wrong in calling me a ‘denier.’ As I noted in my op-ed above and in my original Facebook post on Climategate, I have never denied the existence of climate change. I just don’t think we can primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.”

Palin then turned her response to the so-called “Climategate” story as evidence that scientific findings are “flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.”

“Former Vice President Gore also claimed today that the scientific community has worked on this issue for 20 years, and therefore it is settled science,” Palin wrote. “Well, the Climategate scandal involves the leading experts in this field, and if Climategate is proof of the larger method used over the past 20 years, then Vice President Gore seriously needs to consider that their findings are flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.”

“Vice President Gore, the Climategate scandal exists,” she added. “You might even say that it’s sort of like gravity: you simply can’t deny it.”

"The way humans effect the global climate is not."

Sigh!! You can lead a horse to water ..... etc.

No, you didn't ask politely, you asshole, you started with the Sarah Paylin bullshit.

If that's what qualifies as polite in your circles, you are an ill-mannered ass.

You deserved what I told you.

The models the scientists used were adjusted to account for data which did not fit the hockey stick. Even the very code that they programmed the crunching in, which incidentally is FORTRAN, is being taken apart.

They did what most scientists do when their life's work runs into data which does not agree with their fetish - they fudged it and the programming that processed it. And they discussed ways to blacklist scientists who did not agree.

JFC, read what Lord Monckton has to say about it. I'm not the goddamned standard-bearer for anti-AGW, because I DO believe in AGW. What I take issue with is the phony attempt to claim CO2 causes it when nothing beyond correlation has been established.

Then, there are idiots on here like you and dale, who say things like pollution increases GW when it's the fking OPPOSITE. Aerosol contamination leads to increased atmospheric albedo and produces a net cooling effect.

Again, I think on my very first post, I said if you don't know what these things are or what they mean, you are NOT QUALIFIED to have an opinion on AGW.

Let the big brains hash this out amongst ourselves, ok? thanks, pumpkin

So not solemn lectures about mindless hate, please.

Qshtik, how's my usage here, every to your liking?

Ed, are you (and Turkle) familiar with the concept of proofreading before clicking on Submit?

"Dale if you are not a scientist, and cannot grasp the exponential, then why are you speaking?"
Is this a "scientific" forum where we need to present our credentials and advanced degrees to "speak". Please.....

Everything eventually fails or collapses, including our society. Thus, it will always appear from some perspective to be headed in that direction. I have never suggested otherwise.

I'm sure your correct regarding exponential effects. I don't have to be a scientist to understand that. In terms of your example, I would suggest it is common sense in a way, and of little practical everyday value from a predictability POV.

Afterall, in terms of your bottle universe analogy neither you, I, or science-at-large knows what time it is, do we? Likewise, our little bottle is not an entirely closed system, bacteria don't learn and change in your experiment, we do.

Well done. You caught 'em both, sorry, you detected each error that I made.

Thank God your hear.

JFC, if ANYBODY did a smidgeon of digging into what was going on between the top climate scientists, you would see that there entire model is SUSPECT at its core. It is intended to prove what the scientists WANTED to prove.

OK. But why? Just what is their interest in promoting it, IF it isn't true? I just don't understand how this impacts their self interest? Are they all invested in wind & solar energy companies? What?

Explain to me & others just why scientist whom are supposedly only interested in the 'TRUTH' would promote something that has no basis in the 'Truth', if that is the case.

I can understand the industry-employed 'denyers', they obviously have a financial interest in it.

My pet theory is that they are ALIENS! You have been watching V, havn't you? (nudge-wink)

Big brains? Big ego.

"Sigh!! You can lead a horse to water ..... etc."

Right. So, now that you finally recognize this why not shut the fuck up?

"Then, there are idiots on here like you and dale, who say things like pollution increases GW when it's the fking OPPOSITE."
I've never SAID anything of the kind, I'm not qualified to say so, and you do not appear qualified to say otherwise from what I have seen thus far.

The only supposed "qualified" denier I've seen posted as a source here was "Professor Bob" who turned out to be; short on specific qualifications, wrong on specific issues (see the "information is beautiful post" and in the pocket of vested interests.

Many posters here keep repeating the same canards (cheating scientists etc.) that are responded to well in the IIB post, but post no qualified rebuttal to that source.

I think I'll table my part in this "discussion" since unqualified, straw man rebuttals seems to be all the deniers can respond with. Like the man said; lots of opinion, not much humility (or facts for that matter).

I'll stop misquoting you, if you stop making shit up out of thin air. I never said you can get energy out without puting something in, never happened, never would. Over an out.

Please, everybody google "aircraft contrails global warming"

"September 11 – 14, 2001 had the biggest diurnal temperature range of any three-day period in the past 30 years,” said Andrew M. Carleton[1]. Not in three decades had there been such a large temperature spread between the daytime highs and the nighttime lows. "

There was a paper published in Nature on this, by Dr. Nicola Stuber.

Water vapor is an orders of magnitude higher-impact greenhouse gas than CO2. Hell, even WGBH did a NOVA show on this stuff.

Please, get will help you.

Sarah Palin wrote: "“Well, the Climategate scandal involves the leading experts in this field, and if Climategate is proof of the larger method used over the past 20 years, then Vice President Gore seriously needs to consider that their findings are flawed, falsified, or inconclusive.”

The emails in question are 10 years old.

The experts in question were arguing over whether to include tree ring data in a report.

The report did include the tree ring data and it was properly referenced.

Where is the "scandal" that Sarah Palin says exists?

What was flawed? What was falsified? What was inconclusive?

10 year old emails about a dispute between scientists is being resurrected and called a "scandal" when it is nothing but political manipulation of the public.

The dispute was a disagreement about whether or not some data should be included in the report.

Scientific honesty won out and the final report included the data. So where is the "scandal"?

deejones...everybody has an agenda.

The scientists' may just really want to be huge and famous and get pussy. Who knows?

It's irrelevant as to what their motives are.

I mean, if you ran into data which called into question your entire life's work and something you believed in with every fiber of your being, would you not fudge the data?

Every debate, even about data, is now politicized and partisan. I mean, look at this forum. People who have less than a basic command of the facts and who are of average intelligence get to shout just as loud and post just as frequently as their betters.

Yeast people are taking over the system and creating an intractable din.

"The only supposed "qualified" denier I've seen posted as a source here was "Professor Bob" who turned out to be; short on specific qualifications..."

Bob Carter is a Research Professor at James Cook University (Queensland) and the University of Adelaide (South Australia). He is a palaeontologist, stratigrapher, marine geologist and environmental scientist with more than thirty years professional experience, and holds degrees from the University of Otago (New Zealand) and the University of Cambridge (England). He has held tenured academic staff positions at the University of Otago (Dunedin) and James Cook University (Townsville), where he was Professor and Head of School of Earth Sciences between 1981 and 1999.

Bob Carter's current research on climate change, sea-level change and stratigraphy is based on field studies of Cenozoic sediments (last 65 million years) from the Southwest Pacific region, especially the Great Barrier Reef and New Zealand, and includes the analysis of marine sediment cores collected during ODP Leg 181.

Bob Carter has acted as an expert witness on climate change before the U.S. Senate Committee of Environment & Public Works, the Australian and N.Z. parliamentary Select Committees into emissions trading and in a meeting in parliament house, Stockholm. He was also a primary science witness in the U.K. High Court case of Dimmock v. H.M.'s Secretary of State for Education, the 2007 judgement from which identified nine major scientific errors in Mr Al Gore's film "An Inconvenient Truth".

dumber-than-dale continuously updates his stoooopidity. At least we are all kept current.

Asoka - that is incorrect. The emails are NOT 10 years old. That is Al Gore's set of talking points.

Fuck, you guys are WORSE than the AGW deniers!

Good lord, read up on this Climategate crap on the press, check out this thread on TickerForum, which is full of AGW haters, most of whom I don't agree with

They cherrypicked data, they fudged numbers, the basic crunching code was effed with...many papers should not have been published. The whole thing is a clusterfuck of garbage.

Earth has been warming since 1650. Even MARS is warming rapidly lately. Science had papers 7 years ago showing correlation to solar intensity fluctuations.

As for the IDIOTS on here who claim CO2 "lets in sunlight but traps heat," this is utterly REFUTED by the data, which shows global DIMMING. Pan evaporation rates have fallen by 30% over the past 50 years.

What you people say is true is actually NOT...why should anyone listen to you when you have such a POOR command of the facts?

And leave Sarah Paylin out of this...who CARES why or what that dumbo says?

Bringing up Paylin is a strawman argument.


You seem like a bright guy to me, and someone with some passion for your debate, which is seriously lacking at the political level.

2 tips for you. 1) just because someone CHALLENGES your view does not make them immediately wrong and 2) swearing in your rants reduces the effectiveness of your argument. Usually we resort to the F-Bomb when we have no other intelligent things to say, and I doubt that is the case with you.

You clearly buy into the theory of man made global warming, and are satisfied with what you readon the topic. I am not, however, convinced. That does not make me a denier, troll, or oil company patsy. It makes me, and the others who also aren't convinced, human.

I saw the program on this regarding the dramatic data measured during the 911 shutdown of air traffic. Very interesting, and if nothing else proves how mankind can have tremendous effects on the environment, something often disputed by the deniers.

However, if my memory serves it was not just the water vapor but the particulate matter from the jet exhaust in the vapor reflecting sunlight that created the effect measured.

"What you people say is true is actually NOT...why should anyone listen to you when you have such a POOR command of the facts?"

Because if one repeats a BIG enough lie, often enough, it comes to be seen as fact. Like how one can SPEND their way out of a recession, or claim Obama's plan in Afghanistan differs from that of Bush, or fly in to pick up a Nobel Peace Prize when you've just escalated troop levels. "You want facts? You can't handle the facts!"

Am I right or what?

Phil Jones, Mike Mann, etc:

No sooner do they go onto the topic of the science when Rajendra Pachauri, the CHAIR of the IPCC for whom the aforementioned scientists have been heavy contributors (and gotten lots of free trips and paid presentations as well as probably tons of ass and oil-for-food vouchers) says "we need to live differently, consume less."


When your means are shown to be fraudulent, you shoot your ends in the head. We NEED to consume less, we cannot continue to grow. But as long as nobody comes out and argues why THAT is necessary, we get nowhere except full speed ahead into the wall.

The AGW crowd reminds me of Peak Oil deniers...just intractable yeast people.

"You seem like a bright guy to me..."

Oh fuck, Stig. As soon as this escaped your typewriter the rest of what you wrote just fell in the shitter.

Dale, this is precisely why you should not be speaking.

Your memory does not serve you.

Sunlight was not reflected...mean surface temperatures were several degrees LOWER at night as the earth re-radiated heat into space. This is something prevented by too much atmospheric water vapor.

GFD, think of the DESERT, dude.

Look, if you cannot understand the BASIC mechanics of AGW, what is reflective and what is absorptive, then you are NOT qualified to have an opinion!

Un huh....and a couple of "tips" for you.

If you want your argument to have any credibility whatsoever, don't equate 16th century theology and modern science suggesting that it was "science" when the church insisted the earth was the center of the universe.

Don't suggest that accepting the top climate scientist opinion, arrived at using the best data and modeling available is "running with the herd"

Does anyone here besides me miss the old numbered piano keys? They were fun, like a card game, trying to remember your previous reading place. Of course they were buggered, like this blog software, so I guess they got pulled. Now it's just a looong list.

Anyway, just checking the fluid reservoir levels and the air pressure in the tires. Do carry on.

"And leave Sarah Paylin out of this...who CARES why or what that dumbo says?

Bringing up Paylin is a strawman argument."

Because in the context of what Gore says, claims, is worshipped for saying and got a fucking Nobel prize for, she sounds more logical and reasonable. Gore (according to the MSM) be da man. Palin (according to the MSM) is a moronic, fool. And yet who offers the more reasoned and logical stance? What does than suggest regarding the intelligence of the Gore-bots?

I was referring to the "global dimming" effect measured during the 911 shutdown where sunlight reflected into space, due to con trails and their particulate matter, was actually masking GW effects. So in that manner, yes, pollution does muinimize the effects of CO2 caused GW. Look it up Mr. Humility.

What's Ricco's blog address?

"I was referring to the "global dimming" effect ..."

aka dumber-than-dales brain.

dale...manmade climate change is real. ok?

The asian brown cloud (which produces a 1-2 degree net COOLING effect) and aircraft contrails are proof of this.

That is not the same as saying AGW as put forth by Mann, Gore and the rest is trueJust because something didn't appear in Inconvenient Truth does not mean it isn't real. IT was an advocacy piece that was tantamount to advertising or propaganda. The most inconvenient truth about IT was all the data they OMITTED.

The problem is that most people on the AGW train are fking ignorant; they DO NOT read the science. They can't grasp it. Anything which doesn't jibe with CO2=warmer is discarded.

That is a sign of dogma, religious orthodoxy.

Please do yourself and everybody else a favor and get educated. If you cannot grasp the science, ask someone who can.

Sarah Paylin is a reasonably attractive moron and Algore is a megamillionaire who rides around in armored SUVs and flies on carbon-dense private jets. To hell with them, the UN, Goldman Suchs, and all the rest of the hijackers of science.

And to hell with all their cult followers, none of whom seem capable of forming an intelligent opinion on the matter and who are utterly disinterested in wrapping what passes for their brains around anything other than a slogan.

I have tried, and failed, so many times to get anybody on the AGW or anti-AGW side to accept facts or data that disputes their childish positions, which seem to distill down to which team they like better.

You can't get a Repugnicon to admit the wars were idiotic so long as they were Busch's wars, now the left is solidly behind NeObama as he has put his own stamp on them and the rank-and-file GOPers have suddenly found religion when it comes to massive deficits. It's all a partisan shitslinging contest with no positive outcome for the few reasonable people left.

Professor Bob, who doesn't believe in peer review...that's your fucking scientific source? What a joke. Just like you. Call everyone else a fucktard while you're THE supreme, #1 fucktard of this blog of all time.

No one bothered to refute anything I wrote. Qdick points out I used "effect" instead of "affect", as if it matters at all.

Great! He's been hoping you would drop by. It's He'll be thrilled to hear from you, no kidding, and you can use your old handles there. dimming has been observed for 50 years. It is not proposed to be related to aircraft contrail disappearance post-911, which mitigated warming.

Atmospheric water vapor is a greenhouse gas of ASTOUNDINGLY more effect than CO2.

This is easily grasped by anybody who has been in a humid area of the same surface temperature as a dry area, by comparing overnight temperatures (solar reradiation)

"He has held tenured academic staff positions at the University of Otago (Dunedin) and James Cook University (Townsville),"
Practically fucking Harvard there, huh?

dale...aircraft contrails DO NOT MASK GW, THEY help CAUSE IT

GFD man, can you get a SINGLE THING RIGHT?

"I was referring to the "global dimming" effect measured during the 911 shutdown where sunlight reflected into space, due to con trails and their particulate matter, was actually masking GW effects. "

And now we are to derive some significance (Remember, we're talking GLOBAL FUCKING WARMING and trends going back billions of years) from the widdle planes that didn't fly for a couple of days.

(Notice: anecdotal instances such as this should in NO WAY be construed as grasping at straws.)

Listen, if you want to dispute the significant findings measured during the 911 shutdown, not known and only theorized, then measured worldwide using delta temperatures, that's up to you. But don't bother responding to me anymore if you want a reply. If there is anything worse than ignorance it's arrogant ignorance. We're done.

"Practically fucking Harvard there, huh?"

So everyone you view as having credence could only be affiliated with Harvard? Hmm same open-mindedness you show in much of your other rantings. I surmise that his doctorate from Cambridge does not make the grade?

"And now we are to derive some significance (Remember, we're talking GLOBAL FUCKING WARMING and trends going back billions of years) from the widdle planes that didn't fly for a couple of days."
That would be correct Parrot Boy, since the differences they measured were abnormally large, based on delta temps. which are extremely consistent, so large that they were statistically and scientifically unexplainable by any other means. Again, go look it up. Oh forget it! don't believe in science anyway.

Things are looking up. The discussion is less heavy on insults and ethnic slurs than whats usual here. Talk of the thermodynamics, mathematics and the evil mime of the Armageddon mindset seems to have pushed the egotistical rantings aside a bit. Movement in the right direction for sure.

If we can stop fighting about who is smart enough to have a valid opinion on GW or not we might get somewhere. Of course whoever is right wrong or smarter won't matter a twit if all we do is talk anyway.

Climate, Oil, War, and Money is the title of this weeks post and there are plenty who can argue the details. Some with more finesse than others for sure but whats the point except to play the game the 'man' wants you too.

The climate is changing, of that there is no doubt. The shift in jet-streams could make for an exceptionally cold winter in Seattle if this year weather repeats last years performance. Is it do to global warming or not? I have an opinion but it is irrelevant.

What matters is reality. The finger which points at the moon is not the moon. The quality and correctness of the mental edifice of thought in the smart brain does not matter if nothing concrete results.

Behavior change is all that matters, a fundamental change in our living arrangements is needed. Unfortunately hubris and resistance to change dominates human thought and leads to ridiculous beliefs when the status quo and ego are threatened. Beliefs with no basis in fact at best and with roots in superstition at worst.

Somebody will deny that global warming is real to the point of self ignition if changing this belief offends their ego.

This leads to feelings of gloom and doom in the more enlightened but there is hope. The dull and ignorant can adopt beliefs which could lead to a more just and verdant world but convincing them is a waste of time. A tipping point could be reached where beliefs in line with reality could actually become popular.

Now I'm not holding my breath, libertarian unrestrained capitalism is the American mantra and religion. Those who benefit the most from it control the mass media and hold public office. Not a recipe for success but progress is possible. Hope enough to keep up the good fight.

There are no enlightened men. Some men have enlightened moments. Lets work on having more of these moments. Take actual action on the basis of the enlightenment and stop fighting about who is smarter and more 'entitled' to an opinion.

Stay thirsty my friends.

If I wanted to waste my fucking time, I could go out and find 100 more widely respected and better educated profs on the other side of the debate, for every "professor bob" you come up with, and you know it!


'asia' is a handle not my name...what fffin diff does it make what ones handle is? cept when yve been banned and need a new one?

' DIMMING THE SUN' ... that movie?

I can see over any big city the effect of contrails.....and its legal for the planes to dump fuel in the air before they land.

Did anyone else here hear Hanson [?] talk on public radio about GW etc?

' It is intended to prove what the scientists WANTED to prove.'....

YES! but why do they want this? follow the money? grants? cap n trade? religion?
did you hear alex jones on coast to coast this week? he has his opinion on this!

Professor Bob is the John Bolton of GW. Any scientist who tries to downplay the importance of peer review has his head up his ass. I don't care what degrees or qualifications they have.

"If I wanted to waste my fucking time, I could go out and find 100 more widely respected and better educated profs on the other side of the debate..."

Sure you could but they would all have to teach at Harvard and they would all have to have the same exact opinion. That is what entails an open debating society in your goofy world. And that is fine. Until it involves the appropriation and redistribution of trillions of dollars..based on faulty science no less.

"The scientists' may just really want to be huge and famous and get pussy. Who knows?"

OK, so is Sara Palins pussy THAT hot that they all want to gang-bang her?

I guess you are right, in the end it all comes down to getting a few seconds action for the lil' swizzle stick. sigh. The human race had such high potential.

Oh well.

So Dr, hows the air pressure and fluid levels?

Parrot Boy's idea of open debating is calling the opposition fucktards, Nancy-Boys, and idiots before he has provided any evidence proving his points.

Believing the GW hypothesis does not mean that one is for cap and trade or any other specific government scheme. Just because you are against the government's proposed measures does not mean GW isn't happening. Some of you seem to have a hell of a time separating your politics from the facts.

Hey dumber-than,

Here are the credentials of Phil Jones, the big dog at the University of East Anglia. You know the center where the email brouhaha has broken out. In my estimation his credentials are no greater or less than those of professor Bob. I will note you will probably be disappointed as he does not hale from Havard.

"Philip D. Jones (born 1952) is a climatologist at the University of East Anglia, notable for maintaining of the time series of the instrumental temperature record;[1] this work figured prominently in the IPCC TAR SPM.[2] He was director of the Climatic Research Unit[3] and a Professor in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia in Norwich. He holds a BA in Environmental Sciences from the University of Lancaster, and an MSc and PhD from the University of Newcastle upon Tyne. His PhD was titled "A spatially distributed catchment model for flood forecasting and river regulation with particular reference to the River Tyne". His research interests are instrumental climate change, palaeoclimatology, detection of climate change and the extension of riverflow records in the UK."

" Just because you are against the government's proposed measures does not mean GW isn't happening."

Who are you suggesting (on this site) that does not believe in GW?

"In my estimation his credentials are no greater or less than those of professor Bob."

Except Dr. Jones is an actual climate scientist who contributed to the IPCC, while Professor Bob studies manatees and fossils. Bob disregards peer reviewed results, which is a neat trick. It allows him to throw away the careful, cross-checked research of other scientists and claim that everyone should believe his non-peered reviewed results.

Some fucking scientist, this Bob character. Sounds like a complete ass to me.

"Parrot Boy's idea of open debating is calling the opposition fucktards, Nancy-Boys, and idiots before he has provided any evidence proving his points."

Turkey-lurkey's idea is to go crying to mommy so she'll have them removed from the debate so there is no debate. A true pussy tactic. But thats OK as pussy does what pussy is;>}

"Bob disregards peer reviewed results, which is a neat trick."

Really? Where do you come upon this enlightened nugget?

As usual, all Parrot Boy has to add to the "debate" is insults. When he gets called on his inane posts about other people's mothers, he claims that we're trying to suppress open debate. What a fucking tool.

"Really? Where do you come upon this enlightened nugget?"

Hey, asshat. You obviously didn't even read the sources you're posting here about Professor Blob. But I guess I should have expected that.

"Really? Where do you come upon this enlightened nugget?

Jesus, Parrot Boy, just step away from the keyboard for awhile. Go take a walk or something. Drink some fruit juice. Telephone your mother.

Calling other people pussies on the internet is not the way to prove your manhood. Frankly, it is downright pathetic.

"Calling other people pussies on the internet is not the way to prove your manhood. Frankly, it is downright pathetic."

You're right, Nancy, I like pussy, why would I equate you with something I like. I'll stick with Nancy-boy. OK Nancy-boy?

""Calling other people pussies on the internet is not the way to prove your manhood."

Furthermore the term "asshat" is way more macho, right Nancy-boy?

"OK Nancy-boy?"

Whatever floats your boat, Stinky. I'm willing to admit that your e-peen is ginormously larger than everyone else's if you'll just STFU for a day or two.

Parrot Boy, how old are you? You remind me of a middle schooler trolling youtube.

"Parrot Boy, how old are you? You remind me of a middle schooler trolling youtube."

You spend an inordinate amount of time trifling with a middle schooler. Could you be even dumber than dumber-than-dale? I'm beginning to wonder.

I didn't say you are a middle schooler. I said you act like one.

You, on the other hand, spend an inordinate amount of time creating new accounts here after your old ones get banned, because you can't control your urge to call anyone who disagrees with you a fucktard.

How fucking dumb is that?

At least dale has only had one account here, because he knows how to be civil. You've had what, like 8? But the who the fuck is counting, anyways.

"You, on the other hand, spend an inordinate amount of time creating new accounts here after your old ones get banned, because you can't control your urge to call anyone who disagrees with you a fucktard."

Duhhhhhhh...I suppose you could just ignore my posts, Nancy-boy.

"I didn't say you are a middle schooler. I said you act like one."

Excuse me. You spend an inordinate amount of time trifling with someone who ACTS like a middle schooler.

"But the who the fuck is counting, anyways."

Ahh. Let me guess. Nancy-boy?

And by the way you used the "F" word, Nancy. That is just a "tard" short of being as offensive fucktard. Better watch yourself potty mouth.

"I suppose you could just ignore my posts, Nancy-boy."

Hahahaha, now you tell me to ignore all your posts (could that be because they aren't worth reading?) and admit that you do act like a middle schooler. You're a real master of internet debating there, fella. I give up.

Ignoring you is probably what I should have done in the first place. That's at least one post you've made with some sensible advice. Smell ya later, stinkEye. Good luck finding some more "friends" to play with. Been real fun.

Holly Shit! I just found this incredibly stupid recent passage by George Monbiot:

"The denial industry, which has no interest in establishing the truth about global warming, insists that these emails (which concern three or four scientists and just one or two lines of evidence) destroy the entire canon of climate science.

Even if you were to exclude every line of evidence which could possibly be disputed - the proxy records, the computer models, the complex science of clouds and ocean currents - the evidence for manmade global warming would still be unequivocal. You can see it in the measured temperature record, which goes back to 1850; in the shrinkage of glaciers and the thinning of sea ice; in the responses of wild animals and plants and the rapidly changing crop zones."

Holy fucking SHIT. He's saying throw out all the data. You can see it with your very own eyes..."the evidence of manmade global warming would still be unequivocal." And what would this be based upon? Well the fact that you could see it with your own eyes.

OK, Moonbat lets do this. You put me in a time machine and dial me back to a warmer time that existed before man existed. I'd be able to see thinning ice, shrinking glaciers, and and the responses of wild animals and plants. A warmer time, with shrinking glaciers and penguins copping suntans BUT no man. Could I also chalk this up to man made global warming? I mean because I could see it with my eyes and shit?

"Ignoring you is probably what I should have done in the first place."

No fucking shit, Nancy. What a fucking genius!!!

"Been real fun."

Well you should thank me for the fun. You are welcome Nancy. Now remember you gave me the big kiss-off so don't backslide and return to your fucktarded ways.

Dear JHK:
If you haven't thought of running for higher political office yet, I would urge you to seriously consider the prospect. You are one of the few American thinkers out there who has a clear grasp of the shit storm we are headed for in the next four years. All we ask is that you don't play the game of identity politics and change your message to suit the religious, ethnic or economic makeup of your audience. God knows how much more bullshit we can take from America's two major political parties.

"You're a real master of internet debating there, fella. I give up."

Why am I not surprised that you have given up to a "real master."

"You are one of the few American thinkers out there who has a clear grasp of the shit storm we are headed for in the next four years. "

That being the case, why on earth would an electorate embrace his views? If he is that rare he hasn't an icebergs chance in an age of AGW of success.

The data being discussed in the emails is ten years old. Here is an excerpt from an email from Professor Phil Jones of the Climatic Research Unit:

"The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct +is 0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998."

The first thing to point out is that this refers to one diagram - not a scientific paper - which was used in the World Meteorological Organisation's statement on the status of the global climate in 1999 (WMO-no.913)."

What is the fucking scandal? It is ten year old data they are arguing about. And the data was included in the final report.

This argument about 10 year old data is resurrected in 2009 as "Climate Gate" (just before Copenhagen) to manipulate public opinion.

Dale wrote: “I'll stop misquoting you, if you stop making shit up out of thin air. I never said you can get energy out without puting something in, never happened, never would. Over an out.”

Stuff and nonsense. Dale, the study you quoted (and praised, and used as an example of why we'd all be driving EV's shortly) claimed that extra watt-hours could be gotten out of large stationary fossil-fuel-burning powerplants without extra consumption of fuel. The smarter people in the room snickered while the non-scientists (that includes you, by your own admission – see above) ran around shrieking how the breakthrough was now in sight and how we'd be able to keep driving personal vehicles forever and ever, amen, yada yada yada, now that the energy problem had been “solved”.

It's the same thing you do every time someone improves their battery design a little, or claims they've got some secret new ultracapacitor ~ what matters is not how you store the energy (that's become a trivial problem by now) but how you get enough of it in the first place. Oh, I'm not busting on you, really .. it's actually amusing as all hell to see someone who thinks of himself as “smart” fail to realize the depth of his failings.

Dale, please go check out some library books on physics when you get a chance. If nothing else, hunt down someone who's gotten some education in the matter and ask them to explain it to you so you can understand it. After all, we all live in the physical world already anyway. Examples of physical laws are all around us, but most of us don't recognize them as such. A good teacher can help you past that part.

Above all, please don't stop posting here. You're the only reason I come back to this forum anyway. I couldn't find humor like this on a dozen other blogs.

The ignorance of your entire comment is surpassed only by its irrelevence. While you as a conserative cackle about how Obama's donors gave his true agenda away (a conclusion with which I agree by the way) the same could be said of your champion John "Uncle Fester" McCain and Sarah "drill baby drill" Palin. Same with Hillary "y'know" Clinton and that Mormon proto-nazi-racist, Mitt Romney.

and the band plays on

Dale, to continue the above thread about wild free-press claims to “get extra energy” out of X, and how non-scientists salivate and cavort while others snicker and watch ..

Please understand that capitalism is essentially a wargame. That is, each party seeks to get competitive advantage over the other. When viewed in this light, money appears to be transferred from less-clueful owners to more-clueful owners. The short history of that company that claimed spectacular energy breakthroughs in its compressed-air was essentially a story of wealth transfer. To wit, the principals crafted some PR verbiage that would not fool anyone with a knowledge of physics but that functioned as pure catnip to the non-scientist “infestor class”, ie, people like you, who then lost their shirts on something that was a practical impossibility from day zero anyway.

It's sort of like sending your new temp office help looking all over for a left-handed stapler. Anyone with half a brain gets the joke without any explanation needed. By disdaining the advice of people who actually knew what they were talking about, many an infestor lost his or her shirt on the compressed air car thing, all because it sounded so “scientific” ~ just like that report about getting extra power from generators without also feeding them more fuel.

Email if you have any questions.

Nudge, you mean, the compressed air car doesn't work?

I think Dale was regarding the power-down periods, like late at night, when power plants have reduced load demand from peak daylight hours, but must still keep some baseload level of support going. He thought this energy was going to waste. Perhaps some of it is, but It doesn't make sense that too much of it does go to waste. Some if not most grids can share loads, and perhaps across time zones to some extent, to mitigate this baseload waste problem.

At any rate, if there was a big new demand for electricity as a replacement of fossil fuels used for transport, any baseload waste would soon be consumed/overwhelmed by the new demand.

Besides, what will the broken US middle-class unemployed and mortgaged underwater folks use for capital to buy those new electric vehicles? And their expensive battery replacements?

Dr. Doom said: "At any rate, if there was a big new demand for electricity as a replacement of fossil fuels used for transport, any baseload waste would soon be consumed/overwhelmed by the new demand."

As usual, you are assuming all electrical baseload demand to power vehicles must be supplied by pollution-producing, energy dense fossil-fuel products derived from oil, coal, or natural gas.

And you ignore the fact that real world examples exist like the solar bus being run on zero-emission, sustainble solar energy in Australia. Other alternative-energy powered transport efforts are underway in Delhi, Barcelona, and other places.

In Adelaide, South Australia, the Tindo is an electric bus providing municipal service that can recharge using solar energy. The air-conditioned 26-seat bus is powered by a 70,000 kilowatt hours of zero-carbon emissions electricity. It can carry 42 passengers, includes two wheelchair spaces and has an operational range of about 200 kilometers between charges. The vehicle's power comes from a solar photovoltaic system (PV) established on the roof of the Adelaide Central Bus Station.

There is no need to depend exclusively upon a carbon-based, polluting, and unsustainable electrical grid... no need to assume base load demand would bust the grid... just the will to create smarter grids and change the focus away from combustible fueled vehicles, as the City Council of Adelaide has done.

Thank You.

PV Solar powered cars and buses won't scale to present use and need, so you are right that *some* will ride around on PV Solar, in sunny places like Adelaide, South Australia, it's just the rest of those folks presently using fossil fuels, in places like not-so-sunny Michigan and southern Canada, that will be immobile.

After the coming bottleneck, fewer drivers can revert back to the old ways or even the far less energetic new ones, assuming the roads and power grids hold up. A long-shot assumption, BTW.

The only conservative in the last election cycle was almost completely ignored.

The theory of relativity means nothing is absolute, and there are exceptions everwhere. You may not be able to find the exceptional, but that does not prove anything about the absoluteness of any rule, only the limitations of human mind.

The finer your approach to reality, the more exceptions you find. Exceptions everywhere. Nothing is absolute.

This is good news. Science (pre-Einsteinian) was that the world is a vast mechanism. Not an organism but a mechanism that functions without exceptions. It simply goes on moving, never gets bored, never feels to do something just for a change, other than what it has always done. There is no mind in it. Hence, the machine can be absolute.

But organisms, living beings, cannot be absolute. It is a free agent. If it follows a certain rule, it is its decision. It can drop out. It can go into the opposite direction.

Science after the theory of relativity will never have the certainty of the old science. When we go inside the atom: electron, neutron, positron... it was thought they must be following a set discipline, just as we find in every material thing. But they are strangely individualistic. Their behavior changes.

Observation changes their behavior.

"The only conservative in the last election cycle was almost completely ignored."

Gee, I wonder why.

Conservatism has destroyed America with its free market capitalism, promotion of economic slavery (get the cheapest labor possible to get highest profits), American triumphalism and paranoia that leads to wars and loss of civil liberties.

Conservative leaders, like Ron Paul, laugh off the idea of the public interest as airy-fairy nonsense; they caution against bringing top-notch talent into government service; they declare war on public workers.

Conservatives have made a cult of outsourcing and privatizing, they have wrecked established federal operations because they disagree with them, and over the last eight years they have deliberately piled up an Everest of debt in order to force the government into crisis. The ruination they have wrought has been thorough; it has been a professional job.

Conservatives like Grover Norquist, Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, Newt Gingrich, and the whole troupe of activists, lobbyists, and corpora-trons who got their start back in the Reagan years -- have for the last three decades been among the most powerful individuals in America.

This wave of misgovernment has been brought to you by conservative ideology, not incompetence. They piled up the national debt on purpose, intent on shrinking government until, as Norquist said, it could be "drowned in a bathtub." Their attack on America has been deliberate, inhumane, evil.

Conservatives intentionally appointed the opponents of government agencies to head those government agencies; they auctioned their official services to the purveyor of the most lavish "golf weekend"; they mulcted millions from groups with business before Congress; they dynamited the Treasury and sabotaged the regulatory process and forced government shutdowns -- in short, they treated government with contempt -- they were running true to form.

They have not done these awful things because they are bad conservatives; they have done them because they are good conservatives.

So, yes, the only conservative in the last election was ignored. Thank God.

I hope Ron Paul, who is a racist and anti-semite, never gets near the White House with his conservative philosophy. Ron Paul's support of tax cuts, his support of regulatory snafus that save industry millions and perhaps even billions of dollars, Paul's embrace of conservative rule (and opposition to unions) allowed greed to thrive and allowed the rise of a new plutocratic order populated by false patriots who are ruled by greed, the country be damned. Capitalism unbridled for the last eight years.

James K:

I look forward to your weekly dispatch. I don't always agree with your writings, but find your words intelligent and insightful. You know how to 'turn a phrase', with a humor that is rare, even as you explore some pretty dark subjects.

So, it's always disappointing to read the comments section. Two images come to mind:

1) A Ralph Steadman illustration from the early 70's that portrays Richard Nixon and his advisors
as toddlers in a playpen, playing with their own

2) A scene from Ken Kesey's 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest'where the Chronics and Acutes at the mental hospital are playing poker, babbling on, cutting each other down, vying for attention.

There are a few gems in here, but for the most part,it's just noisy and stoo-pid. Demeaning to this website.

You deserve better.

"They took the whole Clusterf*ck Nation
Put them on the Reservation"

No one missed them.

Pull the plug, James!


Dr. Doom says solar power won't places like not-so-sunny Michigan and southern Canada.

I think my point is that what is not scaling is yoiur imagination. The largest solar power plants, like the 354 MW SEGS, are concentrating solar thermal plants, but recently multi-megawatt photovoltaic plants have been built.

Completed in 2008, the 46 MW Moura photovoltaic power station in Portugal and the 40 MW Waldpolenz Solar Park in Germany are characteristic of the trend toward larger photovoltaic power stations.

Much larger ones are proposed, such as the 100 MW Fort Peck Solar Farm, the 550 MW Topaz Solar Farm, and the 600 MW Rancho Cielo Solar Farm.

As for those "not so sunny" places, fear not. Solar power is a predictably intermittent energy source, meaning that whilst solar power is not available at all times, we can predict with a very good degree of accuracy when it will and will not be available.

Some technologies, such as solar thermal concentrators have an element of thermal storage, such as molten salts. These store spare solar energy in the form of heat which is made available overnight or during periods that solar power is not available to produce electricity.

Those two aren't real Conservatives. Both of them are Republican warmongers. Both of them are for the continuation of massive immigration, both legal and illegal-and thus are traitors to America and the American People. How do you know a real Conservative? They want to Conserve the American Nation and Culture-not just conserve their portfolios. Once that is clear, you can see that there are no real conservatives on the popular stage.

A wise man once said, "Man does not live by bread alone". No mere economic philosphy can sustain a nation. Why? Because things like outsourcing and insourcing are extremely profitable in the short term for those who do it, but massively destructive to the workforce and the long term interests of the Nation. A real cutlure just wouldn't allow such things-end of story. Businesmen should not be allowed to rule a nation. They are not qualified. They are too selfish in the main. Their incredible energy and know how should be channeled by better men to for everyone's benefit. Communism stupidly just tries to destroy the business class, which is unjust to them-they have right too! And moreover, it is disastrous for the Nation, because a Nation needs their energy. Greed is one of the great motivators, it must be used not indulged and not destroyed-as if it could be. But businesmen, bankers, and investors aren't going to control themselves. If they could and understood why, they probably wouldn't be in that field. And they would be sued by their stockholders for not going with the bottom line.

Real consevatives take seriously Washington's injunction to stay out of foreign wars. They protested both WW1 and WW2-massively. All of this has been deleted from our history. During WW1, the protestors were called "isolationists". During WW2 they were called "Anti-Semites".

Ron Paul is a decent man with some great ideas-like auditing the fraudulent Federal Reseve. There will be no recovery until the debasement of our currency ceases. But he is still too enamoured of capitalism to do the cracking down which needs to be done. He wants to continue massive legal immigration at the current rate of over a million a year. This was madness even before the crash. But now, it must be seen as Criminal. What are all those people going to do except take our jobs or failing that, go on welfare? The ever expanding economy is over-he just doesn't get that. No one does. If they did, no one would vote for them. And of course, they will continue to dilute our culture, which should be our main concern to begin with. No, we do not have the strength to acculturate them. Some Chinese aren't even bothering to learn English now, just Spanish. Why bother learning the languarge of a decieved, defeated, dying people?

You're just projecting your anger from yourself onto "conservatives". You voted for Obama even though part of you knew better, didn't you? Just couldn't resist the participaton mystique. Get angy at your own gullibility. We do not live by bread alone, but by every word which proceeds from the mouth of the Father. There can be no long term culture without a Religion to support it. People need that and the Culture needs a higher purpose and sanction.

Right on, Sister, Right on! But just so you know it stands: they passed the hate crime law a few weeks ago and America will begin to change in the near future as they train Prosecutors and Attorney Generals to implement it. It was an incredible triumph for the Anti Defamaton League. This is what they've wanted from the begining decades ago. Under these new strictures, Whites are not protected like everyone else. So our statements above could be a basis for prosecution once things get really going. Certainly we wouldn't get away with it under the German system. If you are not White, or are Gay, you still have civil rights and it becomes much more fuzzy as to how they would proceed or if they would.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. They live we sleep. Maybe if the long debate-which lasted over a decade, had been televised, it might have been different. But why would they do that? They own the media by and large. But not the internet, not yet. They're working on it though.

Obama received the Nobel Piece Prize today! Suburban Empire invites any hypocrisy hawks out there to visit, read a short essay, and clear up a simple spelling error that has led to global misunderstanding!

Biting opinion, oversimplified drivel...
Suburban Critical, Empire Chronicle.

"Dr. Doom says solar power won't places like not-so-sunny Michigan and southern Canada.

I think my point is that what is not scaling is yoiur imagination. The largest solar power plants, like the 354 MW SEGS, are concentrating solar thermal plants, but recently multi-megawatt photovoltaic plants have been built."--asoka

You're talking multi-megawatt, what we need are multi-gigawatt. A city of 1 million like Honolulu draws over 2 gigawatts. That means places like LA or NY are drawing about 20+ GW for about 10+ million people in each metropolitan area. And, they aren't yet using grid power for running vast fleets of electric cars and trucks.

So, you're low by about a factor of 1000. Even geochemists get concerned when they're off by three orders of magnitude.

Hi Dr Doom :) .. and you are so right. Just look at the projected sticker prices for the Volt or any of the Tesla series. As the economy continues to unwind, fewer people than ever will be considering replacing their vehicles just to save energy money. Those particular EV's are so expensive that the payoff period (even vs a F250 that's being used as a daily solo commuter) is decades out ~ I did the math for my boss once to show him this.

With the Insight I can sort of harness that momentum energy (to recharge the batteries) but this has the effect of slowing the car down quickly, since the energy has got to come from somewhere. When doing the same on a downhill stretch, speed can be maintained while energy is harvested .. but we must remember that the car already expended substantial energy getting up the other side of the hill first, and is recouping only a small amount of it going downhill. That's TANSSAAFL for those of you who don't know the phrase “there ain't no such thing as a free lunch” (with the corollary that if there is, it's only because the drinks cost 2x or 3x more).

Mmm, that solar stuff doesn't work here in not-sunny New England. We average

Where did Dale go? I really do like him, though not for the reasons he might imagine.

"They have not done these awful things because they are bad conservatives; they have done them because they are good conservatives."

You are infatuated with labels. Try replacing "conservative" with "constitutionalist" and perhaps you will understand what I am trying to communicate. Probably would make any difference anyway.

Sorry, it probaby would NOT make any difference anyway.

"Conservatism has destroyed America with its free market capitalism, promotion of economic slavery (get the cheapest labor possible to get highest profits), American triumphalism and paranoia that leads to wars and loss of civil liberties."

"For feds, more get 6-figure salaries
Average pay $30,000 over private sector"

Full story here:

"In a bold but risky year-end strategy, Democrats are preparing to raise the federal debt ceiling by as much as $1.8 trillion before New Year’s rather than have to face the issue again prior to the 2010 elections.

“We’ve incurred this debt. We have to pay our bills,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told POLITICO Wednesday. And the Maryland Democrat confirmed that the anticipated increase could be as high as $1.8 trillion — nearly twice what had been assumed in last spring’s budget resolution for the 2010 fiscal year."

Full story here:

"Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the powerful Senate Finance Committee, gave a nearly $14,000 pay raise to a female staffer in 2008, at the time he was becoming romantically involved with her, and later that year took her on a taxpayer-funded trip to Southeast Asia and the Middle East, though foreign policy was not her specialty."

Full story here:

“I said if you don't know what these things are or what they mean, you are NOT QUALIFIED to have an opinion on AGW”

I haven’t expressed an opinion on AGW here. The opinion I expressed had to do with your silly conspiracy theory:

"I believe that many of these scientists are veiling either class or consumption envy behind a wall of shoddy science. IOW, they have emotionalized it. They don't like those consumptive "rednecks" in their SUVs."

So you point me to Lord Monckton (not a climate scientist), who also has a silly conspiracy theory. His involves “the need of the international left for a new flag to rally round" following the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.

I bet I know what her "specialty" was.

not mommy/OEO/fefe/etc

Let's not forget to thank President Bush for the increase in federal employee salaries:

"Key reasons for the boom in six-figure salaries:

•Pay hikes. Then-president Bush recommended — and Congress approved — across-the-board raises of 3% in January 2008 and 3.9% in January 2009. President Obama has recommended 2% pay raises in January 2010, the smallest since 1975."

You should also calculate bonus pay as part of private sector income.

And how many federal employees get four, five, six, seven, eight, or nine figure end-of-year bonus checks? ZERO.

President Bush did send me a bonus one year: it was a three figure check for $600.

"Average pay $30,000 over private sector" (Blah, blah, blah, asoka-your-pants. Average pay (forget fatcats) 30,000 more...)

It ain't capitalism thats the problem. It's bloated, overpaid government workers and unending programs that are rife with corruption. Obama says we can cut 60 billion dollars of corruption out of medicaid. Really? If you can cite an actual figure, you must know where the corruption exists. So, please, be my guest cut the corruption. Do THAT fucking first. Then maybe we can talk about other changes in our medical delivery system.

End of story.

Dr. Doom said: "A city of 1 million like Honolulu draws over 2 gigawatts. That means places like LA or NY are drawing about 20+ GW for about 10+ million people in each metropolitan area. And, they aren't yet using grid power for running vast fleets of electric cars and trucks.

So, you're low by about a factor of 1000. Even geochemists get concerned when they're off by three orders of magnitude."

First of all, thank you for your response. Second, I AM very concerned.

Third, all of your figures are assuming a maintenance of current levels of consumption, when everything I have read by green groups indicates we will need to reduce our energy consumption through conservation and efficiency measures.

Fourth, your estimate that LA is drawing 20 GW for 10 million peoople is off by a factor of I don't know how many zeros, according to the Los Angeles Times article by Phil Willon this week:

"The pilot solar project would generate an estimated 50 megawatts by 2012, or about 0.5% of L.A.'s energy needs. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has vowed to halt the use of coal-burning power plants by 2020 and -- that same year -- generate at least 40% of its energy from renewable resources.

The DWP estimates that the solar pilot project also could save 2,460 acre-feet of water a year -- worth $1.7 million -- because the solar arrays could be used to control dust in that portion of Owens Lake instead of flooding." --Los Angeles Times, By Phil Willon, December 2, 2009

If my math is correct, LA would only need 200 of these to supply ALL (that is 100%) of its energy needs with sustainable solar energy: 0.5 x 200 = 100

Let's do the other math: 200 arrays at 50 megawatts per array = 10,000 megawatts total, which I believe would be 10 GW, not 20+ GW.

You are doing much better than me, only being off by a factor of 2.

My larger point remains: I am a scientific illiterate (I readily admit my ignorance) and I can figure out a solution on paper.

I'm sure the smart people can make it happen in reality. And I prefer to think it is possible... because throwing up your hands and saying "We are fucked!" is paralyzing and negates the possibility of any kind of solution.

I would prefer we be in the lead worldwide in the development of solar. Right now China has over 400 photovoltaic (PV) companies and produces approximately 18% of the photovoltaic products worldwide. In 2007 China produced 1700 MW of solar panels, nearly half of the world production of 3800 MW.

Worldwide, solar production needs to increase by a factor of 1000 in the next year.

And energy demand needs to decrease, especially in the developed nations. Peak Oil will make the transition a rough one if we don't voluntarily transition for a softer landing.

Here is a book I am reading now:

Living Off the Grid: A Simple Guide to Creating and Maintaining a Self-Reliant Supply of Energy, Water, Shelter, and More / by Dave Black (2008).

The solution will have to be a combination of the most energy intensive nations decreasing their demand, combined with an increase (and decentralization) of sustainable energy production.

not mommy said: "Average pay (forget fatcats) blah blah blah"

Average pay for a federal worker is $75,000 (forget fatcats)

And thank President Bush for the enormous growth in federal government:

"If you look at the four-year period from 2006 to 2010, the number of Homeland Security employees has grown by 22 percent, the Justice Department has increased by 15 percent, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can claim 25 percent more employees. (These figures assume that Congress adopts Mr. Obama's 2010 budget without significant changes.)"

not mommy wrote:

"In a bold but risky year-end strategy, Democrats are preparing to raise the federal debt ceiling by as much as $1.8 trillion before New Year’s rather than have to face the issue again prior to the 2010 elections."

Since no one in Washington seems capable of learning from experience, it seems all too likely that this "bold and risky year-end strategy" will work out pretty much just like last year's bold risky strategy - which was TARP.

Trying ever-bolder, ever-riskier unproven untested "strategies" has got all the overtones of that thing Albert Einstein warned us about: insanity is defined as doing the same thing again and again and expecting a different result every new time.

The same is seen in the confused stupidity clouding the issue of housing as understood by the beltway crowd. Policians have been quoted saying "Housing got us into this mess, so housing will get us out of this mess." Meh. That's like "junping off the garage roof is what broke my leg, so jumping off again should fix it."

Our federal government functions admirably as the poster child for the Peter Principle, don't you think?

And let's also thank both Bush and Cheney for increasing the overpaid private military (mercenary) contractors like Blackwater, instead of using less expensive military soldiers.

The average starting salary for a private contractor in Blackwater is around $600 a day and they get paid for 275 contract days in country (right now in places like Pakistan).

275 x $600 = $165,000

(over twice the average pay of a federal worker)

Why did Bush and Cheney do that? No accountability.

Xe contractors are in Pakistan killing and torturing right now, being paid $165,000 a year, funded by our taxes... but there is no accountability for their actions as there would be if they were less expensive military soldiers in a command and control structure.

I had an interesting talk last nite w someone who works for a company called SOLAR CITY...he said that 1 in 60,000? homes in usa is solar paneled and that the powers that be dont want better cheaper alt energy.
he claimed 15 years ago he saw a system that got its power from radiation...not just solar radiation that at 5' x 5' WOULD POWER 1 OR 2 never was put online but it did work....again thats what he claimed he saw.

Nudge said: "it seems all too likely that this "bold and risky year-end strategy" will work out pretty much just like last year's bold risky strategy - which was TARP."

Heavens, let's not repeat! ... Einstein and all... insanity, etc. ...

But if TARP worked, is it still insanity to repeat it?

Audit Finds TARP Program Effective
WASHINGTON — The independent panel that oversees the government’s financial bailout program concluded in a year-end review that, despite flaws and lingering problems, the program “can be credited with stopping an economic panic.” --NY Times

Stopping an economic panic, Could that be qualified as a failure, or insanity? (maybe disappointing... if your mindset was such that you were fully expecting an economic collapse in 2008 or 2009?)

And, of course, you are sure collapse will happen in 2010 or 2011 or 2012, etc.

Is repeating a failed expectation year after year... Einstein and all... insanity?

Reply to Asoka

About your comment:

" I'm sure the smart people can make it happen in reality. And I prefer to think it is possible... because throwing up your hands and saying "We are
fucked!" is paralyzing and negates the possibility of any kind of solution. "

I agree having a negative attitude is paralyzing. I agree that total negativity will negate the possibility of any kind of solution. But one clueless knuckleheads can negate the efforts of ten smart people.

Solutions to global warming and the rest of the clusterfuck abound, it's people, Soylent Green time. Thats the problem.

It does not take a genius to realize that a few cherry picked emails from a few scientists doesn't negate global warming. Critical thinking 101 and a will show the illogic pretty quick. see

This link is not for you Asoka, I'm not saying your illogical at all.

The whole climategate thing amounts to intellectual terrorism. Boundless energy has been put into defending a point of view which at this point really needs no defense.

Nothing works better for a dishonest man than to call an honest man dishonest. The energy the honest man will spend defending his honor will be huge and his energy misdirected.

Email thieves are not honest men but like terrorists they have drained their opponents energy (us) quite effectively.

We need to understand our enemies or we will never overcome them. We need to wise up.

The AGW deniers, like Sarah Palin, cannot, and therefore do not want to debate the issue, as Sarah Palin's interview with Laura Ingraham demonstrated.

Ingraham: Would you agree to a debate with Al Gore on this issue?

Palin: Oh my goodness. You know, it depends on what the venue would be, what the forum. Because Laura, as you know, if it would be some kind of conventional, traditional debate with his friends setting it up or being the commentators I’ll get clobbered because, you know, they don’t want to listen to the facts. They don’t want to listen to some reasonable voices in this. And that was proven with the publication of this op-ed, where they kind of got all we-weed up about it and wanted to call me and others deniers of changing weather patterns and climate conditions. Trying to make the issue into something that it is not.

Ingraham: But what if it's an Oxford-style, proper debate format. I mean, he’s going to chicken out. I mean, if you challenge him to a debate, do you actually think he would accept it?

Palin: I don’t know, I don't know. Oh, he wouldn’t want to lower himself, I think, to, you know, my level to debate little old Sarah Palin from Wasilla."

No time to be shy, "little" Sarah. Shooting spitballs and then hiding behind your computer screen isn't going to get you into the White House. But nailing Gore's carcass but good - that's the stuff that conservative dreams are made of.

I think this will take more than a little bit of outside prodding. When asked about her interest in a debate with Gore, Palin balked at getting set up by Gore's "friends." If that's her biggest problem, then she should listen to Ingraham, who is hardly going to be confused with someone from The two sides could find a neutral setting like the Oxford Union, which has honestly hosted generations of debates, and head into the debate knowing they were on an equal footing."

For the record Sarah Palin was a failure at managing the town of Wasilla, pop. 7,000, and she was a failure at being the governor (quitter) of the state of Alaska, and now she is failing as an author/debater. She quit the marathon race, too, don't you know, also, too? You betcha!

But Sarah gets to be on TV a lot and we don't.

With only 24 hours in a day every 2 minute sound-bite to keep attention from real issues counts. Maybe Sarah's trying to be dumb on purpose. You know, taking one for the team, her team not ours.

But believing that would give her too much credit. She's probably just dumb and she is on TV because thats the best the AGW crowd can do right now.

Anything to keep science and reason off the tube.

And we would all like to be Nailin Palin.

"Solutions to global warming and the rest of the clusterfuck abound"


asoka his pants sez:

"Why did Bush and Cheney do that? No accountability." just accounted for it. the sum was $165,000. (What a fucking idiot!!!)

Duh! Just duh! Duuuuuuh! Fucktard!

reply to turkel

"Solutions to global warming and the rest of the clusterfuck abound"


Ok turkel you are right. I should have said:

Solutions to global warming and the rest of the clusterfuck abound but none are easy and all will require a double scoop of pain.

Pain is the problem, it's pain which makes the clusterfuck less of a scientific problem and more of a human one.

There is no magic bullet but if people were willing to change and make other living arrangements solutions WOULD abound.

Eliminating air travel, develop a rail system to rival what Bulgaria has. Start a TARP style bailout dedicated to localization and green jobs. Tax anyone having more than two children. National health care with ONLY a public option to remind people we are all in it together. I could go on for pages.

Solutions abound but they go against the wild west unregulated capitalism we suffer under. A system which enriches our masters and which they will maintain so long as we are fool enough to let them.

Solutions abound but they impoverish the rich (and some of the not so rich) who would have to give up lifestyles of excess with unlimited carbon footprints.

Learning to live with less is not something Americans will embrace easily. Wearing a t-shirt from Asia made by slave labor does not seem to bother most Americans. We have a long way to go for sure. Buying a T-shirt made in America would cost more because living wages would have to be paid to the workers making it.

Solutions abound but they all require changes in the way we live. That is the problem.

There's no solution to population overshoot except for die off.

fefe fail said: " just accounted for it. the sum was $165,000."

You really believe that is all the money they get? Guess you haven't heard about the pallets-full of cash that gets distributed to... well, we don't know because there is no accountability, for the money or for their actions. From Senate oversight hearings:

"This was how the Bush Administration decided to do business, in a climate that a former Administration official described as “the Wild West.” We airlifted billions of dollars in cash to Iraq. This picture shows pallets of cash arriving in Iraq. Each pallet contains 640 bundles of 1,000 bills and weighs 1,500 pounds. In all, this Administration sent 484 of these pallets from New York to Iraq. That’s more than 363 tons of U.S. currency, or about $12 billion. And most of that money simply vanished."

--“An Inside View of the ‘Second Insurgency’: How Corruption and Waste Are Undermining the U.S. Mission in Iraq”, Monday, September 22, 2008

You are the idiot FeFe for voting twice for Bush.

"There's no solution to population overshoot except for die off."

Good point. You first. I'll follow. (Honest.)

This is a photograph of a $2 million payment to a U.S. contractor in Iraq. A witness at one of our previous hearings described how contractors were told “bring a bag, because we pay cash.”

"Ingraham: Would you agree to a debate with Al Gore on this issue?"
It wouldn't matter. Gore will not debate. According to big Al the science is settled. We are beyond debate. (This is sort of like all of the debating that has occurred to date regarding healthcare. In the House they actually changed the locks to exclude the participation of Republicans. And more recently when Obama had his "jobs" summit he excluded the U.S Chamber of Commerce. (The Chamber only represents about 135 million workers. Wouldn't want to include them...merely chump change.)

"This is a photograph of a $2 million payment to a U.S. contractor in Iraq"

What is your point? Corruption is corruption. Send all involved to jail. If the Dems are now in charge, gather up the evidence and put all offenders away. End of story, asoka-your-pants.

mommy would prefer a hot man love session with Tom Sizemore than a debate with Al Gore.

"You are the idiot FeFe for voting twice for Bush."

Why do you say that? Obama is turning out to be Bush Two, only bigger and better. He's increasing troops in Afghan and out spending Bush in monumental terms. He even gave his little "sometimes war is pretty okay" speech at the Nobel ceremony.

You mean you voted for Obama and not for Bush? What a hypocrite!

OEOEOEO couldn't debate his way out of a wet paper bag. Of course, he's real good at calling people fucktards and idiots. Kind of a pot-kettle-black thing he's been working on for awhile.

"mommy would prefer a hot man love session with Tom Sizemore than a debate with Al Gore"

My, my Nancy, who shared a grief stricken moment yesterday, and decided she would no longer pay attention to yours truly is back at it. Hi Nancy, welcome back!

"Obama is turning out to be Bush Two, only bigger and better."

So what's the problem? I thought you loved Shrub.

So you do have a man crush on Tom Sizemore?

Hey, Parrot Boy, do you have a real job or do you get paid to troll here?

Who is grief stricken? LOL. You have quite the active imagination there.

I decided to come back because I know how much you like me. I live for your approval.

""mommy would prefer a hot man love session with Tom Sizemore than a debate with Al Gore""

And by the by, I could debate Gore using the articles I've thrown away and win the argument. Gore won't debate. He's another little Nancy-boy. His carbon foot print is almost bigger than God's and he spews more CO2 than Mt. Saint Helen's for the privilege of being a complete hypocritical peen-lick.

Hey Nancy, do you have a real job or do you get paid to trool here?

" I live for your approval"

I thought there was something just a little bit creepy about you. Whatever...

FeFe Fail said: "What is your point? Corruption is corruption. Send all involved to jail."

When people are told to bring bags because "we pay cash" there is no accountability. That is my point.

You claimed there was accountability. You are wrong. With your man Bush, the guy you voted for twice, there was neither accountability nor transparency.

"And by the by, I could debate Gore using the articles I've thrown away and win the argument."

Ahahahahahahahaha. You are so full of shit.

"Hey Nancy, do you have a real job or do you get paid to trool here?"

I know you are but what am I...that's a real razor sharp wit you got there.

"I thought there was something just a little bit creepy about you."

There's something very creepy about you.

Heavens to Betsy, it looks like OEO/zsazsa/ParrotBoy has taken a little break. Must be time to go to Sizzler's for dinner.

turkel sez:

"There's no solution to population overshoot except for die off."

To support turkel's point see:

By David R. Klein
Alaska Cooperative Wildlife Research Unit, University of Alaska, College

But what if the reindeer had practiced birth control before the population reached the point of no return?

Have we passed the point of no return?
Another discussion for another day. Plenty will be on both sides of the fence on that one but I'll show JHK the respect he deserves and keep my comments on topic.

To quote this weeks post.

"Against a greater welter and flow of incoherence jerking the nation this way and that way en route to collapse comes "ClimateGate," the latest excuse for screaming knuckleheads to defend what has already been lost. It is also yet another distraction from the emergency agenda that the United States faces - namely the urgent re-scaling, re-localizing, and de-globalizing of our daily activities."

Keeping the discussion on topic the question this week is not are we too high on the population crash curve but what to do about the knucklhead reindeer who refuse to admit there is a problem and put a sock on the rocket.

We have to figure out what to do about the screaming knuckleheads because they WILL keep us on the dieoff curve until it is too late if we let them.

I'm thinking even turkel would like to see himself proved wrong. He wouldn't be around to enjoy being right anyway.

"Heavens to Betsy, it looks like OEO/zsazsa/ParrotBoy has taken a little break."

I'm sorry, I had to go and take a turkle.

"We have to figure out what to do about the screaming knuckleheads because they WILL keep us on the dieoff curve until it is too late if we let them."

Hmmm? Well the Germans tried ovens. Hell with modern day convection ovens you may just have a shot. Get biddy with it.

Ha, that was kind of funny.

Here's the current state of things.


Parrot Boy -56 (up from -57)
world 9582732

You shouldn't blame anyone for population overshoot.

Except Parrot Boy, you can blame him if you want.

So if you were to debate Al Gore on GW, could we expect you to call him a fucktard within the first 30 seconds?

Using ovens would just make me another knucklehead.

No thanks

"Using ovens would just make me another knucklehead."

Well you're going to have to take some type of definitive action. I mean the knuckleheads are going to throw you into the die off curve for crying out loud. That means its either you or them. Kind of a kill or be killed scenario from your description. How about gas chambers?

FeFe said: "Why do you say that? Obama is turning out to be Bush Two"

OK, so we are counting now?

FeFe voted for Bush 1 and Bush 2.

Asoka voted for Bush 3.

I guess that makes Asoka an idiot once, and FeFe an idiot twice.

"FeFe an idiot twice"

You miscounted by several thousand.

Not really. I never said I voted for Bush. I've never endorsed or claimed to have voted for a single candidate on this site. Sorry, asoka-your-pants, you be da lone idiot. (Once again.)

"I've never endorsed or claimed to have voted for a single candidate on this site."

Good for you poop stain. You get a gold star.

"you be da lone idiot"

Says's #1 idiot of all time.

We climate skeptics need to be careful. The thought police are warming up.

The American Psychological Association thinks if you don't buy into the AGW story you are crazy.

I'm serious -- take look here:

Similar to Nazi Germany, where if you didn't toe the official line you were declared crazy and locked up.

So all you alarmists don't need to wait for real science -- you can just lock up the scientists that disagree with you.

'capitalism is essentially a wargame. '

and communism isnt? with 100 million dead and counting?

"climate skeptics"

Is that what you're calling yourselves these days? Why does every moron with a Government Motors pickup think they are a climatologist all of a sudden?


What you have is called a persecution complex.

Hey, Puker.

Has any scientist, or anyone for that matter, been "locked up" for disbelieving GW?

You're not crazy, just another paranoid moron.

You know, I've gotta second the motion from Trotskys litter-box.
I mean, sometimes there are some good comments, but after a very short while it starts looking like this:

Arf! Arf-arf-arf!! Arf-arf-arf! Arf-arf-arf-arf!

for 399+ posts.

Either moderate or close it.


Hi Trotsky Catbox. You said it way better than I did.

I'll second DeeJones here. We need rules.

We don't need no stinkin rules. It's just pixels on a screen.

Farts & Global Warming

"The global warming fart debate is really heating up. By now, it seems everybody has heard about the environmental impact of cow farts. Many are advocating that we move away from eating meat, as that would decrease the number of cows raised for their beef, and would decrease the number and volume of the cow farts.

"OK, all well and good. But, in doing research, it seems that people with vegitarian or vegan diets tend to fart much more than people with a balanced diet, including meat. Because of the extra cellulose and various complex sugars contained in legumes and vegitables, some studies indicate that vegitarians might produce 50-100% more gas daily than omnivoires.

"Looks like we’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t. So, might as well have a good steak, rip a few farts, and enjoy the ride…and, when the next study comes out, we can come up with some more knee-jerk reactions and modify behavior appropriately."

Thanks to:

Cow Farts vs. Sheep Burps

Is it possible cows are getting a bad rap?

For years, we’ve been hearing stories about cow farts being a major contributor to climate change and global warming. It has been argued that farting cows release a large amount of methane into our atmosphere. And, with methane being such a “strong” greenhouse gas, it’s impact is much greater than CO2 on a unit by unit basis.

Now, it’s being reported that sheep burps are an even bigger factor than cow farts. The recent study, headed up by John Goopy (you can’t make this stuff up), indicates that the vast majority of Australia’s agricultural gasseous emmissions come from burps.

“There’s not very much passed out the animal’s anus at all,” said Goopy

What could I possibly say after a quote like that?

Thanks to:

Who said it?

"First of all, don't believe anything you hear from power systems. So if Obama or the boss or the newspapers or anyone else tells you they're doing this, that, or the other thing, dismiss it or assume the opposite is true, which it often is. You have to rely on yourself and your associates—gifts don't come from above; you're going to win them, or you won't have them, and you win by struggle, and that requires understanding and serious analysis of the options and the circumstances, and then you can do a lot. So take right now, for example, there is a right-wing populist uprising. It's very common, even on the left, to just ridicule them, but that's not the right reaction. If you look at those people and listen to them on talk radio, these are people with real grievances. I listen to talk radio a lot and it's kind of interesting. If you can sort of suspend your knowledge of the world and just enter into the world of the people who are calling in, you can understand them. I've never seen a study, but my sense is that these are people who feel really aggrieved. These people think, "I've done everything right all my life, I'm a god-fearing Christian, I'm white, I'm male, I've worked hard, and I carry a gun. I do everything I'm supposed to do. And I'm getting shafted." And in fact they are getting shafted. For 30 years their wages have stagnated or declined, the social conditions have worsened, the children are going crazy, there are no schools, there's nothing, so somebody must be doing something to them, and they want to know who it is. Well Rush Limbaugh has answered - it's the rich liberals who own the banks and run the government, and of course run the media, and they don't care about you—they just want to give everything away to illegal immigrants and gays and communists and so on."

Still not sure, this might help:

Well, you know, the reaction we should be having to them is not ridicule, but rather self-criticism. Why aren't we organizing them? I mean, we are the ones that ought to be organizing them, not Rush Limbaugh. There are historical analogs, which are not exact, of course, but are close enough to be worrisome. This is a whiff of early Nazi Germany. Hitler was appealing to groups with similar grievances, and giving them crazy answers, but at least they were answers; these groups weren't getting them anywhere else. It was the Jews and the Bolsheviks [that were the problem].

I mean, the liberal democrats aren't going to tell the average American,


"Yeah, you're being shafted because of the policies that we've established over the years that we're maintaining now." That's not going to be an answer. And they're not getting answers from the left. {!!!!!!}

So, there's an internal coherence and logic to what they get from Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and the rest of these guys. And they sound very convincing, they're very self-confident, and they have an answer to everything—a crazy answer, but it's an answer. And it's our fault if that goes on. So one thing to be done is don't ridicule these people, join them, and talk about their real grievances and give them a sensible answer, like, "Take over your factories."

What a great little movie. So tell us hows to do one. Links?

In Capitalism, there are big winners and big losers. You want to get rid of the safety net. Fine. Are you then willing to tithe ten percent of your income to take care of the poor, the broken, the ill, and old? Traditional American Society did just that. And people who couldn't afford that at least took care of their own extended family at home. We are so far from that now that we don't even remember it. But Libertariarianism wont work without a return to some kind of community that does what old America used to do. You can't just change one big thing, (like the Federal Safety Net) without changing everything.

Hear that distant thunder? That's Him trampling down the Vintage where the Grapes of Wrath are stored. This isn't a time for Peace but for War. A time to beat your plowshares into swords and pruning hooks into spears. You think if everyone sits down and starts singing kumbaya the Mexicans and the Feds will just see the Light and start acting nice? The World doesn't work that way. And Natural Law is His Law just as much as Supernatural Law is. You want to have compassion on the aliens-before they are defeated. No, compassion comes after victory. Your failure to understand this is to me another Fall of Man (Shakespeare). This is how we lost it-to begin with, this kind of sentimentality. That and of course our old friend greed. And they go together you see. Cunning greedy men phrased their agenda in terms of Christain Charity. And the dopes bought it. And they still are. No, Rush and Beck don't get it. They're Neo Cons. Still partisans playing the game of Good Party/Bad Party. Dupes. The real war isn't in Afghanistan, it's right here.

"...Rush and Beck don't get it. They're Neo Cons. Still partisans playing the game of Good Party/Bad Party."

Not certain about Rush but Beck doesn't have the time of day for the Republican party. His rant is against the corruption found in BOTH parties. He states this daily. He has clearly said over and over that he considers himself a Libertarian.

"Your failure to understand this is to me another Fall of Man (Shakespeare)."

Oh I understand it, friend. I'm trying to help others understand it.

Chomsky is stuck in that morass where truth is politically incorrect. He has the intellect to see this, but lacks the courage to break the taboo because he knows it would cost him dearly. This is the politician's dilemma. Everybody knows if you let the cat out of the bag (class war) the game is over for the winners. So you pretend. You talk like it's a left-right split, and keep the slaves from dwelling on their slavery to the money/power system.

He manages to ridicule the class, race, and religion of "middle America", and all from the posture of broad-mindedness, which is what is most annoying about people like him, their posture of being on the side of the angels when in reality they act like conniving devils. Another left-gate-keeper complaining about a right-gate-keeper.

OEO said: "Beck doesn't have the time of day for the Republican party."

This is good news!

Glenn Beck will remain in a minority and Joe Scarborough will try to rebuild the Republican party.

Beck can continue making emotional appeals against Republicans (and embrace conspiracy theories).

Scarborough will continue to focus on reason and practical policy solutions.

Beck's emotional appeals will tear down the Republican Party and prevent it from moving forward, by undermining Scarborough's practical communication of conservative principles.

Obama is sure to be re-elected, thanks to Beck and Rush.

"Obama is sure to be re-elected, thanks to Beck and Rush."

I've got one conjugated word that explains why Obama doesn't have an icebergs chance in hell to be re-elected: Hairy-Pelosi. This conjugated beast spells the end of both Obama and the Dem majority in BOTH houses. It am over.

"This is good news!"

There is nothing "new" about it. It is "olds."

And your jive on Scarborough is laughable. If you think Conservatives are going to line up behind a guy that sits across the desk from the spawn of Zbignew, on a daily basis, you don't know your ass from your chin. (Nothing new there.)

"Beck's emotional appeals will tear down the Republican Party and prevent it from moving forward..."

The Republican Party will move forward simply due to the fact that they will be serving in the capacity as the clean-up crew of the Demotwats. The Repubs. would be able to have Charles Manson released from prison and run and win as the Senatorial candidate from Michigan by the time this shakes out. Sorry, asoka-your-pants but for you, it is all over, save the crying.

Business week:

Dominion Group [they of the privatized prisons] and Blackrock etc are buying up huge areas in africa [and south a?] to bring in the corporate in the usa..with disasterous consequences as the chinese buy up minerals / oil in africa....
in a separate pice therein Jim Rogers says ' its because they know the world in a few years will be in a major food crisis'

............. YIKES

'Even George Soros, the billionaire hedge fund operator, says money managers would find ways to manipulate cap-and-trade markets. “The system can be gamed,” Soros, 79, remarked at a London School of Economics seminar in July. “That’s why financial types like me like it -- because there are financial opportunities”...'

didnt some guy from TATA just close a factory in Uk...1500? lost their jobs while getting a half cash or Carbon credits?

'it’s the next 5 years that terrify me.'



1500 Limos, 200? private denmark...wake up..the power elites wanna be in power not on a farm! do you think BO cares about the planet?

... but after a very short while it starts looking like this:

Arf! Arf-arf-arf!! Arf-arf-arf! Arf-arf-arf-arf!

Around 9-10 AM every Monday Jim K publishes a new essay. Within minutes a flow of comments begins. For the first few hours we hear mostly from newbies with unfamiliar names. They tiptoe in shyly, genuflect before Jimmie, kiss him on the ass, praise his way with words and then politely offer thoughtful comments on the subject matter at hand.

For a day or two civility reigns before the regulars toss these poor saps aside and take control. By Friday or Saturday it's an all-out insult slinging food fight ... I picture a tag-team battle of grotesque midgets and dwarfs delivering metal chairs to heads and knees to the nuts. In all honesty it can be quite hilarious.

Two of this week's memorable insults:

From Not Mommy: "I'm sorry, I had to go and take a turkle."

From Turkle: "Good for you poop stain. You get a gold star."

you said something here recently about IQ and altruism....i cant find it now but heres a gem from that is:

the aclu donations are down 25% this year all because dave gelbaum didnt donate his usual 19 million to the aclu this year.
so there..who says they arent caring and giving?

and public radio was riffing about BO war speach...talking about nelson m as a ' peaceful' man! he who had blacks immolating blacks! how dumb are people?

31,000 American Scientists Disagree with Man-caused Global Warming.

Contrary to the alarmist claims, the overwhelming consensus is that man-caused global warming is NOT a threat.

I concur. These two are great together, like Hope and Crosby, Abbot and Costello, Laurel and Hardy etc. Turkle has been really looking for his metier and now he's found it-in internet comedy. And kudos to Not Mommy for taking young Turk under his wing. The sky is the limit. I just feel privledged to have been here at the begining. Bah Humbug to all the Kill Joy Scrooges who want to edit such genius.

Oh yeah Gelbaum was the one who bribed the Sierra Club not to come out against Illegal Immigration. What a tragedy this is. Environmentalism is THE great achievement of late twentieth century Liberalism. Conservatives were involved with the founding of the National Park System, but it was Liberals who developed the whole science of interelated systems that has revolutionized our thinking. And now they are throwing it all away because they don't have the wisdom to defend their achievment in the Political Realm. Why? Because it would mean admitting the Conservatives are right about something; and it would mean applying the law of limits, which they developed in Ecology, to the political situation-instead of their usual quasi religious "We are a Nation of Immigrants" dogma. So the negatives of Hatred and Superstition have
clearly won the day against their idealism and scientific understanding.

Kunstler..... debatable from writings digested thus far... but keep up the struggle.

You will be shown wrong, completely, regards the CO2 linkage.... and in fact warming. This backdoor to neo-Malthus and Erlich isn't going to work, but their theses still need advancing to arrive at a whiter world.

But, the larger argument which CO2 factions attempt to control, is how do we take the hard decisions to eliminate the black and brown races. I exclude China, as they already at least have a policy to eliminate their population.

Chris Korda (draft for 2012) has the answers, but we waste time dancing around on "economic justice"... and other such nonsense. Right now, production is going to migrate to whom ever, and where ever the pollution allowance is. It will not address over population on any level though. The german chancellor tried to save europe by elminating large swaths of the population, and at the same time improve the quality of the remainder.

We have to use more subtle arguments today, but the end objective is the same, and ecobabble sophistry just really gets in the way of meaningful progress.

"Queering" the nation at the elementary school, also really futile, as most LUGs are shown to be prolific breeders once through the "moments of teaching" offered by the soft bigots.

Quite right MA: only Whites and North East Asians are really suited for Advanced Civilization. And a few South Asians whose Aryan Ancestry hasn't been completely washed away by the Aboriginals. But I fear this is "Wisdom from the mouth of sucklings" or just plain mockery. The Chris Korda I met was a typical far left hater of all things White and European. But a very good drag queen-I was attracted until I found out.

The Elite are really pro White? That's why they've innundated our Homelands with Cororeds no doubt. Just like the old chestnut that Hitler was Jewish-he just killed Jews to hide the fact. The Elite have utter contempt for everyone outside their own circles. They probably know about the racial differences, but they consider ordinary Whites as trash too. They think that they can survive as a Head without a body. They have made a most unwise choice. They should have been satsified as Traditional White Aristocrats justly ruling White Cultures behind the scenes. In trying to take the World they have sown the seeds of Universal Destruction. That includes them. The Chinese, Japanese, Arab, and Russian Elites know the score. And they have no intention of going quitely into that good night.

You are sharp though. You know about the campaign against children-to turn them into queers and miscegenators. Of course most people are dumb-all serious consideration of human condition takes that for granted; that ordinary people are beasts. But somehow they have souls too. So our job is to make them good beasts like the talking animals of Narnia.

Did Chris ever have the opearation? Last I heard, He/She was deciding against it.


as usual you are ahead of most, including me!
didnt know about the bribe!
any info on BO czars? the ones who are communist etc...........I figure Bo is like his minister they both hate and want to destroy the USA.

what other conclusion can i draw?

male citizen

If I recall correctly, a faction within the Sierra Club wanted to come out against immigration because of the energy-intensive lifestyles those of us in the US have.

The theory is that when an immigrant from the Third World comes to the US, he adopts the higher quality (more energy intensive) lifestyle of the natives. That is, he stays in a house with air conditioning/heating, uses a lot of plastic, eats more food, etc.

So from an environmentalist standpoint, population growth in the First World is undesirable, and whether that growth is via the native population or immigration is irrelevent.

My research skills are miserable, I find things out, forget them, sometimes remember them when someone asks, sometimes not. You asked about this fellow a long time ago in another life, but I couldn't give you his name.

The most egregious example right now of Obama's secret agenda, is his appointee as czar of safe schools. Can't remember his name, but he is the founder of the Gay/Straight alliance. He believes in teaching very young children all about being gay. At the high school level, this erodes into actual secret "how to" classes. Google "Fistgate" to learn about this miscreant and how he was outed as the queer rogue he is. A rogue with rouge so to speak.

Does Gay mean Happy? Is Man kind? What do Womb Men want? Do Womyn have any future without Men? Can a living Man become immortal? Rajneesh was caught in his barber chair taking nitrous saying over and over "I'm so bored, I'm so bored...The current Lesbian craze has a positive side: this gene, allowed full expression, will be outed out of the gene pool since few of these womyn will bear. In the past, womyn like this would get married and have children, all the while making everyone miserable. This way is better.

not daddy/OEO/FeFe/DSM IV: 300.14 said:
"Sorry, asoka-your-pants but for you, it is all over, save the crying."

Right, like Sarah Palin helped NY 23. Conservatives could not win (even after the Republican withdrew) in a place where no Democrat had ever held office... Republicans will continue to lose thanks to Beck/Rush/Palin.

Beck and Rush and Palin will help some Republicans move to Libertarian/Conservative candidates and the results will be New York 23 writ large.

I don't know where you get your peculiar idea that Robert Anton Wilson thought women's bodies have hierarchical power. RAW is on record for ridiculing hierarchy. Please don't put words into his mouth just because you can't get laid.

Hierarchy is for mugs, bait held out for those who have an itch to control, and the drug of choice for power-mongers who have yet to find out when they reach the top that they have won a desert and inherited a circle of gravestones.

It's true that women are able to exercise tremendous control through their bodies, including, or especially, over powerful men, but nobody knows when it happens in private, and when it is made known to the public, as in the recent case of Tiger Woods, everybody has a good laugh.

Well sure he might have said that he was against hierarchy-but was just the silly 60's part of RAW. Meanwhile he believed in Leary's strict 22 or so stages of hierarchical growth. Women love when powerful, rich, or famous men speak out against hierarchy-like Alan Alda. Are you really fooled by any of that? They have no interest in anyone with less money than themselves. They much prefer someone with much more. No one is more naturally hierarchical than the average female.

You just tried to best me in battle for my place in the hierarchy. You have failed. Return to where you were. There are different kinds of hierarchy: those of power and those of being. Jefferson refered to the latter as the Natural Aristocracy or Aristocracy of merit. Your attempt at dominance was of the first type: that of male display and pecking order. People who are good at this are often not very advanced at the latter type of hierarchy. And that in a nutshell is the whole tragedy of Human History.

It does matter because only Whites and some Northeast Asians care about the Environment. Your will to not understand is typical of the Liberal Left and it dooms Environmentalism to destruction. As the great Edward Abbey said, unless we can stop the Mexican invasion everything we have done is for naught. He was no Naif-nor was he a hater of all things Western. Rather, as a deeply cultured man he not only knew the weaknesses of America and the West, but also our triumphy and great strengths. How different from the self righteous little frauds who prate on and on about Western Evil and dote on third world savages. Abbey fought during the last years of his life against the growth of this cult within his cohort and the next generation coming up behind them.

"No one is more naturally hierarchical than the average female."

That this is so is rarely diputed. For why it is so there are many theories.

"And that in a nutshell is the whole tragedy of Human History."

As Abbeysbooks has noted in the past, you often paint with too broad a brush.


I scratch my head and wonder what the hell happened to those omnipotent Nigerian Rebels that were so instrumental in shorting market supply and justifying the speculative oil price spikes of the past two years?

a. vacation

b. retired

c. Hollywood extras

d. sued CNBC & FoxNews for injunctive relief from libel/slander

Just in case anyone cares or is paying attention, Kunstler (once again) predicted the Dow Jones Average would end this year at 4,000.

He's only off by, oh, 250% or so. Close enough for somebody who has consistently made this erroneous prediction for about 5 years running, now, eh?

By ignoring Kunstler's end-of-the-world predictions, I loaded up on a number of equities earlier this year when things looked rather grim and have so far seen a 34% gain.

Also, for those who care, Kunstler predicted a Y2K total economic meltdown just about one decade ago. We all know how that turned out.

Just trying to bring a little reality-check to a blog that seems to be over-populated with doomers and conspiracy theorists.

Yes, we'll see North America's economic fortunes slide over time as energy prices rise. But that will happen slowly, and the real peak that will set that off is probably at least 5 years away. Mark my words.

OK, mark.

I have an acquaintance who was down on the border a few years back getting a car or something like that. Texas, AZ? I forget. He said t was completely lawless. Very scary.

I have no ideas as to how they can stop this influx. The Hispanics are eve coming in here where I am.

I read about the drug murders in the apartment complex just outside of Atlanta. The cop took a look at the scene and knew it was too much for him. Ritual murders. So he went down south for training. He said that the game is this: As Hispanics move in small towns and communities northwards, they provide cover when a critical mass is living there. These are probably good people, with children, working jobs and probably legal. But as soon as they are commonplace (not stared at in the supermarket, etc)the druglords move in and start their business. Then it is all over as the local police are not experienced in handling this problem until it is too late.

Our only hope now is legalization and taxation. India used to prohibit gold from coming into the country so there was quite a huge smuggling business. People carried through customs, boats brought it in and when chased by police cruisers they dumped it overboard. The govt didn't want it to come in because Indians buried it to save for tuition etc for their children to study in the US. It was hoarded not used for business growth. Then the stock market opened up, commodity trading and they beganto tax it as it came in at a horrendous rate, but still cheaper than the black market.

My Polish friends didn't believe me when I told them their game was over as soon as I read that the stock market was opening in India. Cassandra again. Right but doomed not to be believed.

That's out of how many total scientists?

I'm not talking about upper-class suburban white folks who drive Priuses and recycle vs. Third World Mexican immigrants who don't have an appreciation of preserving the natural world -- because, for them, nature is unforgiving.

I'll admit, class (which in this country, overlaps with race) and environmental awareness seem to be related. That is, the poor generally aren't concerned about recycling, etc.

But that wasn't my point. My point is this: We in the US use a shitload of energy and have a disproportionate impact on the environment than Third Worlders. That was the issue the faction in the Sierra Club was concerned about. It's not that they hated Mexicans or anything like that. It's just that more immigration = more people living an energy-intensive lifestyle.

You know, in a way I think JHK almost has too much faith in the system. For if things were operating by the rules, we would be in a depression right now and the government would be busting up big banks and putting criminal banksters in prison. But the system is rigged, and we keep this McLifestyle and Ponzi scheme going some more.

I talked to a doom-and-gloom financial advisor right after the Sept. 08 crash and he was sure we were going into a depression because, like JHK, he expected the rules to apply. But lately, he's like "Wall Street is going to do whatever it wants; it owns DC."

So don't get too excited about JHK's theories not panning out. It just means that our government and banking system are a criminal enterprise.

But the reaper will have to be paid eventually...

Perhaps JHK's just 50 years or so ahead of his time.

JHK is my favorite Yankee.

Rico is a close second.

I would like to hear from others... your favs? A top ten list?

"You know, in a way I think JHK almost has too much faith in the system."

No kidding? Why don't you include 78% of the people that post here also? {LOL 78% very conservative WAG} Good Night.

But the reaper will have to be paid eventually...

Reaper? or Piper?

Wow! Good comeback. I really couldn't care less about Leary's model. In fact, I find it repugnant. If it were better known, it would be used as another tool of oppression. Doubtless people would tell me that I'm a "good housekeeper" and that's all I'll ever be.

A former colleague of mine who met Leary said to me when I asked him what he thought of him: "I don't like the kind of man he is." I got a glimpse of what my colleague might have meant when I watched a clip of Leary holding forth when he was well into his dotage and could barely string a sentence together. Ooh, what an authority! Translation: what an ego.

I get RAW. I don't know where he thought he was in some imaginary hierarchy, but I do know, from the evidence of his own writings, that he suffered from at least one simple failing: whether he was too cheap or simply vain, he thought his books didn't need a good editor. The most egregious example is the Cosmic Trigger trilogy. Painful!

Messianicdruid for third? Qshtik fourth?

Vlad, there is this myth that women prefer men much wealthier than they are. Well, if you can find a trustworthy man with similar values and expectations who happens to have wealth, that's nice, but it's not a reasonable expectation and most women know that, and care more for someone they can trust- and perceive most super-wealthy men as being untrustworthy. While some women and men prefer to mate "up", most women are not nearly so concerned with a man's income as they are to mate with someone they feel SAFE with.

Remember, until the past 200 years or so, women had no choice in selecting their mates. Their parents, specifically their fathers, selected their mates for them, and marriages were arranged with the aim of bolstering and improving family fortunes and forging advantageous economic and political alliances.

We women definitely don't want to marry "down", because a woman with a couple of young children to care for has a full time job on her hands doing that and doesn't need the economic burden on supporting the whole family on her shoulders- though I can point you to numerous women in that position.

What we want is someone safe and comfortable, whose expectations vibe with our own. That means we usually end up with someone who grew up in similar circumstances, in a similar culture, and is more or less on our level. The idea is to prosper through mutual work and sharing. Sure, there is a significant number of Gold-diggers out there, but they are not representative of most of us.

Laura Louzader first place Lady?

Best of Holiday Wishes to you all!

Messianic, How can you celebrate truth with a lie?

I consider Carter greter than Reagan, I consider Shula greater tha Saban.

Was he born on the 25th?

McClellan Grant?

” Pilot responded with “What is Truth?”

That wasn't your point-but it is mine. Your point is obvious and therefore worthy because true. I'm adding to it by saying that Whites care about the Environment and others don't. And rich Mexicans aren't going to care either. Unless they happen to be White. And Whites are at the top of all of Latin America. To stay there, they must use State Terrorism. The Police kill huge numbers of people in Brazil. If they didn't, they would be toppled and millions would die. Your suppositon that people will care about the environment when they become wealthy irrespective of race is unproveable. Because Whites being the smartest, always are on top. If they get overthrown by sheer weight of numbers or by treason like here in the United States, then industrial society collapses and still your point remains unproven.

In a traditional context, some indigenous groups learned to live in harmony with their environment. Jared Diamond talks about some Pacific Islanders who learned. And of course, the American Indian cared in the last few centuries anyway. Their ancestors wiped out many species however. But coming into Industrial Civilization, one that they didn't build, is inauthentic for these groups. They can't be expected to really learn to manage it since they didn't create it-as opposed to their own Traditional Societies.

jim e,

Good to hear from you!

I had a visiting student from Germany who once asked: "How can one be a part-time liar?"



An infortunate choice of moniker that appears to rhyme with "Squished dick".

What's on your mind?

I think it's time for a quote from the late Hunter S. Thompson:

"We're all wired into a survival trip now... no more of the speed that fueled the 60's. That was the fatal flaw in Tim Leary's trip. He crashed around America selling conciousness expansion, without ever giving a thought to the grim meathook realities that were lying in wait for all those peoples who took him seriously. All those pathetically eager acid freaks who thought they could buy peace and understanding for three bucks a hit. but their loss, and failure, is ours too. What Leary took down with him was that the central illusion of a whole lifestyle that he helped create... a generation of permanent cripples, failed seekers, who never understood the essential old mystic fallacy of the acid culture. The desperate assumption that somebody, or at least some force, is tending the light at the end of the tunnel."

Holy shit -- almost 500 comments in this biatch.

"Was he born on the 25th?"

No, September 29th 2BC

asoka-his-pants sez:

"Beck and Rush and Palin will help some Republicans move to Libertarian/Conservative candidates and the results will be New York 23 writ large."

Read on bro:

"President Obama and Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. won't be on the midterm ballot next year, but their former Senate seats will be, and both races are now either tossups or leaning Republican in high-visibility contests.

"Not to steal one of President Obama's favorite words, but in Illinois and Delaware, Republicans have a truly historic opportunity to win both the president and vice president's Senate seats, and we're fortunate to have the strongest possible candidates already in the race," said Brian Walsh, chief spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee."

Tee, hee, hee.

The Clusterfuck continues - anyone care about the folks "breaking up" the climate convention?

Worth discussing - there seems to be a very large portion of the scientific community "mobilized" into discussing the rather dire future we face because of increased amounts of man-made gas fouling the atmosphere. Currently, it seems to me, that very few "science" studies consider the rather hopeless possibility of harnessing the activities of the poorer, but densely populated nations to join in some "global" response to man-made climate changes.

In other words, how come there isn't a more balanced admission of "we're screwed" remarks from the science communities - and more attention to dealing with the future as it is likely to be - rather than some pie-in-the-sky notion that we can get the entire planet to adhere to some kind of global "protocol?"

I found this on craigslist..and make no claims to its accuracy!
May 2006 – ALIEN NATION: Secrets of the Invasion – Why America's government invites rampant illegal immigration

It's widely regarded as America's biggest problem: Between 12 and 20 million aliens (MOST SOURCES SUGGEST THERE ARE MUCH MORE LIKELY NEARLY 40 MILLION ILLEGALS HERE NOW) – including large numbers of criminals, gang members and even terrorists – have entered this nation illegally, with countless more streaming across our scandalously unguarded borders daily.

The issue polarizes the nation, robs citizens of jobs, bleeds taxpayers, threatens America's national security and dangerously balkanizes the country into unassimilated ethnic groups with little loyalty or love for America's founding values. Indeed, the de facto invasion is rapidly transforming America into a totally different country than the one past generations have known and loved.

And yet – most Americans have almost no idea what is really going on, or why it is happening.

While news reports depict demonstrations and debates, and while politicians promise "comprehensive border security programs," no real answers ever seem to emerge.

But there are answers. Truthful answers. Shocking answers.

In its groundbreaking May edition, WND's acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine reveals the astounding hidden agendas, plans and people behind America's immigration nightmare.

Titled "ALIEN NATION," the issue is subtitled "SECRETS OF THE INVASION: Why government invites rampant illegal immigration." Indeed, it reveals pivotal secrets very few Americans know. For example:

Did you know that the powerfully influential Council on Foreign Relations – often described as a “shadow government" – issued a comprehensive report last year laying out a five-year plan for the "establishment by 2010 of a North American economic and security community" with a common "outer security perimeter"?
Roughly translated: In the next few years, according to the 59-page report titled "Building a North American Community," the U.S. must be integrated with the socialism, corruption, poverty and population of Mexico and Canada. "Common perimeter" means wide-open U.S. borders between the U.S., Mexico and Canada. As Phyllis Schlafly reveals in this issue of Whistleblower: "This CFR document asserts that President Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin 'committed their governments' to this goal when they met at Bush's ranch and at Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005. The three adopted the 'Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America' and assigned 'working groups' to fill in the details. It was at this same meeting, grandly called the North American Summit, that President Bush pinned the epithet 'vigilantes' on the volunteers guarding our border in Arizona."

The CFR report – important excerpts of which are published in Whistleblower – also suggests North American elitists begin getting together regularly, and presumably secretly, "to buttress North American relationships, along the lines of the Bilderberg or Wehrkunde conferences, organized to support transatlantic relations." The Bilderberg and Wehrkunde conferences are highly secret conclaves of the powerful. For decades, there have been suspicions that such meetings were used for plotting the course of world events and especially the centralization of global decision-making.

Did you know that radical immigrant groups – including the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan (MEChA) and the National Council of La Raza (La Raza) – not only share a revolutionary agenda of conquering America's southwest, but they also share common funding sources, notably the Ford and Rockefeller foundations?
''California is going to be a Hispanic state," said Mario Obeldo, former head of MALDEF. "Anyone who does not like it should leave." And MEChA's goal is even more radical: an independent ''Aztlan,'' the collective name this organization gives to the seven states of the U.S. Southwest – Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas and Utah. So why would the Rockefeller and Ford foundations support such groups? Joseph Farah tells the story in this issue of Whistleblower.

Why have America's politicians – of both major parties – allowed the illegal alien invasion of this nation to continue for the last 30 years unabated? With al-Qaida and allied terrorists promising to annihilate major U.S. cities with nuclear weapons, with some big-city hospital emergency rooms near closure due to the crush of so many illegals, with the rapid spread throughout the U.S. of MS-13, the super-violent illegal alien gang – with all this and more, why do U.S. officials choose to ignore the laws of the land and the will of the people to pursue, instead, policies of open borders and lax immigration enforcement?

The answers to all this and much more are in Whistleblower's "ALIEN NATION" issue.

Is there hope? Or is America lost to a demographic invasion destined to annihilate its traditional Judeo-Christian culture, and to the ever-growing likelihood that nuclear-armed jihadists will cross our porous borders and wreak unthinkable destruction here?

There most definitely is hope, according to this issue of Whistleblower. Although most politicians of both major political parties have long since abdicated their responsibility for securing America's borders and dealing effectively with the millions already here illegally, there are a few exceptions – most notably Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo.

May's Whistleblower includes an exclusive sneak preview of Tancredo's forthcoming blockbuster book, "In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America’s Border and Security." In an extended excerpt, Whistleblower presents Tencredo's expert and inspired analysis of exactly how to solve the nation's most vexing problem.



LaRaza Calls For Boycott Against Free Speech
No surprise here. Pulling the race/hate card again and using political correctness La Raza goes after cable shows reporting on illegal immigration.

"Murguía said she recognized that ultimately the power to change the debate lies with the Hispanic community itself. “Latinos buy products from the advertisers supporting these programs,” she said. “Latinos vote in primaries and in the general election. We have a significant role to play picking winners and losers in both arenas. We need to make it clear to those who embrace hate that they do so at their own economic and political peril.”


How many businesses can "we the people" boycott that support LaRaza and illegal immigration ?

Corporate Partners Program

The National Council of La Raza invites corporations large and small and Hispanic entrepreneurs to join in its mission to empower current and future generations of Hispanic Americans.

We encourage individual Hispanic entrepreneurs to become an NCLR partner as well. Partners like you have firsthand knowledge of the hard work and dedication it takes to achieve the American Dream. We would deeply appreciate your involvement in our institution and welcome your membership participation.

Allstate Insurance Company
American Airlines
American Express Company
Bank of America
Bridgestone Firestone Trust Fund
Cardinal Health
Caterpillar Foundation
Catholic Healthcare West
Chevron Corporation
The Coca-Cola Company
Comcast Corporation
ConAgra Foods, Inc.
Coors Brewing Company
Cox Communications
DaimlerChrysler Corporation Fund
Darden Restaurants Foundation
Eastman Kodak Company
Enterprise Rent-A-Car
Fannie Mae
FedEx Corporation
Ford Motor Company
General Mills, Inc.
General Motors Corporation
Hallmark Cards, Inc.
Harrah's Entertainment
Hess Foundation, Inc.
J.C. Penney Company, Inc.
Johnson & Johnson
Kraft Foods, Inc.
The Kroger Co.
McDonald's Corporation
The McGraw-Hill Companies
Mercedes Benz
MetLife Foundation
MGM Mirage
The Microsoft Corporation
Miller Brewing Company
Morgan Stanley
Northrop Grumman Corporation
PepsiCo, Inc.
Prudential Financial
Qwest Communications
Rockwell Automation
Schneider National
Sears, Roebuck and Co.
Southwest Airlines
State Farm Insurance Companies
Time Warner Inc.
United Parcel Service (UPS)
Verizon Communications
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Waste Management, Inc.
Wells Fargo
Wilmer Cutler Pickering, LLP
Xerox Corporation

Institutional Corporate Partners
The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) recognizes those corporations that have invested in NCLR’s long-term strategic efforts with multiyear, multimillion-dollar commitments, including NCLR’s Empowering An American Community Campaign.

The Allstate Corporation
Bank of America
The Coca-Cola Company
Fannie Mae
Freddie Mac
Ford Motor Company
General Motors Corporation
MBNA Corporation
PepsiCo Foundation
The PMI Group, Inc.
State Farm Insurance Companies
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Corporate Programmatic Supporters
NCLR depends on our corporate partners for a variety of programmatic support in areas such as Education, Community Development, Health, Youth Leadership Development, Civil Rights and Advocacy, Workforce Development, and Affiliate Member Services.

Chevron Corporation
Lockheed Martin
Lucent Technologies Foundation
Marathon Oil Corporation
Rockwell Automation
State Farm Insurance Companies
Toyota Motor Corporation
Verizon Communications, Inc.

Housing and Wealth Building
The Allstate Corporation
Chase Home Finance
Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
E*TRADE Financial
Fannie Mae
Freddie Mac
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Corporation
Wells Fargo & Company
Washington Mutual, Inc.

Belrex Inc.
Eli Lilly and Company
Metropolitan Life
Novo Nordisk
Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide
Pfizer Global Pharmaceuticals
PepsiCo Foundation

Workforce Development
American Express Company
Ford Motor Company
The Home Depot, Inc.
PepsiCo Foundation

Youth Leadership Development
The Allstate Corporation
Exxon Mobil Corporation
Marriott International, Inc.
MBNA Corporation
Sallie Mae
Sodexho, Inc.
Sprint Nextel Corporation
U.S. Marine Corps

Civil Rights and Advocacy
The Allstate Corporation
American Honda Finance Corporation
Bank of America
Chevron Corporation
Freddie Mac
The UPS Foundation
WFS Financial Inc.

Affiliate Member Services
Comcast Corporation
Ford Motor Company (NCLR Affiliate of the Year Award)
Microsoft Corporation
The Annie E. Casey Foundation

Email the entire Senate regarding the LA RAZA HISPANDERING OBAMA AMNESTY PUSH:
Lou Dobbs Tonight
And there are some 800,000 gang members in this country: That’s more than the combined number of troops in our Army and Marine Corps. These gangs have become one of the principle ways to import and distribute drugs in the United States. Congressman David Reichert joins Lou to tell us why those gangs are growing larger and stronger, and why he’s introduced legislation to eliminate the top three international drug gangs.
Lou Dobbs Tonight
Monday, September 28, 2009

And T.J. BONNER, president of the National Border Patrol Council, will weigh in on the federal government’s decision to pull nearly 400 agents from the U.S.-Mexican border. As always, Lou will take your calls to discuss the issues that matter most-and to get your thoughts on where America is headed.
CALL NANCY PELOSI Washington , DC - (202) 225-4965 San Francisco , CA - (415) 556-4862 EMAIL NANCY PELOSI

criminal illegals and the benefits to society
1126 16th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
202-785 1670
Get on La Raza’s email list to find out what this fascist party is doing to expand the Mexican occupation.
LA RAZA is the virulently racist political party for ILLEGALS (only Mexicans) and the corporations that benefit from illegals, and the employers of illegals. IT IS ILLEGAL TO HIRE AN ILLEGAL.
However LA RAZA does like the AMERICAN WELFARE SYSTEM. The welfare system in the country is so good that Mexico has dumped 38 million of their poor, illiterate , criminal and frequently pregnant over our border.

WTF? I was with you till the conclusion, then you totally lost me. Chains Sets Charms rings tiffany Bracelets Accessories Accessories Setting & Co Ring tiffany engagement rings jewelry engagement rings Bracelets Bracelet silver bracelets gucci bracelet Earrings earring earrings uk heart earrings Jewelry Necklaces Necklaces pendant Pandora necklaces Match Pendants Mix Pendants Mix and Match Pendants Jewelry Chains & Co Chains tiffany Chains & Co Pendants silver Pendants & Co Pendants 1837 1837 Necklaces 1837 bracelets

Solutions to global warming and the rest of the clusterfuck abound but none are easy and all will require a double scoop of pain.That's better i think!Rational info

Pleassse --- "climate change" seems to be dripping out of everyone's lips now-a-days; we might as well use it as a greeting

Glad reading this.

Indeed. I certainly agree with you.

Climate plays a vital role right?

Climate, Oil, War, and Money topics are indeed worth reading.

I totally agree with post and also informative post.

For a complete list of books by James Howard Kunstler and purchase links, click here.




You are currently viewing an archived version of this website because you have arrived through an older link. To view the current version of this site, please click the home link.