Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - QwazyWabbit

Pages: 1 ... 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 [81] 82 83 84
Politics / Re: global warming - it's really pissing me off
« on: July 09, 2008, 05:14:19 PM »
AGW: Anthrogenic Global Warming is a fiction.

I think my original posts made it pretty clear where I stand. It's obvious you didn't read me very closely since you erred so grossly on the Marland citation. You also didn't follow the links and read them.

1. 50 or 100 years is nothing to the Earth.
2. The global average temperature swings 5 to 7 degrees centigrade every 40,000 to 100,000 years and has been doing so for millions of years.
3. AGW has been attributed to cause 0.9 degrees or so. This is false.
4. Analyzing a few graphs of the last 25 or 50 years is pointless. I have been clear on this from my first post.
5. YES dammit! There is no such thing as AGW given the NATURAL fluctuations that can be ascertained from the geologic record.
6. A 38% change of a component of the atmosphere that is only a 0.038% component is insignificant.
7. Climate models run on computers are over-simplifications and are APPROXIMATIONS of reality. They are TWEAKED and tested and tweaked again until they yield the answers the investigator wanted to see in the first place.

For instance, how do you test a climate model? You start with the current state of the earth as you can best approximate it today. Then you pick a starting point in the past and run it forward, tweaking the parameters until you get a new state that is closer to what you claim to observe in the real world today. You tweak and tweak and twist the model until you get the answers you desire. Then you claim that the components of the model explain the history of the real world and the factors and terms in the equations explains the actual events the earth underwent to arrive at present state.

The Global Fallacy is that you can choose your model, choose your starting point, choose your ending point, choose your factors and proportions and arrive at an explanation that is not under the influence of the chooser.

The proper term for the whole weather process is Climate Change. Earth's climate is continuously changing; it's ALWAYS getting warmer or colder and there isn't very much that MAN in his present state of technology can do about it on a global scale.

Get off oil addiction. Give up your SUV, give up your Jetskis, give up your tailgate parties and BBQ's and give up your fresh vegetables trucked daily from California and Florida. Give up your airline trips back home for Christmas. Because this is what it means to be reducing your CO2 output. Give up your plastic bags, give up your molded plastic game consoles. Give up your 24 hour computer operations because coal fired electric generators are a bad thing. Give up your machine tools, your cars, your aircraft and defense products because they are all made with oil or depend on oil products for their manufacture and they certainly require coal fired electricity in that process. Give up your microelectronics, because refining silicon is very energy intense. Give up your your microprocessors because the robots that make them depend on reliable electricity and plastic and ceramics like nothing else on earth.

This is the reality of the situation. The present way of life and industry in the world depends on coal and oil and that is the truth, giving up all that means throttling back and losing jobs and items this whole world depends on.

Politics / Re: global warming - it's really pissing me off
« on: July 09, 2008, 04:02:44 PM »

I'm not even sure why you posted the stuff about maryland's carbon output of 2004.

Not Maryland.


The name of the researcher who produced the data that was cited in quadz's USGS documents.

My point was that USGS in that case was a secondary source, not a primary.

The whole point of my graphics post was to show that the Earth is changing dynamically over hundreds of thousands and millions of years. The changes and the temperature swings are far greater over that time scale than man has even given himself credit for in the worst-case CO2 scenarios. What we record over 50 years is microscopic in comparison. The impact of man is not even evident in the charts at that scale and won't be visible for another 10 or 20 thousand years if we even survive that long as a species.

AGW (Al Gore's Warming) is propaganda, plain and simple. It's designed to bring the topic to crisis proportions in order to induce action along a preconceived agenda.

What disturbs me more is that Americans refuse to be moved to energy independence for its own sake. Wouldn't it be a hell of a lot more fun to give the stink finger to the OPEC states and tell them where to shove their oil than to sit and fret about global processes that we simply can't control and which have been doing their thing since before man had opposable thumbs?

Do it for the pride. Do it because Western Civilization IS the best and the brightest and the greatest hope for humanity. Not some stupid rag heads wiping their butts with sand.

Politics / Re: global warming - it's really pissing me off
« on: July 09, 2008, 07:00:09 AM »
A single burp from Kiluea or Vesuvius can put more CO2 into the air than the entire output of the U.S. in 50 years.

Wow... based on the 6 billion metric tonnes of annual US CO2 output -- even allowing for a large Kilauea eruption, if it were to output 100 million tonnes of CO2 instead of its usual 3.3 million tonnes per year, your statement above still appears to be off by a factor of over 3,000.

That's equivalent to believing the distance between New York and San Diego is 0.8 miles.


Something is wrong with the numbers.

6 Billion tonnes per year? I don't think so. Since you cited USGS and USGS cites Marland, let's see what Marland has to say:

The United States continues to be the largest single national source of fossil fuel-related CO2 emissions with emissions of 1650 million metric tons of carbon in 2004. The U.S. has emitted almost 88 billion metric tons of carbon since 1800 from fossil-fuel consumption and cement production.
Emissions in 2004 rose slightly (1.75%) from 2003 but have doubled since the early 1960s, although the U.S. share of global emissions declined from 44% to 22% over the same interval because of higher growth rates in other countries.

(1650 million = 1.6 Billion) for just one country and this is 1/4 (22%) of world output. Assuming all the other countries are doing their share then you get 1.6 x 4 = 6.4 Billion tonnes WORLDWIDE.

But even Marland's numbers are skewed. They are the sum total of SOLID, liquid and gas emissions and by solid, we mean stuff locked up and not a greenhouse contributor. They are also the total CARBON output, not CO2.

So this proves that numbers on these scales can be skewed to be mostly meaningless to average people and since Carbon output is NOT CO2 output and people are easily confused when dealing with large numbers.

BTW, per Marland the US ranks 9th in global per capita Carbon production.

So it takes 5.6 Tonnes of Carbon per year to support a single human in a modern society. Interesting.

So at 5.6 tonnes per person per year and 5 billion people that would be 28 billion tonnes per year total carbon (not CO2) but even this is oversimplified since the distribution is not uniform globally.

If the price of development is carbon emissions, then the question becomes who should give up development? The developed nations or the developing nations? Should the US stop and wait for China and the rest of the world to catch up? Who will do all this great CO2 research if not the taxpayers?

The US can instantly reduce it's CO2 emissions by 25% or more: Stay home and don't work every Friday.  :headbang:

Politics / Re: global warming - it's really pissing me off
« on: July 08, 2008, 10:57:07 PM »
The single most dominant source of energy for Earth is the the sun. Some 98 to 99 percent of input is solar. The remaining 1 to 1.99 percent is geothermal or wind and wind is driven by the sun so it's really a secondary energy source.

Anyone who as spent any time in desert climate knows what happens when the sun goes down and you have a clear, cloudless night. It literally freezes at night. Here in So. California we can get frost on cars left outdoors on clear summer nights. This is because infrared energy radiates from the objects into the absolute zero of the night sky and low humidity night skies are transparent to infrared. You have to have infrared opacity to limit this effect. What is the single most effective infrared shield? Clouds. Water vapor. CO2 is still substantially transparent to infrared and even methane (natural gas) is a more effective greenhouse gas than CO2. That's why the joke about cows in fields being bigger emitters than a car. Plants, trees and photosynthetic organisms emit CO2 at night and only produce O2 during the day.

Our preeminant model for the greenhouse effect is Venus. It's 96% CO2 atmosphere was detected decades ago and the only explanation for the apparent 462C temperatures observed was the CO2 we saw in the absorption spectrum, primarily due to the CO2 being such a dominant component. Today we know this is part of the equation but by far the greatest contributor to the "runaway greenhouse" of Venus is the Sulfuric Acid cloud cover of the upper atmosphere, the 92 ATA and the active vulcanism on the surface, not the CO2. The 0.725 AU distance from the sun doesn't help either.

By the same token. Look at Mars: 96 to 98% CO2 and a tranparent, 0.008 ATA pressure atmosphere making it a nice cool -46C average temperature at a mean 1.56 AU distance from the sun. Clearly, orbital mechanics plays a major role in the process yet it is seldom discussed. The almost complete absence of active volcanism on Mars is also distinct. A single burp from Kiluea or Vesuvius can put more CO2 into the air than the entire output of the U.S. in 50 years. The number of volcanic eruptions around the world in the last 30 years is left as an exercise for the student. Don't forget Mt. Saint Helens. :)

Politics / Re: global warming - it's really pissing me off
« on: July 08, 2008, 08:34:34 PM »
Now, unless someone has some evidence to support a contention that humans had more influence on greenhouse gasses or used more fossil fuels 5 million years ago, then there is no reason whatsoever to presume that this overall trend of GLOBAL COOLING and wider variation of temperature on the order of 100,000 year CYCLES is caused by man's gas emissions.

Given that there is only one cause for temperature variation... :dohdohdoh:

And what single cause is that?

Man? False.

Quake / Re: BEN - Random Deathmatch Map Generator for Quake2
« on: July 08, 2008, 08:32:12 PM »
The map would already exist as a file unless the server and client clean up at the end of the level after moving into the new map. There would be no need for a "vote savemap" command unless you were going to keep a collection of favs. Saving faves would be self-defeating of a "random map" server but a good map is a terrible thing to waste.

Depending on the map sizes and textures it looks like a typical Ben2 medium sized map is about 1MB, simple download from game server to the clients would be sufficient unless you want to que them to the client before play to be sure everybody has them and can enter the map simultaneously. This would guarantee that no one would have advantage of exploring the map before everyone downloaded and entered.

Politics / Re: global warming - it's really pissing me off
« on: July 08, 2008, 05:15:35 PM »
Pointing to individual years as the hottest or coolest is pointless on geologic scales and this is the fundamental fallacy of Al Gore's Warming (AGW). People fall for this and point to glaciers receding or advancing "this year" or "last 10 years" and call it evidence.

Here's a nice chart of the last 5.5 million years based on sea floor sediment.
The ZERO line is "modern temperatures" circa 1950.
Present day is on the LEFT, ancient times on the RIGHT.
As you can see it was 1.5 to 2.0 degrees C WARMER than present day about 5 million years ago.
Moving LEFT we see the oscillations increase in magnitude and trend downward to a LOWER MEAN TEMPERATURE than present day.
About 2.5 million years ago the temperature variation begins to clearly increase while at the same time the trend averaged 2 degrees cooler than present day.
Getting closer to present day the swings increased and the average tended lower with a mean of -4 C from present day.

Now, unless someone has some evidence to support a contention that humans had more influence on greenhouse gasses or used more fossil fuels 5 million years ago, then there is no reason whatsoever to presume that this overall trend of GLOBAL COOLING and wider variation of temperature on the order of 100,000 year CYCLES is caused by man's gas emissions.

Politics / Re: global warming - it's really pissing me off
« on: July 08, 2008, 06:59:39 AM »
From Wiki:

The Sun does not have enough mass to explode as a supernova. Instead, in 5–6 billion years, it will enter a red giant phase, its outer layers expanding as the hydrogen fuel in the core is consumed and the core contracts and heats up. Helium fusion will begin when the core temperature reaches around 100 million K and will produce carbon, entering the asymptotic giant branch phase.[15]

Life-cycle of the Sun; sizes are not drawn to scale.Earth's fate is not clear. As a red giant, the Sun will have a maximum radius beyond the Earth's current orbit, 1 AU (1.5×1011 m), 250 times the present radius of the Sun.[28] However, by the time it is an asymptotic giant branch star, the Sun will have lost roughly 30% of its present mass due to a stellar wind, so the orbits of the planets will move outward. If it were only for this, Earth would probably be spared, but new research suggests that Earth will be swallowed by the Sun due to tidal interactions.[28] Even if Earth escapes incineration in the Sun, its water will be boiled away and most of its atmosphere would escape into space. In fact, even during its life in the main sequence, the Sun is gradually becoming more luminous, and its surface temperature is slowly rising. The increase in solar temperatures is such that in about a billion years, the surface of the Earth will become too hot for liquid water to exist, ending life as we know it.

So pulsations will probably get us long before Sol enters red giant phase.
Live fast, die young, leave a good looking ash.

Is it ingenuity or ego to consider man supremely influential over his environment? Man is ingenious when it comes to some things but egotistical when it comes to others. (Unsinkable Titanic, levees that can control storm surge or river floods, bridges over rivers that won't collapse) Mans knowledge is imperfect, his perceptions short compared to geologic time scales.

A century and a half ago, Wisconsin was completely covered with trees, old growth forests nearly impenetrable. We logged it until it was farmland and planks.

All ecosystems are delicately balanced. That's what makes them chaotic. Quazi stable in the long term, unstable in the short term and more likely to change than to not change. Only Man's judgement makes it "good" or "bad" change. There is no self-correction only a Q-point at this or that point in time where some forces we can observe are "in balance" or not. We cannot control or predict these processes, only observe some limited number of aspects of them. Choose a parameter to measure and you can arrive at any theory to explain that parameter's influence on the global process. It's like predicting tides in India by counting individual grains of sand in San Diego.

Cosmological decades, a very bad term IMHO. Decades implies 10 + 10 + 10, not 10 * 10 * 10.
A billion is a thousand millions, not 3 decades of millions.
3 billion years is 3000 millions of years or 3000 times longer than we theorize Man has been on the planet. Extinctions are commonplace and yet life goes on. It's not a matter of IF man will become extinct but when. It's as likely to occur tomorrow as it is on any day. That undiscovered NEO might hit us next week. :)

Politics / Re: global warming - it's really pissing me off
« on: July 08, 2008, 01:23:58 AM »
There are at least 10 orders of magnitude difference between human biology and its reaction to toxins and the planetary processes that occur on the order of 10, 100 or 1000 human lifetimes. Human understanding of the processes is based on indirect evidence and inference. No one knows what killed the dinosaurs but we have theories and theories are only good until the next theory comes along that describes the observations better. (i.e., the theory was gradual climate change killed them, until Iridium was found in strata indicating massive extinctions and now the theory is climate change induced by impact)

In fact, more money is being spent on "proving" the significance of manmade climate change vs. disproving it. Anyone proposing a contrary opinion is at risk for losing his funding or position. Thus, instead of informed investigation one sees a strong bias toward global warming = bad = man is bad = global warming is caused by man.

Humans cannot at present understand complex processes over millenial time scales, hence the "we must do something NOW" syndrome over the issue. They also don't respond to needs or processes that are not emergency or crisis stage events. (Witness sinking of Titanic due to design flaws and overconfidence, Apollo 1 fire, Pearl Harbor, 9/11, Katrina, etc.) Humans must see clear and present danger before they begin to understand and react. (Safety rules for vessels, complete redesign, military preparedness, overreaction to boogiemen, blame big government, etc.)

Could Man warm the climate in a decade by deliberately trying? No.

Not even JFK could have done it. Putting 10 tons of flesh and steel on the moon is easy compared to raising 1080 billion cubic kilometers of rock and gas a few degrees. Unless, of course, your name is Sol and you have 11 million degrees and the mass of 333,000 earths to spare.

Water is 20 times more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide yet it's 1% of the air vs 0.038% carbon dioxide (There is 26 times more water in the air than there is CO2) A 10% change in global RH would have 200 times more effect than 10% change in CO2, yet no one is fearful of dihydrogen oxide pollution.

A few billion years? More like another 10 or 15 billion at last estimate... but it's been a while since I checked those theories about evolution of the sun. Compared to the 60 million year reign of dinos and the 1 million years of Man, I'd say we have a while.

The roaches will survive as they have proved true survivors since the age of dinosaurs and probably before. :)

Conservation for conservation sake? Yes, nothing wrong with that at all. Good stewardship is always advisable but Man's shortsighted nature and greedyness impede his good intentions. So the hystrionics continues with Chicken Little and his sky and the boy who cried wolf gathering their followers and alarming the populace until everyone is tired of spinning around trying to find the evildoers or holding up their umbrellas. So Al Gore clangs the alarm and everybody jumps for the chance to make their mark on history and the fat man laughs all the way to the bank.

Politics / Re: global warming - it's really pissing me off
« on: July 07, 2008, 10:14:16 PM »
Manmade global warming is a complete fiction. The financial aspects and the influence on scientific research and exploration cannot be ignored. It's fashionable to investigate global warming and derive expositions on it. Follow the money.

The global climate is a stochastic (random) process and cannot be modeled linearly. We don't have enough information and there are too many variables. We also cannot even agree on the solar irradiance constant (which isn't).

In about 30 or 40 years the present trend will have reversed and people will be worried about Global Cooling and the advancing glaciers. Beware of southward migrating Canadians. ;)

I only wish I was going to live long enough to see Al Gore and his fiction completely discredited. Hell, I wish Al Gore was going to live long enough to see himself discredited... but then again, he's a rich man getting richer on his propaganda so maybe early termination would be better.

What this planet really needs is a nice big fat comet impact to bring about a nice mass extinction. Maybe the roaches can do better than the mammals and dinosaurs.

Politics / Re: america the beautiful
« on: July 07, 2008, 09:33:47 PM »
besiedes, christians have given us great things along history, like the crusades, the dark ages, the inquisition, and more recently, prohibition, segregation, zealotry, and the state of oklahoma.   :oops:

The Crusades was Europe's response to invasion by the Moors, an empire of Muslims from Spain and the middle east. Europe didn't invade Islam, Islam invaded Europe. The invasion of Europe was the direct consequence of Muhammad's doctrine of spreading Islam by the sword and the natural tendency of empires to spread in pursuit of enrichment of the empire.

The dark ages weren't really dark, it was a term used to describe the early middle ages (470-1000AD) after the fall of the Roman Empire and the lack of substantial recorded history during the period compared to the output of the empire.

The Inquisition was a purging of "heresy" from the Catholic church and began with the purging of the Cathars in France in the 12th century. From Wikipedia:
The Cathars believed there existed within mankind a spark of divine light. This light, or spirit, had fallen into captivity within a realm of corruption identified with the physical body and world. This was a distinct feature of classical Gnosticism, of Manichaeism and of the theology of the Bogomils. This concept of the human condition within Catharism was most probably due to direct and indirect historical influences from these older (and sometimes violently suppressed) Gnostic movements. According to the Cathars, the world had been created by a lesser deity, much like the figure known in classical Gnostic myth as the Demiurge. This creative force was identified with Satan; most forms of classical Gnosticism had not made this explicit link between the Demiurge and Satan. Spirit, the vital essence of humanity, was thus trapped in a polluted world created by a usurper God and ruled by his corrupt minions.

It's easy to see why the Catholic church would view this as a threat.
The later Inquisitions were more politically driven, being lead by kings against insurrections and papal emperors against apostate kings or sects. All this was as much a part of the European political reorganization and history as much as it is a Christian history. Nothing new here. Christians, Jews, Pagans, Muslims and people have been killing each other throughout Europe and the Middle East in one way or another since before Rome was an empire.

The Spanish Inquisition was set up by King Ferdinand II and Queen Isabella I in 1478; yes, the same F. and I. who sent Columbus to find a new route to the East by sailing west and he instead found the New World, which was completely unexpected. :) The Spanish Inquisition was operated completely by the state under royal authority and was independent from the Pope.

Prohibition is by no means new or unique to the U.S. as it was practiced first in Iceland and Norway in 1915-1916 to 1922. Prohibition in the U.S. was initiated in 1919 under pressure from the temperance movement and was passed by Congress over Pres. Woodrow Wilson's veto.

Segregation is a natural consequence of human tribalism. Segregation by religion, race, tribe, national origin are commonplace in all corners of the globe and it can be voluntary, people associating with people of their own tribe, religion, background or skin color; or involuntary, by people being excluded from associating with people NOT of the same tribe, religion, background or skin color. This has been going on since pre-history and is not at all recent. Recognition of tribalism as a factor in human society as a "wrong thing" is recent.

Zealotry is not new. Zealots arose as a sect within Judaism in the 1st century and was a political opposition to political rule of Judea by the Roman Empire.

Oklahoma became a state in 1907. :)

Of course, all these things (except prohibition and Oklahoma statehood) occured in Europe and the Middle East long before there was a United States or even a British colony in America. Of course Tongans don't discriminate... they have a King to do that for them. An American in Tonga would be welcomed and easily integrated into the society without prejudice. They also have a guy with a bridge for sale.

Pat Robertson is not a true Christian. The True Christians were put to death by the Romans in the 1st century AD.
Robertson is merely a leader of a sect and benefits financially from a following of people with more money than sense.

Politics / Re: america the beautiful
« on: July 05, 2008, 05:45:08 PM »

Population 119,000
an archipelago of 169 islands (36 inhabited)
Median age:
male: 21.3 years
female: 22.3 years
Life expectancy at birth:
male: 67.9 years
female: 73.1 years (2008 est.)

Constitutional Monarchy. PM and Vice PM appointed by King.

Labor force:
33,910 (2003)
(28.5% of population)
13% unemployment rate
25% is below poverty line

Industries: tourism, construction, fishing

No oil, no natural gas. Imports 100% of 880 barrels of oil per day. (est.) (not many cars there)

Exports: $22 million f.o.b. (2006)
Imports: $139 million f.o.b. (2006)

39.7% of exports go to U.S.
30.3% of imports come from Fiji

Receives $31.75 million (2005) in economic aid. (Probably from U.S.)

National Debt: $80.7 million (2004)

Internet users: 3,100 (2006)
(2.6% of population)

Interesting that one of the more affluent Tongans wants to nuke U.S.
(see picture in other thread) and wishes us a happy Independence Day
while implying that Americans are unhappy or in a bad mood or drug users.
As a non-drug using American, I resent that stereotype.
I didn't even have a beer with my BBQ.

Don't believe everything you read in newspapers or on the web.

Tonga was on my list of places to visit.
I was considering diving there.
I think I will probably go to Hawaii instead.

Quake / Re: BEN - Random Deathmatch Map Generator for Quake2
« on: July 04, 2008, 05:08:49 PM »
Suggestions and comments:
1. A setting for pointing to custom quake2 executable. Default is quake2.exe, it would be nice to be able to launch user choice of binary like r1q2, q2ace, etc.
2. Maybe a mod setting while you're at it to allow launch into mods for testing the map under that mod.

I noticed on a big map, 100 moves, 12 branches, 4 x 4 on all rooms settings and 5% prob. that there were some vertical railing posts on some platforms. No horizonals railing attached.

Quake / Re: BEN - Random Deathmatch Map Generator for Quake2
« on: July 04, 2008, 01:44:17 PM »
This looks very cool indeed. I tried a few maps and they all have the same flavor and from a tournament standpoint it would be a very nice tool. Everyone is seeing the maps for the first time and they all learn them at the same time. I've never mapped before and it's interesting to see how it's done from this point of view.

Trouble Shooting / Re: AVG found win32 virus in anticheat.dll
« on: June 27, 2008, 09:22:51 PM »
I agree, but it's an indicator that AVG isn't the only one that flags the signature. I have seen them all come up clean on actual viruses too. A lot depends on the currency of the sig files as well as the engine. They seem to be a bit more up to date today. It's been a while since I used that site. The interface is cleaner. I like that. They used to state the scans were based on "default" configuration of the scanners. I'm not sure that's true anymore.

Pages: 1 ... 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 [81] 82 83 84