Paths To Knowledge (dot Science)

What is actually real in Objective Reality? How do you know? Now, prove it's real!

Archive for the ‘Something to think about’ Category

Matrix of Design, Why Some Computer Scientists See What Other Scientists Can’t

Posted by pwl on March 29, 2014

The unseen world of science that some computer scientists have an advantage seeing the objective reality of Nature through the Matrix of Design.

Two important characteristics of maps should be noticed. A map is not the territory it represents, but, if correct, it has a similar structure to the territory, which accounts for its usefulness.” – Alfred Korzybski

Matrix_Code

It must be noted that Information Science is at the very heart of the objective reality of Nature, the fabric of spacetime itself distinguishes information into discrete quantum packets of particles and components of energy at the smallest level of Plank time and length (Plank Spacetime). Existence would not exist without distinction of information, this from that, that from this, here from there, there from here, now from then, etc… in a (seemingly) never ending continuum and volume.

In a very real way information science is more fundamental than even physics. Without information existence would not exist. Is it even possible to have existence without information? Only in a singularity of the pre-big bang instant when there is nothing, I’d assert.

“There is a considerable difference between a mathematician’s view of the world and a computer scientist’s. To a mathematician all structures are static: they have always been and will always be; the only time dependence is that we just have not discovered them all yet. The computer scientist is concerned with (and fascinated by) the continuous creation, combination, separation and destruction of structures: time is of the essence.
Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

Posted in A New Kind of Science [NKS], Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Complex Systems, Definition of Terms, Ignorance to Knowledge, Philosophy, Rational Thinking, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Scientific Method, Something to think about | 1 Comment »

On the omni impotence of the alleged gods

Posted by pwl on April 13, 2013

speed of light

One of many proofs against the existence of alleged gods goes as follows.

The Speed of Light Limit prevents all matter, energy and most importantly information from going faster than the speed of light, c. Since the universe is a very large place it takes a very long time for matter, energy or information to travel from one place to another should they not be near each other. For example the nearest star system to Earth’s Sol system that has a known planet is about 20 light years which means that it takes light and thus information 20 years to travel there.

The alleged gods are super alien beings because of their alleged super powers, specifically their alleged omni* powers, omniscience, omnipresence, omnipotence, omnibenevolence aka omnievil.

Unfortunately for these alleged gods their omni* powers are not possible in the actual objective reality of Nature due to the limiting factor of the Speed of Light.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in A New Kind of Science [NKS], Adult Supervision Required, Awesome beyond awesome, bashing ingorant shit over the head with a shovel, Get some perspective people, Good science attitude, Hard Science, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Majestic Universe, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about | 6 Comments »

Catastrophic Human Caused Global Warming Falsified aka Proven Wrong

Posted by pwl on November 12, 2012

Polar Bears Relaxing now that CAGW is falsified

We show that although these anthropogenic forcings share a common stochastic trend, this trend is empirically independent of the stochastic trend in temperature and solar irradiance. Therefore, greenhouse gas forcing, aerosols, solar irradiance and global temperature are not polynomially cointegrated. This implies that recent global warming is not statistically significantly related to anthropogenic forcing.

CAGW is therefor automatically falsified by the rules of the Scientific Method. Bam. Time to end your beliefs about co2 doomsday. The science for CAGW just isn’t supportable and has now been utterly demolished.

“No theory is carved in stone. Science is merciless when it comes to testing all theories over and over, at any time, in any place. Unlike religion or politics, science is ultimately decided by experiments, done repeatedly in every form. There are no sacred cows. In science, 100 authorities count for nothing. Experiment counts for everything.” – Michio Kaku, a professor of theoretical physics at City College of New York

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome beyond awesome, bashing ingorant shit over the head with a shovel, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Doomsday Claim Falsified, Ethics in Science, Get some perspective people, Good science attitude, Hard Science, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's weather AND climate!, Majestic Universe, Paradigm Shift, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | 1 Comment »

The Paradox Of Self-Government

Posted by pwl on November 3, 2012

The Paradox Of Self-Government
By Alan Lovejoy

The state hypothesis argues that granting the state certain powers and authorities that no other entity has is the optimal solution to the problem of peaceful human interaction, cooperation and collaboration. Of course, there are many variations on the theme: Absolute monarchs, direct democracies, and modernly Constitutional republics, to name just the most common.

The principle argument for the state hypothesis is that human beings tend to mistreat each other, and so the state is necessary in order to protect the rights of all from the deprivations and abuses of the few.

But who will guard the guards themselves? Humans do not cease to have a tendency to mistreat others simply because they become employees (or leaders) of the state. That is the central paradox of establishing a state with a monopoly on the authority to operate as a government.

“If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” ~ James Madison

The United States was founded by those who believed that a Constitutional republic might be the optimal form of a state, and that a Constitutional republic with limited powers might be a good solution to the problem of how to keep the state from becoming the very thing that it is intended to prevent from coming into existence, namely, a tyrannical violator of individual rights that no one has sufficient power to oppose:

“The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.” -Thomas Jefferson

But the state hypothesis has a fundamental flaw that categorically prevents it from being true: It’s based on multiple logical contradictions.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Exercise For the Reader, Get some perspective people, History, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Ignorance to Knowledge, Making a REAL Positive Difference in the World, Ontology of Being, Paradigm Shift, Philosophy, Police State Insanity, Politics, Quotations, Rational Thinking, Science Ficition, Something to think about | 129 Comments »

The Climate Science Criminal Aniled Minds

Posted by pwl on February 23, 2012

The Climate Science Criminal Aniled Minds

Peter Gleick’s actions are shocking and atrocious, a sad event for standards in science where we see otherwise dedicated scientists violate their own integrity in furtherance of their belief stricken cause to save the Earth at all costs. It’s an unfortunate pattern of behavior that the end justifies the means.

By using fraud and deception Peter Gleick compromised himself. This is all too familiar in climate scientists dedicated to their cause above their commitment to the scientific method. Peter Gleick likely fancied himself, absurdly, as a whistle-blower of sorts, as DeSmog climate doomsday rapture cultists have characterized him justifying his criminal actions, but the facts now show that there was nothing of substance to the climate issues to be “blown”, just private information stolen in a crime against a think tank who disagrees with Gleick’s world view of CO2 Climate Doomsday Rapture aka CAGW. Nothing to blow the whistle on thus Gleick’s acts are wholly criminal acts not qualifying for whistle-blower status.

The two Climate Gate incidents also fit this pattern but on a much larger scale where an entire clutch of climate scientists, Dr. Mann, Dr. Hansen, Dr, Jones, Dr. Briffa, Dr. Threnbreth, et al., as is evident by the two sets of Climate Gate Emails, had a similar ongoing conspiracy to fudge their numbers, defraud the public, violate the scientific method using secret political actions to block publication of papers, coordinating their actions to the benefit of their pet hypothesis, CAGW, to the benefit of their careers, to the benefit of their funding, to the benefit of their “cause” rather than to the benefit of science or to the benefit of the public paying their bills.

It is obvious that an insider having observed these suspect activities of scientific fraud and cronyism and the resulting gaming of the data to bias towards CAGW plus the fact that funding monies where clearly involved as motivation to career and person adds in the suspect activities of potential criminal fraud not only across state lines but across international borders as well.

The role of the whistle-blower is typically reserved for insiders who observe highly unethical and or criminal behavior going on in an organization who then reports such events and crimes to the public for action by those with the legal obligation to act accordingly and responsibly. Some countries even provide legal protections for such “honest” whistle-blowers who side on the side of doing the right thing rather than letting the crimes continue.

The direct comparison of these two events, ClimateGate and Gleick Fake Gate, leaves one with the bitter taste that, unfortunately, there are many climate scientists willing to engage in unethical actions even crossing the line into scientific fraud (fabrication of data is a no no Dr. Hansen and Dr. Mann) and advancing their own careers using deception (hiding the decline is a big no no Dr. Mann) and, now evidently clearly criminal acts of identity theft, social hacking misrepresentation deception passing oneself as a board member of an organization one is not a member of nor a board member of, receiving stolen documents across state lines for wire fraud, and likely many more charges will be identified as this story develops and unfolds, not to mention the loss of scientific integrity and violating ones commitment to the scientific method and nuking one’s own career with a Tsar Bomba in the process.

So two major cases, Climate Gate I & II (with III in the wind) and Gleick Fake Gate have shown the criminal aniled minds of climate science are active and willing to break the laws that help to keep civilization civil and worse they routinely break the rules of the scientific method claiming they are under attack. Well dah! If you can’t stand the heat get out of the lab!

Science is about testing all claims of hypotheses put forward, it’s the science that is being “attacked” since it’s not hard science of the order of f=ma or e=mc^2. If these two equations had the lack of “predictive value” of the climate science statistical virtual models we’d not be able to build sky scrapers safely let alone have humans visit the moon and robotic probes explore the solar system and beyond!

There is a serious quantitative failure of the field of climate science to keep it self rooted in hard science, sure they put up space satellites and take observations, but it’s the climate scientists methods of analysis that are the key problems (when the frauds and blatant politics are removed that is) they have an over reliance on statistical games and statistical models that disconnect many if not most of their results from the Actual Real Atmosphere and Climate of this Small Blue Marble known as Earth.

If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.” – Ernest Rutherford

Rutherford’s Rule of Experiments is a very concise and elegant filter that separates true hard science from pseudo sciences such as Climate Science.

Judith Curry hits the head on the nail with Gleick’s [lack of] Integrity: when one “perceives with passion” that the Earth is at risk one’s emotions lead one to compromise ones values and self; and in the case of scientists it seems that shows up as a Passion Bias or a Dedication Bias or as commonly known, Confirmation Bias, but to that we can now add Compromise Bias: these are all the blatant ignoring of the counter evidence that has a damn good habit of falsifying the many claims of CAGW.

What makes a Bad Scientist? What makes a Good Scientist? What makes a Great Scientist? How well they adhere to the scientific method and how well they can shift their point of view to consider what others are telling them. Also being honest and not using deception or fraud is a baseline essential commitment.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Belief Stricken, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Caustic Scientists, Climate Science, Climategate, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Real Climate Deniers, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, The Stupid It Burns!!! | Tagged: , , , , , | 10 Comments »

Behold the Mind-Rending HORROR of …

Posted by pwl on May 11, 2011

The comic continues:

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Awesome, Philosophy, Rational Thinking, Something to think about, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | Leave a Comment »

Which is the Real Newly Released Obama Birth Certificate? A Faked One Already?

Posted by pwl on April 27, 2011

Ok this is bizarre. Somebody has already retouched the Newly Released Certificate of Life Birth that Obama released today. Heck it’s not even been a day and it’s been retouched.

UPDATE: Ok, part of the mystery solved. The official copy is the “green” one as that is what was released by Whitehouse.gov here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate with the PDF of the certificate here: http://whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf.

Hold on, the PDF file is NOT just a bit map, the background pattern is just that with other images and items LAYERED on top of it. In other works it’s not one image it’s a composite set of images in the PDF document! For example there are multiple items making up the black parts of the image, the signature block at the bottom is clearly a bit map while the lines and labels seem to be text or other bit maps that highlight white while being drawn! This gets more interesting.

You can see this by saving the PDF and opening it in Adobe PDF Reader then resizing the window and watching it redraw, it redraws in layers a piece at a time quickly. Hmmm….

Could be just the way they do it in Hawaii… but it’s not just a scan of an image. This would also explain how they can easily get multiple different backgrounds, as that could easily be removed or changed with a PDF editing program!

Just the observed facts with questions. Please don’t shoot the messenger. I’m Canadian and really have no vested interest in this one way or the other, just curious about it.

What’s with the “green” background that looks so fake?

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Ignorance to Knowledge, Insanity beyond Insanity, Proofs Needed, Scam?, Something to think about, Watching the Watchers, WOW!!!, Yeah Right, Yikes! | 1 Comment »

A Long Argument With The Specter Of Death

Posted by pwl on April 23, 2011

Christopher Hitchens writes:

Dear fellow-unbelievers,

Nothing would have kept me from joining you except the loss of my voice (at least my speaking voice) which in turn is due to a long argument I am currently having with the specter of death. Nobody ever wins this argument, though there are some solid points to be made while the discussion goes on. I have found, as the enemy becomes more familiar, that all the special pleading for salvation, redemption and supernatural deliverance appears even more hollow and artificial to me than it did before. I hope to help defend and pass on the lessons of this for many years to come, but for now I have found my trust better placed in two things: the skill and principle of advanced medical science, and the comradeship of innumerable friends and family, all of them immune to the false consolations of religion. It is these forces among others which will speed the day when humanity emancipates itself from the mind-forged manacles of servility and superstitition. It is our innate solidarity, and not some despotism of the sky, which is the source of our morality and our sense of decency.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Christopher Hitchens, Damn it!, Get some perspective people, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Philosophy, Quotations, Rational Thinking, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, The End is Nigh, Wait for it!, Yikes!, Yikes! The sky really is falling! | 3 Comments »

2002 Coral Doomsday Claim is Falsified by Observational Data

Posted by pwl on April 17, 2011

2002 Coral Doomsday Claim is Falsified by Observational Data

The Doomsday Claim: World’s Coral: 40% gone by 2010. “Across the world, coral reefs are turning into marine deserts. It’s estimated that more than a quarter have been lost and that 40 per cent could be gone by 2010.”

Doomsday Claim Validation/Falsification Test: Check the current amount of Coral in the world for 2011. If the coral has dropped by 40% or more or thereabouts the claim is validated and coral doomsday might have arrived, however if the level of coral in 2010 or after has not dropped as predicted the coral doomsday claim is falsified, null and void.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Climate Science, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Doomsday Claim, Doomsday Claim Database, Doomsday Claim Falsified, Eco-Junk Science Terrorists, Eco-zombie Terrorists, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Get some perspective people, Green Religion, Hard Science, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, They got the math wrong!, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | Leave a Comment »

Professor Muller Kicks Mann, Briffa, Jones, Wahl et. al. Out Of The Science Club For What They Did That You Can’t Do In Science

Posted by pwl on March 22, 2011

While part of Professor Muller’s video takes the Team (Mann, Briffa, Jones, Wahl, et. al.) to task for stuff you can’t do in science, the longer version makes it clear that the Professor is biased towards the Catastrophic AGW hypothesis claims. Unfortunately the Professor doesn’t explain the reasoning behind his claims or his support for the CAGW claims.

The extract from the longer talk with Professor Muller taking the Team to task for what you can’t do in science and rebuking them by asserting that he now has a list of people whose papers he won’t read anymore. Ouch, cast them out of the science club. Three cheers for professor Muller for standing up for scientific integrity.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Bad Science Attitude, bashing ingorant shit over the head with a shovel, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Get some perspective people, Good science attitude, Green Religion, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Rational Thinking, Real Climate Deniers, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about, Video, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | 1 Comment »

Real Benefits Of An Enriched CO2 Atmosphere

Posted by pwl on February 20, 2011

The benefits of carbon dioxide supplementation on plant growth and production within the greenhouse environment have been well understood for many years. Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is an essential component of Carbon Based Life on Earth.

There would be NO GREEN without the ESSENTIAL NUTRIENT CO2. MORE CO2 = MORE PLANTS. Inconvenient FACTS of PLANT BIOLOGY. More CO2 = More Plants = Cleaner Air. More CO2 = Plants = More Food For Humans. More CO2 = A Good Thing.

GROWING MORE PLANTS WITH CO2 IN GREENHOUSES TODAY
“The benefits of carbon dioxide supplementation on plant growth and production within the greenhouse environment have been well understood for many years.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Food, Get some perspective people, Good science attitude, Hard Science, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Science Shows, Something to think about, Terraforming Earth, Video, WOW!!! | 1 Comment »

The Pioneer Anomaly, a 30-Year-Old Cosmic Mystery that Illustrates Dedication To The Scientific Method

Posted by pwl on December 17, 2010


The Pioneer Spacecraft: Pioneer 10 now soars toward the constellation Taurus, and 11 aims for Aquila

Thirty years ago, NASA scientists noticed that two of their spacecraft, Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11, were veering off course slightly, as if subject to a mysterious, unknown force. In 1998, the wider scientific community got wind of that veering—termed the Pioneer anomaly—and took aim at it with incessant, mind-blowingly detailed scrutiny that has since raised it to the physics equivalent of cult status. Now, though, after spawning close to 1000 academic papers, numerous international conferences, and many entire scientific careers, this beloved cosmic mystery may be on its way out.

Slava Turyshev, a scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, Calif., and Viktor Toth, a Canada-based software developer, plan to publish the results of their strikingly comprehensive new analysis of the Pioneer anomaly in the next few months. Their work is likely to bring a conclusion to one of the longest and most tumultuous detective stories of modern astrophysics.

NASA launched Pioneer 10 in the spring of 1972 and Pioneer 11 one year later. The spacecraft’s joint mission was to gather information about the asteroid belt, Jupiter, Saturn (in the case of Pioneer 11), and their moons. As they hurtled past those various celestial objects, the probes measured previously unknown properties of their atmospheres and surfaces; they also photographed Jupiter’s Red Spot and Saturn’s rings up close for the first time. Then, after completing their “flyby” missions in the mid-1970s, the Pioneers kept going. Carrying identical plaques depicting a man and a woman, the atomic transition of hydrogen, and the location of our planet within the galaxy—a message to aliens—the probes became the first manmade objects ever to plunge beyond the solar system into the inconceivable cold and dark of interstellar space. [1]

This is a fascinating story for many reasons: (1) it has parallels to the entire climate debate, (2) complex computer models of various forces of Nature such as gravity and heat, (3) 1,000s of scientific papers peer reviewed none-the-less attempting to find the cause of the anomaly, (4) destruction of the data (almost), (5) refutation upon refutation leading nowhere, (6) a mystery of great complexity, (7) models that are just to inefficient or full of errors, (8) mistaken idea after mistaken idea, (9) complexity, (10) tenacious independent non-official scientific oriented people dedicated to solving the problem on their own time, (11) …, (N) the list of valuable comparisons goes on and on.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome beyond awesome, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Ethics in Science, Exercise For the Reader, Get some perspective people, Good science attitude, Gravity, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Majestic Universe, Philosophy, Rational Thinking, Science Education, Science Missions, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about, Space Travel, They got the math wrong!, Vehicles, Wait for it! | Tagged: , | 6 Comments »

The Messiah, and why to be Skeptical

Posted by pwl on October 29, 2010

Derren Brown, illusionist, “travelled to the United States to try to convince five leading figures that he had powers in their particular field of expertise: Christian evangelism, alien abduction, psychic powers, New Age theories and contacting the dead.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Get some perspective people, Good science attitude, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Something to think about, Terrorfying, Video | Leave a Comment »

Jesus explains the Crucifixion

Posted by pwl on October 7, 2010

Crucial fix is on.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Baby that became Zombie Jesus, bashing ingorant shit over the head with a shovel, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Get some perspective people, History, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Live Brains!, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Rational Thinking, Really Funny, Something to think about, WOW!!!, Zombie Jesus | Leave a Comment »

Exploring the Graphic Gory Grotesque and Ghastly Stories in The Bloodthirsty Bible

Posted by pwl on September 27, 2010


“The prophet Elisha gets some divine assistance when a group of children insults his pride.”

Posted in Avoiding Quesitons, Awesome beyond awesome, Baby that became Zombie Jesus, bashing ingorant shit over the head with a shovel, Cannibalism, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Rational Thinking, Really Funny, Religion, Science over Propaganada, Some Intelligent Designer, Something to think about, Terrorfying, Video, Violent, Zombie Jesus | Leave a Comment »

Genocide of People In the Name of God in Canada

Posted by pwl on September 19, 2010

“When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are to entering to possess, and drives out before you many nations, and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them and show them no mercy. Do not all any of them to live. This is what you are to do to them: break down their altars, smash their sacred stones, cut down their trees and burn them in the fire. For you are a people chosen by the Lord over all others on the face of the Earth.” – From the Old Testament of the Bible, Deuteronomy 7: 1-2, 5-6.

When God is on our side we can commit any crime. We are absolved individually from that crime by believing that we have a higher sanction and that is the danger of religion in that it allows people to do that, it allows them to kill without a shred of conscience. ” – Kevin Annett, former minister

Kevin Annett was expelled from the United Church for bring this matter of their crimes to their attention. Finally a priest with some actual ethics and morals who wouldn’t take it up the ass from his church hierarchy.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in 1984, Avoiding Quesitons, Bad Ideas, Belief Stricken, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Britsh Columbia Police State, Canadians, Conspiracy Theory, Damn it!, Do Not Click At Work, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Film, Get some perspective people, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Insanity beyond Insanity, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Police State Insanity, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, To Hell With You Buddy, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, Violent, Yikes!, Yikes! The sky really is falling! | Leave a Comment »

Don’t Talk to the Police

Posted by pwl on September 15, 2010

Professor James Duane and Officer George Bruch talk about why you should never talk to the police.

James Duane is a Regent University School of Law professor and Fifth Amendment expert.[1] He has come under fire for his suggestion to never talk to police under any circumstances.[2][3] His reasoning is that police sometimes lie to criminal suspects; police may have substantial evidence against even innocent witnesses; and individuals convinced of their own innocence may have unknowingly committed some crime.[4] This is along the lines of Justice Robert Jackson’s reasoning in Watts v. Indiana. [*1]

“Everything he [Professor James Duane] said was true, and it was right and it was correct.” – Officer George Bruch

“Though the videos are reflective of American law, the principles are largely applicable here in Canada. Though we do not have a 5th Amendment, Canadians have long had a right to silence which is now constitutionally entrenched in s. 7 of the Charter (see R. v. Singh, 2007 SCC 48 for a discussion).” – [*2]

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Avoiding Quesitons, British Columbia ICBC Police State, Britsh Columbia Police State, Damn it!, Do Not Click At Work, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Get some perspective people, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Something to think about, Terrorfying, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, Violent, Yikes!, Yikes! The sky really is falling! | 1 Comment »

Where do the laws of Nature come from? It from Bit?

Posted by pwl on September 3, 2010

Where do the laws of Nature come from?

Let’s explore this by way of two very interesting conversations, one from philosopher and physicist Paul Davies and the other from Stephen Wolfram.

Philosopher and physicist Paul Davies give a fascinating and thought-provoking talk on the possibility of an ultimate explanation for our universe. Dismissing the multiverse and God, he outlines an idea for finding an explanation for the universe and physical laws within the universe itself.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in A New Kind of Science [NKS], Adult Supervision Required, Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Complex Systems, Definition of Terms, Energy, Get some perspective people, Gravity, Hard Science Required, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Majestic Universe, Paradigm Shift, Philosophy, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Science over Propaganada, Science Shows, Something to think about, Spooky Action at a Distance, Stephen Wolfram, Video | 1 Comment »

Letter to the Reverend Pat Robertson

Posted by pwl on August 27, 2010

By DAN BARKER – FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION
Added: Tuesday, 24 August 2010 at 7:26 AM

Rev. Marion “Pat” Robertson August 23, 2010 The Christian Broadcasting Network 977 Centerville Turnpike Virginia Beach VA 23463

Dear Rev. Robertson,

On behalf of our organization’s more than 16,000 members nationwide, and representing millions of atheists and agnostics, I am writing to protest your inflammatory and slanderous hate speech against nonbelievers, specifically your advice that no Christian should marry an atheist. During a program aired last year on the Christian Broadcast Network that has been recently rebroadcast, a woman with an atheist fiancé asked, “How do you think we can interact with each other peacefully when it comes to spiritual matters?” You responded unpeaceably:

I’m sure this is a nice guy, and you like him a lot, but the bible says, “What fellowship hath Christ with Belial?” There is no fellowship between an atheist and somebody who is a believer in God. . . . I hate to tell you, you’ve got to go find somebody else. . . . I mean, he’s gonna be serving the Devil and you’re gonna be serving God. It’s just that simple.

That remark is a blanket prejudicial smear against the character of all nonbelievers. If you had said the same thing about other minority groups — such as the recent controversy caused by Laura Schlessinger’s thoughtless use of the N-word on her show, suggesting to a caller that she should not have married “outside your race” — the country would be demanding your resignation, asking affiliates to cancel your show and calling on viewers to boycott your extremist, intolerant program. If you had told the woman to break up with a Jewish fiancé because Jews are “reprobate, dissolute and uncouth” (which is what “Belial” means), you would be properly branded an anti-Semite. If you had told her to dump her African-American fiancé because blacks are “worthless and useless” (which is also what “Belial” means), you would be quickly exposed as a racist. Likewise, labeling the entire class of nonbelievers as “demonic and evil,” and as the Devil itself (the meaning of “Belial” in the verse you misquoted), is equally abhorrent.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, atheophobic, Double Yikes!!, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Get some perspective people, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Making a REAL Positive Difference in the World, Philosophy, Religion, Science over Propaganada, Some Intelligent Designer, Something to think about, To Hell With You Buddy, Zombie Jesus | 2 Comments »

Eliminating Faith and Beliefs About the Nature of Nature

Posted by pwl on August 2, 2010

‎”Faith is belief in the absence of evidence, science is belief in the presence of evidence.” ‘When the evidence disagrees with a scientific proposition, the proposition is discarded. When the evidence disagrees with a religious proposition, the evidence is thrown out’. – Victor J. Stenger

I work to eliminate belief and faith from my life, now I’m not talking about the “belief” that I left my car parked in it’s spot and whether or not it’s still there, I know I left it there but it’s possible that it is no longer there for a variety of reasons all possible within the known limits of objective reality. I’m talking about the kind of belief and faith that asserts “truths” or “facts” or “aspects” of the objective reality of Nature, about the very nature of Nature itself without any evidence to stand on. That is the kind of belief and faith that is the most pernicious and dangerous. I prefer knowledge that can be verified or proven with hard evidence or even better, proven with experiment done by yourself.

The problem is that the word “belief” has SO many meanings and people often don’t mean the same thing by the word. In addition when talking with “believers” it’s a huge pile of dogma that you’re taking about when you use the word “belief”, it’s not just one belief.
The point Stegner is making is which determines what you accept as real, the faith based beliefs and dogma, or the hard evidence? If the beliefs and dogma determine what is real, that is religion, that is highly dangerous, that is what leads to delusions. If the evidence determines what is real that is science, that is rationality, that is being connected with the objective reality of Nature where we actually exist.

Of course it all hinges on what the evidence is. There is good evidence and then there is bad evidence and faulty proofs.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Good science attitude, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Majestic Universe, Philosophy, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Quotations, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about, Victor J Stenger | Leave a Comment »

What happens after you die?

Posted by pwl on July 29, 2010

What happens after you die? Nature is a harsh mistress indeed.

What happens after death is very clear, your body rots as it’s being recycled by Nature and “you” are permanently and utterly obliterated… you cease to be… no magical heaven, no roasting hell, you just cease to be… when your brain stops working… that’s it… nothing more.

What happens when you take something apart, such as a car? As you begin to remove non-critical pieces it’s still a car, you can take the roof off and it’s still a car, you can take the hub caps off and it’s still a car, you can even take the doors off and it’s still a car; taking the wheels off and while it’s still a car it’s now a disabled car… but at some point as you remove parts – critical parts – it’s no longer a car; and if as you take those parts off the car and destroy them so there is no chance of putting it back together either… that’s what happens with humans and other living things… at some point a critical component or critical components are removed or cease functioning that are critical for it to be alive and that’s it… that is the moment you cease to be – when your brain stops functioning, just like a car ceases to be….

Now to be sure, did the car go to “car heaven”? Nope, it simple ceased to be, it vanished… it’s car-ness is no more… it existed from the point that it’s critical parts made it a car and was a car while it was a car and then it ceased to be after it was disassembled at that critical moment when enough parts where removed that it ceased to be…

Enjoy being alive. It is all that matters. Everything else is meaningless.

There is no mystery about death. Only people who don’t want to face it or those that don’t like it make it mysterious and invent alleged gods and being saved by jesus to a futile pitiful attempt to defy the objective reality of Nature in it’s harshness and cold fact of obliterating end of life.

Science wins over mythology. If after reading the attached article/document you still believe in the resurrection of jesus you know that you’re highly delusional and denying the facts of life in the objective reality of Nature.

BE. Even BE kind to others. For no other reason than the shocking horror of our own ceasing to be.

Here is the science:


Beyond the Grave – Understanding Human Decomposition
by Arpad A. Vass, Senior Staff Scientist at Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Adjunct Associate Professor at the University of Tennessee in Forensic Anthropology.
Reprinted from MICROBIOLOGY TODAY, page 190, VOL 28/NOV 2001.
This verbatim copy below ( PDF version Beyond the Grave – understanding human decomposition – no photos v1) of the text has been sanitized of the horrific graphic photos.
Warning: original version with highly graphic photos of actual bodies decomposing. PDF: Not suitable for most people.

Human decomposition begins approximately 4 minutes after death has occurred. The onset is governed by a process called autolysis – or self-digestion. As cells of the body are deprived of oxygen, carbon dioxide in the blood increases, pH decreases and wastes accumulate which poison the cells. Concomitantly, unchecked cellular enzymes (lipases, proteases, amylases, etc.) begin to dissolve the cells from the inside out, eventually causing them to rupture, and releasing nutrient-rich fluids. This process begins and progresses more rapidly in tissues that have a high enzyme content (such as the liver) and a high water content such as the brain, but eventually affects all the cells in the body. Autolysis usually does not become visually apparent for a few days. It is first observed by the appearance of fluidfilled blisters on the skin and skin slippage where large sheets of skin slough off the body. Meanwhile, the body has acclimated to ambient temperature (algor mortis), blood has settled in the body causing discoloration of the skin (livor mortis) and cellular cytoplasm has gelled due to increased acidity (rigor mortis). After enough cells have ruptured, nutrient-rich fluids become available and the process of putrefaction can begin.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Hard Science, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ick!, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Ontology of Being, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, Yikes! | 12 Comments »

Soothsaying Hot Doomsday Futures

Posted by pwl on July 29, 2010

Soothsaying Hot Doomsday Futures is all the rage.

“Scientists from around the world are providing even more evidence of global warming. ‘A comprehensive review of key climate indicators confirms the world is warming and the past decade was the warmest on record,’ the annual State of the Climate report declares. Compiled by more than 300 scientists from 48 countries, including Canada, the report from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said its analysis of 10 indicators that are ‘clearly and directly related to surface temperatures, all tell the same story: Global warming is undeniable.'” – Slashdot.org article “Global Warming ‘Undeniable,’ Report Says”

Yikes, start packing for doomsday for the soothsayers are out and about using The Force to intensify propaganda after their self inflicted Climate Gate revelations of their Alarmist Scientist Core Cult members improprieties. Pack light though, it’s going to be a scorcher, allegedly. Hawaii at the North Pole. I really am beginning to wonder if all these alarmist scientists are just rapture christians firing things up for the coming end times? Nostradamus still beats any climate scientist with soothsaying doomsday predictions. Hands down, and he’s been dead a long time. Now how can that be? Let’s explore the science that prevents predictions of complex systems.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in A New Kind of Science [NKS], Caustic Scientists, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Ethics in Science, Get some perspective people, Good science attitude, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's weather AND climate!, Rational Thinking, Real Climate Deniers, Reality Based Environmentalism, Richard Feynman, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, The Stupid It Burns!!!, Yikes!, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling!, Zombie Environmentalists | Leave a Comment »

Objective Reality is a Harsh Mistress ™ as Hansen, Mann, Jones, Gore, Pachauri, Strong, et. al. are Finding Out The Hard Way

Posted by pwl on February 3, 2010

Actual Science vs Faith in Anthropomorphic Global Warming Climate Change
(click to enlarge).

“One of the key features of Hansen’s global warming theory is that the polar regions are supposed to warm much faster than the rest of the planet. The image below is from his classic 1984 paper, and shows that Antarctica is supposed to warm up 6C after a doubling of CO2. If the cooling trend which UAH shows continues, it will take Antarctica a very long time to warm up six degrees.” – [1]

There is very little difference between what Hansen is doing and the old time soothsayers. Sure Hansen has computers with which to ply his magical tricks of math and dead tree entrails are at the core of his “dire doomsday” climate predictions. It’s the same old confidence game just different means of deception.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Avoiding Quesitons, Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Belief Stricken, Caustic Scientists, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Disasters, Dupenhagen aka Copenhagen 2009, Eco-Junk Science Terrorists, Ethics in Science, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Scams, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about | 1 Comment »

New Scientist Magazine Backpedals In CYA Move and Acknowledges Climate Science Has Been Damaged by the Climategate Emails

Posted by pwl on January 16, 2010

The 16 January 2010 issue of New Scientist is really interesting as New Scientist admit that they published “non peer reviewed speculations” as if it was science (rather than soothsaying) and that those speculations were treated as if they were peer reviewed science by the politicians who run the IPCC panel and produce the Alarmist Anthropogenic Global Warming Climate Change Hypothesis (that has now been falsified in so many ways). Now let’s get into it.

[Update 20100119: It’s fine if a science magazine publishes “speculation” AS LONG AS it is so labeled! If it’s not labeled as a “speculative possibility” without any evidence then the readers might be inclined to “blindly accept it on faith or trust” or to accept it “on authority” as seems to have happened with the Himalayan Glaciers are Melting Doom and Gloom. New Scientist does have cache as an allegedly authoritative (to some degree) science publication, at least in some circles. As such it is their responsibility to indicate accurately as possible the evidence available for any particular hypothesis. One way science rags such as New Scientist, Nature, Scientific American, Discover, Popular Science, et. al. fall down is in not presenting opposing hypotheses or contrary evidence that falsifies the hypothesis. By only presenting the one side a rosy picture is transmitted into the minds of many of their readers not all of whom have the time nor inclination nor skills to dig deeper. That failure is on the shoulders of the editors and policy makers of those rags. – pwl]

New Scientist magazine’s unnamed Editors write:

Sifting climate facts from speculation
IT WAS a dramatic declaration: glaciers across much of the Himalayas may be gone by 2035. When New Scientist heard this comment from a leading Indian glaciologist [Syed Hasnain], we reported it. That was in 1999. The claim later appeared in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s most recent report – and it turns out that our article is the primary published source. The glaciologist has never submitted what he says was a speculative comment for peer review – and most of his peers strongly dispute it. ” – New Scientist magazine, 16 January 2010, page 3

In the article Fred Pearce writes:

A decade ago, New Scientist reported (5 June 1999, p 18) a comment by the leading Indian glaciologist Syed Hasnain, who said in an email interview with this author that all the glaciers in the central and eastern Himalayas could disappear by 2035. Hasnain, of Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi, has never repeated the prediction in a peer reviewed journal, and now says it was ” speculative”. – Fred Pearce, New Scientist magazine, 16 January 2010, page 11

So the glaciologist who made the comments and New Scientist are both backpedaling their claims which amount to nothing more than the equivalent of soothsaying the future. Shame, shame, shame. When scientists peddle “predictions” without sufficient hard evidence what really is the difference between what they are doing and soothsaying from dead tree entrails? Nothing really.

“So how could such speculation have become an IPCC “finding” which has, moreover, recently been defended by the panel’s chairman [Rajendra Pachauri]?” – New Scientist magazine, 16 January 2010, page 3

You’re kidding right? Rajendra Pachauri is a politician and will attempt to use anything regardless of how verified it is to support his political agenda and personal wealth accumulation agenda as his recently revealed conflicts of interest demonstrate! This shows that the Editors of New Scientist clearly fail to see the highly political nature of the alleged AGW Hypothesis. Are the editors still under the delusion that climate science is a pure science without being driven by a hard core polarized political movement? I can’t believe they are that naive, can you?

“We are entitled to an explanation, before rumour and doubt compound the damage to the image of climate science already inflicted by the leaked “climategate” emails.” – New Scientist magazine, 16 January 2010, page 3

This is a very strange item. Still attempting to unpack it’s full meaning. Thought I’d share it and see what others had to say about it.

It seems that New Scientist, unnamed author, is backpedaling a published claim that was being propagandized by the chief politician of the IPCC to support the political non-science based AGW hypothesis agenda.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Majestic Universe, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about, Watching the Watchers | 10 Comments »

Shaping the News Masterfully, Jon Stewart Frames Climategate

Posted by pwl on December 2, 2009

We have seen Noam Chomsky’s principle of “Manufacturing Consent” working with the Climategate criminals Jones, Mann, et. al.. A conspiracy of “values and beliefs”, an elitist clique that thought that they were above the rest of the people they worked for, us. Other scientists have this “academic” elitist bias or shared value, that says that you need not just the “qualifications” but the “right attitude” otherwise you’re “outside the group”. Einstein broke the mold as have McIntyre and others, Einstein was a “patent clerk” when he worked on his famous breakthroughs.

Now we see it with Jon Stewart. While making light of the Climategate in a really funny way he reveals his bias in that he “believes” in “global warming” when he says “does it [Climategate] disprove global warming, no”. Unfortunately it’s much more complex than Jon Stewart realizes and that his shared values and beliefs in “global warming” blind him from deeper inquiry. OR, as a masterful media perception shaper he’s doing his job of making people laugh with short segments and the Climategate is way too much to get into and his demographic also shares his values in “global warming”.

In any event the science will clearly demonstrate what’s going on as time unfolds and Nature does what she does.

What’s interesting in Jon Stewart’s masterful media play is really how good he is at it.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Politics, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Respect Nature or Else, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about, Video, WOW!!! | 2 Comments »

Without this one thing there would be no Global Warming at all and we’d all freeze to death!

Posted by pwl on November 28, 2009

The Sun Sol

It matters, especially in modern times, what the Sun is doing.” – Neil deGrasse Tyson

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Awesome beyond awesome, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Double Yikes!!, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Philosophy, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Science Shows, Something to think about, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, Video, WOW!!! | Leave a Comment »

Human Caused Global Warming Climate Change Doomsday Called Off due to the alleged science of the Climategate alleged Scietists

Posted by pwl on November 28, 2009

The amazing CBC documentary Doomsday Called Off.

This following summary updates the above documentary with the Climategate revelations.

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Reality Based Environmentalism, Respect Nature or Else, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, Terrorfying, Video, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »

The Ice is Melting, The Sea is Rising, Hurricanes are Blowing, and it’s all YOUR FAULT!

Posted by pwl on November 26, 2009

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Climategate, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Fun, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Respect Nature or Else, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, Splish Splash Taking a Bath, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Ground is Falling Up!, The Sky Is Falling, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »

When scientists fail to present all the known facts including the ones that contradict their hypothesis they become propagandists and bad scientists

Posted by pwl on November 8, 2009

The belief that the ends justifies the means may be the true root of all evil. – Troy Brumley

A prime example of how science is distorted by – likely well meaning – scientists or science educators. Deliberately or not this video is a masterful piece of propaganda pretending to be science. Credits are due to Greg Craven, the master propagandist who appears in the video.

Greg Craven: falsum in uno, falsum in omnibus?
Greg Craven: false in one thing, false in everything?

Neither risk presented in the video is acceptable because they are a false choice and Greg Craven knows it [or he should know it as a science teacher]! His logic is flawed since he presents a “binary choice” and that is his mistake, black and white thinking. His second mistake is presenting a false dilemma when he knows the facts much better [or should know them better as a science teacher]! There are so many other choices one can choose that it’s not funny. It’s typical of many people trained in the sciences and technology, as well as the general public, to think in black and white binary terms. The universe is fuzzy people. It’s about time we realized that.

The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy) involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options. Closely related are failing to consider a range of options and the tendency to think in extremes, called black-and-white thinking. Strictly speaking, the prefix “di” in “dilemma” means “two”. When a list of more than two choices is offered, but there are other choices not mentioned, then the fallacy is called the fallacy of false choice, or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses.

False dilemma can arise intentionally, when fallacy is used in an attempt to force a choice (“If you are not with us, you are against us.”) But the fallacy can arise simply by accidental omission—possibly through a form of wishful thinking or ignorance—rather than by deliberate deception (“I thought we were friends, but all my friends were at my apartment last night and you weren’t there.”)

When two alternatives are presented, they are often, though not always, two extreme points on some spectrum of possibilities. This can lend credence to the larger argument by giving the impression that the options are mutually exclusive, even though they need not be. Furthermore, the options are typically presented as being collectively exhaustive, in which case the fallacy can be overcome, or at least weakened, by considering other possibilities, or perhaps by considering a whole spectrum of possibilities, as in fuzzy logic.

Furthermore the dark vision of doom and gloom presented by the human caused global warming alarmists is exaggerated! Even Al Gore admits that he exaggerates – lies outright – just to get people to act! It’s clear that the alarmist views are not on the same footing as a rational scientific view that can be audited and examined fully in the public eyes.

Al Gore admits that he deliberately lies to and scares people for political gain on the topic of human caused global warming climate change. His lying is so blatant that he arrogantly brags about it! Wow, mastery of propaganda is certainly a strong suit for Al Gore.

“In the United States of America, unfortunately we still live in a bubble of unreality. And the Category 5 denial is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.” — Al Gore in an interview.

Steven Schneider [now deceased], [was] an alleged climate scientist who also advocates [advocated] lying to people and scaring them with outright lies for political gain. Wow what a one man propaganda machine.

On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but — which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands, and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broadbased support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.” – Steven Schneider, National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), (Quoted in Discover, pp. 45–48, Oct. 1989; for the original, together with Schneider’s commentary on it misrepresentation see also American Physical Society, APS News August/September 1996.

Schneider has been publicly criticized by fellow atmospheric scientist, Craig Bohren, for his history of self-promotion using contradictory climate scares:

“…some of the prominent global warmers of today were global coolers of not so long ago. In particular, Steven Schneider, now at Stanford, previously at NCAR, about 30 years ago was sounding the alarm about an imminent ice age. The culprit then was particles belched into the atmosphere by human activities. No matter how the climate changes he can correctly say that he predicted it. No one in the atmospheric science community has been more successful at getting publicity. NCAR used to send my department clippings from newspaper and magazine articles in which NCAR researchers were named. We’d get thick wads of clippings, almost all of which were devoted to Schneider. Perhaps global warming is bad for the rest of us, but for Schneider and others [such as Al Gore] it has been a godsend.

More scare mongers with a deliberate lying bent where the end justifies the means, scientists, politicians and eco-warriors alike admitting they are willing to lie through their teeth to get the job done even if it’s global warming is false! Wow.

“What we’ve got to do in energy conservation is try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, to have approached global warming as if it is real means energy conservation, so we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”
— Timothy Wirth, former U.S. Senator (D-Colorado)

Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public . . . and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are.” (Petr Chylek, Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, commenting on reports that Greenland’s glaciers are melting. Halifax Chronicle-Herald, August 22, 2001)

We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing”
(Tim Wirth 1990, former US Senator) as quoted in NCPA Brief 213; September 6, 1996

A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the [enhanced] greenhouse effect
(Richard Benedict, US Conservation Foundation)

We have wished, we ecofreaks, for a disaster or for a social change to come and bomb us into Stone Age, where we might live like Indians in our valley, with our localism, our appropriate technology, our gardens, our homemade religion — guilt-free at last!
— Stewart Brand (writing in the Whole Earth Catalogue)

Taking action can cause much worse problems for humans by rushing and taking the wrong actions. It’s very possible that the huge economic upheaval that is being caused by the rush to judgment by the alarmists will actually cause more harm than any real amount of actual warming.

Will Greg Craven, the guy in the video, take personal responsibility for all those that die in the economic turmoil of the implementation of useless “carbon solutions” for his role in presenting false dilemmas? Will he be responsible for those that die as the planet it terrorformed by his advocacy? I doubt it.

Besides the facts now show that the last ten years have been getting colder. Cold is the new warming. What? Yup. It’s getting colder which means the planet is warming. Weird, but that is what the alarmists claim.

Having an accurate assessment of the risks is crucial for any decision making process. This guy presents the situation in binary thinking and aims you towards his forgone conclusion revealing his bias. More propaganda based upon false reasoning steps and a very crude method of risk management. Since we already know that the alarmists claims are false (even they admit it) this guy is presenting a false choice on the alarmist side of the ledger.

Overall Greg Craven fails as a scientist to present the full set of known facts but passes as an effective and craven propagandist. As such Greg Craven gets a failing grade.

One Richard Feynman has this to say about falsification and full disclosure and it should be a lesson to Greg Craven and the others quoted above as Greg and the others are being schooled by Feynman indeed:

“But this long history of learning how not to fool ourselves–of having utter scientific integrity–is, I’m sorry to say, something that we haven’t specifically included in any particular course that I know of. We just hope you’ve caught on by osmosis.

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself–and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you’ve not fooled yourself, it’s easy not to fool other scientists. You just have to be honest in a conventional way after that.

I would like to add something that’s not essential to the science, but something I kind of believe, which is that you should not fool the layman when you’re talking as a scientist. I am not trying to tell you what to do about cheating on your wife, or fooling your girlfriend, or something like that, when you’re not trying to be a scientist, but just trying to be an ordinary human being. We’ll leave those problems up to you and your rabbi. I’m talking about a specific, extra type of integrity that is not lying, but bending over backwards to show how you are maybe wrong, that you ought to have when acting as a scientist. And this is our responsibility as scientists, certainly to other scientists, and I think to laymen.

For example, I was a little surprised when I was talking to a friend who was going to go on the radio. He does work on cosmology and astronomy, and he wondered how he would explain what the applications of this work were. “Well,” I said, “there aren’t any.” He said, “Yes, but then we won’t get support for more research of this kind.” I think that’s kind of dishonest. If you’re representing yourself as a scientist, then you should explain to the layman what you’re doing–and if they don’t want to support you under those circumstances, then that’s their decision.

One example of the principle is this: If you’ve made up your mind to test a theory, or you want to explain some idea, you should always decide to publish it whichever way it comes out. If we only publish results of a certain kind, we can make the argument look good. We must publish both kinds of results.

I say that’s also important in giving certain types of government advice. Supposing a senator asked you for advice about whether drilling a hole should be done in his state; and you decide it would be better in some other state. If you don’t publish such a result, it seems to me you’re not giving scientific advice. You’re being used. If your answer happens to come out in the direction the government or the politicians like, they can use it as an argument in their favor; if it comes out the other way, they don’t publish it at all. That’s not giving scientific advice.

But not paying attention to experiments like that is a characteristic of cargo cult science.

And now you find a man saying that it is an irrelevant demand to expect a repeatable experiment. This is science?

So I have just one wish for you–the good luck to be somewhere where you are free to maintain the kind of integrity I have described, and where you do not feel forced by a need to maintain your position in the organization, or financial support, or so on, to lose your integrity. May you have that freedom. ” – Richard Feynman, Cargo Cult Science, A Lesson From Richard Feynman For Scientists of Today to Learn

Sounds like Greg Craven needs to go back to grade ten science class and relearn the basics as long as his science teacher is someone like Richard Feynman and very unlike Greg Craven.


 

A detailed analysis of Greg Craven’s video “How the World Ends” (which have the same false dilemma argument) is illuminating of Greg Craven’s craven attitude towards factual science presentations.

Now a more rational video presentation on climate science.

What is Normal Climate?

 


 

All we can do is adapt, it is the sun that does it, not man.


Article updated 20101230.

Posted in Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Caustic Scientists, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Eeek!, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Philosophy, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Video | 2 Comments »

Climate is a mathematical abstraction, Weather is what is real and happening now and now and now, now being the only time that exists in reality

Posted by pwl on November 7, 2009

Now is the only moment of time that actually exists in reality. The past is but a memory. The future an illusion. Tomorrow never comes for when it does it is today and there is always another tomorrow. Now is the Time! This moment, now! Now. Now. Now. The Time is Now and never any other!

That time is NOW! Save us from Mann Caused Global Warming Climate Change Alarmists and their Soothsaying Hysteria! Save US NOW and bring Justice to Science so that Science can Prevail over Soothsaying Alarmist Propaganda!

So it’s fine for the endangered human caused global warming climate change alarmists to yell “look it’s Ida, extreme weather” caused by human caused global warming climate change yet when it’s pointed out that October 2009 is the 3rd coldest in 115 years on record it’s just weather and not climate? Double standards on the “it’s weather no it’s climate vs. it’s climate no it’s just weather”?

Climate extremes cause weather extremes! Is that a fair statement? Or is it that weather extremes cause climate extremes?

Climate is weather averaged over decade long times scales… extreme climate depends on your time window and your statistical prowess poker face.

Climate is weather. Without weather there would be no climate. Two sides of the same coin flipping about with randomness generated internally within the system. (See Wolfram’s A New Kind of Science, chapter 2 for how this newly discovered form of randomness operates for even very simple systems to show highly complex and extremely unpredictable behaviors).

Climate is weather. Extremes in weather are just the planet going about it’s business. As such extremes in weather mathematically show up in the decade long time scales to varying amounts.

How do we really know where each change in climate really comes from? Assigning this fraction of a degree to that cause and that fraction of a degree to this other cause ad infinitum makes no sense as that isn’t how Nature plans it out not that Nature plans it out.

Now it seems that it’s a heat budget thing with heat into a system (the planet) and heat out (of the planet) by various means. We have various forms of light and electromagnetic radiation touching and being absorbed by the planet with some reflecting off or changing and reflecting off. We have movement of the planet in it’s ever changing always unique orbit of Sol, not to mention other gravitational influences such as the moon and even other planetary bodies. We have cosmic rays and other high energy particle streams impacting the planet or going right on through. Cosmic rays from near and distant stars as we orbit the galaxy so close. We have chemical reactions and volcanoes and oceans mixing and moving and we have the hot and molten inner layers plus the rotating core providing our magnetic fields fluctuating always churning and interacting. Not to mention the bizarre lumpy gravity fields that distort the seemingly squashed spheroid of the planet into what can best be described as a total gravity mess beaten up all bent out of it’s idealized shape we can see from space. We’ve got so many processes and forces at work that we think we can apportion a fraction of a degree to this or that.

It would be really funny if it wasn’t so serious a conversation about doom and gloom. The climate change soothsayers have taking a bite out of sanity and are running a con game that has at it’s core irrational correlations that are weak at best and fraudulent at worse and outright lies in the extreme.

I would love to see an article by one of the major scientists on ALL the elements impacting the climate summarized, glossarized and indexed by the various “fractions of degrees” that they allegedly contribute and how to the climate and to the all important weather.

Climate is a mathematical abstraction. Weather is real and is happening now, the only moment in time that actually exists. The past gone. The future is an illusion and never exists. Tomorrow never comes as there is always another tomorrow when today shows up now. It’s an important aspect of comprehending time that now is all that is real. All there ever is is now and that means weather rules the climate not the other way around.

This is what we really need to be protecting against: The Real Threat to Humanity – other than ourselves – are Asteroid Impacts! We missed being hit two days ago and a month ago our atmosphere protected us from an asteroid with enough punch to product an 50 Kiloton detonation high up in the atmosphere. Ouch!

Actually it would be more like this but the above video has a better sound track!

This one is the bomb, literally an Extinction Level Event (ELE)!

Posted in Climate Science, Complex Systems, Definition of Terms, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Humbled by Nature, Philosophy, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about | Leave a Comment »

Learning to think for yourself means getting outside of your box of known knowns, known unknowns, unknown knows and unknown unknowns and explore the possibilities beyond the options

Posted by pwl on November 6, 2009

The Ontology of Being

“It’s to give people an opportunity to think for themselves… what happens is that most of us think that our very strongly held beliefs, you know those things we hold, our opinions, that are very strong, we think that that is thinking for ourselves but it isn’t really. The ability to think for yourself really means the ability to think something that you haven’t thought before. To think outside the allowable range of thoughts rather than just inside the allowable range of thoughts.” – Werner Erhard, TV Interview

Learn to think for yourself out side of your allowable range of thoughts and especially outside the cage of your beliefs and opinions.

The Known Knowns.
The Known Unknowns.
The Unknown Knowns.
The Unknown Unknowns.

“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. These are things we do not know we don’t know.” – quote popularized globally by Donald Rumsfeld in justification of mass murder; quote popularized by Werner Erhard in the 1970’s and 80’s to make the world a better place one person at a time.

During the 1970’s and 1980’s Werner Ehard’s est Training Program used this quote (or a variant thereof that covers all four possibilities, known knowns, known unknowns, unknown knowns, unknown unknowns) as a part of the course material. Landmark Education’s The Landmark Forum course also uses it. One point of using it is to help people see the limits of their knowledge and the edges of the metaphorical box they live in. Where are our blind spots when it comes to our knowledge or lack there of? What are the risks of ignorance? The exploration of these four domains would be extensive and take many hours of these courses.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Ethics in Science, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Live Brains!, Ontology of Being, Philosophy, Rational Thinking, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, Video, Werner Erhard, WOW!!! | 8 Comments »

Why is science important?

Posted by pwl on October 20, 2009

“It’s said that science will dehumanize people and turn them into numbers. That is false and tragically false. Look for yourself, this is the concentration camp and crematorium at Auschwitz. This is where people where turned into numbers. … It was not done by gas… It was done by arrogance… it was done by dogma… it was done by ignorance. When people believe they have absolute knowledge with no test in reality this how they behave. this is what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of the gods. … Science is a very human kind of knowledge… we are always at the brink of the known… every judgment in science stands on the edge of error and is personal. Science is a tribute to what we can know although we are fallible. We have to cure ourselves of the itch for absolute power.” – Bronowski‘s The Ascent of Man

Continuing Dr Bronowski’s personal view of mans major discoveries and the evolution of his thought; this programme highlights the achievement of twentieth century physics in proving that absolute certainty inside or outside science is beyond our grasp.

1) The Method of the Artist.
2) The Invisible Waves.
3) Karl Friedrich Gauss and Göttingen.
4) Max Born and Heisenberg.
5) The Principle of Uncertainty.
6) Leo Szilard.
7) The Tragedy of Scientists.

Posted in Awesome, Biology, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, History, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Science Shows, Something to think about, Video | Leave a Comment »

Gilligan’s Island Sinking due to Global Warming (AGW)? The condemned will eat a hearty meal.

Posted by pwl on October 9, 2009

The condemned will eat a hearty meal.

Anthropomorphic Global Warming Hits Gilligan’s Island with a vengeance.

“Just like in real life with Anthropomorphic Global Warming the professors hypothesis of the island sinking is proven false due to bad data collection, misinterpretation, and above all fear based soothsaying of the future when it’s not prudent nor scientifically possible.

Fear NOT, CO2 is life as it’s an essential plant nutrient needed for our friends the plants to grow strong and lush. CO2 is needed to feed the ever growing human population.

If you want to save the environment stop REAL pollution like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.”

UPDATE:

Gilligan’s Island Sinking due to Global Warming (AGW)?
From: MountThor | October 09, 2009 | 291 views
Unfortunately Warner Brothers chose to prevent even a fair use of Gilligan’s island from occurring. There are 98 episodes of Gilligan’s Island of about 25 minutes each for a total of about 2450 minutes. The video which was deleted was about 8 minutes and 40 seconds, say 9 minutes… that’s less than 0.37% of the total footage ever shot and broadcast which makes the amount I used fair use under international copyright laws. The copyrights were left intact as were the shot titles and a thank you for usage was added to this descriptive note (not that that is necessary for fair use situations). The footage was ONLY used since it provides a public commentary on the politics of global warming and how the data the so called science is based upon is flawed as was the science the professor used in his conclusion that the island is sinking was flawed.

I refer you to: http://www-sul.stanford.edu/cpyright.html where you’ll see that this limited in size video expert for non-profit review and critique and commentary meets all the criteria for fair use.

I subscribe to the Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Online Video.
http://www.centerforsocialmedia.org/resources/publication…

I kindly request the permission of Warner Brothers to use this limited extract for not for profit political commentary.

Posted in Awesome, Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Climate Science, Eeek!, Fun, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Scams, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Science Smackdown, Something to think about, Splish Splash Taking a Bath, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Ground is Falling Up!, The Sky Is Falling, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! | 1 Comment »

Green House Conspiracy

Posted by pwl on September 20, 2009

This documentary is a good companion to the latest documentary,”The Great Global Warming Swindle” recently shown on CH 4 UK and is available on Google video. The hoax of Global Warming / Green House was exposed 19 years ago by CH 4 UK in this documentary entitled Green House Conspiracy. Those who subscribe to the rubbish trotted out by Al Gore and his mindless followers are not new they were the same arse clowns who were telling us we were all going to freeze to death 30 years ago.

What The FUCK? Almost every aspect of this video from 19 years ago is exactly the same as it is today!!!! Wow, nothing has changed. The warmies are still crying wolf. I wonder who let them out of the asylum?

Posted in Awesome, Bad Science, Bad Science Attitude, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Conspiracy Theory, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Exercise For the Reader, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Religion, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | Leave a Comment »

Solaranite Theory of Rapid Anthropomorphic Climate Change

Posted by pwl on September 17, 2009

The Solaranite Theory of Climate Change starts around 3:00 into the flick.

Solaranite Theory of Rapid Anthropomorphic Climate Change: “Take a can of your gasoline. Say this can of gasoline is the sun. Now, you spread a thin line of it to a ball, representing the earth. Now, the gasoline represents the sunlight, the sun particles. Here we saturate the ball with the gasoline, the sunlight. Then we put a flame to the ball. The flame will speedily travel around the earth, back along the line of gasoline to the can, or the sun itself. It will explode this source and spread to every place that gasoline, our sunlight, touches. Explode the sunlight here, gentlemen, you explode the universe. Explode the sunlight here and a chain reaction will occur direct to the sun itself and to all the planets that sunlight touches, to every planet in the universe.

The details of the Solaranite Climate Change Theory come to light in this following riveting conversation. Pun intended.

Eros, the leader, confronts a group of skeptical earthlings with the true nature of his plan. The scientific minds of Earth are on a treacherous course of weapons discovery that will eventually lead to a bomb that could explode the whole universe, the “Solaranite Bomb”.

Colonel Edwards: Why is it so important that you want to contact the governments of our earth?

Eros: Because of death. Because all you of Earth are idiots!

Jeff Trent: Now you just hold on, Buster.

Eros: No, you hold on! First was your firecracker, a harmless explosive. Then your hand grenade: you began to kill your own people, a few at a time. Then the bomb. Then a larger bomb: many people are killed at one time. Then your scientists stumbled upon the atom bomb, split the atom. Then the hydrogen bomb, where you actually explode the air itself. Now you can arrange the total destruction of the entire universe served by our sun: The only explosion left is the Solaranite.

Colonel Tom Edwards: Why, there’s no such thing! Why, a particle of sunlight can’t even be seen or measured.

Eros: Can you see or measure an atom? Yet you can explode one! A ray of sunlight is made up of many atoms.

Jeff Trent: So what if we do develop this Solaranite bomb? We’d be even a stronger nation than now.

Eros: “Stronger.” You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!

The impassioned plea continues with an appeal to intelligence and metaphor.

Colonel Edwards: You speak of Solaranite. But just what is it?

Eros: Take a can of your gasoline. Say this can of gasoline is the sun. Now, you spread a thin line of it to a ball, representing the earth. Now, the gasoline represents the sunlight, the sun particles. Here we saturate the ball with the gasoline, the sunlight. Then we put a flame to the ball. The flame will speedily travel around the earth, back along the line of gasoline to the can, or the sun itself. It will explode this source and spread to every place that gasoline, our sunlight, touches. Explode the sunlight here, gentlemen, you explode the universe. Explode the sunlight here and a chain reaction will occur direct to the sun itself and to all the planets that sunlight touches, to every planet in the universe. This is why you must be stopped. This is why any means must be used to stop you. In a friendly manner or as (it seems) you want it.

Plan 9

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Climate Science, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Eeek!, Energy, Entertainment, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Film, Fun, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Science Education, Science Ficition, Science Info Educational Videos, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Vaporizing Earth!, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! | 1 Comment »

The Most Important Conversation to have with a Roman Catholic or other Christian

Posted by pwl on September 6, 2009

Hi,

Over a period of 28 hours or so this long weekend I had a conversation with someone, CK, I met on Face Book who shared a common technical interest. We had a number of other exchanges with each other over the past few months but this one was different partly for it’s brutal honesty and partly since CK choose to jump out of what was likely the most important conversation of his life.

I managed to save a copy of the conversation moments before CK deleted my access (it was on his wall) and thus ending the conversation with us two. Likely he’s busy gathering agreement with his friends that I’m an evil no good person when in fact it’s likely that I’m one of his best new friends he’s ever had. Be that as it may, here is a non edited transcript (spelling corrections were made). Oh, from what I can tell CK is a young adult male with a gay lover and a roman catholic upbringing.

I hope this helps when talking with religious delusionals of all sorts but christians in particular since we deal with dispensing the christian miracle mythologies here.

I’ll add comments and expand my responses and even critique my own responses over the next few weeks or so as I have time to reread the transcript below and think longer it.

All the best and live long and prosper in peace. Your feed back and comments are appreciated.

PWL

ps. This Jesus and Mo comic is appropriate since CK’s solution for “resolving the incompatibilities” between science and religion is to become insane by fully embracing “cognitive dissonance” and not working to resolve the conflict even though he claims to work towards that end. More on this in the conversation. He also, as you will see, negotiates his way between these two incompatibilities by accepting part of Objectivism (it’s basic three axioms of existence, identity and consciousness) while maintaining his “faithful belief” in his invisible super friends even though acknowledging that objectivism provides “proof” that there are no gods other than those in human minds. Thus CK’s religious driven insanity.

CK: just wants to find SOMEONE who shares his philosophies… lol

PWL: What philosophy are yours?

CK: Except for the stance on matters of sexuality and religion, I’m a staunch objectivist. Go Ayn Rand!

I believe cognitive dissonance is the greatest evil in the universe.

That’s a good start to the summary. In essence, I believe you must accept a small set of axioms as true, and then use inductive logic based on that. If only I could put my axioms in words… lol

PWL: I am also a big fan of Ayn Rand.

People do work well together and can in many circumstances work towards their mutual benefit.

What do you mean by cognitive dissonance?

I’m confused by your sexuality considering you seem to be very catholic… seems mutually incompatible to me.

I’m confused by your religious stance and Ayn Rand, objectivism proves that your mythical god doesn’t exist and is just an artifact of your mind wanting comfort or what not. So you’re not a staunch objectivist if you believe in the mythical invisible super beings and thus the supernatural realm.

The real world doesn’t care about our philosophies since it doesn’t care about anything.

They are not axioms if they are not in words…

BUT then Leaps of Faith know no boundaries or limits and ignore any that are pointed out. That is the essential nature of a leap of faith, it destroys actual rational thinking with the emotional non-rational leap of faith.

“Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. The “ideas” or “cognitions” in question may include attitudes and beliefs, the awareness of one’s behavior, and facts. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors.[1] Cognitive dissonance theory is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.” – Cognitive Dissonance.

So if you believe “cognitive dissonance” is the greatest evil in the universe why do you practice it?

Why do you consider it evil?

MD: wow :{

CK: Sexuality: Rand didn’t exactly believe they should wait until they found the right one, and then stay with them the rest of their life. Yes, objectivism does reject the almighty.

When I say cognitive dissonance, I mean holding two apparently exclusive beliefs wihout batting an eye — it’s an offense to reason. In my case (objectivist Catholic), although you’d think they are exclusive, but the reason I believe they are not is that I do not blindly believe — I observe the positive effects of faith, I observe the evidence of miracles, and I make judgments for myself. I consider the beliefs and try to reason and justify them.

If I were to just say, “well, it is” THEN faith and reason would be exclusive. But to examine faith and try to reason about it, why you believe it even when you know science, then you have used reason. You just use inductive logic rather than deductive logic.

PWL: Actually you must use actual repeatable verifiable evidence not logic or some belief stricken dogma system…

As the saying goes you are mistaken about a great many things CK.

There are no real positive effects of faith that are not available without faith!

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome beyond awesome, Bad Science Attitude, Belief Stricken, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Biology, Ethics in Science, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Gay, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Majestic Universe, Math, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Philosophy, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Really Funny, Religion, Scams, Science over Propaganada, SkyNet Battlefield Earth, Some Intelligent Designer, Something to think about, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Ground is Falling Up!, The Sky Is Falling, To Hell With You Buddy, Total Control Over Our Lives, WOW!!!, Yeah Right, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling!, Zombie Jesus | Leave a Comment »

The Math of Zombie Infections and Pandemics

Posted by pwl on August 16, 2009

This time the Math of Zombies tells us like it is: basically were all doomed to either be eaten alive for our brains (highly nutritious component of the Zombie Diet not to mention very addictive) or be converted into a zombie and eat the brains of the rest of us. Take your pick: be the food or the eater of the food.

A zombie outbreak is likely to lead to the collapse of civilisation, unless it is dealt with quickly. While aggressive quarantine may contain the epidemic, or a cure may lead to coexistence of humans and zombies, the most effective way to contain the rise of the undead is to hit hard and hit often.

Zombies are … usually … brought about through an outbreak or epidemic. Consequently, we model a zombie attack, using biological assumptions …. We introduce a basic model for zombie infection, determine equilibria and their stability, and illustrate the outcome with numerical solutions. We then refine the model to introduce a latent period of zombification, whereby humans are infected, but not infectious, before becoming undead. We then modify the model to include the effects of possible quarantine or a cure. Finally, we examine the impact of regular, impulsive reductions in the number of zombies and derive conditions under which eradication can occur. We show that only quick, aggressive attacks can stave off the doomsday scenario: the collapse of society as zombies overtake us all.” – Math of Zombies (pdf paper)!

First off you should note that there is a fundamental flaw in the paper: it assumes that Zombie Attacks are not real but just in the movies! This is a way of keeping the secret while discussing this serious problem in academic papers! Zombies are as real as Jesus Christ! The more real you think Jesus Christ to be the more real Zombies are! Fantasies come alive in our brains and that is why Zombies of all kinds including Sweet Zombie Jesus want your brain! Don’t let them have it, remain belief and faith free by embracing Nature and Rational Thought and Science. May your brains survive the Zombie Attacks of religion, faith and belief in the supernatural and may you avoid having the delusion of an invisible friend in the sky who will save you from death with the false promise of an everlasting life! Obliterate faith and belief in delusions that can’t be proven since that is how they get your live brains and then control you sucking the independence and life out of you! Face it, the only way to exist is to not have your brains eaten by the Zombie Virus and other mind eaters!

An outbreak of zombies infecting humans is likely to be disastrous, unless extremely aggressive tactics are employed against the undead. While aggressive quarantine may eradicate the infection, this is unlikely to happen in practice. A cure would only result in some humans surviving the outbreak, although they will still coexist with zombies. Only sufficiently frequent attacks, with increasing force, will result in eradication, assuming the available resources can be mustered in time.

Furthermore, these results assumed that the timescale of the outbreak was short, so that the natural birth and death rates could be ignored. If the timescale of the outbreak increases, then the result is the doomsday scenario: an outbreak of zombies will result in the collapse of civilisation, with every human infected, or dead. This is because human births and deaths will provide the undead with a limitless supply of new bodies to infect, resurrect and convert. Thus, if [WHEN] zombies arrive, we must act quickly and decisively to eradicate them before they eradicate us.

The key difference between the models presented here and other models of infectious disease is that the dead can come back to life.

In summary, a zombie outbreak is likely to lead to the collapse of civilisation, unless it is dealt with quickly. While aggressive quarantine may contain the epidemic, or a cure may lead to coexistence of humans and zombies, the most effective way to contain the rise of the undead is to hit hard and hit often.

See other articles on the important topic of Zombies and of Sweet Zombie Jesus!

Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Baby that became Zombie Jesus, Conspiracy Theory, Double Yikes!!, Eaten Alive, Eeek!, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Health, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Live Brains!, Philosophy, Science Education, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, The End is Nigh, WOW!!!, Yikes!, Zombie Jesus, Zombies | Leave a Comment »

Roland Emmerich is a GOD!!! 2012, the best most horrific action packed disaster film ever!!! This film puts Al Gore’s wettest dreams to shame!!!

Posted by pwl on August 1, 2009

Al Gore’s wettest dreams of global destruction don’t even come anywhere close to this awesome beyond awesome film, 2012! Sorry Al, just like your film An Inconvenient Truth, 2012 is just science fiction – none of it’s going to happen (unless we don’t stop the asteroid – see below!!!!). So sit back with your drink and pop corn and enjoy the ride!

Ok, the real trailer for the film (short version):

A pretty funny review of the movie with N special effects, where N is ___!

The second trailer, medium length. Awesome!

The full on third hard core extended version of the trailer that really shows mega destruction!!! YES!!! Al Gore eat your heart out! Oh, this one can only be viewed at youtube… since they turned off embedding….

Oh the FEAR! Soothsayers predicting DOOM and DESTRUCTION!!! Yikes!!!

Nope, no hard science behind the warnings! No soothsayers can’t predict the future! Sorry Al Gore, that includes climate soothsayers in the ninny crowd of those that can’t predict the future!

But does it have Nazi’s or Zombies??? Nope, for that you’ll need to see this film.

This is the real concern that we face:


Oh, the lunacy. You’ve got to love how insane we humans really are…

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Believe it or your a denier!, Climate Science, Complex Systems, Eeek!, Film, Fun, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Rational Thinking, Really Funny, Science Education, Science Ficition, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Ground is Falling Up!, The Sky Is Falling, Vehicles, Video, Violent, Waste Management, Yikes! | 2 Comments »

Open Source Science is the path through the dark into the new enlightenment

Posted by pwl on July 27, 2009

The articles linked here raise some very disturbing problems with the manner in which climate science is being conducted. This is especially important due to the HUGE public costs about to be undertaken over the next decades.

“The UK’s Met Office Hadley Centre and University of East Anglia have been refusing access to the data used for their global climate averages and scientific studies.” – slashdot

Opening Science is the way forward, the path through the darkness, the endarkenment of closed source science.

If’s it’s paid by the public purse it must be OPEN data that anyone can see and audit.

Yes, you feel certain that you are right about your science but lets see the actual data and the methods used by that science to prove that your certainty is justified.

Science is based upon the notion of being able to validate or invalidate in whole or in part the “claims” made by various “hypotheses” put forward.

When you “BELIEVE” science you’re just another religion.

When you can’t audit the work of scientists whose work is the basis of public policy then you and the public are being endarkened and kept excluded. But why? For what or whose agenda?

As long as the data, the methods, the algorithms, the statical analysis, the step by step procedures are kept secret the work is suspect to scientific fraud.

Have the guts to open your science to the light of day, it will in the end be better for it once it’s vetted by more eyes and brains and math nuts and others poking holes in it.

ANY AND ALL CLAIMS MADE BY PEOPLE WHO KEEP THEIR SCIENCE CLOSED AND SECRET is suspect of FRAUD. What are they hiding? Are they simply embarrassed to admit that they might be wrong? That they’ve made mistakes? That they are afraid that others might gain an edge in the grant process and shut them out of funding?

Open Source Science is the way forward through the darkness into the light that empower verification and falsification and thus progress EITHER way!!!

When you “BELIEVE” science you’re just another religion. In fact, open source science is the BEST and ONLY WAY to avoid science from becoming the new religion as it has, for example, in the climate debates.

The scientific method is the tool for vetting the works of science and if the work of science is closed and secret and kept close to the scientists chests by refusals to share their data, methods, source codes, procedures, etc… then their work can’t be verified and might as well be works of fiction just like those of any religious cleric or priest or nutter.

If you can’t take others vetting your scientific work then maybe you don’t belong in science?

Open Source Science raises the bar and will in the long run improve the quality of the science that is done. Some progress is being made, much more needs to be done.


Climate science makes extraordinary claims about Anthropogenic Global Warming and Global Warming.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” – Carl Sagan

Yet when asked for the data that is claimed to provide some of the evidence the data is refused on POLITICAL grounds. Very disturbing.

Regardless of the reasons that the data is not provided the bad science attitude by the MET office hinders actual science from proceeding. Very disturbing.


When you can’t test a scientific hypothesis or read all of the supporting evidence for it you must then rely on “taking their word for it” which is also known as “accepting based upon belief alone”. This is the end of science bit by bit and leads to the path of the dark side, to an age endarkenment.

When people find science open to validate themselves with experiments that they can do themselves or by reading all the evidence and vetting the work of others belief is eliminated and tested knowledge is obtained by that person bolstering the accuracy of their representation of the universe.

Belief is the enemy of science. Open Source science is the path forward that helps to eliminate belief and lay the ground work for a new scientific enlightenment accessible to the masses.

Terminate belief. Grow your knowledge based upon the scientific method. Stop being a science geek who takes it up the ass from authorities just like the religious nut jobs who take it up the ass from The Pope and his ilk.

Posted in A New Kind of Science [NKS], Awesome beyond awesome, Bad Science Attitude, Believe it or your a denier!, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Energy, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Philosophy, Politics, Proofs, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Smackdown, Something to think about | Leave a Comment »

Let’s go Direct to Mars for real!

Posted by pwl on July 22, 2009

Mars Direct is a proposal for a relatively low-cost manned mission to Mars with current rocket technology. The plan was originally detailed in a research paper by Robert Zubrin and David Baker in 1990. The mission was expanded upon in Zubrin’s 1996 book The Case for Mars.

The plan involves launching an unmanned “Earth Return Vehicle” (ERV) directly from Earth’s surface to Mars using a heavy-lift booster derived from Space Shuttle components. The booster is no bigger than the Saturn V used for the Apollo missions. Several launches are made in preparation for the manned mission.

The first of these launches the ERV, a supply of hydrogen, a chemical plant and a small nuclear reactor. Once there, a relatively simple set of chemical reactions (the Sabatier reaction coupled with electrolysis) would combine a small amount of hydrogen carried by the ERV with the carbon dioxide of the Martian atmosphere to create up to 112 tonnes of methane and oxygen propellants, 96 tonnes of which would be needed to return the ERV to Earth at the end of the mission. This process would take approximately ten months to complete.

Some 26 months after the ERV is originally launched from Earth, a second vehicle, the “Mars Habitat Unit” (MHU), would be launched on a high-energy transfer to Mars carrying a crew of four. This vehicle would take some six months to reach Mars. During the trip, artificial gravity would be generated by tying the spent upper stage of the booster to the Habitat Unit, and setting them both rotating about a common axis.

On reaching Mars, the spent upper stage would be jettisoned, with the Habitat Unit aerobraking into Mars orbit before soft-landing in proximity to the ERV. Once on Mars, the crew would spend 18 months on the surface, carrying out a range of scientific research, aided by a small rover vehicle carried aboard their MHU, and powered by excess methane produced by the ERV. To return, they would use the ERV, leaving the MHU for the possible use of subsequent explorers. The propulsion stage of the ERV would be used as a counterweight to generate artificial gravity for the trip back.

The initial cost estimate for Mars Direct was put at $55 billion, to be paid over ten years.

Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Business, Complex Systems, Dreaming, Energy, Ethics in Science, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Gravity, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Invaders from Earth, Learning about Science Organizations, Philosophy, Politics, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Economics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Info Educational Videos, Science Missions, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, Space Travel, Vehicles, Video, WOW!!! | Leave a Comment »

Closing the Gaps by Solving Mysteries

Posted by pwl on June 24, 2009

Hats off to Jesus And Mo dot Net.

Posted in Belief Stricken, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Philosophy, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Rational Thinking, Really Funny, Religion, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about | Leave a Comment »

A tribute to the unstoppable and indelible spirit of human beings – life on the edge, literally beyond all limits imagined

Posted by pwl on June 17, 2009

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVLLBDlVUYg]

On August 7, 1974, shortly after 7:15 a.m., Petit stepped off the South Tower and onto his 3/4″ 6×19 IWRC (independent wire rope core [3]) steel cable. The 24-year-old Petit made eight crossings between the mostly finished towers, a quarter mile above the sidewalks of Manhattan, in an event that lasted about 45 minutes. During that time, in addition to walking, he sat on the wire, gave knee salute and, while lying on the wire, spoke with a gull circling above his head.

Port Authority Police Department Sgt. Charles Daniels, who was dispatched to the roof to bring Petit down, later reported his experience:

I observed the tightrope ‘dancer’—because you couldn’t call him a ‘walker’—approximately halfway between the two towers. And upon seeing us he started to smile and laugh and he started going into a dancing routine on the high wire….And when he got to the building we asked him to get off the high wire but instead he turned around and ran back out into the middle….He was bouncing up and down. His feet were actually leaving the wire and then he would resettle back on the wire again….Unbelievable really….[E]verybody was spellbound in the watching of it.[4]

[http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAVj2IVC9ko]

Petit was warned by his friend on the South Tower that a police helicopter would come to pick him off the wire unless he got off. Rain had begun to fall, and Petit decided he had taken enough risks, so he decided to give himself up to the police waiting for him on the South Tower. He was arrested once he stepped off the wire. Provoked by his taunting behaviour while on the wire, police handcuffed him behind his back and roughly pushed him down a flight of stairs. This he later described as the most dangerous part of the stunt.[5]

His audacious high wire performance made headlines around the world. When asked why he did the stunt, Petit would say “When I see three oranges, I juggle; when I see two towers, I walk.”

He crossed EIGHT TIMES and danced while doing it!!! You’re kidding right? Nope…

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TXrMLKDu5g]

Very amazing. Beyond words amazing. Indelible WOW!

A true tribute.

Man on Wire is an Academy Award-winning 2008 documentary film directed by James Marsh. The film chronicles Philippe Petit’s 1974 high-wire walk between the Twin Towers of New York’s World Trade Center. It is based on Philippe Petit’s book, To Reach the Clouds, recently released in paperback with the new title Man on Wire. The title of the movie is taken from the police report that led to the arrest (and later release) of Petit, whose performance had lasted for almost one hour. The film is crafted like a heist film, presenting rare footage of the preparations for the event and still photographs of the walk, alongside reenactments (with Paul McGill as the young Petit) and present-day interviews with the participants.

What in your life gets you to take risks and get to your edge of peak performance?

Philippe Petit (born August 13, 1949) is a French high wire artist who gained fame for his high-wire walk between the Twin Towers (WTC) in New York City on August 7, 1974.[1] For his feat (that he referred to as “le coup” [2]), he used a 450-pound (200 kg) cable and a custom-made 26-foot (7.9 m) long, 55-pound (25 kg) balancing pole.

Tight-rope walker, unicyclist, magician and pantomime artist, Petit was also one of the earliest modern day street jugglers in Paris, having begun his career in 1968. He juggled and worked on a slack rope with regularity in Washington Square Park in New York City in the early 1970s. Other famous structures he has used for tightrope walks include Notre Dame de Paris, the Sydney Harbour Bridge, the Louisiana Superdome, the Hennepin County Government Center, and between the Palais de Chaillot and the Eiffel Tower.

The documentary film Man on Wire by UK director James Marsh, about Petit’s 1974 WTC performance, won both the World Cinema Jury and Audience awards at the Sundance Film Festival 2008. The film also won awards at the 2008 Full Frame Documentary Film Festival in Durham, N.C. and won the Academy Award for Best Documentary.

Petit is one of the Artists-in-Residence at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City. He currently lives in Woodstock, New York.


Learning to tight rope walk. Not as easy as Petit makes it look.

Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Bad Ideas, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Film, Fun, Get some perspective people, Gravity, Hard Science, Health, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Lawn Chair Larry, Majestic Universe, Man on Wire, Philosophy, Proofs, Rational Thinking, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, The End is Nigh, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! | 3 Comments »

Finally The Indisputable Cause of Global Warming is Revealed Conclusively with ACTUAL VIDEO EVIDENCE for once and for all! Can’t Deny This!!!

Posted by pwl on June 11, 2009

Finally the real cause of Global Warming is Revealed!!! It’s ALIENS! Yes, ALIENS are TerrorFroming Earth for their liking! It’s V all over again (oh they are remaking V too which is too cool…)!

She’s an ex-model. He’s an elite commando. They’re going to solve global warming – by stopping the aliens who are causing it!

The most important question: Is Al Gore a Lizard creature hell bent on terrorforming Earth? Yes, inquiring minds want to know!


Al Gore on a terrorforming rampage!

This, ahem, theory of “Global Warming as Caused By Aliens” (Alien Global Warming AGW) has about as much credence as the Anthropomorphic Global Warming (AGW)! Oh, wait, the above video is indisputable proof of the Alien caused Global Warming! So now the science is settled as in the Aliens have Settled on Earth terrorformed by Global Warming!!!

Has anyone noticed Gore’s red eyes?

All in good fun… the only reason I poke fun at the AGW crowd is that they think the science is settled… science is just about never settled in the sense that asking questions is at the core of science… asking questions and VERIFYING the answers with EXPERIMENTS to confirm or refute the hypothesis! For example, new particles are being discovered which upset the standard model… or at least require it to be rethought at regular intervals. Were are the experiments that “settle the science” of “anthropomorphic global warming”? Lacking basic methods of science isn’t having the science settled. Anyway it’s a fun little movie that provides more evidence for Alien caused Global Warming that I’ve ever seen for Anthropomorphic Global Warming and you’ve gotta love that!!!

Posted in Awesome, Climate Science, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Do Not Click At Work, Double Yikes!!, Eeek!, Entertainment, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Film, Fun, Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Really Funny, Science Education, Science Ficition, Science over Propaganada, SkyNet Battlefield Earth, Something to think about, Space Travel, Splish Splash Taking a Bath, Terraforming Earth, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, UFO Proof, Video, Violent, Waste Management, WOW!!!, Yikes! | 1 Comment »

A REAL Doomsday Scenario We Should be Putting Our Resources into Preventing!

Posted by pwl on June 3, 2009

Rather than wasting resources on the myth of global warming we should be putting all of our resources into preventing and averting the inevitable asteroid impacts that will befall Earth given time. To do nothing is irresponsible.

Thanks to NJM for the video link.

Posted in Awesome beyond awesome, Climate Science, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Double Yikes!!, Film, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Majestic Universe, Rational Thinking, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science Missions, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, TerrorForming Earth, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Video, Violent, WOW!!!, Yikes! | Leave a Comment »

Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) 2009 Report

Posted by pwl on June 3, 2009

What I find most interesting about the NIPCC 2009 Report is the vast quantity of references to scientific papers and journal articles. Clearly this report raises the bar and for the better. I also appreciate this impressive collection of the materials in one place that seek to educate people about the actual challenges to the “consensus” of AGW.

Science isn’t about consensus, that’s what “agreement realities”, “cult belief systems” and “politics” are about. Science is about asking questions over and over again occasionally coming up with potential answers that make some rational sense and that fit into a framework of knowledge that represents objective reality in a way that can actually be tested or falsified.

Remember that Richard Feynman insisted that we be curious and ask questions as an essential prerequisite of science. His way of being with science is an exemplar for us to follow. It certainly is for me.

“Curiosity demands that we ask questions. If we are standing on the shore, look at the sea, the waves, the foam, the sand, the rocks of different types, listen to sounds. Is the sand other than the rocks? Perhaps it is a multitude of very small stones? Is the moon a great rock? How many sounds are there? … There may be situations where nature has arranged, or we arrange nature, to be simple and to have only few building blocks, so that we can predict exactly what will happen. And thus we can verify the validity of our rules (there might be only few chess pieces in one corner of the chess board, and we can predict the “best move” exactly). … Imagine that the world is a great game of chess played by the “gods”, and we are the observer. We do not know what the rules of the game are, and we are not allowed to ask questions. At first we will learn to distinguish the basic figures (“King”, “Queen”, “Bishop”, …). If we observe long enough, we may catch on to a few of the rules. It is not easy to learn all the rules (every once in a while something like castling is going on that we still do not understand). Even if we know all rules, however, we might not be able to understand why a particular move is made in the game. One problem that we might have is, “How do we tell whether the rules that we guessed are really right if we can not analyze the game very well”? – Richard Feynman. Quotes and fragments in no particular order.

What Richard Feynman was saying is that we need to keep asking the basic fundamental questions, otherwise what’s the point of doing science in the first place? At least that’s a key point I take home and to work.

The scientific method is the heart of this process and others have defined it better than I. The key is that intelligent people are motivated to follow the methods of science as a guide to understanding the scientific claims that are put forward as the way of Nature and in the process set aside their “politics”, their “bias”, their “opinions” and seek a means of verifying the scientific claims of all parties who propose various claims and counter claims and counter counter claims ad infinitum… eventually objective reality might reveal itself as we seek it.

However the dark side of the force, to steal a phrase, is prevalent in many discussions that are “considered sacred” or “considered settled”. Those that have made up their minds to various degrees have solidified their beliefs about what is real and what is not real. Unfortunately there always is a measure of distance between ones beliefs about what is real and the actual objective reality that we all find ourselves actually existing within. I call that distance how “belief stricken” a person’s notions are. Obviously the ideal goal is to eliminate all forms of belief about objective reality with as accurate a model or representation of the actual objective reality as we can.

Raising the bar: As such and in the best traditions of science and the scientific method I urge those reading and engaging in discussion to remove all “ad hominem” personal attacks from their fingers and minds. Please be on your best behavior. Strictly stick to the science please. Thanks so much in advance.

Now let’s get into it. I’ll say from the start that I’ve not yet had a chance to read this voluminous report nor study in depth yet the portions that I have read so far. It looks to be a tome that will take some time to digest. As time goes on I’ll add some updates and comments in this posting or in another on this site.

I think this is fantastic since it brings into one volume much (but not all) of the challenges to the AGW theory.

May the best hypothesis (where best means most highly representative of objective reality) pass the tests of time or be adapted to do so or be falsified and a new hypothesis rise to take it’s place in the best grand tradition of advancing human knowledge of objective reality, aka Nature – our true home. – pwl

In “Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC),” (PDFs of entire report available for download) coauthors Dr. S. Fred Singer and Dr. Craig Idso and 35 contributors and reviewers present an authoritative and detailed rebuttal of the findings of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), on which the Obama Administration and Democrats in Congress rely for their regulatory proposals.

The scholarship in this book demonstrates overwhelming scientific support for the position that the warming of the twentieth century was moderate and not unprecedented, that its impact on human health and wildlife was positive, and that carbon dioxide probably is not the driving factor behind climate change.

The authors cite thousands of peer-reviewed research papers and books that were ignored by the IPCC, plus additional scientific research that became available after the IPCC’s self-imposed deadline of May 2006.

Dr. Craig D. Idso is founder and former president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. He received his Ph.D. in geography from Arizona State University, where he studied as one of a small group of University Graduate Scholars. He was a faculty researcher in the Office of Climatology at Arizona State University and has lectured in Meteorology at Arizona State University. Dr. Idso has published scientific articles on issues related to data quality, the growing season, the seasonal cycle of atmospheric CO2, world food supplies, coral reefs, and urban CO2 concentrations.

Dr. S. Fred Singer is one of the most distinguished scientists in the U.S. In the 1960s, he established and served as the first director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service, now part of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and earned a U.S. Department of Commerce Gold Medal Award for his technical leadership. In the 1980s, Singer served for five years as vice chairman of the National Advisory Committee for Oceans and Atmosphere (NACOA) and became more directly involved in global environmental issues. Since retiring from the University of Virginia and from his last federal position as chief scientist of the Department of Transportation, Singer founded and directed the nonprofit Science and Environmental Policy Project.


Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC),” (PDFs of entire report available for download) coauthors Dr. S. Fred Singer and Dr. Craig Idso.

Executive Summary (PDF available)

The Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Working Group-1 (Science) (IPCC-AR4 2007), released in 2007, is a major research effort by a group of dedicated specialists in many topics related to climate change. It forms a valuable compendium of the current state of the science, enhanced by having an index which had been lacking in previous IPCC reports. AR4 also permits access to the numerous critical comments submitted by expert reviewers, another first for the IPCC.

While AR4 is an impressive document, it is far from being a reliable reference work on some of the most important aspects of climate change science and policy. It is marred by errors and misstatements, ignores scientific data that were available but were inconsistent with the authors’ pre-conceived conclusions, and has already been contradicted in important parts by research published since May 2006, the IPCC’s cut-off date.

In general, the IPCC fails to consider important scientific issues, several of which would upset its major conclusion—that “most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid- 20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations [emphasis in the original].” The IPCC defines “very likely” as at least 90 percent certain. They do not explain how they derive this number. The IPCC also does not define the word “most,” nor do they provide any explanation.

The IPCC does not apply generally accepted methodologies to determine what fraction of current warming is natural, or how much is caused by the rise in greenhouse gases (GHG). A comparison of “fingerprints” from best available observations with the results of state-of-the-art GHG models leads to the conclusion that the (human-caused) GHG contribution is minor. This fingerprint evidence, though available, was ignored by the IPCC.

The IPCC continues to undervalue the overwhelming evidence that, on decadal and centurylong time scales, the Sun and associated atmospheric cloud effects are responsible for much of past climate change. It is therefore highly likely that the Sun is also a major cause of twentieth-century warming, with anthropogenic GHG making only a minor contribution. In addition, the IPCC ignores, or addresses imperfectly, other science issues that call for discussion and explanation.

These errors and omissions are documented in the present report by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC). The report is divided into nine chapters that are briefly summarized here, and then more fully described in the remainder of this summary.

Chapter 1 (pdf) describes the limitations of the IPCC’s attempt to forecast future climate conditions by using computer climate models. The IPCC violates many of the rules and procedures required for scientific forecasting, making its “projections” of little use to policymakers. As sophisticated as today’s state-ofthe- art models are, they suffer deficiencies and shortcomings that could alter even the very sign (plus or minus, warming or cooling) of earth’s projected temperature response to rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations. If the global climate models on which the IPCC relies are not validated or reliable, most of the rest of the AR4, while it makes for fascinating reading, is irrelevant to the public policy debate over what should be done to stop or slow the arrival of global warming.

Chapter 2 (pdf) describes feedback factors that reduce the earth’s temperature sensitivity to changes in atmospheric CO2. Scientific studies suggest the model-derived temperature sensitivity of the earth for a doubling of the pre-industrial CO2 level is much lower than the IPCC’s estimate. Corrected feedbacks in the climate system reduce climate sensitivity to values that are an order of magnitude smaller than what the IPCC employs.

Chapter 3 (pdf) reviews empirical data on past temperatures. We find no support for the IPCC’s claim that climate observations during the twentieth century are either unprecedented or provide evidence of an anthropogenic effect on climate. We reveal the methodological errors of the “hockey stick” diagram of Mann et al., evidence for the existence of a global Medieval Warm Period, flaws in the surface-based temperature record of more modern times, evidence from highly accurate satellite data that there has been no net warming over the past 29 years, and evidence that the distribution of modern warming does not bear the “fingerprint” of an anthropogenic effect.

Chapter 4 (pdf) reviews observational data on glacier melting, sea ice area, variation in precipitation, and sea level rise. We find no evidence of trends that could be attributed to the supposedly anthropogenic global warming of the twentieth century.

Chapter 5 (pdf) summarizes the research of a growing number of scientists who say variations in solar activity, not greenhouse gases, are the true driver of climate change. We describe the evidence of a solarclimate link and how these scientists have grappled with the problem of finding a specific mechanism that translates small changes in solar activity into larger climate effects. We summarize how they may have found the answer in the relationships between the sun, cosmic rays and reflecting clouds.

Chapter 6 (pdf) investigates and debunks the widespread fears that global warming might cause more extreme weather. The IPCC claims global warming will cause (or already is causing) more droughts, floods, hurricanes, storms, storm surges, heat waves, and wildfires. We find little or no support in the peer-reviewed literature for these predictions and considerable evidence to support an opposite prediction: That weather would be less extreme in a warmer world.

Chapter 7 (pdf) examines the biological effects of rising CO2 concentrations and warmer temperatures. This is the largely unreported side of the global warming debate, perhaps because it is unequivocally good news. Rising CO2 levels increase plant growth and make plants more resistant to drought and pests. It is a boon to the world’s forests and prairies, as well as to farmers and ranchers and the growing populations of the developing world.

Chapter 8 (pdf) examines the IPCC’s claim that CO2- induced increases in air temperature will cause unprecedented plant and animal extinctions, both on land and in the world’s oceans. We find there little real-world evidence in support of such claims and an abundance of counter evidence that suggests ecosystem biodiversity will increase in a warmer and CO2-enriched world.

Chapter 9 (pdf) challenges the IPCC’s claim that CO2-induced global warming is harmful to human health. The IPCC blames high-temperature events for increasing the number of cardiovascular-related deaths, enhancing respiratory problems, and fueling a more rapid and widespread distribution of deadly infectious diseases, such as malaria, dengue and yellow fever. However, a thorough examination of the peer-reviewed scientific literature reveals that further global warming would likely do just the opposite and actually reduce the number of lives lost to extreme thermal conditions. We also explain how CO2- induced global warming would help feed a growing global population without major encroachment on natural ecosystems, and how increasing production of biofuels (a strategy recommended by the IPCC) damages the environment and raises the price of food. The research summarized in this report is only a small portion of what is available in the peer reviewed scientific literature. To assist readers who want to explore information not contained between the covers of this volume, we have included Internet hyperlinks to the large and continuously updated databases maintained by the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change at co2science.org.

Key Findings by Chapter

Chapter 1 (pdf). Global Climate Models and Their Limitations

• The IPCC places great confidence in the ability of general circulation models (GCMs) to simulate future climate and attribute observed climate change to anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases.

• The forecasts in the Fourth Assessment Report were not the outcome of validated scientific procedures. In effect, they are the opinions of scientists transformed by mathematics and obscured by complex writing. The IPCC’s claim that it is making “projections” rather than “forecasts” is not a plausible defense.

• Today’s state-of-the-art climate models fail to accurately simulate the physics of earth’s radiative energy balance, resulting in uncertainties “as large as, or larger than, the doubled CO2 forcing.”

• A long list of major model imperfections prevents models from properly modeling cloud formation and cloud-radiation interactions, resulting in large differences between model predictions and observations.

• Computer models have failed to simulate even the correct sign of observed precipitation anomalies, such as the summer monsoon rainfall over the Indian region. Yet it is understood that precipitation plays a major role in climate change.

Chapter 2 (pdf). Feedback Factors and Radiative Forcing

• Scientific research suggests the model-derived temperature sensitivity of the earth accepted by the IPCC is too large. Corrected feedbacks in the climate system could reduce climate sensitivity to values that are an order of magnitude smaller.

• Scientists may have discovered a connection between cloud creation and sea surface temperature in the tropics that creates a “thermostat-like control” that automatically vents excess heat into space. If confirmed, this could totally compensate for the warming influence of all anthropogenic CO2 emissions experienced to date, as well as all those that are anticipated to occur in the future.

• The IPCC dramatically underestimates the total cooling effect of aerosols. Studies have found their radiative effect is comparable to or larger than the temperature forcing caused by all the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations recorded since pre-industrial times.

• Higher temperatures are known to increase emissions of dimethyl sulfide (DMS) from the world’s oceans, which increases the albedo of marine stratus clouds, which has a cooling effect.

• Iodocompounds—created by marine algae— function as cloud condensation nuclei, which help create new clouds that reflect more incoming solar radiation back to space and thereby cool the planet.

• As the air’s CO2 content—and possibly its temperature—continues to rise, plants emit greater amounts of carbonyl sulfide gas, which eventually makes it way into the stratosphere, where it is transformed into solar-radiationreflecting sulfate aerosol particles, which have a cooling effect.

• As CO2 enrichment enhances biological growth, atmospheric levels of biosols rise, many of which function as cloud condensation nuclei. Increased cloudiness diffuses light, which stimulates plant growth and transfers more fixed carbon into plant and soil storage reservoirs.

• Since agriculture accounts for almost half of nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions in some countries, there is concern that enhanced plant growth due to CO2 enrichment might increase the amount and warming effect of this greenhouse gas. But field research shows that N2O emissions fall as CO2 concentrations and temperatures rise, indicating this is actually another negative climate feedback.

• Methane (CH4) is a potent greenhouse gas. An enhanced CO2 environment has been shown to have “neither positive nor negative consequences” on atmospheric methane concentrations. Higher temperatures have been shown to result in reduced methane release from peatbeds. Methane emissions from cattle have been reduced considerably by altering diet, immunization, and genetic selection.

Chapter 3 (pdf). Observations: Temperature Records

• The IPCC claims to find evidence in temperature records that the warming of the twentieth century was “unprecedented” and more rapid than during any previous period in the past 1,300 years. But the evidence it cites, including the “hockey-stick” representation of earth’s temperature record by Mann et al., has been discredited and contradicted by many independent scholars.

• A corrected temperature record shows temperatures around the world were warmer during the Medieval Warm Period of approximately 1,000 years ago than they are today, and have averaged 2-3ºF warmer than today’s temperatures over the past 10,000 years.

• Evidence of a global Medieval Warm Period is extensive and irrefutable. Scientists working with a variety of independent methodologies have found it in proxy records from Africa, Antarctica, the Arctic, Asia, Europe, North America, and South America.

• The IPCC cites as evidence of modern global warming data from surface-based recording stations yielding a 1905-2005 temperature increase of 0.74ºC +/- 0.18ºC. But this temperature record is known to be positively biased by insufficient corrections for the nongreenhouse- gas-induced urban heat island (UHI) effect. It may be impossible to make proper corrections for this deficiency, as the UHI of even small towns dwarfs any concomitant augmented greenhouse effect that may be present.

• Highly accurate satellite data, adjusted for orbit drift and other factors, show a much more modest warming trend in the last two decades of the twentieth century and a dramatic decline in the warming trend in the first decade of the twentyfirst century.

• The “fingerprint” or pattern of warming observed in the twentieth century differs from the pattern predicted by global climate models designed to simulate CO2-induced global warming. Evidence reported by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) is unequivocal: All greenhouse models show an increasing warming trend with altitude in the tropics, peaking around 10 km at roughly twice the surface value. However, the temperature data from balloons give the opposite result: no increasing warming, but rather a slight cooling with altitude.

• Temperature records in Greenland and other Arctic areas reveal that temperatures reached a maximum around 1930 and have decreased in recent decades. Longer-term studies depict oscillatory cooling since the Climatic Optimum of the mid-Holocene (~9000-5000 years BP), when it was perhaps 2.5º C warmer than it is now.

• The average temperature history of Antarctica provides no evidence of twentieth century warming. While the Antarctic peninsula shows recent warming, several research teams have documented a cooling trend for the interior of the continent since the 1970s.

Chapter 4 (pdf). Observations: Glaciers, Sea Ice, Precipitation, and Sea Level

• Glaciers around the world are continuously advancing and retreating, with a general pattern of retreat since the end of the Little Ice Age. There is no evidence of a increased rate of melting overall since CO2 levels rose above their pre-industrial levels, suggesting CO2 is not responsible for glaciers melting.

• Sea ice area and extent have continued to increase around Antarctica over the past few decades. Evidence shows that much of the reported thinning of Arctic sea ice that occurred in the 1990s was a natural consequence of changes in ice dynamics caused by an atmospheric regime shift, of which there have been several in decades past and will likely be several in the decades to come, totally irrespective of past or future changes in the air’s CO2 content. The Arctic appears to have recovered from its 2007 decline.

• Global studies of precipitation trends show no net increase and no consistent trend with CO2, contradicting climate model predictions that warming should cause increased precipitation. Research on Africa, the Arctic, Asia, Europe, and North and South America all find no evidence of a significant impact on precipitation that could be attributed to anthropogenic global warming.

• The cumulative discharge of the world’s rivers remained statistically unchanged between 1951 and 2000, a finding that contradicts computer forecasts that a warmer world would cause large changes in global streamflow characteristics. Droughts and floods have been found to be less frequent and severe during the Current Warm Period than during past periods when temperatures were even higher than they are today.

• The results of several research studies argue strongly against claims that CO2-induced global warming would cause catastrophic disintegration of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets. In fact, in the case of Antarctica, they suggest just the opposite—i.e., that CO2-induced global warming would tend to buffer the world against such an outcome.

• The mean rate of global sea level rise has not accelerated over the recent past. The determinants of sea level are poorly understood due to considerable uncertainty associated with a number of basic parameters that are related to the water balance of the world’s oceans and the meltwater contribution of Greenland and Antarctica. Until these uncertainties are satisfactorily resolved, we cannot be confident that short-lived changes in global temperature produce corresponding changes in sea level.

Chapter 5 (pdf). Solar Variability and Climate Cycles

• The IPCC claims the radiative forcing due to changes in the solar output since 1750 is +0.12 Wm-2, an order of magnitude smaller than its estimated net anthropogenic forcing of +1.66 Wm-2. A large body of research suggests that the IPCC has got it backwards, that it is the sun’s influence that is responsible for the lion’s share of climate change during the past century and beyond.

• The total energy output of the sun changes by only 0.1 percent during the course of the solar cycle, although larger changes may be possible over periods of centuries. On the other hand, the ultraviolet radiation from the sun can change by several percent over the solar cycle – as indeed noted by observing changes in stratospheric ozone. The largest changes, however, occur in the intensity of the solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field.

• Reconstructions of ancient climates reveal a close correlation between solar magnetic activity and solar irradiance (or brightness), on the one hand, and temperatures on earth, on the other. Those correlations are much closer than the relationship between carbon dioxide and temperature.

• Cosmic rays could provide the mechanism by which changes in solar activity affect climate. During periods of greater solar magnetic activity, greater shielding of the earth occurs, resulting in less cosmic rays penetrating to the lower atmosphere, resulting in fewer cloud condensation nuclei being produced, resulting in fewer and less reflective low-level clouds occurring, which leads to more solar radiation being absorbed by the surface of the earth, resulting (finally) in increasing near-surface air temperatures and global warming.

• Strong correlations between solar variability and precipitation, droughts, floods, and monsoons have all been documented in locations around the world. Once again, these correlations are much stronger than any relationship between these weather phenomena and CO2.

• The role of solar activity in causing climate change is so complex that most theories of solar forcing must be considered to be as yet unproven. But it would also be appropriate for climate scientists to admit the same about the role of rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations in driving recent global warming.

Chapter 6 (pdf). Observations: Extreme Weather

• The IPCC predicts that a warmer planet will lead to more extreme weather, characterized by more frequent and severe episodes of drought, flooding, cyclones, precipitation variability, storms, snow, storm surges, temperature variability, and wildfires. But has the last century – during which the IPCC claims the world experienced more rapid warming than any time in the past two millennia – experienced significant trends in any of these extreme weather events?

• Droughts have not become more extreme or erratic in response to global warming. Real-world evidence from Africa, Asia, and other continents find no trend toward more frequent or more severe droughts. In most cases, the worst droughts in recorded meteorological history were much milder than droughts that occurred periodically during much colder times.

• Floods were more frequent and more severe during the Little Ice Age than they have been during the Current Warm Period. Flooding in Asia, Europe, and North America has tended to be less frequent and less severe during the twentieth century.

• The IPCC says “it is likely that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense, with larger peak wind speeds and more heavy precipitation associated with ongoing increase of tropical sea surface temperatures.” But despite the supposedly “unprecedented” warming of the twentieth century, there has been no increase in the intensity or frequency of tropical cyclones globally or in any of the specific oceans.

• A number of real-world observations demonstrate that El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) conditions during the latter part of the twentieth century were not unprecedented in terms of their frequency or magnitude. Long-term records suggest that when the earth was significantly warmer than it is currently, ENSO events were substantially reduced or perhaps even absent.

• There is no support for the model-based projection that precipitation in a warming world becomes more variable and intense. In fact, some observational data suggest just the opposite, and provide support for the proposition that precipitation responds more to cyclical variations in solar activity.

• As the earth has warmed over the past 150 years, during its recovery from the global chill of the Little Ice Age, there has been no significant increase in either the frequency or intensity of stormy weather.

• Between 1950 and 2002, during which time the air’s CO2 concentration rose by 20 percent, there was no net change in either the mean onset date or duration of snow cover for the continent of North America. There appears to have been a downward trend in blizzards.

• Storm surges have not increased in either frequency or magnitude as CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere have risen. In the majority of cases investigated, they have tended to decrease.

• Air temperature variability almost always decreases when mean air temperature rises, be it in cases of temperature change over tens of thousands of years or over mere decades, or even between individual cooler and warmer years when different ENSO states are considered. The claim that global warming will lead to more extremes of climate and weather, including more extremes of temperature itself, is not supported by real-world data.

• Although one can readily identify specific parts of the planet that have experienced both significant increases and decreases in land area burned by wildfires over the last two to three decades of the twentieth century, for the globe as a whole there was no relationship between global warming and total area burned over this period.

Chapter 7 (pdf). Biological Effects of Carbon Dioxide Enhancement

• A 300-ppm increase in the air’s CO2 content typically raises the productivity of most herbaceous plants by about one-third; and this positive response occurs in plants that utilize all three of the major biochemical pathways (C3, C4, CAM) of photosynthesis. For woody plants, the response is even greater. The productivity benefits of CO2 enrichment are also experienced by aquatic plants, including freshwater algae and macrophytes, and marine microalgae and macroalgae.

• The amount of carbon plants gain per unit of water lost—or water-use efficiency—typically rises as the CO2 content of the air rises, greatly increasing their ability to withstand drought. In addition, the CO2-induced percentage increase in plant biomass production is often greater under water-stressed conditions than it is when plants are well watered.

• Atmospheric CO2 enrichment helps ameliorate the detrimental effects of several environmental stresses on plant growth and development, including high soil salinity, high air temperature, low light intensity and low levels of soil fertility. Elevated levels of CO2 have additionally been demonstrated to reduce the severity of low temperature stress, oxidative stress, and the stress of herbivory. In fact, the percentage growth enhancement produced by an increase in the air’s CO2 concentration is often even greater under stressful and resource-limited conditions than it is when growing conditions are ideal.

• As the air’s CO2 content continues to rise, plants will likely exhibit enhanced rates of photosynthesis and biomass production that will not be diminished by any global warming that might occur concurrently. In fact, if the ambient air temperature rises, the growth-promoting effects of atmospheric CO2 enrichment will likely also rise, becoming more and more robust.

• The ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content likely will not favor the growth of weedy species over that of crops and native plants.

• The growth of plants is generally not only enhanced by CO2-induced increases in net photosynthesis during the light period of the day, it is also enhanced by CO2-induced decreases in respiration during the dark period.

• The ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 content, as well as any degree of warming that might possibly accompany it, will not materially alter the rate of decomposition of the world’s soil organic matter and will probably enhance biological carbon sequestration. Continued increases in the air’s CO2 concentration and temperature will not result in massive losses of carbon from earth’s peatlands. To the contrary, these environmental changes—if they persist—would likely work together to enhance carbon capture.

• Other biological effects of CO2 enhancement include enhanced plant nitrogen-use efficiency, longer residence time of carbon in the soil, and increased populations of earthworms and soil nematodes.

• The aerial fertilization effect of the ongoing rise in the air’s CO2 concentration (which greatly enhances vegetative productivity) and its antitranspiration effect (which enhances plant wateruse efficiency and enables plants to grow in areas that were once too dry for them) are stimulating plant growth across the globe in places that previously were too dry or otherwise unfavorable for plant growth, leading to a significant greening of the Earth.

• Elevated CO2 reduces, and nearly always overrides, the negative effects of ozone pollution on plant photosynthesis, growth and yield. It also reduces atmospheric concentrations of isoprene, a highly reactive non-methane hydrocarbon that is emitted in copious quantities by vegetation and is responsible for the production of vast amounts of tropospheric ozone.

Chapter 8 (pdf). Species Extinction

• The IPCC claims “new evidence suggests that climate-driven extinctions and range retractions are already widespread” and the “projected impacts on biodiversity are significant and of key relevance, since global losses in biodiversity are irreversible (very high confidence).” These claims are not supported by scientific research.

• The world’s species have proven to be remarkably resilient to climate change. Most wild species are at least one million years old, which means they have all been through hundreds of climate cycles involving temperature changes on par with or greater than those experienced in the twentieth century.

• The four known causes of extinctions are huge asteroids striking the planet, human hunting, human agriculture, and the introduction of alien species (e.g., lamprey eels in the Great Lakes and pigs in Hawaii). None of these causes are connected with either global temperatures or atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

• Real-world data collected by the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) show the rate of extinctions at the end of the twentieth century was the lowest since the sixteenth century—despite 150 years of rising world temperatures, growing populations, and industrialization. Many, and probably most, of the world’s species benefited from rising temperatures in the twentieth century.

• As long as the atmosphere’s CO2 concentration rises in tandem with its temperature, most plants will not need to migrate toward cooler conditions, as their physiology will change in ways that make them better adapted to warmer conditions. Plants will likely spread poleward in latitude and upward in elevation at the cold-limited boundaries of their ranges, thanks to longer growing seasons and less frost, while their heatlimited boundaries will probably remain pretty much as they are now or shift only slightly.

• Land animals also tend to migrate poleward and upward, to areas where cold temperatures prevented them from going in the past. They follow earth’s plants, while the heat-limited boundaries of their ranges are often little affected, allowing them to also expand their ranges.

• The persistence of coral reefs through geologic time—when temperatures were as much as 10°- 15°C warmer than at present, and atmospheric CO2 concentrations were two to seven times higher than they are currently—provides substantive evidence that these marine entities can successfully adapt to a dramatically changing global environment.

• The 18- to 59-cm warming-induced sea-level rise that is predicted for the coming century by the IPCC falls well within the range (2 to 6 mm per year) of typical coral vertical extension rates, which exhibited a modal value of 7 to 8 mm per year during the Holocene and can be more than double that value in certain branching corals. Rising sea levels should therefore present no difficulties for coral reefs.

• The rising CO2 content of the atmosphere may induce very small changes in the well-buffered ocean chemistry (pH) that could slightly reduce coral calcification rates; but potential positive effects of hydrospheric CO2 enrichment may more than compensate for this modest negative phenomenon. Real-world observations indicate that elevated CO2 and elevated temperatures are having a positive effect on most corals.

• Polar bears have survived changes in climate that exceed those that occurred during the twentieth century or are forecast by the IPCC’s computer models.

• Most populations of polar bears are growing, not shrinking, and the biggest influence on polar bear populations is not temperature but hunting by humans, which historically has taken a large toll on polar bear populations.

• Forecasts of dwindling polar bear populations assume trends in sea ice and temperature that are counterfactual, rely on unvalidated computer climate models that are known to be unreliable, and violate most of the principles of scientific forecasting.

Chapter 9 (pdf). Human Health Effects

• The IPCC alleges that “climate change currently contributes to the global burden of disease and premature deaths” and will “increase malnutrition and consequent disorders.” In fact, the overwhelming weight of evidence shows that higher temperatures and rising CO2 levels have played an indispensible role in making it possible to feed a growing global population without encroaching on natural ecosystems.

• Global warming reduces the incidence of cardiovascular disease related to low temperatures and wintry weather by a much greater degree than it increases the incidence of cardiovascular disease associated with high temperatures and summer heat waves.

• Mortality due to respiratory diseases decrease as temperatures rise and as temperature variability declines.

• Claims that malaria and tick-borne diseases are spreading or will spread across the globe as a result of CO2-induced warming are not supported in the scientific literature.

• Total heat-related mortality rates have been shown to be lower in warmer climates and to be unaffected by rising temperatures during the twentieth century.

• The historical increase in the air’s CO2 content has improved human nutrition by raising crop yields during the past 150 years on the order of 70 percent for wheat, 28 percent for cereals, 33 percent for fruits and melons, 62 percent for legumes, 67 percent for root and tuber crops, and 51 percent for vegetables.

• The quality of plant food in the CO2-enriched world of the future, in terms of its protein and antioxidant (vitamin) contents, will be no lower and probably will be higher than in the past.

• There is evidence that some medicinal substances in plants will be present in significantly greater concentrations, and certainly in greater absolute amounts, than they are currently.

• The historical increase of the air’s CO2 content has probably helped lengthen human lifespans since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, and its continued upward trend will likely provide more of the same benefit.

• Higher levels of CO2 in the air help to advance all three parts of a strategy to resolve the tension between the need to feed a growing population and the desire to preserve natural ecosystems: increasing crop yield per unit of land area, increasing crop yield per unit of nutrients applied, and increasing crop yield per unit of water used.

• Biofuels for transportation (chiefly ethanol, biodiesel, and methanol) are being used in growing quantities in the belief that they provide environmental benefits. In fact, those benefits are very dubious. By some measures, “the net effect of biofuels production … is to increase CO2 emissions for decades or centuries relative to the emissions caused by fossil fuel use.”

• Biofuels compete with livestock growers and food processors for corn, soybeans, and other feedstocks, leading to higher food prices. Rising food prices in 2008 led to food riots in several developing countries. The production of biofuels also consumes enormous quantities of water compared with the production of gasoline.

• There can be little doubt that ethanol mandates and subsidies have made both food and energy more, not less, expensive and therefore less available to a growing population. The extensive damage to natural ecosystems already caused by this poor policy decision, and the much greater destruction yet to come, are a high price to pay for refusing to understand and utilize the true science of climate change.


UPDATE 20090605a
Oh, found this interesting site, PolesApart.com which has discussions and counter discussions related to the above plus potent counters to those counters. Very interesting indeed. Most certainly “poles apart” in the scientific community.

Posted in Climate Science, Complex Systems, Debunking Bad Environmentalism, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Philosophy, Politics, Reality Based Environmentalism, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Something to think about, The Ground is Falling Up!, Video, WOW!!!, Yikes! The sky is NOT falling! | 83 Comments »

Path to Political Freedom from State Based Terrorists

Posted by pwl on May 20, 2009

Rise up and take back your State Based Terrorist Governments and hold your leaders responsible for their crimes against humanity.

Posted in Awesome, Awesome beyond awesome, Conspiracy Theory, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, History, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Invaders from Earth, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Philosophy, Politics, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Rational Thinking, Religion, Scams, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, SkyNet Battlefield Earth, Some Intelligent Designer, Something to think about, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, To Hell With You Buddy, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, Violent, WOW!!! | 1 Comment »

Science Obliterates Religion, Angels & Demons, but most of all Science Obliterates All Gods

Posted by pwl on May 15, 2009

Set phasers on maximum disintegration and fire.

In every way imaginable, that is real, science and objective humanism obliterates not just religion but the need for religion as well. Objective Reality, Nature, what is real verses what is fantasy and delusional beliefs that an invisible super being that violates all of, or the vast majority of, the known and well tested laws of science, laws of Nature, and even the nature of Nature is very clear.

Dead bodies don’t rise from the dead once brain death, organ death, heart death, and cell death have set in – not even in modern hospitals can that be achieved. The only gods that exist are the ones within the skulls of believers, the fantasy gods that they construct to avoid the harsh facts of life: that they, that all, will die the permanent death without any life after death. Even the memories of our lives left behind with those still alive will fade with time and the passing of the ages. Even the Earth and all that is on it will perish given time and celestial events in our solar system.

That which makes us unique in space and time and in biology passes into oblivion from whence we came in time. There is no hope of an eternal salvation. Hope itself is a great killer of minds. The kind of hope that supports delusional thinking that that which is impossible in Nature can happen, that hope dooms you and all to a path of delusional fantasies of rising dead bodies, of the doom of death avoided, of walking on water, of all the other miracles that require the other great killer of minds and free will, faith.

Pernicious faith, the evil of the ages roosting within the dark minds of it’s committed adherents. Faith the denier of objective reality. Faith the denier of that which is real and the limits of reality. The dead only come back to life in zombie movies and other silly mythologies only most people can tell that zombie movies are fantasy yet for some reason those same people can’t tell that their jesus is also just a fantasy delusion of epic proportions. The act of faith kills the best minds and brings them into the fold of the cult of death that each and every religion or faith on earth represents. A cult focused on selling life immortal if only you’d make your donations as a good member. The greatest con game perpetrated upon the human species by their fellows.

Oh, I went to the midnight showing of the action fantasy film, “Angels & Demons”. As far as action goes, it’s got that in spades. Intrigue, for sure. Suspense, yup. Delusional fantasies, absolutely tons of delusionals all over the screen spouting their silly beliefs of gods and demons. They even have a pope as an action figure! Never saw that one coming! Overall a good movie if you can stomach the religious nonsense and not take any of it seriously; if you do you know that you’re beyond the typical religious delusional and are into the total nut job category. They even have a really big boom. I’ll have to say that the cinematography was awesome but the music was one of the best parts of the film. Yes, it’s pretty much 24 meets the Vatican conspiracy chest of delusions. Bright light, bright light.

Of course the movie opens with the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and spins a technobabble story with, oh scary, antimatter! Yikes. How about some real science to correct the silly myths that Angels & Demons took extreme liberties with.

Don’t know if this last one qualifies as science but what the heck.

Posted in Baby that became Zombie Jesus, Belief Stricken, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Conspiracy Theory, Energy, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Film, Fun, Get some perspective people, Hard Science, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Human|Ape, Humbled by Nature, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Philosophy, Politics, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Rational Thinking, Really Funny, Religion, Scams, Science Education, Science over Propaganada, Some Intelligent Designer, Something to think about, Splish Splash Taking a Bath, To Hell With You Buddy, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video, Violent, Yikes!, Zombie Jesus | 2 Comments »

Throw the Hammer At The Torturers all the Way up to Bush and Cheney et. al.

Posted by pwl on May 9, 2009

Charging all those involved with torture will be a paradigm shift. To actually have the criminals in the USA government brought to account for their actions, wow! Earth Shaking Event! Bring it on!

The Torture Trial of Bush, Cheney, et. al. isn’t just for the USA, it’s for the world to see that the Americans are actually serious about what they claim to be about: justice.

Posted in 1984, Adult Supervision Required, Big Brother Planetary Control System, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Politics, Rational Thinking, Something to think about, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video | Leave a Comment »

The New World Order Conspiracy

Posted by pwl on May 9, 2009

Posted in Big Brother Planetary Control System, Conspiracy Theory, Damn it!, Do Not Click At Work, Evil Walks the Earth and Carries a Big Stick, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Get some perspective people, Hard Science Required, Holding those who run the world responsible for their crimes against humanity, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, Politics, Proofs Needed, Rational Thinking, Really Funny, Scam?, Something to think about, Terrorfying, The End is Nigh, The Sky Is Falling, To Hell With You Buddy, Total Control Over Our Lives, Video | Leave a Comment »

Proving God Only Exists in your Head with Chocolate

Posted by pwl on May 9, 2009

In the video you prove the speed of light with a microwaved piece of chocolate.

Given the speed of light and that nothing can go faster than it, not even god this means that god can’t be omnipotent, omnipresent, nor omniscient. Since those are defining characteristics of they invisible friends known as god must have in order to be a god, god can’t possibly exist. Enjoy the chocolate while your god delusion melts down.

Sorry, that also means no FTL warp drive for all you sci-fans and Star Trek Fans. No, and no worm holes for you Star Gaters either – you’d be crushed and torn apart in an instant, oh wait you are… never to be reintegrated again, sorry Too Much Critical Information Lost (TMCIL).

Looking on the bright side of life, chocolate tastes awesome especially when microwaved.

Posted in Adult Supervision Required, Awesome, Energy, Exercise for the Reader (that's you), Humbled by Nature, Ideas Crazy Enough to Have a Chance, Ignorance to Knowledge, Intelligent Designer - Yeah Right, Invisible Friend Crowd, It's a good thing that your god(s) die with you, My Invisible Friend Needs Me For His-Her-Its Existence, Proof God Can NOT Exist, Rational Thinking, Science Education, Some Intelligent Designer, Something to think about, Space Travel, Video | Leave a Comment »

 
%d bloggers like this: